Letters posted here are associated with the following Salon Premium Member:

Rob Mac

Published Letters: 28
Editor's Choice: 4

Wednesday, December 12, 2007 07:44 AM

Really?

Sheesh. When feminists complain about silly stuff like this it makes it seem that they really don't have anything to complain about and are just looking for trouble. I don't really think that's true, but come on, people. Pick you targets a little more carefully. Getting all freaked out about something like this just makes you seem like silly self-parodies.

The panting outrage reminds me of nothing so much as the right-wing fake outrage machine that kicks in whenever a Democrat suggests we're not "winning" the war or some such thing.

And I sincerely hope Zach's cliche ridden screed is a joke. Either way, grow up.

Thursday, December 13, 2007 07:47 AM
Original article: Girlies for a good cause

Sadly

Of course, no one wants to take away "women's rights to take off their clothes," . . .

Sadly, there most certainly are people who want to do just that on both the right and the left. Well, mostly on the right . . .

Tuesday, December 18, 2007 02:25 PM

Great Job Glen!

You deserve a lot of the credit for flogging this issue so hard. The nation owes you a debt of thanks.

Monday, January 14, 2008 03:09 PM

What Comments?

Now to be fair, this issue is neither of Obama's nor Clyburn's making. The comments coming from the Clinton camp were the catalyst.

The comments from the Clinton camp that were supposedly the catalyst for this ridiculous brouhaha are all innocuous and completely taken out of context. The most charged comments are those having to do with Obama's drug use, but why should criticisms of Obama's admitted drug use automatically be considered racist? Surely a white candidate who wrote so honestly about past drug use would get the same treatment.

Clearly this controversy has been ginned up by the media and a few opportunistic Obama supporters. If I were conspiracy minded I'd consider that right-wing operatives might be involved somehow. This controversy threatens to undermine the historic coalition of blacks and whites that is the Democratic Party.

Monday, January 14, 2008 03:57 PM

Amen, owlsareus

What owlsareus said above. For the good of the Democratic Party and, yes, the good of African Americans in this country, Senator Obama needs to step in and end this distraction. Only he can do it. It's not too late. And if he did it he'd actually look like more of a winner than ever. In this case Obama's smartest move is also the right thing to do. And it would probably win him my vote as well.

Monday, January 28, 2008 01:47 PM

Who Knew Jesse Jackson was Willy Horton?

Glenn compares Bill Clinton's reference to Jesse Jackson to Willy Horton and rumors about John McCain fathering a black child out of wedlock. Does this comparison really seem reasonable to anyone?

Who knew that comparing a politician to Jesse Jackson was a blood libel. I certainly didn't. I thought a lot of people actually liked and respected Jesse Jackson. I do. In fact, I voted for him in 1988.

Candidates and their surrogates explain away defeats all the time. Every pundit in the country was saying Obama was bound to win South Carolina because of the high percentage of black voters in the Democratic primary. But Clinton implies this and he's the new David Duke.

I side with those who fear that the constant crying of racism by Obama's campaign and his supporters (and, of course, the news media) will come back to haunt them in a big way. This strategy might win them the Democratic priamry, but in the general it will alienate large blocks of the electorate. If it is essentially impossible to speak of Obama in anything other than glowing terms or to ever mention the fact that he is black without being labeled a racist, we'll have a big problem on our hands come November.

So much for uniting the nation. Obama's supporters have nearly split the Democratic Party with their cynical hypersensitivity on this subject.

Thursday, February 7, 2008 12:55 PM

Lighten Up

People really need to stop being so easily offended. I watched both ads. Neither seems even remotely offensive to me. Yes, the pandas speak with slightly (very slightly) goofy Chinese accents. But they're supposed to be Chinese. What's wrong with this?

And as for the Indian ad--the guy just happens to be Indian and speaks with a very mild Indian accent. This is a problem? So immigrants should not be depicted in cartoon commercials? What's the problem?

Tuesday, February 19, 2008 06:51 AM

. . . and that's still the best they can do?

The facial animation in the "Casting" demo was as wooden and creepy as any I've ever seen. Yes, they made nice advances in skin tone and the forehead was better than average. But the character's mouth was very stiff and creepy. She had odd whitish spots at the corners of her mouth and she seemed to have a large, sacry overbite. The overbite was not so much a problem though as the fact that she seemed to have been injected with far too much botox in the lower half of her face.

Yeah, this might be a bit better than GTA, but clearly, realistic rendering of human faces in video games still has a long way to go.

Most Active Letters Threads

530

Do Obama officials know what his Afghanistan plan is?

What explains the completely contradictory statements from key aides on a central plank of the war strategy?
189

I live in a van down by Duke University

How do I afford grad school without going into debt? A '94 Econoline, bulk food and creative civil disobedience
167

A new report questions "suicides" at Guantanamo

Why is the Obama DOJ attempting to block judicial review of three highly suspicious deaths?
128

Is my kids making me not smart?

Stay-at-home fatherhood dulls my intellect to a nub. Excuse me while I ponder the subtext of "Hippos Go Berserk"
126

Trig, the anti-abortion straw baby

Sarah Palin's son is being used to demonize pro-choicers

View all »

Letters Help

Currently in Salon