While Michael Moore often comes across to many as ego-maniacal, and even somewhat silly at times, I believe he is unfairly criticized for the alleged offense of taking items out of context, especially when it comes to Fahrenheit 9/11. His deconstruction and (sometimes artless) reassembly of the issues that confront us may not always render the most palatable results, but I think his methods are more necessary than not as a counter to a dysfunctional system of government and media that serves to constantly obscure and destract us from disrupting the status quo.

Although I intend to, I haven't yet seen Sicko. I hope that it accomplishes for a fresh perspective on medicine in this country what those replayed minutes of George W. Bush in that Florida classroom on 9/11 did: countering the failure of the media and Bush's colleagues in government to accurately portray him as an utter incompetent and to subsequently hold him accountable.

Mr. Moore's sins at least haven't killed anyone.

My opinion about this is more cynical: I've heard speculation that, rather than listen to either their own constituencies or the Iraqi people, these self-serving Republicans are really more interested about keeping or maintaining power. Like George W. Bush, they "hear the voices," but are frustrated that they cannot convince their constituencies of the necessity to "stay the course" -- or whatever they are calling it this week. Republicans seem fairly convinced that they have no chance of winning the 2008 presidential election as long as we're in Iraq.

Withdrawal now serves as multi-pronged strategy: 1) They can say that they have taken the reins from Bush and Company, because they have mismanaged or bungled a just cause; 2) George W. Bush still gets to say that we didn't stay long enough to "complete the mission"; 3) It will take the issue completely off the table for the Democrats to leverage, as a worst-case scenario... and severely hinder them at best.

This may not necessarily be a bad thing, however. To counter the increasingly shrill "bomb, bomb Iran" chorus from the right, the Democrats may still be able to articulate a more sane foreign policy.

So, while I don't trust their motives, I'm quite comfortable with the new anti-war wolves in their new wool suits. As far as I'm concerned, they're still losers.

I love Keith Olbermann. And I love everything he has to say. Unfortunately, however, I believe this message is way, way too late. We needed voices like his now is when we, the voices of true dissent, were marching in the streets in 2002, 2003, and 2004. And quite lonely we were.

Mr. Olbermann is part of a media machine that was incredibly negligent during that period. Late entries to this party, while welcome, are really just that -- late entries to a party that really could have been so much more celebratory rather than the lingering, disappointing hangovers we've been reduced to suffering over the last six-plus years.

I didn't hear Mr. Olbermann when Phil Donahue and Bill Maher were sacrificed at the alter of false patriotism. I'm hearing him now, but I believe it is way, way too late to realize that Nixonian moment with this administration. The dissenting voices now are lost in the cacophony.

Oh, I guess we tune in to Chris Matthews for that. Enough said.

This is the first feature in the years I've been subscribing to Salon where I've found the letters in response to be so much more insightful (and entertaining) than any other feature and their replies.

It is so refreshing to have Salon focus on gender-bending now, instead of John Edwards' hair, or any of the other important issues for that matter.

Healthcare? Natch. Income inequality? Natch. Illegal occupation of Iraq? Natch. Deficits? Trade Deficits? Natch.

This one piece lends an entirely new meaning to the term "push-polling." And if the responses are correct, Salon is pushing more than polling.

I, for one, will keep a jaundiced eye as my subscription ticks away for several more months throughout this campaign.

Like discussing this on Hardball is going to have any meaningful impact to counter the tactics incredibly corrupt, inept administration.

So you've eliminated Audiofile, but retained the utterly lame VideoDog?

This is called "reorganizing" the "culture department?"

Well, if I were in charge if "reorganizing" the "culture department" as a a premium subscriber, I have a few alternate suggestions:

Say goodbye to Farhad Manjoo, Joan Walsh as a blogger, and anything further by Camille Paglia.

I live in Los Angeles, and can handle only so many noxious fumes in one day. Please don't test my commitment to subscribe any further.

While Joan is focused on "slash and burn" corporate-style antics for Audiofile, let's add censorship to her "leadership" style... a blanket removal of an article regarding child pornography, with no other reasonable explanation to readers. (Earlier posts disregarded even letters, but I see that those have been reinstated.)

http://archive.salon.com/letters/corrections/2006/08/25/nathan/index.html?source=rss