Thanks to Josh Marshall for sending people here, he was one of the bright lights when I first started at Salon and I wouldn't have gotten through impeachment without him.

I fixed the War Room link, that was my bad coding; apologies.

In terms of my being too nice to Politico - I don't know them; I live in San Francisco, nobody called to complain. But I wear two hats here, and wearing my Salon editor hat, at first, I felt a little mixed that we were hitting this newcomer so hard. But as I wrote, my affection for the truth trumped my aversion to seeming competitive, and I was happy we called them out. And we'll do so as often as the truth requires.

And about Joe Scarborough: I can't see into his heart. But I've been treated fairly on the show, and I personally admire his willingness to say he was wrong about the war, when so many Iraq hawks won't. And even when he disagrees, as he does about the U.S. attorneys mess, he invites me back and sometimes even gives me the last word. Locutus, I'm not Mother Teresa -- I do the show because I think it's good for Salon, not just MSNBC. At least once a day I get a letter from a Republican or former Republican, frequently an Iraq war veteran, who saw me on "Scarborough Country" and hadn't known Salon existed, and writes to thank me for Salon. So I welcome another platform, and another audience.

El Ranchero, just a quick reply...It's their newness to the Web that made me think twice, not a generic aversion to criticizing other media. (I had no trouble slamming Adam Nagorney's NYT piece on the "perils" of the Democrats' big gavel, or MSNBC's echoing that line.) Since its founding, Salon has regularly called out our "competitors" on their mistakes and bad judgment. We found an audience in the early years largely through reporting critically not only on impeachment and the Starr investigation, but also on the awful coverage of those issues by the media.

Anon, honestly, I didn't delete your letter. I've deleted exactly three letters in all these blog threads, and yours wasn't one of them. Are you sure you posted here? Or could it have been in Glenn Greenwald's 2 Politico threads? Or Tim Grieve's?

Domini, thank you, I agree with you. I took pains not to state that Jesus was black, just probably more chocolate than the standard vanilla art we see. But my coverline about "the myth of a white Jesus" skewed the reaction. And it was my coverline; the brave new world of blogging means I can't blame those nasty headlines on anyone else.

I'm downright ashamed I'd never heard Tom Waits's "Chocolate Jesus." I'll download it tonight, thanks!

The idea of founding Catholics for Freedom from Bigotry is a nice tribute to Frances Kissling, who just retired from Catholics for a Free Choice. I dedicate my Bill Donohue blogging to Frances, who fought him so well for so long (and who will I'm sure keep doing so.)

Great idea, b.t., thanks. And yes, Little Brother, there's still too much cutting and running out there.

New Deal Democrat, I agree it was unprofessional, and I don't respond that way anymore. Besides, God bless you is turning out to be more effective.

Irving143, I'm honored that you agree with me! I actually do have Republican friends and family members, not just my pals on "Scarborough Country." Increasingly more Republicans are agreeing with me, and I appreciate their open minds about this president and this war.

Cordelia525, thank you!

Hi biff, thanks for your advice. I did in fact remind Joe that Rep. Frank Wolf and other Republicans had just gone to Syria, too. Nancy Pelosi has nothing to apologize for, so I don't really think that line of reasoning plays out well. Gingrich apologizes again and again, yet continues his hypocrisy. I usually prefer to keep my retorts above the belt, but there's very little of Newt Gingrich that's above the belt.

biff, I wasn't being sarcastic. Thank you for your advice.

To the Bonds haters, I say: You are certainly entitled to your opinions. That's grace, one day at a time.

But after my long piece about the way letters/comments can get nasty, I have to say I really appreciate the kindness and courtesy of people reading my blog yesterday. I came home from our Opening Day debacle expecting nasty comments about my poor team from, I don't know, Dodgers fans or something. Or comments about Barry's base-running from Bonds haters. But none of that. Thank you! I appreciate your sympathy and restraint in my hour of loss. It's a long season!

And you can see the video of my Newt moment on our Video Dog blog. Soon I'll be able to upload video here, too.

Lonewolfy, I'm confused. What more would you like me to do besides say, as I did in the post, that I will do my best to stop pointing to racism as a reason people bash Bonds? And then to reply to people who bashed Bonds by saying they're entitled to their opinion about Bonds? I think I'm doing what you're asking; what am I missing?