The demonizing of Bush worked so well, the liberal nation is now madly looking for another target, now that Bush has faded away into the sunset. First Limbaugh, now McCain. Who will be next?

Memo to Dems - You're no longer the party of opposition. The campaign is over. You won. You're in charge now. Stop attacking the GOP straw men. Show me how what you're doing in power is working and is good for the nation. I know that's much harder to do, and that you're really insecure about it all, but that's what the party in power needs to do if they want to stay in power. Good luck, for all our sake.

Oh, no - Rush Limbaugh doesn't have a college degree! That puts him in the same losers group as Richard Branson, Michael Dell, Barry Diller, Walt Disney, Bill Gates, Milton Hershey, Steve Jobs, and Ty Warner, among others. How dare such people express opinions, especially on business/economic issues, without being credentialed by the proper academic establishments? What could they know! Why aren't they keeping their proper place? Send them all back to just sweeping floors, where they belong!

Bad guess - I'm a retired college professor, with a string of degrees in engineering right through a doctorate, plus an MBA as well. I know what college degrees mean, and what they don't. Sorry, but academic credentials, as against real knowledge obtained from experience in a particular field (and the resultant wisdom), are very different things. Sorry you haven't discovered that yet.

I sometimes disagree with what you say, but your columns are always entertaining and well presented. Most importantly, you seem to bring in a lot of new blood to the discussions here (I expect from your columns usually being linked by "Drudge"). Ignore the personal insults and flamers here, who seem to have no tolerance for anyone holding viewpoints different from their own. Since when did "no independent thinking allowed" become part of the liberal mantra?

I and many others appreciate your attempts to introduce some new and differing opinions into Salon's forums through your articles. Salon already has enough liberal circle jerks, where everyone basks in their own goodness and repeats ad nauseum how dastardly those Republicans are. I'm glad you're different.

All this continual nonense in Salon about what the Republicans are doing amazes me. Why is everyone here stuck in oposition party campaign mode? Is everyone still so orgasmic over the last election that they're just trying to keep it going forever?

The Democrats are in power now; what matters is what THEY do. The 2008 election cycle is over, and the 2010 election results will depend on what the Obama Administration has accomplished, particularly with the economy. The GOP is not going to dissappear, Limbaugh and Michael Steele notwithstanding, despite your fondest wishes. They'll be right there as the "anti-Obama" and "anti-Pelosi" party if things don't go well, just like the Democrats were the anti-Bush party this time around.

I think your post is spot on. But I'd take it a bit further. I don't think there's really any way the Democrats can lose the initiative to the Republicans on fixing the credit crisis and the economy. The Democrats control both the White House and the Congress. "Bipartisanship" really didn't work. So the Democrats are the only game in town. Whatever the Republicans push, it's nothing but talk; they don't have the power to implement (or stop) much of anything.

So whatever the Democrats do, it had better work. If the economy doesn't turn around, they'll get blamed. Even if the Republican "plan" would actually have made things worse. Even if it was already too late, and nothing either party tried would have worked. The voters just won't buy those possibilities, after the strong sales job Obama and Pelosi have done to build support for their programs.

A very dangerous game for Obama and the Democrats, I believe.

First it was Palin, then Limbaugh, next Steele, now it's Cramer - All the time. Who on the enemies list is next slated for attack, Salon?

Follow the link to Valenti's "exceedingly thoughtful response" about the wedding, if you haven't already. It's absolutely hillarious. Like a SNL parody. So why is it again she's having a formal wedding at all?

I can't believe she writes with a straight face how she was "thinking about postponing until everyone can marry" and will wear a "somewhat non-white dress" and the rest of that "list". Whether on the political left or right, it is absolutely amazing the contortions a true believer will go though to try to justify behavior so obviously contrary to their supposed politically correct dogma. Why not be intellectually honest and admit maybe, just maybe, things may become a whole lot more complicated when it becomes personal, rather than theoretical. And even more amazing is the ability of many supporters to rationalize away such absolutely hypocritical behavior.

If feminism is really about allowing each woman to do as she wants, why does Valenti feel the need do go though such verbal contortions and justify the feminism of her actions? It's nobody's business except her's what she wants, right?