Here's one I like:

"I wonder if Ferraro works or lobbies for any companies that have war contracts? Those companies might want McCain in office instead of Obama.

-- Karenn22"

The man graduated from the US Naval Academy and served with honor. That alone should merit the consideration of attacking him on policy issues and not non-specific slurs.

-- LT Bohica

True, but if one spends a little while looking at the policies McCain is currently advocating (esp. compared to what has historically been his platform), words like flip-flopper and political opportunist do come to mind...

Angry Clinton supporters tell party leaders: 'Let's go McCain!'

http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/

Clinton is masterful at attacking Obama in ridiculous fashion. Just like the Republicans, she stokes people's fears and prejudices; then, when it works, she points out that a lot of people are strongly opposed to Obama and says it must be because he's so divisive... (if he states the obvious, he's to be attacked for being whiny)

Clinton is utterly Machiavellian opportunist with contempt for both voters and the process.

Joan, your tone is more conciliatory these days (which is good, since it is indeed time to focus on beating McCain and fixing the country rather than wallowing in gossip-column inanity), but your devotion is still very obviously to Senator Clinton rather than the Democratic Party, the greater good, or intellectual honesty.

You ducked the real issue in the compromise, which is the Obama team graciously (or maybe just pragmatically)agreeing to a solution that was quite generous to Senator Clinton (especially given the context of the compromise, the zeal with which she advocated counting a contest in which Obama wasn't even on the ballot).

If Hillary's out, how is McCain better than Obama? Really. How? Is it his anti-choice stance, his flip-flopping on torture and the Bill of Rights, his Ship of (Fools) Lobbyists Express, his flawed half-assed attempt at health care which is only for spin points, his great likelihood to get even more Americans (and other human beings) killed for no reason?

(And yes, I know there are tons are Clinton supporters who wouldn't dream of voting for McCain, who do put party first, but this is clearly a pretty significant part of the Clinton "strategy.")

Why is it that people who want mature political debate, rational policies, and a leader who will engage the rest of the world like a mature adult rather than a truculent bully—

...why is that we are the ones supposedly drinking the KoolAid?

Is the whole generational thing? It is true that the Clinton team is fine at stoking tensions between Boomers and Xers/Millenials (and any other rift she can think of which might work to her advantage). I guess I'm confused.

Clinton is setting fire to the ties that bind us together as a society and cynically playing on fears and prejudices.

[Do I think it's "racist" for poor, working whites to feel that they're often "outta sight." No, there's a lot of truth to these complaints. But we all know it's a lot more complicated than that, and Edwards seemed able to speak to this group (and everyone else) without playing the Dueling Resentments card...]

I'm sure if she ever got into office, though, we'd see nothing but fairness and accountability...

Your vote is your own, but the country is Ours.

We want it back. This isn't a particularly partisan notion.

I chose Edwards first.

"Puerto Ricans, this is your next and certain president!" the loudspeakers insisted, as if repeating it often enough -- and loudly enough -- might make it true. "This is the president for all Puerto Ricans!"

Not just for defending Obama against bogus charges, but for reminding us all what a good, pragmatic thing it would be to make foreign policy based on realistic assessments and genuine understanding of the people we're dealing with.

but then, so was McClellan's book...

Don't forget, the same people who brought us the phony, fear-mongering Iraq war justification are hard at work on

The Crooked-As-A-Dog's-Hing-Leg Talk Express

brought to you by:

-Pastor John Hagee (no, wait, scratch that!)

-lobbyists for big oil, coal

-lobbyists against any and all environmental, financial, or food and drug regulation who call to mind Carlin's observation that they wanna crack down on street crime to make the business criminals safe

-lobbyists for our prison industrial system

-lobbyists in favor of more welfare for wealthy corporations who want to turn America into a third world employment pool

...boy I'm getting plumb wore out, and this list could just keep on goin'...

I admired McCain for quite a while, and still find him a sympathetic figure, but this is way too important a decision to make based on his personality or the very real sacrifices he made (esp. refusing to leave his comrades behind in a torturous prison camp)—his platform, financial donors, and rhetoric all spell continued decline for this fine nation of ours.

And, I know lots of people don't wanna hear this, but Obama—while clearly quite mortal—isn't an insidious America-hater or Maoist, but a person who values our Constitution and who got his big break explaining why he loves this country.

He's absolutely the best chance we have to restore our nation, civil liberties, and international reputation (so that we can be effective and ethichal players on the world stage, not so he can "appease" our enemies).

I know, this stuff is dry as hell compared to the invigorating fun of gotcha gossip, but it's ultimately what's under the hood that matters, not the pinstripe on the side...

Yeh, I wouldn't expect Salon not to report breaking news (though I might quibble about context, interpretation)—my point about funny timing referred to the strange serendipity that caused the slow gears of American Justice to spit this verdict out the day after Obama reached the magic number...

Fair enough. Still, do you really think it's loony to be suspicious?