After wading through six pages, I’ve concluded that Paglia has devolved into little more than a sanctimonious windbag. Her ‘views’ are as rigid and predictable as Bush’s after a point: I know more or less what she will say about global warming, radio talk show hosts, Madonna and her other pet issues as she bangs away at them like worn-out washbaords.

I’d be happier with a Paglia puppet or card-board cut out, and most likely just as enlightened. This is a waste of Salon’s capacity: reading about the late Lady Bird Johnson at the NYT was a welcome relief after Paglia’s latest ramblings. She's becoming more of a commodity and less of a thought provoker, and I'm almost surprised she hasn't marketed her own line of Grecian fashions or developed a line of make up, which she could use.

I used to enjoy her writing some years ago, but now I’m questioning why.

If I read any of her future musings, it will be out of sheer boredom or morbid curiosity.

I just watched episode 5 on a net feed, about an apparently schizophrenic woman who sees the face of Jesus in a potato. It was as touching as it was funny. I did a bit of poking around, and saw there are two seasons of six episodes, plus a Christmas special. I just might go and get religious so I can pray for more episodes.

Oh…and it uses one of my favorite songs for the theme music, The Kinks “Village Green Preservation Society”…can’t beat that.

Clinton’s deputy communications director, Phil Singer, needs to get one thing straight: We are Michiganders, not Michiganians. We like to drink pop, and are confused by ‘soda’.

It’s also funny how Clinton was so silent about this issue before the Michigan primaries, and so outspoken now that she sees it as being to her advantage. If she thought it was so unfair, I’m curious why she didn’t push for a solution before it became a problem. Her after the fact grandstanding has become as threadbare as her 1990s Dress Barn pant suits, which she might consider selling on E-bay to support her flagging financial situation.

That her name was the only one on the ballot would seem more appropriate to the former Soviet Union, or present day China.

I like Hillary Clinton, but wish she would embrace solutions that recognize more than her own political ambitions, as it seems to cheapen her candidancy, polyester slacks notwithstanding.

Moving the parade to an undisclosed location is deeply ironic. It’s a funny thing to be trundling a torch about for droves of spectators to see, without them there to see it.

The other great irony is that China has been very vocal about not wanting the Olympics to be ‘used’ as a political event. At the same time, they have extended the torches tour to its longest journey in history, in order to tout their arriving as a nation of world class status in the twenty first century. What could possibly be more political than that? But being a nation of world class status in the twenty-first century involves more than hosting a series of games, or an increasing amount of wealth. It involves respecting human freedom and dignity, freedom of speech, religious expression, the rights of workers, and the treatment of the environment. Many athletes are not arriving in Beijing until the last possible moment, for fear of breathing the air. Then there are the sheer number of people China imprisons and kills each year, not to mention its various exports of lead-paint ridden children’s toys, poisonous pet-food and toxic tooth-paste.

I was pleased to see Nancy Pelosi’s house resolution today condemning China’s actions in Tibet, which passed by a vote along the lines of 413 to 1. I was also heartened to see Hillary Clinton’s call to boycott the opening ceremonies. That Gavin Newsom has so little faith in his citizens to assemble for the peaceful expression of their views is deeply troubling. As the alleged progressive mayor of a progressive city, his actions are better suited to the autocratic workings of governments like China’s. Newsom strikes me as little more than a philandering glad-hander, squelching the voices of dissent in his capitulation to whatever pressures. So the torch gets put out. Boo hoo.

If China imagines the world will turn a blind eye to its dirty laundry and stand humbly in blind Olympic awe, it has made a major miscalculation. China has crafted its hosting of the games into one of the most blatantly managed pieces of political propaganda in history, and its authors aren’t winning any medals.

Sounds like 80% of Salon these days!

Funny, when McCain hatched the idea, Salon ran a piece called ‘McCain’s Gassy Tax Relief’, slamming the idea. Now that Clinton has reformulated the matter, it’s suddenly brilliant.

The fact remains that most people will save very little money. I commute to work in a Chevy Metro, and drive about two hours per day. I estimate I’ll save $44 in three months, or about $14.67 a month. I suppose wealthier people driving gas guzzling SUVs and sports cars stand to save more, but why encourage fuel inefficiency in the first place? Isn’t that one of the key factors driving prices up?

And how is this really going to impact my grocery bills in any meaningful way? Am I going to suddenly splurge and buy a steak once a month? $3.17 a week is not going to make a difference in my grocery bill.

I'm also currently supporting my bf who has broken his arm, has no insurance, and has been unable to work for two months. I can safely say we are at the lower end of the economic scale. The assertion that $3 a week will be some kind of windfall is rubbish.

Joan Walsh continues to blemish her already loopy editorial judgment by publishing such inanities.