...that these sites would at least have some capability for editing in terms of grammar. "Attempting to sleep should be made only after..." WTF?? I'd expect a Stanford expert to parse a sentence better than that. My fifth-grade teacher wouldn't let me get away with that kind of mistake.

But it seems editing is an art that's fast going the way of the dinosaur. I'm appalled at the horrid grammar, punctuation and total lack of style that runs rampant on the web, and I'm not talking about forum posts. Articles in major news outlets read like a 12-year-old wrote them. FEH.

And those same people come home and have the fucking gaul to preach to westerners

Really? I'm sure any French readers - you know, the people that live in GAUL - would object to your sneering remark. But then, who cares about them? They're only French.

*eyeroll* Really, I wouldn't expect such a sophisticated commenter to let a typo as clumsy as that slip by.

This must be the offices of Bitter, Snearing and Crabbe. How're those grapes today, boys? Sour enough for ya?

Oh yeah. The worst one I've seen is Greenpeace, who've sent me at least 10 letters in the last six months. It's unbelievable!

Good trick. What I do is tear up the entire contents of the original envelope, being careful to keep the piece with my name, address and record number intact. I put all the torn-up shreds into the postage-paid reply envelope, with the piece with my info on it right in front, so it'll be seen when the envelope is opened.

It always works. It may take a couple of times, but they finally get the picture when they realize that they're paying to hear me tell them to fuck off. It's quite satisfying.

Yet another useless gadget for bored rich people. I can't imagine anything sillier, given how easy it is to grow herbs. Hell, a tray on a window ledge that faces the sun will do the same job. Why in the world do people think these things have to be done with high-tech wankery?

And of course we have P. back with her endless yammering about how Salon never reports on the minutiae of marijuana and government. NO, YOU CAN'T FIND THAT OUT HERE. It's not a subject this site is interested in pursuing. PLEASE for the love of the GODS - GET THAT THROUGH YOUR HEAD. There are other places on the web where you can get that info. Why do you insist on harping on and on about it here? Even those of us who are sympathetic to the issue have had it with you. Go wave the flag over at High Times, will you?

Dude, just because Microsoft conned millions of people into buying Vista right out of the gate doesn't make it a success. The only success is Microsoft raking in the cash. As an OS, it's definitely a piece of crap. Ask anyone who's actually had to use it.

Or do you define a success only by how much money it makes the seller, and not how satisfied the customer is?

You've got about a third of your column repeating in the middle. Might want to fix that.

Someone actually expects me to pay good money for a gizmo that makes...a fried egg sandwich?

I've got a gizmo at home that'll do that. It's called a skillet. Works just fine.

No. Think. Read. Try. You can do it.

You're still equating a criminal with a victim. It doesn't matter how drunk the rape victim is, she (or he) still didn't commit a crime. So it doesn't matter how much you think it's "unfair" that a victim should be protected by law but a criminal should be arrested and tried. Whatever issues you have with the idea of women drinking and men being allowed to act as they please with them are immaterial. The law is there to protect the innocent and punish the guilty. Until somebody makes a law saying it's illegal to get drunk AT ALL, your argument will never be valid.

Try to get it through your head:

Victim - protection

Criminal - jail.

Really, it isn't that hard to understand.

Your comment makes me wonder if the law will then eventually have to be changed to define "rape" in terms of what contact is or isn't allowed. Lots of people tend to include contact that isn't intercourse in the definition of "sex", so would those contacts - oral, anal, etc. - be covered under "rape"? If a women gets drunk to the nines and a guy gets her alone and does everything possible short of actually penetration without her consent, would it still be prosecutable as rape?

Thorny details to iron out.

"Ominous"? "Sniffing"? Where did those adjectives come from?

Having followed the link to the ad, I found the narrator sounded exactly like any other campaign ad narrator - serious and careful. I heard no "sniffing" (other than that implied in Shapiro's head), and he certainly didn't sound "ominous".

Salon has made lots of noises over how biased and peremptory the MSM is about all the Democratic candidates except Clinton and Obama. And yet here we are, with a report about a Democratic candidate that is just as snarky, unpleasant and judgmental as anything the MSM cooks up.

Hypocrisy, anyone?