We see that Hillary Clinton's fibbing, first rate "experience," was as a figurehead, which is a no official responsibilities spousal position, one with no real actual power, at all. She was first lady, which matters in real terms about as much as being high school president of the girl's glee club. It's about ime Obama got on this, because I was begining to think he was giving charity to his cheap shot taking challenger.

I don't know who "we" is because it seems to me that you have always hated Hillary and this article and the memos that it references have simply given more reason for Obamabots to love Obama and for Hillary supporters to support Hillary.

Is there a reason, oh wise and powerful Salon editors, that Manos has not been banned yet?

Here is a genuine question. I hear a lot of people repeating that line that Clinton said McCain would be a better commander-in-chief than Obama. As I recall she said nothing of the sort, if memory serves, she simply said that McCain had more experience in the area than Obama. Which is, frankly, true. If someone can point me to a source where she actually claims McCain would make a better commander in chief, I'd appreciate it.

Why wouldn't someone called Rosenkavalier be for Hillary?

Why wouldn't someone called Rosenkavalier not be for Hillary?

I don't recall a person's taste in opera being an indicator for their political preferences.

As to the stuff about reading between the lines, that seems to be largely a matter of interpretation. If that quote about being more experienced is all the more evidence people have for Clinton believing McCain would be a better commander in chief, I think that's a bit weak. What I interpret Clinton to be saying there is that Obama is a complete newcomer to the national political scene. He hasn't been around the block like Clinton and McCain have. Obviously Clinton isn't endorsing McCain as a presidential candidate. In case you hadn't noticed, Obama and Clinton's platforms are nearly identical, and both of them are completely different from McCain's. If anything, I think Clinton is making the argument that the Democrats are going to need someone with serious political experience to fight McCain in the national campaign.

So you can read between the lines the way you want, but that's a matter of your own personal opinion and not of fact.

Does that make Wolf Blitzer the fat lady?

When Obama wins, Clinton gives him a pat on the back. When Clinton wins, her opponents scream at her that she's dividing the party and people hurl accusations of racism and fear-mongering being primarily responsible for her win.

So, who's the candidate of hope and change, again?

And enjoying the freakishly warm 40 degree weather. Minnesota's not so bad. It helps you appreciate anything that's warmer than 15.

I don't feel strongly either way towards this article, but I am surprised by the letter writers who are offended by the mere mention of bowel movements. You were eating and got sick? My my, what a sensitive one. What goes in must come out, after all, and this article just discusses the perfectly natural and fairly non-disgusting end of that food you're forking down.

Manos is apparently so new to these hallowed webpages that he cannot separate his/her own irrational hatred of Hillary Clinton with his irrational hatred of her supporters, regardless of whether the topic of discussion actually relates to Clinton in any way whatsoever.

I don't think he "gets" that A) No one cares how much he hates Hillary and B) No one cares how stupid he thinks we are (the level of his diatribe indicates about how much respect we should confer to his opinion) and C) Our dislike of Paglia and our annoyance at Salon's continual support for this pseudointellectual has nothing to do with how we feel about Obama or CLinton.

Come on, Salon. You said you would be reading the letters more carefully. Well, even if you won't listen to those of us who are sick of Paglia, you should at least see that Manos99 is nothing but a shameless troll who can't produce a thoughtful letter to save his own skin.

I'm pretty sure Salon contracts out to an advertiser that analyzes the content of the web page and advertises accordingly. For example, on a thread that mentions Obama a lot, a lot of ads for pro-Obama web sites pop up. I'm sure the appearance of a sex ad on your screen is a result of the mention of "call girls" on the front page. So it isn't completely Salon's fault.