Here in we see the teats of conservatism

"Paul Weyrich, president of the Free Congress Foundation, published a column laying out three requirements for a successful third-party bid: major defections of elected officials from the Republican Party, the financial backing of an independently wealthy individual, and the support of a major news organization, like the Fox News Channel or the Wall Street Journal."

To sum it up, financial backing from the super rich, and support from corporate media are what feeds the conservative movement. Note that Paul Weyrich did not mention popular support, grassroots movement/activism, or voter confidence and trust. Probably because he knows that a Christian Right movement determined to overturn Roe vs. Wade, criminalize homosexuality, invade the bedroom, destroy the separation of church and state, illegalize contraception items, counter all efforts to research stem cells, counter all sciences with elements of evolution and global warming studies contained within them, and infringe on women's fight to do away with glass ceiling and gender inequality in the work force, isn't going to gather much popular support, encourage much grassroots movement/activism, or inspire much voter confidence and trust.

The conservatives only prayer is that rich Santa Claus will come to visit them, and that smarmy media will spread propaganda on their behalf and slander the opposition on the left (or in Paul Weyrich cause, the center).

As you pointed out yourself AKA Smith's remark was a question (with a question mark), not an endorsement.

On the topic of bras (what I am about to say is an observation not an endorsement), I have noticed that more and more of my female coworkers actually tape up or bandage their bosom securely in place, as they can't show cleavage with a uniform on anyways. To be totally honest men don't care much about female bosoms unless they are naked in front of us. (Then of course we like them a lot, though it is more because the women have shown us so much trust and confidence by bearing their breast, then in actually looking at naked breast).

But my letter is not condemnation of bras, any woman should be allowed to wear any sort of support that she likes, and I have heard from many women that wire bras give the most support (as opposed to tape and bandages that give the most).

On the topic of security, a topic I know a fare enough about, in security teams that I was a part of, we always kept a woman with us to do the frisking of women (as a rule, male servicemen were not suppose to ever touch women, unless there was overwhelming suspicion that a weapon was present. A male soldier (I am not a soldier) touching an Islamic woman is going to lose a lot of hearts and minds). Even in ship boardings, the US Navy would send a female serviceman with the boarding team just in case their might be a woman present on a suspected al-Qeada gun running ship.

Why is it that more women are not present at metal detecting check points in airports and in public buildings?

Though, I wonder if women would feel more or less uncomfortable being felt up by a woman, when their wire frame bra causes a metal detector to beep?

In any case the whole paranoia thing is getting a bit out of hand.

If this keeps up eventually we will get to mandatory body cavity searches for all. And I bet Shadow would love that.

Tracy Clark-Flory, you wrote!

"I don't exactly believe in the power of panties over the diplomacy of the United Nations, but as a form of global mocking, the campaign seems promising. Still, I can't help feeling that the silliness of this symbolic offensive makes light of a dire situation -- so I won't be parting with my panties anytime soon, thank you."

Tracy Clark-Flory, it is so disconcerting to see a woman of such influence as yourself discourage such a harmless, non-violent way to make real results happen. Sit-in were silly, but they garner results. Bus boycotts in the South were silly, but they also garnered result. John Lennon's and Yoko Ono's bed-in for peace was silly but it garnered huge results.

Tracy Clark-Flory, you do don't seem to understand that the smallest of actions can be so powerful when the masses are behind the movement. Sending your soiled panties to Burmese embassies is a great idea, because no gets hurts, the totalitarian, undemocratic, Burmese Junta gets embarrassed, and coordination from women from around the world puts real recognizable pressure on the Burmese Junta to change their evil ways.

To further what could be a very successful, easy to participate in campaign, I would also recommend writing in permanent ink on all soiled panties "free Aung San Suu Kyi".

Also men could get involved in this. If your girlfriend or wife doesn't know about the free Burma campaign, then remind her, and tell her how dear it is to your heart, as every woman loves a sensitive man that cares about global women's issues.

Aung San Suu Kyi is the rightful leader of Burma, and it's time she was allowed to rule.

Tracy Clark-Flory, I am so disappointed in you. This is a movement that could be so powerful, and yet so easy to be a part of, and you comdemned it, only because you thought it was silly. Like as if you don't silly things everyday.

"I'm almost ready to give up on keeping abortion legal, women can always got to Canada to if they need to."

So a woman living in Texas, Southern California, or any other Southern state should have to get a passport, travel thousands of miles, take a week off from work, and live in secrecy, just because the condom broke or other forms of birth control failed (or she was raped)?

I am not about to give up the gains we made on reproductive rights, under any circumstances.