Joan,

I'm always a fan of yours, even when I disagree with you. I like the way you hang in there, time and time again, honestly facing the issues and your readers.

Regarding this issue, perhaps you and Glenn are watching polls that I and other readers have no knowledge of, but I strongly agree with the other posters who are encouraging you/Salon not to get too hung up on Obama's politically correct word/story usage. The numerous articles and interviews with members of black churches in the news since last Tuesday already show an impressive groundswell of support for Obama's unique role as leader (of both black and white America, as E.J. Dionne points out) and provides evidence that his speech is well on its way to being the cultural watershed many of us immediately felt it could be.

Why be defensive about Wright's angry accusations from his pulpit? He said what he said. Those are his words, not ours, and not Obama's. His anger might seem foreign, but why fear it? Anger is so not the same as hate. To me it is evidence enough that Wright is in fact a loving man who gives generously to his country that his influence on Barrack and Michelle Obama has helped shape them both into the thoughtful, big-hearted, positive and courageous couple that they are today.

The media should not be any more afraid of Wright than Obama is. You all have a profound responsibility to keep the dialogue GROWing.

I have to ask, where's HIllary? I voted for her, but her relative silence is awfully hard to take now. Obama is the only one who could have given the speech he gave, but her generous applause would have been a strong signal about her own commitment to dialogues on race in this country. She caved when the conservatives geared the country up for war and now she's caving to conservatives' fear mongering again? (It kind of makes me angry!)

I don't have the time to carefully read all the letters in this lively discussion thread, but every time I come across one of yours, I think, WOW. You are like Buddha in your patience, but very thoughtfully human in your observations! Salon should give you a job! Honestly, I'm so glad you're out there.

If we accept that guilt by association makes the Wright sermons and Obama's history with Wright's church a valid story, then it makes sense for Obama to hold the press conference he did today. But then it also makes sense that the press (including columnists like Will) be open to raising questions about who other politicians/leaders are associating with in order to understand who they are. For example, the way I see it, Rush Limbaugh's Operation Chaos is more than just anti-patriotic rhetoric--it is anti-patriotic action. He seeks explicitly, openly to disrupt the election process, and what could be more basic to democracy than the election process. How much have either Bush or Cheney been villified for their associations with Limbaugh? Who has called Limbaugh an anti-patriot? Has anyone asked how often Bush and/or Cheney sit in his church? How often they support his cause financially by listening to the ads on his program? Are there mentors that we don't know about in Hillary's and McCain's lives? Seriously, the logic used for all this concern about Obama's connection to Wright should bear out in more ways than one. (My preference by far would be to change the logic, but somehow that seems too much to expect.)

We were so glad to have Canadian coverage of the Olympics available as an alternative to NBC. Not only did we get to see the amazing Chinese gymnastic male and female teams during their competitions (all of the members for both teams), we also were totally keyed into the Japanese team and all its members. The Americans figured in to the broadcast too, and while the tone toward the Americans was warm/supportive, despite their lackluster performances in the last two gymnastics events, they weren't treated as though they were the center of the universe.

We also witnessed the seonnd Gold Medal event for Michael Phelps on Canadian TV (that amazing relay) before NBC was covering it. Then they (NBC) had the nerve to announce that they were covering it "live"!

[I have to add that we cannot believe that Chinese "women's" gymnastics team is all under 16!]

I hope you won't back off this story. Warren's un-Christlike mendacity and immature narcissism deserve every voters' attention.

We watched a few minutes of Fox's post-Michelle speech coverage, too. It was infuriating. Chris Wallace is a jack ass. But how he could he not be frustrated and envious?! Michelle did just what she needed to do--she let us know she can be political and still be who she is. She has incredible poise and comfort in her own skin.

I thought she was fabulous, but I still regretted that she seemed to be pandering to right wing prejudices. Michelle and Obama embody the American dream--they don't need to wear flag pins and be defensive about loving this country. It'd be so great if she didn't even try to "soften" her image to try to soften Chris Wallace and Fox's attacks. I say, let those guys' insecurity define themselves, not Barack and Michelle.

I thought Biden was SUPER. I liked the way he delivered his speech. Very much. He's articulate, confident, smart, authentic. He comes across as having a lot of character, and he's got content.

Clinton was great, too. It's perfect that he gets to be a beloved statesman without being president or first husband. Much better this way than worrying about how he'd mess things up, intelligence and all.