Once you place people in that kind of fantasy sexual position you remove their power and authority. I remember all of that sexual fantasy reasearch of the 80s, bad and good. Placing powerful men in sexual positions gives the voyeur power. The same for women.

You can write about what you want. I can think that it's typical of a certain sort of sexualization of minorities who are professionals and who are not acting in a sexualized manner. It is depowering.

I think it says something about those reporting the fantasy. If they said that to me, I'd give them wide berth. I've been around people who did fantasized about specific blacks in authority positions, even though it was not aimed at me (a black woman). It was not a good thing.

Why am I reminded of the Bebe Campbell Moore novel "Brothers and Sisters"? I hope Obama keeps his door open around all women now.

Bits of paper, papyrus, stone writing, hierglyphs hide and surprise us. From the Dead Sead Scrolls to the Songhai records trunk to the ancient Egyptian records, a number of records have survived that shouldn't have.

Server ports, while still difficult, happen. Backwards compatability happens. I have my dissertation chapters, first written in Wordperfect 5.0 for DOS, transferred lovingly multiple times and now in Word 2007.

We do not know all that will happen in the future. But I guarantee you, there will still be trolls and bomb throwers competing with those who want to have a civil discussion. Some things will never change.

I'm reading the letters and I'm surprised. The usual trolls are not about, there's been very little namecalling. The pot advocates have done most of it.

I think that telling people straight up that they are hurting people is not mean in and of itself. HOW you tell them is important. This LW is deluding herself if she thinks her thinking is sober. Is enabling better?

I'm not a twelve stepper or in a twelve step program. I've never been an addict. I've been on the business end of verbal abuse from two relatives (not my parents, thank God) who were alcoholics in combo with pot. SOme people can smoke pot without problems, but addicts can not. They get mean, paranoid, and reckless in my experience. When they combine pot and alcohol, bad things happen to other people.

In my experience, verbally abusive alcoholics call people who either shut down and cut them off or who confront and cut off "passive aggressive", "over-senstitive" or "control freaks". It means "I can't control them". They only way yo deal with a verbal abuser is exactly what the ex is doing: minimize contact, set boundaries, and in my experience, leave the room or drop the phone at the first insult. They lose it. They hate it. But they are forced to confront it, as the LW is being forced to confront her behavior. She is being forced to think about why her ex is keeping his distance. It's a good step in her recovery. He is doing her a favor.

LW needs to drop the weed and either go to counseling or something to get some insight into why she wants to continue, in any form, a relationship she herself identified as toxic. That's addict thinking.

Go to the National Archives Washington National Records Center. You will find the records of US Third Army, who opened some of the camps. They have pictures, testimony, and proof of the gassing of Jews, that is definitive and undeniable.

You are just wrong. Over a thousand American servicemen helped liberate the camps, and they ran until the liberation. Hitler diverted supplies from the front to keep them running (from Kegan's book on the Second WOrld War). The Nazis took meticulous records. We have the Wann See Conference documents, the documents of the gassings from the Totenkampf division of the Waffen SS, etc. We have hundreds of people's testimony, including that of Totenkampf division guards. We have the Nuremberg trial records. Get a copy of Conklin's A Gallery of Nazis. The pictures came from the captured camps.

We have many eyewitness accounts, not just the one you reference.

I guess it doesn't matter. No evidence will move people if they are committed to an ideology. Reality can hit them upside the head, and they will still deny.

This Pope hates Vatican II and brought this group (with Williamson) in to help destroy it. We have had many corrupt popes before. We will again. And this church will survive. I am a post-vatican II catholic, and that doctrine is supported by Jesus's words in the Gospels in ways that the Tridentines/anti-Vatican II doctrine is not.

Benedict is destroying the church from the inside. Many of us will not tithe to the Bishop's appeal or to other resources. Others just leave. His church may be small and obedient, but it will be irrelevant. The loss of relevance is happening as we speak. So many catholics of my generation and younger just roll our eyes at Benedict and keep on trucking. He has no moral or persuasive power to influence us or enforce doctrine.

There is a God and God has a wicked sense of humor.