"Atheism alone is a rotting corpse. I substitute art and nature for God -- the grandeur of man and the vast mystery of the universe."

What is she talking about? This whole article is an unfocused and rambling attack on the excesses of liberalism, by... a liberal? Really? She's so crazy. Can I have my 5 minutes back?

Rock the Vote has a statement about this. These students are legal residents of their college state for years, pay taxes in the local community and often end up living there. Sounds to me like most people are just afraid of WHO they will caucus for.

"Why do people give this woman the status of cultural critic? My high-school children write better essays than this.

How to write an essay:

1) Come up with a thesis

2) Support the thesis with arguments

3) 3-4 paragraphs

4) conclude by reminding reader of arguments.

Does she grade essays of her students? What are her standards? You get an A if your essay is idiotic, pointless, and has no valid or sensible arguments?"

This is what I'm saying. Any essay this blathering, unsupported, and structureless would receive a "C" in the Ivy League "University Writing" course that I teach. I can't imagine how this woman is a published academic.

Excuse me that I don't have "tolerance" for unsupported B.S. from either side of the aisle. People, a lack of content is a lack of content, I don't care where it comes from. I can't even argue with this woman's points because they are so flimsy. I'm thinking the conservative thinkers who are popping up here seem to be really into that. Flimsy opinions, based on opinion and hearsay...

" That same argument could be applied to women in this country who see sex with multiple partners, wearing skimpy clothes, working etc as "empowering"."

Let me get this straight... you are equating sex with multiple partners and wearing skimpy clothes with WORKING? So working is just as falsely empowering as showing cleavage?

Wow. Um, yeah.

I've never been a HIllary supporter either (she's much too moderate and triangulating for my taste) but I've found it absolutely disgusting how men (and women) of all political stripes have piled on Clinton. It's like before, only Rush Limbaugh could talk about her wrinkles and worrisome female state-- now, everyone can. Yay! And what's still NOT being discussed are the real issues here. That's what worries me-- this whole sexism debate, while totally valid and needed, might be obscuring the differences between the candidates at this stage, making Hillary's tearful moment more a focus than her relationship with lobbyists. Yes, I have to say that as a former conservative who grew up listening to Limbaugh and who loathed Hillary with a passion, this piling-on stuff has made me at least sit down and listen to her more seriously than before. Hopefully we can move past all this to the real issues. But this business has really made me notice that "progressive" and "feminist" are not the same-- not at all.

It doesn't matter who "won" or "lost" here (if Hillary won the popular vote fairly, then kudos to her). But which candidate has the ability to pull in crossover voters, not just die-hard Democrats? I think that data will prove very interesting.

...but does it really matter all that much if most people are opposed to her anyway? Won't her attacks just be seen as unfair? I had confidence that Hillary could convince people such as I to give her a second look-- I grew up in a conservative household, but became progressive-independent-- but the Clintons' pulling-out-all-the-stops campaigning style has really given me pause. They are very hard to believe in. Granted, this is coming from a woman in her late 20s who has probably heard every negative story about the Clintons that could possibly be invented. I genuinely believe that Hillary cannot pull anyone new over, especially in the south. Many people are making the argument that Barack could never win in the South because of his race, but I honestly think Hillary will have an even harder time. And not because she's a woman necessarily (though my mother's admonition that "Southern women will never vote for Hillary" definitely reeks of same-gender discrimination) but because this country has a long history of hating her. Having spent the first 22 years of my life in the two most conservative counties in very-Red State Texas, I cannot imagine a worse scenario than the re-hashing of the Clinton scandals AGAIN. I'm not blaming the Clintons for that intense hatred, necessarily (the right hates so many people/ things) but I am seeing their worst side here. So besides their policies, which I find much too Republican for my independent-progressive self (even my uber-conservative father thinks Clinton made a "decent" moderate-conservative president, aside from his scandals--what does that tell you?), I find the dirty tricks truly repugnant, and I feel an impending nausea at the campaign that is to come if she is the nominee. Of course I'll vote Democratic, but I have a sour feeling that some of my moderate-to-conservative aquaintances who have expressed some mild liking for Barack probably wouldn't... and I don't want a repeat of the sob-and-vomitfest that was election night 2004 after Bush was declared the winner.

Wow, I feel all good about my place in society as a 20-something woman and then I read these comments.

I'm guessing that gender-symbols guy spends a lot of time here that he does not spend with living, breathing women.

This whole business truly nauseates me. The Clintons may not be racist, but they are gunning for the racist vote, and they are counting on the worst in Americans to put them in the White House. Is this the future my generation can look forward to? (I'm 28.) I can no longer support Hillary Clinton as I did after Iowa. I may not vote for McCain in the end, but he has an edge of my respect over the Clintons at this point.