So, "Oscar castrates himself" this year, according to Cintra Wilson. "Just when you thought it couldn't possibly get any more wrist-slashingly boring, the boringness collapsed in on itself and became a deadly howling void of terrible sucking from which the light of no star could escape."

Wow! That must be pretty boring. Not like last year, right?

from 2005: "Welcome to wartime Academy Awards: Cheap, tense and cobbled together from graphics rations donated by the E! Channel. Not even Chris Rock or Beyoncé -- or the travesty that is Antonio Banderas -- can save it."

Oh, maybe 2004 was better:

""The Passion of the Frodo" sweeps, and more beautiful stars bravely impersonate the genuinely homely to great success. But all the crooked teeth in New Zealand can't save a dull, dull Oscar night."

Okay, 2003?

"But nobody was able to justify the existence of the Oscars this year. Oscar shot his self-rationalizing power-wad defending himself after 9/11. "

Hmm. 2002? Oh yeah, that was the year that the article was titled: "Somebody make it stop!"

2001? There seems to be no links for that, but there is for 2000: "Untethered hooters! Suave cocksmiths! But even Billy Crystal and Hilary Swank couldn't save a crushingly boring show."

Salon editors! What kind of journalistic Gitmo are you running there! Stop the torture! If you have any decency, you'll let Cintra cover Iraq or Darfur or something more compelling -- and certainly less boring.

So, "Erectile Dysfunction" -- a 'medical' condition that became popular around the turn of the century largely because it was one more way to sell snake oil -- is now occuring in young men?

I agree that to blame sexually active women for hurting a man's ability to be sexually active is ridiculous on its face. I see instead a predictable new way for ED drug makers to extend their sales beyond elderly men. And it doesn't hurt that the ED may as likely be the result of the anti-depressents the same companies sell. Coming soon: the Viagra/Prozac delayed action combo-drug!

And, as an added perk, the prozac can ease the guilt you might normally feel for your viagra-fueled tryst.

What's with all the haters hating on this article? This is a fantastic Q&A and you all know it and are totally hating on this because you wish, in your heart of hearts, you could have gotten this totally street, old school, down to earth kin of guy who doesn't care about money to talk about his love of watches or shoes and apparent obliviousness to his impending divorce.

An America at war, with political upheaval, economic disparity and social chaos bubbling the surface needs K Fed. It's not that he's a distraction -- he's an emblem.

The 2000s will be looked upon as a time when the country was raided by an unworthy power elite, drained of resources and lives, livlihood and energy by cynical politicians and business leaders. And...

Okay, I'm trying too hard. But really, the Federline-Spears collapse is one you can enjoy to watch without feeling too bad. You can be a sadistic voyeur without the guilt. Isn't that something we all need?

Sure, we may have more movies released than there is interest to see them all, and yes, films do often come and go faster than I, for one, can find a babysitter so as to get a night out to see them.

Yet we get something now that was never available during the golden age of Hollywood -- video, DVDs, streaming downloads. We're enjoying a time in which even the smallest films could be found by the most far-flung cinematic gourmand, thanks to Netflix and others. And it's not hard to assume that downloading films will make such distribution even easier. So even if you can't see Pan's Labyrinth in the theater, it can still be savored post-theatrical mortem. That way, such gotta-see-it-twice classics like Donnie Darko and others have survived.

Sure, that way, we miss out on that group-experience in the theater or the big-screen vision of the directors, but it's a trade that Americans have been happy to make.

I am a big fan of Salon, I read it daily, have writting for it before, hope to again, and I have tremendous respect for what how the magazine has taken huge chances other media avoid.

That said, I was very disappointed to see the correction (as it were) of the use of "uppity" buried within the comments.

I've been a journalist for decades, and words that loaded don't just appear. Any thinking political commentator or editor sees the word "uppity" and knows exactly what it means.

It's use was purposeful, if regrettable. If Salon regrets it, the editors need to put a statement to that effect on the front page. Thanks to the blogs, too many faithful Salon readers know about it. By scrubbing it; it looks shifty and disengenuous.

Slate, a magazine I don't enjoy nearly as much, does a fantastic job making corrections a public matter. Their technique of anchored corrections show integrity dealing with the smallest mistakes that Salon should mirror with this giant one.

The profile is great, but the focus on strength of the candidate tiers, I think, is overstated. Huckabee has a better chance than Romney.

It was only four years ago that long-shot, small state governor -- Howard Dean -- was a front runner in the Democratic primaries. Four years before that, McCain -- who began the election season polling in the hash marks -- won New Hampshire. With social conservatives unhappy with thei GOP big 3, I'll be shocked if Huckabee doesn't play that role this election. Especially since Obamamania and post-Oscar Gore-lust has sucked the air out of any upstart, dark horse progressive run in the Democratic primaries.

History is filled with these guys -- and they usually do pretty well.