that the smartest show (sci-fi or otherwise) was Firefly? BSG runs a close second with The Tick in third. Season 2 of Babylon was pretty good too..

Have you yet considered the number of talk radio worshippers out there supporting your girl solely to tank the dems chance? Hillary long ago lost any credibility on her own and her base pretty much now consists only of people who would vote for anyone just to get a woman in office and the reich-wing fascists who will do anything to have Her-Most-High-Polarizing-Unelectableness in the opposing slot this time. Obama is NOT Edwards but in a field of manure he is the smallest pile...

To assert that "the Dems need a Clinton/Obama ticket to win" is outright foolish. What any of the 3 remaining candidates needs is a strong VP, because none of the 3 remaining candidates are remotely popular. It speaks to our corrupt system that they are still on the ballot when the right hates McCain, the left hates Ms. McCain (Hill)and the only reason anyone likes Obama is because we all crave change no matter how amorphous it is. The big fight for the Dems now is which one can get Edwards on the ticket.

Clearly you're not blue living in a red state. Let me enlighten your fairytale world. It's not a hoax. People in my home state did it, including my own father who has voted maliciously in Dem primaries since I was a small boy.

And if you don't buy it about Clinton just look at policy stance reversals; her sell out to the healthcare industry, warhawk voting... she and McCain ought to be on the same ticket. If you're going to be a zealot for a female candidate try to find one without compromised morals.

"She moved from New York to Utah at age 19, converted to Mormonism, married an LDS adherent and had two children with him"

I can't think of anything more horrible than converting from a free spirit to one in the chains of a monetary cult which degrades the very idea of women and minorities.

Thank the Jewish God she finally realized the best way to 'compete' with a video game is to realize its not a competition. It's a hobby. Share it, embrace it, and all the misery just goes away. Rachel should teach a class.

Ok, accepted the divorce was the problem... but wake up. The divorce was precipitated by the group marriage. That's what swinging does to established relationships. Anyone who engages in this practice, no matter how mature, is playing with fire. Your mother got burned badly. How dare you glorify it?

"Sorry Joan, but not this time. Women should not be soothed by the cries for party unity. Right now women have the power of their anger as they have never had in my lifetime. It is the best and truest female emotion to be experienced (collectively) in years. In anger, there is tremendous power. Women absolutely should not squander this anger."

Of course, aka, you're right. It isnt the time to reconcile and support the democratic nominee. In fact, its time to support Nader! Or McCain! Because we're MAD! We can't squander this anger! We've got to stay mad! We've got to make sure that the presidency stays in fascist control because we're whining like spoiled little princesses that an awful old black man got the vote before women! Or wait, the nomination! Because equal rights comes in the form of color before sex! Or some other nonsense!! Angry!! Angry angry!!

Nice.

"And not this one either. There won't be any "may" write her in either. I "WILL* write her in. That much I have decided on."

Good plan. Once again the shrill denial of logic that helps to fuel the sexism you love to complain about. Yes, you're mad and pouting but because of that you'll cast this country back into hell? Now? When we're so close to starting the climb out? Go ahead and waste your vote, or better vote for AnyoneButObama. Then we can blame 100 years in Iraq on whacked out feminists. Is that how you want your cause viewed? Vote your interests, not the sex of teh candidate... or the color! Why can't you wrap your little minds around that?

"If she votes for Nader it is her vote to cast. So long as she doesn't vote for McCain it doesn't add to a victory for him."

Obviously you don't remember the 2000 and 2004 elections.

Virtue001 that was a masterpiece, even though the sarcasm is not lost on me, I must say a nice piece of writing. It made me giggle.

"But the precedent is that Jesse Jackson did not win the nomination when he ran for president, or even come as close as Clinton did, but he still was able to help to create the path that lead to...Barack Obama."

I totally disagree. Jackson paved no paths for Obama, they're as alike as oil and water. Saying that Jackson was an Obama trailblazer JUST because of skin color is, well, let's call it misguided. I know your intent is well, but they're about as similar as Hillary and Condaleeza, that is to say they're both female. All Jackson, Sharpton, Wright, and Farrakhan have done for serious black candidates is give them a smeared image that 'activates' dormant racism in whites who might otherwise risk a vote for a black man. It is a great credit to his character that Obama has managed to rise above that and maintain the trust of the common, scared white voter who's had "Obama's Scary Black Pastor" shoved down their throats for months now. Let's face it, you'll never win the majority in an election if you pander only to the minority.