Really? That's so strange. I've never heard of such a thing. Or even thought it possible. BTW, I didn't say I didn't respect you. I think you've written some good posts. I just feel like you go overboard to try to show Joan "respect." In my world, you have to earn respect. And Joan certainly hasn't earned mine. Furthermore, I think you've already witnessed how much respect she's managed to lose here at Salon in the last few months -- with her transparent attempts to manipulate us toward the Hildabeast and her not-so-subtle put downs of Obama. Let it all hang out, Carol. Don't hold back.

The style in which a person chooses to craft his or her response is always up to the individual, of course. I don't think any one style is necessarily better than another. I only object to wild rants and profanity. It's really not necessary and only serves to alienate people. I also tire of those who write lengthy diatribes, which I'd be astounded if many folks actually take the time to read. Better to keep it to a paragraph or two, I think. I also don't like when readers hijack the thread, posting comments ad nauseum -- trying to turn it into a chat room.

PS: If you are truly curious as to why I've lost respect for Joan, you need only read my posts that respond directly to her articles, rather than the comments I've made to others.

Although I'm not at all a Hillary supporter, I think your insights into how America is seen by the rest of the world, our Democratic primary, and the lack of civility here at Salon was remarkably articulate and accurate.

"I'd rather have him {Obama} stumbling over his 'bitter' comments about working-class voters in April than October."

No, Joan, he'll still be stumbling over his "bitter" comments in November -- thanks to Hillary rubbing his nose in it every chance she gets.

"...they {Obama supporters} argue {in the case of Clinton victories) it's either racism, or just old machine politics, with Clinton ward heelers paying their dues and turning out votes."

Really, Joan, how can you claim they say it's "racism" after writing ad nauseum about all the rampant "sexism" your beloved Hillary has experienced? And yes, Joan, it IS "just old machine politics" for the Clintons. Wake up and smell the Starbucks.

"'They [the Clintons] believe it's their party, to do with what they will. That is the Clinton attitude,' said Chris Matthews on MSNBC after the Clinton speech, with Keith Olbermann murmuring darkly alongside him. This is just extraordinarily silly."

Wrong again, Joan. It's not silly. Matthews is correct. The Clintons DO believe its their party, to do with what they will. And what they're doing is using it to get Hillary coronated. Even if it destroys the party. Even if it get McCain elected. They could care less. As for Keith Olberman "murmuring darkly" -- please, Joan, tell me precisely when he morphed into Dick Cheney inside that miniature brain of yours. Oh, I know, it was when he didn't back Hillary, wasn't it? Now he's dark. Now he's evil. I see.

"As much as I admire Obama, I confess that given the nature of his support, it's been easy for me to think of Obama as George McGovern."

My, oh my, Joan, how obedient of you to repeat those talking points on behalf of the Clinton machine as often as possible. I'm sure Hillary will give you a gold star first thing tomorrow morning.

Here's a thought, Joan -- Why not challenge yourself to write an article that's critical of your favorite candidate? You could call it: "Why my dear sweet Hillary would obliterate Iran."

Because after the North Carolina and Indiana primaries on May 6th, your beloved Hillary will begin her final downward spiral, greased by her own lies, racism and duplicity. It will be delicious.

Ever think about getting your priorities in order, Joan?

Here's a thought -- Why not challenge yourself to write an article about your favorite candidate that's NOT about sexism? Let's see, what could you call it? Oh, I know. How about: "Why my dear sweet Hillary would obliterate Iran."

On second thought, I guess that's a tad too complicated a subject for someone who'd rather write bubbleheaded articles for a living. Best leave the real stories to the real journalists. And speaking of real journalists, Robert Scheer has an excellent article on Hillary's Iran stance at:

http://www.alternet.org/columnists/story/83291/

I encourage readers to check it out -- as it IS a rather important story.

As for the pitiful little article you’ve written here, Joan -- I suggest you try not to look at everything through the same old “sexism” prism in regard to Hillary. Because if you could manage to do that, I think you’d realize the Olbermann remark was simply a "Tony Soprano" hyperbole. He really shouldn't have bothered to apologize for it.