The Democrats in Congress won't exercise any of the three options Tim Grieve mentions. They certainly won't have a master plan to defeat Alito. And why would we think they'd focus on GOP scandals or the war when they've done next to nothing about either one up until now? The Congressional Dems are comatose, on the floor, and can't get up. It's a year since the last election and nothing the left envisioned for a revived Democratic Party has even come close to happening. The focus should be on putting lefties into office, working from the ground up in the same way conservatives launched their takeover more than 30 years ago. Otherwise, we're wasting our breath, or our blogs. I say either start learning the ropes of grassroots precinct politics or move to Europe.

Jeez, enough with the cute pets already. As Jane Curtin, in another context, once said on Saturday Night Live, "it's so cute, it makes you want to puke your guts out."

OK, so Truthout screwed up - maybe. Or maybe they just didn't wait long enough to report the story, or whatever the hell happened. Talk about a non-issue! The last thing salon readers, or truthout readers, are interested in is a pissing match between the two organizations. This is a classic bullshit competitiveness-driven press dustup that means little to anyone other than the reporters involved. Readers want to know whether Rove will be indicted or not, not who jumped the gun on a story - that's way more insiderish and gossipy than most of us have time or patience for. Get back to reporting and draw in the fangs.

I have no problem with the many good points Sidney Blumenthal makes about our radical, and radically ignorant, president. But, please, please, Sid, get a writing coach who can loosen up your school-marm style. History and politics DON'T have to be dry.

Some good ideas but not enough talent to pull them off. It's an old story.

I can't vote for either of these first two entries. Audiofile's predilection for ethereal (at best) soundscapes, breathy vocals and slushy, musical opium has apparently infected all the judges. If these two choices are what we have to look forward to in Song Search, then hopefully, the contest will bring Audiofile's questionable musical choices to a head, and someone else can be chosen to bring new direction to the feature, away from the Ecstasy-driven blahscapes that others are apparently tired of, too.

I had a modicum of respect for Rob Thomas' taste before reading his gushing note about Colorform's "dreamy" song. No more. (Rather than "dreamy," try "comatose," Rob.) If the rest of the Song Search competition is going to feature similarly blah, opiated soundscapes, then for God's sake, get it over with quick and don't drag it out. And Audiofile, please start featuring songs that might make listeners want to get up off the couch rather than sink farther into it for a nap.

I did not enter this contest, and I don't know anyone who did, so there's nothing up my sleeve. I am, however, a lifelong music lover, music writer, and music history instructor, so I'm not spouting off half-cocked either. I have to agree with the readers who are dissatisfied with this contest. So far the choices have either been snoozefests or amateurish (and not in the cool, lo-fi sense, just "not good." If wispy, melancholy sounds and self-consciously arty schlock are the future of popular music, well, I'll have to settle for UNpopular music, I guess. In any case, this contest has been a bust - so much so I've heard people recommending it to others as a great "bad joke."

You've topped yourself, TB! This is the godawfulest crap I've heard in years. Don't get me wrong, I like atonal soundscapes - count me in when it comes to John Zorn, Sonny Rollins, Stockhausen or Alban Berg - but In what world is this ridiculous, painfully self-conscious stuff "music"?

Well, at least he didn't throw up on anybody this time.

I have to agree with MacGuffin that the choice of S.R. Sidarth as person of the year is odd. I'm glad Sidarth reported the incident, Allen was defeated, and the Senate went Democratic. And I agree 100 percent that defining America so that it includes everyone is just and necessary. But Mr. Sidarth's actions hardly merit being named person of the year. Frankly, it's kind of ridiculous to even consider it. I could maybe see Sidarth winning an award as Inadvertent But Fortuitous Symbol of the Year, but you should have to have accomplished something significant, or had an extraordinary amount of influence, to be chosen as person of the year, or else the award itself becomes a joke. The macaca incident was just one of many events that added up to a rejection of the GOP, not the main event. I suggest that next year's panel refrain from drinks and bong hits during the naming process.

Once again, it's John Edwards who is showing the courage to speak truth to power. The more I read about Edwards, the more I'm puzzled why progressives aren't lining up behind his campaign rather than flirting with Obama who, although he seems like a nice enough guy, isn't offering any clear ideas of exactly what he stands for. Is it Edwards' Southern accent? Is he considered damaged goods after running with Kerry? Whatever the reason, progressives should look more closely at the presidential candidate who is on the money on nearly every issue. Wake up, people.

This inane review - if you can call it that - is the last straw for me. I will no longer read Stephanie Zacharek's pieces. Using a review as a sounding board for her gossipy opinions on movie stars' lives is just the latest example of SZ's frequent clueless shallowness - and begs for Salon to replace her. She is by far the weakest film critic of any major media outlet in this country (and that's saying something).