...with more of her political observations that range from half-baked to patently obvious.

Rick Santorum gives her the "willies". This is new territory for Paglia; she seems to grasp, however dimly, that Santorum is an unapolegetic bigot. As far as his ad campaign, the award for best political ad campaign really should go to the ads of winning candidates. Why write a paragraph on TV spots that are obviously an attempt to run from the President into the arms of the center, if only for the month or so before the election.

"All civil libertarians should be alarmed by police actions that appear designed to influence elections. And an authentically liberal press should adhere to humanistic principles and constantly monitor its own drift toward partisanship." This is exactly what the Republicans has been doing since 9/11. The Bush adminstration has fiddled with the terror alert status, held press conferences for the arrests of nobodies, and almost rewrote the Geneva Convention in order to cover their colletives asses, and Paglia is concerned about poor, crooked, Curt Weldon. She probably considers his allegations "intriguing" becuase he blames the Democrats. And why single out the liberal press when it's the right that has consistently brought us the most polarized press organs, including, but not limited to, Fox News and her beloved talk radio? Why should a civil libertarian not be concerned about the Right wing press, which has effectively behaved as a propaganda arm for a sitting administration? Concerning your "dissident" view about the relevation of the Foley scandal, I did not know that the word "dissident" was synonomus with "moronic". I'm not a Professor of Humanities and Media Studies, and even I've figured out that the contemporary press loves this stuff because it ad time and papers. Here we have a story that has hypocrisy, weird sex, and a written record of lewd instant messages, and Paglia is trying to figure out the real reason the media is obsessed with it. Give me a break.

"Pelosi didn't coast into prominence on the coattails of an ambitious husband, as did Hillary Clinton..." ad infinitium, ad naseum. Look; if Paglia hates Hilary Clinton, and like's Nancy Pelosi, that's fine (and Lord knows she hates Bill Clinton, Hilary Clinton, even George Clinton). But let's not pretend her personal feelings are some kind of deep analysis. No-one in politics gets anywhere without some kind of in. If it's your husband, great. So what. It's not like Nancy Pelosi started a small senate in her garage or something. These are politicians. If Paglia doesn't like how Hilary Clinton got where she is today, then she probably won't like %90 of her colleagues. Even the men of action.

I don't know why we have to hear from Paglia. It is absurd to watch her nitpick the Democrats for these imaginary transgressions while the Republicans run the country into the ground. If you're going to have someone who basically buys the Right-wing talking points, how about someone who can actually make strong arguments instead of just spouting off? The 90s are over. Democrat-hating intellectuals are no longer interesting; They're called Fox News pundits. Enough already with Paglia.

But I stopped and thought about it. I haven't read all the letters, but I hope someone has pointed out that the letter writer's problem has nothing to do with some kind of generational conflict; he doesn't get along with his coworkers for some reason, and he is rationalizing it. Maybe it's his fault; he might be kind of a jerk. It's also just as likely that he works with a clutch of jerks, and he's bummed out about it. Does anybody really believe that a certain age group has the monopoly on certain human emotions or character traits? If you stop and say that to yourself, does it really make sense?

Sometimes Cary get's a little up his own butt with his answers, so I'd say this to the guy; pull back from this idea about generational combat. Instead of looking at the things you can control, like how you interact with these people, or whether or not you should even be working there, you fixate on things that you can't control, like how old everybody is and what generation they're from. Clear your mind and start fresh.

...is was of the funniest people alive.

He just nailed them to the wall.

"You're demonstrably, horribly, wrong! About everything! Always!"

Priceless.

Absolutely. Is his resignation too late? Oh, my, yes. He has had ample oppurtunity to run this ill-conceived war into the ground. Is there anybody smart enough to prove that there aren't enough troops in Iraq? Well, golly, I don't know, but I'm pretty sure there isn't anyone who is half as smart as Rumsfeld thinks he is. Is it possible that Rumsfeld actually believes that the Iraq War is going well? Who can say? Perhaps it's a "known unknown". Does he accept any responsibilty for the state of Iraq and the prosecution of this war? Probably not.

Will I miss this preening, posturing, incompetent asking and answering his own inane questions?

No. Not at all.

He really is starting to refine his sensibilities about what the general public wants; I think there are a lot of people out there who would like to see him get his ass kicked.