has always mystified me almost as much as the Jew-fundie link. The only reason is ever worked was that Catholics truly believe that abortion is murder, and it has always landed them with some strange bedfellows. But when I was growing up Southern Baptist, we received frequent tracts and warnings about Catholicism - which was considered a form of Satanism, mainly because of its emphasis on ritual. Going to Mass? EVEN WORSE than playing Dungeons & Dragons!!! I am so glad to see this relationship coming apart at the seams at last. If I still believed in God, I would say a prayer of thanks.

you lost me at "biologically programmed." What the hell does that mean? I have had babies, and they are not "biologically programmed" to do a damn thing, except SUCK. They even have to learn how to pass gas (which they manage to do long before puberty, btw). And I think the history of humanity would suggest that men who prefer to form pair bonds are more likely to find mates. I think the jury is still out - possibly eternally - on what is and is not "biologically programmed."

When did he declare the race over? I saw the debate too, and he clearly said the race wasn't over yet. Of course, he also made a little slip and mentioned his work during his Senate campaign and "this presidency," and he did seem to be talking occasionally as though it were already over. But Clinton has been saying "when I'm president" for more than a year now, right? That's part of the job description of a presidential candidate - pretending you're already president. So this is just the latest straw man in a series of logical flaws by this campaign - right up there with "if your campaign is just about words, they should be your own." OK, and who said it was?

You can't say on the one hand that he's fighting desperately outspending you two to one and one the other hand say he's acting like he already won. Which one is it? Probably neither, actually.

But I stole that from my husband's grandmother, who said it at the age of 99 when asked for advice about life. But I guess in this context, I should say:

Just kept doing the next thing.

Seriously, woman. She wouldn't stop crying, but both of you would stop feeling crazy for a few minutes. Christ.

But the more I thought about it, the more it made sense that if you're going to mouth off about wanting unilateral changes to an international treaty, it only makes sense to do a little pre-damage control with the other countries that might be affected by your intentions to re-negotiate. And I have no doubt that both Clinton and Obama have such intentions. Frankly, if they hadn't spoken to a few people in the other two North American countries about that ahead of time, it would have been pretty irresponsible. So, the only question left is whether Goolsbee actually said it was "just rhetoric," and whether it matters if he did. Because, the point is, even if Clinton and Obama fully intend to work on renegotiation (and, as I said, I think they do), it IS just rhetoric right now. It's a campaign promise, not a unilateral challenge to our friendly neighbors.

Anyone who ignores "regardless of the consequences" in that statement is missing the whole point. Neither Democrat promised to withdraw "regardless of the consequences." I think it's stupid for the Obama campaign to be sending this article around. I guess it's only fair, given the kinds of campaigning their opponent has been doing, but I was admiring Obama for being above that kind of campaigning.

I too am mystified by your "conscience" vote. Proud liberal feminist my ... foot. Do you have ANY idea what McCain's views on reproductive rights are? Did you even watch the most recent debate? Clinton and Obama's stance on troop withdrawal is virtually the same. There have been some very good pieces on Broadsheet about McCain's anti-choice votes, just for starters. And did you catch his speeches about how he plans to appoint conservative judges? I don't know if you've bought the "Maverick" schtick, but if he ever was one, he sure ain't now. So, if you're really who you say you are and not a concern troll, I highly recommend a little more self-informing, sister.

until the campaign got so negative. It is like listening to my children fighting in the next room. It is getting on my nerves. And that is the point of all negative campaigning: make people cynical, order to suppress turnout. If she chooses to stay in, I hope she does it in a way that keeps Dems in the headlines without jeopardizing either candidate's chances in November. But I'm running out of hope for that.

Um, 76 percent of girls are not permitted to go to school? People can't even buy food? I'm sure the rich are eating. How is this freedom again? They have neither freedom NOR security. What exactly is she talking about? The fact that they have many dictators fighting with each other instead of a single dictatorship?

Neither Democratic candidate is, particularly. That is part of the problem.

That was too reactive, but I was having trouble getting beyond the "progressive" question-begging to the rest of the point. My apologies. I voted for Obama today, but that does not keep me from seeing the bias in the media. And the bias is totally amoral: it is a simple bias toward sensationalism. It has worked against Clinton, no doubt about it. Watching Obama react to similar attempts is part of the reason I voted for him; he seems to be able to deflect most of the attacks by de-sensationalizing them, and I think that's very important. It's got nothing to do with his gender. I actually "like" Hillary more.

This white woman's robo-call was in Obama's famous baritone. I think my left eardrum might have swooned, almost.