I'm looking forward to Greenwald's take on the next four years. I know that he'll be critical where it counts, supportive of the many improvements, and generally unsentimental about it all.

And that's how we should all be. I was an early supporter of Obama and I'm as excited about his presidency as anyone. But I'm also ready to oppose him when it's appropriate. That's what we want, right? I think Obama's presidency will only be as strong as the grassroots movement that put him there in the first place. Also, I'm not ready to oppose Rahm Emmanuel until I see him in action.

The person who I am most interested in is Samantha Power. I hope she will be a part of the administration. Her analysis of world politics is central to my support of Obama. She was a part of his early campaign (until her HRC gaffe) and she talked about politics on a global level in a way that I have never heard anybody talk.

Whatever, I'm over it. I got my hopes up, they were frustrated. Greewald got sarcastic about it and now you are too, apparently. I don't have much more to say on the topic. C'est la vie, par for a blog, but I had hoped for more here.

Even assuming that you were correct, even if Greenwald's column had been about something really silly, condescension is probably not the best method of persuasion. It tells us that your primary concern is about being right over actually wanting better journalism. Even when we do not explicitly understand this, we pick up on it and respond. I myself have been guilty of this blunder. But I have to be reminded of it by reading the comments of others.

I appreciate Greenwald's explanation of his subject matter. He is nowhere near describable as irrelevant. Not by any stretch of the imagination.

If the last 8 years has taught us anything, it's that the conservative fantasies of morality should be confronted, immediately and without sentiment. It is nice to think that, oh, if we just ignore it they will go away. But it hasn't worked. (As an example, Californians ignored the donations to Proposition 8, and look where it got them.)

I don't want to base my life on confronting the stupidity of people like Joe Scarborough, but I'm tired of being ambushed. Who benefits from Scarborough's crusades? Scarborough himself, and nobody but.

This is why people like Jon Stewart are a blessing to the community. They expose this kind of dishonest rhetoric to the public while having a laugh. I think ridicule is an appropriate response.

I'm outraged at this outrageous vulgarity! Vulgar language which should not be allowed on news television. It's unprofessional and it calls to question Scarborough's professionalism. In short: disgraceful, outrageous, vulgar, not to mention unprofessional. Indeed.

George W. Bush is totally more awesomely happy than he has ever been in his whole entire life.

The most accurate prediction of the whole bunch.

At least Lyndon Johnson had the decency to drink himself to death.

I may have been too harsh in my previous analysis. After all, we just had a beautiful, historic moment in the form of the first African American president. And he talked about unity, so we may as well get started on seeing past our differences, generational or otherwise.

Thanks for illustrating my point!

Incidentally, I protested and was arrested at the beginning of the Iraq war. I organized against the war and traveled all the way across the country to send a message that I didn't want to waste one single life on the disaster to come. But Bush is of your generation, not mine. And his arrogance is typical of it.

We're sorry for rolling our eyes at you all these years. We apologize for scoffing at your earnestness, your lack of self-deprecation, your tendency to take yourselves a little too seriously.

Please speak for yourself on this subject matter.

It's not the "earnestness" that is irritating. If only!

How about spending our future savings?

How about the maddening tendency to start a family, divorce, and then start a new family without adequately providing for the first one?

How about the fact that their parents bent over backwards to give them everything they needed, and yet they earnestly--yes, there is earnestness in this one habit--tell their very own kids that they need to pull themselves up by their bootstraps?

How about their earnest ability to sell out? That was very earnest.

How about the utter absence of mentoring or guidance that they have offered succeeding generations except to council to us, "You're doing it wrong! You don't know anything!"

How about the condescending lectures on "real" Rock-n-Roll, while sniffing dismissively at everything recorded past 1980?

How about the crippling debt they've passed on to us, not to mention the environmental damages?

Yeah. . . no. There is no apology coming from me. And, incidentally, I'm by no stretch of the imagination the only Xer who feels this way. Others may have had wonderful experiences with their parents/predecessors, but those people are, as far as I know, not of the dominating opinion.