Glenn,

I think you wrote an interesting piece, and I love your writing in general, but I don't find this column to be specific enough. If you could answer the kind of questions that follow, I think it would be much more helpful than a generic statement of disappointment with the Democratic Party.

1. Which Democrats in the House and Senate are acting as you think they should?

2. Which Democrats are blowing in the wind?

3. Which Democrats are actively supporting the president and subverting democracy?

Then...

4. Which Republicans are actively supporting the president and subverting democracy?

5. Which Republicans are blowing in the wind?

6. Which Republicans are breaking with their party to defend what is right?

Congress is not an undifferentiated force; nor are the two parties such forces. Indeed, every member of the House and Senate can be individually critiqued and his or her influence on the body politic assessed. It's a little bit more work, but I would invite you to apply your powers of analysis to this project. It could make a good blog in its own right, or a kind of chart to accompany your blog.

Remember: Concrete and complete is better!

MLR

Doesn't anyone else dislike the fact that the cops can arrest you for mundane crap like this?

I would be like, "Whatever I was doing, officer, it was none of your business. Fuck off."

Adultery is baaaaaaad! Baaaaaaaaad!

The He-Man vs. the Breck Girl

How the Right's distorted sexual template helps defeat the Left

Just say "no."

are way cool. That's for sure.

I really like the paintings, but I've thought more about this and read the comments, and my conclusion is that the girl is making at most superficial contributions to the works. I.e., she is not composing and painting these works overall, although whoever is doing so may justify her purported authorship by having contribute ideas and brush strokes.

People keep bandying about the term "prodigy," as if being a prodigy or a genius automatically makes one proficient in all the skills that apply to a craft. For example, being a genius in musical composition (i.e., having that talent from birth) doesn't automatically make one proficient in musical notation; it doesn't let one know the ranges of instruments or their limitations; and it doesn't make one a great piano player. Some of the biggest songwriters have not known how to write music and were poor musicians themselves.

I think what might seem especially fishy in the Marla case is that too many skills applicable to painting have been developed too quickly. In fact, where are any signs that she has developed at all? It would seem that she was painting perfectly from the very start, which is, quite frankly, preposterous.

For example, her being a prodigy might allow her an excellent sense of composition, how colors relate, etc. But being a genius does not automatically bestow the discipline to paint consistently and completely a huge canvas; indeed, we would not expect such discipline to be present in a four-year old, no matter how gifted.

Further, genius in composition does not automatically bestow skill in making the very wide range of brush strokes we see in the works: from chunky, expertly molded blobs to the finest, wirey lines. Not only would it take the aforementioned discipline to maintain consistency of technique across the whole canvas, it would take a kind of physical control and stamina that we definitely do not associate with young children.

To reiterate, no matter how much natural talent Marla might possess, such talent does not automatically convey the mental and physical discipline to complete the works, nor does it bestow the brush stroke techniques which normally would require many years to develop fully.

In addition to the above issue, I also find fishy the following: It really seems that someone has taken pains to vary the techniques, colors, and themes in the paintings for maximum variety. I should think that a prodigious child with good technique would still, say, over the course of a year or so, tend to produce similar works. And the reason for this is quite simple: good, fully developed artists also tend to produce similar works in any given period of time.

Like everyone else who has big doubts, I could be wrong. But the stupid thing is that all they have to do to dispel such doubts is show Marla painting one of her major works from start to finish. But this they "cannot" do--how convenient! I too agree that "Ocean" is not at the same level of the other paintings--not even close; but even this one, readers say, is not really shown being painted start to finish.

I call BS on the inability to install cameras to capture the needed images. For one, $300k can buy a lot of technology and help. Also, I am in Web development, and Marla's website is anything but cheap. If they can afford to promote her to that extent, they can afford to prove her to that extent. It's just that simple.

Nice summary on this. Just when you think these fascist slimeballs can't get any lower, they do. Wow.

When can we get a decent advice columnist for Salon. We get the same crap, day in day out. Horrible advice. Moralistic drivel. Bullshit platitudes.

These people want to move to the Midwest. The proper advice? Why not give it a try! All the "Italy" bullshit is totally irrelevant. Sheesh, what garbage.

What a bunch of asswipes.

God help us should this shallow, evil man ever become president.

to stop torturing yourself. Fold up your campaign and get some sleep.