They just haven't pinned a name on her alleged contact person.

And you know what? It wouldn't surprise me if someone associated with each campaign HAD talked to someone in the Canadian government at some point about distinguishing between the [i]tone [/i]of the anti-NAFTA rhetoric each has been pumping out in Ohio and the [i]content[/i]. It would be easier to hear more than was actually being said by Obama OR Clinton, if one was of a mind to.

That being then twisted around by some Conservative Party lacky to make both Democratic candidates look bad should not come us a shock.

Free advice is worth what you pay for it.

at a time everyone thought Iraq had WMD

Um, don't know how to break this to you, sport, but an awful lot of people who spend time at Salon NEVER believed that BS. And we think those who did are kind of, you know, stupid, or at best incapable of critical thought.

It makes a body proud, it does, to see what was once only an American phenomenon spread to its rightful place on the global stage. *roll eyes*

Because I'm a cruel SOB.

Check to see if he's missing a finger.

As noted elsewhere, it blunts the already dubious "message" of WV coming now. If it had come before WV, and not affected the outcome (extremely likely) it would have been seized upon as evidence that "even Edwards can't help Obama in Appalachia" by those inclined that way.

If the putative endorsement includes him asking his 19 delegates to go with Obama, that would also more than balance the small pickup HRC got in WV. Double whammy.

Seeing what happens when identity politics goes bad.

Last I checked, the Teamsters don't ask the rank and file for a show of hands to determine who the national union endorses. Nor do they step into the booth to ensure the rank and file follow their endorsement. An endorsement by a national organization means that the people who run the organization are making a strategic decision, nothing more, nothing less. Such endorsements are never meant to imply everyone in the organization agrees with the people that run it.

If enough people in NARAL have a problem with the endorsement, they can vote with their feet. I imagine some might. I also imagine no one other than them will care. This reminds me way too much of the scene in "Life of Brian" where the splinter groups are killing each other while the Roman centurions shake their heads.

Seriously, I think they exhausted the supply in 2004.

Exactly. Past tense. They can't do that again. They shot their wad in 2004 and don't have an equivalent to try this time.

Very possibly. But those were pretty much the only states where such an issue would make a difference. The other 39 are either reliably blue or reliably red. They're out of ammo now.

a skill which Americans alone seem to lack

That explains Tony Blair, Steven Harper, and John Howard, yeah. Not to mention Berlusconi, Aznar and Sarkozy. A bunch of dimwitted slacker Americans snuck in and voted 'em all in...

Or perhaps being able to see through the bullshit is a more universal issue than you would like to admit.

And we have a rather more standard letter here: new baby + another(!) work-related relocation pushes husband into a bad mental place, from which he wants to escape. At least Second Life doesn't cost as much as a gambling habit and doesn't leave needle tracks.

In this respect Cary's answer is spot on, and would work in any such situation (as well as any one-size answer can).

So it can't be linked to. Perhaps someone with a stronger stomach copied it.

Hey, what if Shawn et al aren't GOP trolls? What if they're Salon staffers just pissing people off to keep us coming back to drive up their page hits?

That unfortunately fits with my Chief Dictum of the Internet: even assuming the worst of anonymous posters often isn't bad enough.

Hmm. But I like Glenn Greenwald, dammit.

Yes, most A-B products are swill.

However, given InBev's reputation, the chances of them continuing the extremely generous largess A-B has showered on St. Louis over the past century is virtually nil. From massive donations to virtually every charity and cultural institution in the area to free kegs for local wedding receptions, the roots of A-B run deep in the town's soil.

Losing yet another HQ would be another nail in St. Louis's coffin. Losing A-B would be more like hermetically sealing it and pouring concrete over the top.

P.S.--Sierra Nevada is way overrated.

The chances of InBev getting rid of any of A-B's brands is zilch. They want A-B specifically FOR the market share of Bud et al. Trust me, there will be plenty of mediocre swilling beer coming out of the same breweries--it's only the corporate citizenship that will change. The worst of both worlds, as it were.

The karmic payback involved in the transaction has also not escaped my notice. I too mourned when Rolling Rock was bought out by A-B and its production moved out of Latrobe. But that's not the fault of the people who work for A-B, and that's who is going to feel the pain, NOT A-B stockholders, who will make out like bandits.

Dingdingding!

Salon's readership is mostly left-of-center. Posting things that make McCain look bad (think: dog bites man) doesn't generate as many page hits as posting things that try to make Obama look bad. ESPECIALLY when you include hits on the letter pages.

Like the one I just gave them writing this. Ironic, no? :)

As far as I'm concerned, the political staff here has pretty much morphed into concern trolls in an effort to stay afloat. In this respect the analogy with Obama's campaign doing what they have to in order to win should be, perhaps, more present in their minds...

Pot, meet kettle.