My brother signed on with a company to travel to Texas to tarp hurricane damaged roofs. First day on the job a roof collapsed beneath him and he fell. He was injured to the point where he couldn't put weight on his leg yet they didn't provide him so much as a ride to an emergency room. Hell, they expected him to finish out his shift. He ended up having to pay to rent a car to drive 1000 miles back home, pay out of his own pocket to get medical attention for what turned out to be a broken leg. To add insult to the injury, literally, they refused to pay him for the work he had already done.

I think it's pretty clear that sleezy war/disaster profiteers have no scruples whatsoever. They gouge the government with highly inflated prices to perform a service, they entice people to work for them with the lure of a good wage and then try their damnedest to screw them over.

Has the world always been this corrupt or is it just more noticeable now because in the current political atmosphere they don't feel the need to cover up the corruption?

I think this is another issue of people getting all upset about absolutely nothing. There is no special moral issue here. If you transplanted the skin of Angelina Jolie's face onto yours you would not look like Angelina Jolie. Even Brad Pitt wouldn't recognize you. The shape of the face has more to do with the structure of the bones underneath than the skin itself. What you'd end up with is an entirely different looking individual who would probably look more like the original face than the donor face. Separate the facts from the sensationality of this story and you see that there's no large moral issue going on here because the reality of a face transplant and the Hollywood version are not the same thing.

Forget the fictional war on Christmas, there's a real war on science going on in the US with half-truths and myths constantly being perpetuated about scientific advance. I have to agree with other letter writers that Salon is perpetuating ignorance with this little blurb about face transplants. I guess the truth isn't as sexy as the fantasy.

The biggest challenge to Feingold will certainly be the belief that he's not electable. It's unfortunate because he's a man of outstanding character and intelligence. I believe that most Democrats would love to see the party move away from the bland middle of road and towards a dynamic future and I think Feingold has the energy and ideas to get us there. A lot can happen in the next two years but, if the Republican party continues to implode and the Democrats don't take advantage of that by making bold choices, maybe the sad truth is that they don't have what it takes to be leaders and not followers.

Is there really that much anti-semitism out there? I live in Wisconsin and we're certainly not known for having a large Jewish population and both our senators are Jews. Perhaps I misunderestimate red state America. I know I have trouble comprehending a lot of the actions of the religious right so I'm probably misguided here. And also clouded by the fact that I totally adore Feingold.

On the subject of Hillary Clinton, who is it exactly that wants her to be president? I don't know ANY Dems who want her to be president.

"I want to suggest a radical and I think constructive concept: how about writing about the candidates whom you're covering, and leave out the attacks on the one who wasn't there?"

That would be like ignoring the elephant in the middle of the room (so to speak). There is so much speculation and so many people predicting her run that it's virtually impossible to not factor that in and, in my case, be horrified by the idea.

I'm not going to reiterate the issues that have already been mentioned but Hillary isn't Bill. We don't get a BOGO if she gets elected. It's not going to be Bill, the third term. Let me be clear, I think it would be great to have a female president. I admire Hillary's intelligence, her drive and ambition. But a president has to be likeable and Hillary seems to be highly unliked. Unliked enough that I think it would bring voters to the polls just to vote against her.

The same thing is going on with the DNC right now. Howard Dean is continuing a grassroots effort to build up the party. That's not very popular idea on the coasts but the real America lies somewhere in fly-over territory. It's those voters that need to be appealed to. We're not going to win over hard core right wing voters no matter who we nominate. What we need to do is energize the average American, the one who doesn't vote. Increase the number of democratic votes by increasing the number of democrats. I think party building is just as urgent right now as winning back some control. Polls show that Americans agree with Feingold on the war. Popular opinion down here in middle America is that Hillary is unlikeable. Instead of change the minds of a negative opinion wouldn't it be easier to turn a favorable opinion into a vote?

This doesn't phase me in the slightest but I'm a lot more liberal than most people, I beleive Feingold is currently going through a second divorce. That's another thing I could see potentially being held against him.