I wrote my opinions earlier, but I have to say that I am baffled by the negative responses to this article. Some of the responses would be right at home at a Palin rally.

This was not an article attacking Palin for taking the kids along. It was an article asking what the appropriate thing to do is in Palin's situation. Mr. Schone is not condemning Palin; he is asking which is the lesser of two evils.

Can women have it all and be a full-time Mom AND a full-time worker? NO. It isn't possible.

Men can't do it either. That is why we have song like "Cat's in the Cradle." Men have been expected for a long time to be providers first and fathers second. They couldn't devote enough time to one without impacting the other. Now that women are moving into the positions that men held for so long, they are faced with the same choices that men have had to make for many generations.

It isn't fair to hold a woman to a higher standard than a man would be. If a woman chooses to put her career first (and thus the income that provides for the kids), she should not be held to a higher standard than a man would be, assuming that the child will still be getting the best care possible (preferably from the other parent or a relative). However, the notion that somehow a woman can be a full-time VP AND a full time parent is just plain wrong. That she has the right to choose which path is right for her and her family is the cornerstone of any legitimate feminism.

However, that doesn't mean that individual choices she makes along the way cannot be questioned. The father who chooses to skip yet another of his son's ballgames for a get-together that could lead to promotion (but probably won't) is choosing work over family. It isn't wrong to question whether some of those get-togethers should have been skipped in order to show his son that he cares. Likewise, it isn't wrong to question some of the decisions that Sarah Palin makes as she tries to strike the balance between family and ambition.

McCain shamefully played the special needs card. I was furious, but I think that you are incorrect in your specific attack. I believe that McCain was referencing the fact that Palin has a nephew with autism when he said that. He should have made that clearer. Well, he shouldn't have tried to use the kids for political points at all, but if he was going to, he should have made clear that he was talking about the nephew, not about Trig.

An endorsement by Colin Powell would indeed matter. While I and many like me considering him tainted by his activities in Bush's first term (especially the U.N. speech), that view is not necessarily shared by the roughly 8% of voters who say that they haven't yet made up their minds about which candidate they will vote for.

Tainted though he may be, many people think of the First Gulf War when they think about Powell. Not a lot of Americans were really paying that much attention to the U.N. speech in which Powell sullied his name.

This was just a sloppy, poorly written article. Based on the article, one would think that Apple completely ditched FW 400 in favor of USB 2.0 and that, in doing so they were setting USB 2.0 as the new industry standard. Given that 2.0 has been around a while and is everywhere (all my digital cameras and other peripherals use it), that makes no sense.

Was it a poor attempt at satire? Was it just missing some key information that would have let the article makes sense?

If this is the best that Salon can do with The Machinist in the wake of Mr. Manjoo's departure, then perhaps it is time to close shop.

This story set my bullshit meter sailing off the dial when it first popped up last night. I just hope that she is prosecuted to the full extent of the law for this nonsense. This goes beyond filing a false police report, given the timing and the racial and political implications. She deserves the maximum sentence possible.