Eclectic:

1: selecting what appears to be best in various doctrines, methods, or styles

2: composed of elements drawn from various sources.

Camile could not be considered the best in anything. She is a piece of work! A vapid, insipid, pretentious individual who must have been the inspiration for the word ludicrous. A lunatic! She makes Jim Inhofe look intelligent. Not #1, so you're probably talking about definition 2.

I accept that she is an "element drawn from various sources." So what, she is so terrible her writing physically pains me. She is a discredit to anything she is associated with. Read the comments posted about what she writes. Maybe one in ten says she writes meaningful stuff and they do that to cause a brouhaha.

Just like the NY Times hiring a horrible writer like Kristol severely damaged their reputation, Salon embarrasses itself every time it publishes her trash. Kristol's commenters were also almost unanimous in their toxic criticism of his writings.

The poster at UT who criticizes Glenn for staying at Salon, does so because of Paglia. She creates a stench on the website.

Unless there aren't any, and you don't really know what you're talking about. But that's ok--you can't really lose, because it looks to me like you don't know what you're talking about, anyway.

The above is your statement to Heru-ur.

I really held back last night when the antagonistic discussion between Heru-ur, Chris Sinnard and Kovie was taking place. It reminded me of the vicious attacks make against Ondelette. The only one missing was LondonLad. I wanted to tell Kovie this is the norm for this website. Attack, attack, attack with as many insults you can dream up. Nothing needs to make sense; just attack!

If I had to rate posters as to content and general overall politeness, courtesy, and respect for others in discusions, Ondelette and Kovie would be at the top of the list. But on top of that both only speak after doing considerable research that adds to the legitimacy of their arguments. Plus if they are not being recklessly attacked they respond with meaningful responses.

I haven't read many posts today but was very pleased to read yours. Thanks!

I've enjoyed reading your posts today and to me you make many valid points but I don't see any resolution to any of the problems you identify..

In a nutshell, I see four huge problems that the USA has today:

1) Lack of transparency, which Obama also said during the campaign, is destructive. Nobody really knows what is going on or why it is going on.

2) The wealthy, the corporations and AIPAC own congress/M$M and have their sycophants do their bidding. Glenn's post today is just another example. The worst is that the health care bill won't have a public option, which to me is the only option that is fair.

3) The war crimes, most explicitly the torture, are going unpunished. The costs of the Iraq/Afghanistan War are being disregarded and it seems that the Pentagon/CIA is running the country.

4) Obama is complicit in all of the above. Plus he is continuing Bush's policies and in some cases even expanding them. Therefore these problems won't get resolved.

To me a good first step would be to have congress stop accepting money from the wealthy and the corporations. Then maybe some fairness would enter into the game. I know that is being completely ingenuous.

This was posted about 15 months ago and in that short period amassed 106 signatures.

It relates to Bush not playing golf.

I thought that KO's performance that night was stellar. I never considered Bush to be a president, only a puppet who didn't have a clue to understanding what he was told to say by Cheney and his minions. Or by god; in his deepest thought processes. So it was OK for Keith to tell him to shut up.

I am not interested enough to do this but if someone were to go to that website and start a petition to give Olberman a raise because he told Bush to shut up, it would amass more the 106 signatures in 15 months.

Mary probably thinks I "hate America" because I consider Bush to be the most common-place, unaccomplished jerk who ever existed in USA politics, and considering that population includes Jame Inhofe, that's saying a mouth full.

I stopped watching Olberman, but will watch tomorrow night to see if he addresses his silencing and the use of Wolffe.

I agree that this is a pretty stupid thread, but harmless.

I can refer you to the threads where bebopo posted maybe 400 long-winded discombobulated posts of meaningless prattle.

This is also less disturbing to me than when a lot of posters here get into vicious, no-holds barred virulence. Ask Ondelette about that.

That is one total load of crap!

It is our duty to respect even an idiot if he is President.

Very thoughtful of you! A clever, clearer rearrangement.

Regrettably, that is what Mary really thinks! Her thought processes are a pathetic disarrangement.

You said to Glenn:

You're parsing words to prove that you're right and in the process, you're willing to slime KO's reputation to prove how correct you are.

Really disappointing, but not surprising, as you tend to be a grim and unpleasantly righteous man. You seem determined to win this battle even if it loses the war.

I have no idea what you mean by the above. Keith Olbermann is obfuscating details about an event that occurred to an extreme extent. I can't imagine a human being being more mealymouthed than he is being. In my opinion, he needs to murky up what actually happened because if he plainly stated what happened, it will cause him extreme embarrassment.

Because Glenn never, ever distorts anything for some ulterior motive, nor misleads, I find your statements disingenuous. In point of fact, outright lies!

What incidentally is the "war?" I don't think Glenn wants anything from Olbermann, other than his honesty.