Although I agree with some of the points made in this article, I have to draw the line at insulting Jon Stewart. I felt that, thanks to him, this was the most entertaining Oscars I've seen in years. What did you expect, a 3 hour Daily Show? Maybe he'd like to be asked back.

It's very disappointing to hear Camille Paglia express her disbelief of global warming. To say that there is not an international scientific consesus on the issue is just blatantly false. (Sorry that I am not lending credibility to the "scientists" fully funded by the oil and coal industry). She mentions that there needs to be a balance struck between economic interests and environmental concerns, but if we destroy our environment, what kind of economy are we talking about?

She does make a good point that humans are so weak compared to nature, how can we possibly permanently affect the Earth? We are not destroying the Earth, we are destroying our ability to live on it. The planet will shake us off like a wet dog. The question is, how many species and ecosystems are we going to take down with us? The argument that global warming is still unproven is not just wrong, it is selfish, irresponsible and downright dangerous.

I don't agree with most of Ron Paul's beliefs, but I respect him. (In somewhat the same way I USED to respect McCain). At least his beliefs follow a coherent train of thought, and logically follow a line of thinking, unlike the mess the rest of the Republican field tend to spew. Even as the most liberal Liberal there are several points I can agree with him on, not the least of which is getting out of Iraq. It will be a real shame if the Republican establishment manages to exclude him from future events - his is a voice that needs to be heard right now.

I have never wanted to see anyone go to jail so badly in my life.

Why is Camille Paglia still pretending to be a Democrat?

Let me get this straight. It is ok to lead this country into an illegal, immoral, and illogical war, to imply that Sadam Hussein planned 9/11, to rule with fear and deceit, to pack an administration with incompetent cronies (Katrina, anyone?), to let your VP run roughshod over our constitution and country, and to stubbornly reject the advice of any expert not in your inner circle, as long as you don't get a blowjob in the oval office? Wow. I knew people had sex issues in this country, but this takes the cake. I'm no Clinton cheerleader, I was consistently disappointed with decisions he made while in office - including opening himself to Republican attacks by having an affair and then denying it. But I would take Clinton back in a hot minute, as I'm sure most people in this country would, including many Republicans.

Maybe these crowds acted that way because they do love him. I know I do. Whenever I see him on TV or one of his movies I say, out loud, "Thank God for Michael Moore." When you are living in the depths of a red state with no end to the horror of this administration in sight, his voice can offer hope - or at least the confirmation that other people out there see through the bullshit and are brave enough to speak out about it.

I appreciate the thought posted by some that the best thing to do might be to elect another Republican so they can continue to fuck everything up and destroy themselves. The only problem is, they are destroying us too. Look how much damage Bush has done in such a short time. Damage that will take years and years to fix - if it can be fixed. Examples: The Supreme Court, the Justice Dept, Gitmo, environmental destruction, global warming, corporate handouts, the bankruptcy bill, attempt to privatize social security. Should I go on? The list is long and depressing, and I for one do not think this country will survive another Republican candidate and still be recognizable. I'd take any one of these candidates over the wackos the Republicans have put forth, even, grudgingly, Clinton.

I can totally relate to the LW. I'm 35, and my husband and I have finally decided that we want to have a child...we have just begun trying, as well as looking at adoption. I really would like to have a baby...but I go to the grocery store and see other women with their kids and am so annoyed. "Breeders" we call them, a kid or two in the basket, another on the way. I am annoyed by the way they talk to their children, their mini vans and SUVs, their baggies of cheerios. Meeting Moms is even worse...the blathering about how it has made them complete. Like we somehow are not complete because until now we have chosen not to have children?

My husband works in a high school where a frightening number of the students have or are expecting babies. They are so proud of this. "Wow," I feel like saying, "You and cockroaches and stray dogs and rabbits can all breed, you must be so proud." Where does this resentment come from? I think it has to be from the people who define themselves first and foremost as Moms. I hope that I will always be able to define myself as a woman who happens to have (or not) a child. I don't want to lose my individuality (or sense of style, intellectual curiosity, satisfying marriage) because I have chosen to reproduce.