I just want to be one of the few people to give you positive feedback for speaking your mind and heart so articulately. I didn't see your appearance, because I haven't watched television for fifteen years, but, from what I can tell, Hardball exemplifies why I made that choice. Those who insist on turning this into a forum for their own arguments about which candidate is "great" (and/or which one is the reincarnation of Satan himself) have totally missed the point. They deserve the bad TV they insist on consuming.

(FTR, I currently support neither Obama nor Clinton - or, rather, I support both of them, but neither very strongly. Like you, I am a disaffected John Edwards supporter.)

are reading these CPAC posts. You will notice that John McCain assured them yesterday that he would appoint conservative judges. Whatever you think about Clinton (and I know a lot of it is not good), she would clean up the administration quite a bit (more forced abstinence-only education, anyone? not for me!) and appoint rational judges who actually believe in the Constitution. (And, speaking of the Constitution, the "four more years" chant is more than a little scary.)

and it's a drop in the bucket v.v. the mortgage. So the college savings plan is the best idea for us.

that the people most likely to "stimulate" the economy with this check are the same ones who really ought to be paying down their credit cards to begin with. The working poor, that is, who almost never have money in chunks. It's a dirty trick, taxing the poor while the rich laugh all the way to the bank.

Our only debt is a huge one - a 30-year mortgage - so we won't be dropping it in that bucket. Instead, we'll probably put it in the college education fund. By the time my kids go to school, it might buy a text book or two!

While I have my deep, disillusioned criticism of The Bill, this comment reminded me of the guy who won my very first presidential vote, back when I was a child of 19. Such innocent times....

Did you guys who are hating on him notice that he admitted in the first couple words that he indeed made a mistake? Now THAT is refreshing. And (even if you don't believe him) he said he didn't want to "be the story"?

He is NOT the story, and I'm glad he is able to acknowledge that. Are you? Can we get back to how we're going to beat McCain now? Together?

when you need him?

I like to see Hilary Clinton using her considerable power and influence! Cleaning up slime! Good for her.

A while back, I asked you who was paying you, and you denied that you were being paid. Now I know. Too bad you slipped, Republican concern troll.

I think your analysis is true in pretty much any other year - but I think the electability (a.k.a. "baggage") issue is Hilary's one big weakness.

As you well know, since you pay such close attention to the posts of people who do not agree with your trollish idiocy, I do not currently have a candidate. Mine dropped out.

I think it makes both camps look like petty schoolyard Republicans. But I did think we were trying to be more like the Republicans after all these years of letting THEM call the shots, write the talking points, and put the Democrats on the defensive. So do we want to see that both of our good candidates can play politics - really? Or do we not?

That's a rhetorical question.

I guess I would not be surprised if Penn were the person who hired the various Spambots, both the anonymous ones and the ones with pseudonyms. But my intuition tells me that at this stage of the game, it is more likely to be a right-winger sowing divisiveness. Or maybe just a sadistic, amoral, non-partisan who doesn't have access to cock or dog fights, so goes online to create them instead. It is incredibly tedious, having to stop every few minutes to scrape the troll leavings off the bottom of one's shoe. If I were in charge, I would probably edit them out of existence - but luckily, cooler heads prevail at Salon! In the end, it is better to have it all aired and ignored. Anyone with a two brain cells to rub together can see how childish it is, and most Salon readers are very intelligent.

Your 30s are your fourth decade, not your third.

LMAO, even though I've been skipping both trolls' messages altogether for months.

I have thought for a while now that cythera is a winger. I think he is being paid to make Obama and Clinton look bad - two Democrats with one stone. And I think most of the people who have joined the conversation in the last few weeks are in the same category. Including Thrasher, maureenodonnell and all those people with z's and x's in their names - can't keep them straight (except edziu's muse - and Xrandadu Hutman and damnthatxanadu, who, even though I get their names mixed up, are supporting opposite candidates). I don't care what people's views are; I am currently uncommitted and I like to read all of them, when they are genuine. But all these people posting in bad faith gets on my nerves. Taking advantage of Salon's very liberal editorial policy. They are not Democrats, let alone liberals, and they have no shame.

but I am getting better at it every time I read the way one of these Republicans talks.

Slackie, I would so love to see someone run a third-party right-wing campaign, but even if they do, I doubt it will be this huckster. He seems more interested in establishment acceptance. I would expect it to be some brand of libertarian. That Party sent the RNC a funereal wreath when McCain became its de facto candidate.