I loved reading Walter's reply to Jameka's list of questions related to the existence of god. I can't imagine how devastated she must be because he reasonably destroyed all the illusions she has on god and religion.

AKA is an emotional, illogical, partisan feminist who is not equiped to deal with the knowledge contained in the mind of Walter and his extraordinary way of denigrating his opponents verbally.

But I can't say I feel sad observing these lunatics getting their inane arguments thoroughly destroyed by Walter.

It was probably a freudian slip. I wasn't familiar with Roespan and always strongly disagree with whatever Jameka writes.

"walter_map, you miserable lying sack of shit,

post the ENTIRE LIST or fuck off!"

In a prior post I had described AKA as an "emotional, illogical, partisan, feminist." I also said I thought her to be a lunatic.

I was much too kind.

AKA has some real problems! She possesses a visceral hatred of men and you are the perfect antagonist, causing her to really "lose it." She is completely frustrated and seems to be on the brink of something very unpleasant.

"I'm extremely disappointed in Salon and will be moving on now."

I am sad to see you go. I'm not a prolific poster, just sort of a dabbler who responds sometimes when I get particularly annoyed with some of the trash I read.

I am surprised you are moving away from Salon because it does offer Greenwald who I feel covers areas that I am concerned with and he does it logically, researching his posits to an extreme degree and making his points extraordinarily well. And you and I share many similar viewpoints, at least it seems to me.

Once in a post, I was expounding on neo-conservatism and you chided me because I was unaware of the teachings and influence of Leo Strauss and Albert Wohlstetter. When I said I never heard of them you directed me to read the NY Times.

I have been reading the NY Times and doing the crosswords much of my life as I thought it was a great way to get proficient in the English language. I went to their web-site and did a search of Leo Stauss (University of Chicago) and got around 5,000 hits and about 500 hits on Whoflstetter.

I read many of the articles and I learned a lot about how much they influenced Wolfowitz, et al and I thank you.

I agree with you and your description of the feminist posters on this website. Regrettably, I come to Salon to read Greenwald and get sucked-in or grabbed by the title of a Joan Walsh article. I read it and then I get annoyed at her and then get more annoyed at the inexplicable prattle in the postings. Yet, I keep coming back, despite my resolve not to.

Do you have any idea as to where you're headed?

"My feminist friends have assured me that the 'feminists' on Salon, Walsh included, are not 'feminists' at all. The 'feminists' here are not interested in the actual issues of social equality and egalitarianism and never mention them. Instead they whine. They are only interested in scapegoating men for their own deficiencies, and particularly enjoy sadistically savaging men who are otherwise sympathetic towards women's issues, which shows that they not only have a visceral hatred of decent men but hate themselves as well, and deservedly so."

I'll sorely miss that kind of penetrating analysis. So well-written, and so pithy, yet so few people can do it!

It's obvious that the PUMA's are not HRC supporters because they are only concerned about putting down Obama with lies. They obviously don't give a damn about anything HRC says. They never did and never will! They just ignore what she says.

Which means to me that they are republicans fronting as HRC supporters in order to cause discord in the democratic party. Their main goal is to disrupt the convention and denigrate Obama. Nothing more! HRC is completely irrelevant to them! The PUMA's are racists and trolls and essentially repubs.

And the MSM is eating it up! Therefore the republican strategists, namely Rove, et al, are licking their chops at how enormously successful this tactic is for them. It's working just like the "swift-boating" of Kerry.

Also, It was a pleasure listening to AKASmith representing the PUMA's, as she was being interviewed by Chris Mathews. She displayed her enormous talent for calling a spade a spade, by accusing Obama of being a Muslim.

"Rebecca, I only hope it was either a direct order from Walsh that you write this or that you were well-compensated."

Rebecca and Joan will be writing about Hillary until the day they die. I posit that women voted for Hillary only because she is a woman, therefore they can comfortably shift to the Palin/McCain ticket.

Then I hope that Joan and Rebecca and all the Hillary lunatics leave this website, or as an alternative, just sort of convert it from a Clinton website to a Palin website.

I am all for the lunatics to convert to Palinites because I am sure sick of HRC. At least Clinton was interesting when she was ducking sniper-fire and single-handily bringing freedom to Ireland, but now without the tensions of the primary, the HRC hoopla set forth by the repub trolls gets very old very fast.