As one of the first to usually criticize Joan Walsh, primarily because of her tendencies to parse endlessly in defense of the status quo, (i.e. "centrist" positions to "reach out"), I have to defend her here because she calls it exactly like it is. Senator Obama's rising popularity over the last year has been primarily due to message, not any clear cut stances on issues. His recent actions have run counter to this "message," with yesterday's among the most reprehensible... and yes, indefensible.

Nearly as reprehensible are his defenders, as are those who constantly criticize those of us who would cast our vote for Ralph Nader in protest. The tired old blame game over Bush vs. Gore demonstrates a clear lack of understanding of *everything* that transpired then, and denigrates those of us nuanced enough to carefully consider our votes in states where the luxury of sending a message should be safely prioritized over another empty vote for a show of numbers. And instead of criticizing those not living in "safe" states, go cry to Obama and his colleagues who needlessly capitulated once again to this so-called "president" and his cronies. They're the ones who have been wasting our votes by either stealing them or dismissing them outright.

Ms. Walsh clearly outlined what transpired yesterday, and why most would still hold their nose and vote for Obama in November anyway. I'm just glad I don't have to.

A departure caption as uninspiring as his typical content. But the one indelible topic (inadvertently?) omitted from the list was (stolen) elections. For that, I echo the reader who wrote "don't let the door hit you on the way out." And whether the pay is better or not, and despite Salon's recent seismic shifts, this move is definitely one that is "downward lateral." But you go, girl.

Code Pink is one of the most important dissident groups we have in this country... but does anyone really take "pink" seriously any more? After all, it's been effectively diluted with the "breast cancer industrial complex," teen girl marketing, and the (now-dated) SoCal/Florida retro mid-century modern sensibility so prevalent in the mid to late 1980s.

On the flip side, this group has taken the color to the nth degree. Brilliant were the "pink slips" issued to various members of the Bush administration during various protests I witnessed in southern California, in particular from the balconies at the very Republican Century Plaza Hotel in Century City.

Street theater is one of our last remaining vestiges of protest that has any chance of cracking the code of our consciousness through dissent. But it fortunately/unfortunately depends upon a lax and lazy media that is so increasingly corporate for its survival.

It's really a "Catch 22" situation: we're damned if we do, and damned if we don't. But as an early dissenter for all things Bush administration, I'm willing to don the tiara and risk the humiliation of dress-up. After all, the ratings for Bush and Company are in the tank... (And we know what the tank is at $5 per gallon gas is.)

Medea Benjamin and Jodie Evans and all of their colleagues get my accolades. While they are presently marginalized in the present, they will be lauded for what they have accomplished for our pasts... and our futures.

"White mother from Kansas thang?" Whatever.

That was the worst aspect of this ill-conceived piece, which was an exercise in sheer silliness. It also demonstrates what is so wrong about our system and how it is constantly debased and trivialized by armchair punditry.

I'm voting for Ralph Nader, so my already irrelevant opinion is rendered even more so... But since I'm the sandbox today, I'll play along.

For starters, Mr. Schaller's choices are too "centrist," which means they would probably play to the mythical, so-called "middle" and nothing meaningful would get accomplished over the next four years. So, in order to effect real "change" my choices are as follows:

Feingold

Edwards

Boxer

Gore

But all of these have a "while male with 'thang.'"

All of this evangelical masturbation is predicated on the myth that George W. Bush actually won the presidency (twice), and that this constituency was a deciding factor. Even if he did win, (and we'll never really know), the margin would have been so slim, and much less than that of Bill Clinton. And the immediate response of Clinton detractors was that he didn't have a "mandate," and needed to govern accordingly. The spoils of war are so much more generous to the marginal factors these days.

Are we really having this conversation in 2008? With "mainstreamed" freaks like Rick Warren and his ilk? Why do we continue to cede this ground? Jesus H. Christ.

We have allowed this nonsense to go on for nearly 30 years, while find ourselves in evermore dire straits. Every time we pursue this avenue, another, more desperate one is ignored. I'm tired of this empty pandering. The "audacity of hope" and "yes we can" requires so much more.

Um, gee, I hate to rain on the parade, but is Barack Obama really ready to defend the constitution, in light of his recent FISA vote?

I hate to sound blond and dim here, but really?!? I AM NOT getting on this train until the Democratic Party, and that means B.O. (in all of its meanings)... leads with a representative platform. Hello?!?

Call me a party pooper, but I'll be voting for Ralph Nader until then.

Thank you, and good night.