I hear ya. What's ironic and tragic is that a child is more likely to be sexually abused by familiars than by strangers. Statistically, if you want to keep your kid sexually safe, give them the boot.

Likewise, it you don't want to curse them with diabetes, which is a HORRIBLE disease, get them moving. I was playing dodgeball with kids yesterday on our street. Now, when I was a girl, I threw like a boy and it was the rare boy who "threw like a girl." It was sad to see several boys, all overweight, who couldn't let it fly. Like you, I wonder if they're not laying the cerebral circuitry to manage their muscles. And it was sadder to see an old woman like me having teenage boys fear my arm and never mind that they were wise to do so. By the advantages of youth and testerone, it should have been vice-versa.

No, Parson Jim is a hero. And he's wise. He voted for Bush. That alone is proof of his prognostic powers. And he worships at the altar of Rush Limbaugh's cock, whose virility is on loan from God and Viagra.

Now, some people defend children. Some defend the poor. But Parson Jim, our hero, defends slurs.

Being a parson, he has a church. It's called "The Chapel of Love" and it's located in Oceania.

I know what you're thinking, The New Number 2. You're thinking I'm crazy. Okay, okay. Go ahead and critique my analysis.

Say it.

Say, "Bigguns, that analysis of yours, that's so....."

That wasn't a dream come true for me and I'm a feminist. I think most feminists dream of a world where men and women are strong and free to steer their ship. I thought I made it quite clear that I considered it to be sad, seeing boys who can't throw. Likewise, I'd consider it to be sad seeing girls who can't throw. Or operate a computer, male and female. Or read well, male and female. Or operate a chop saw, male and female.

You've an odd notion of feminism if you think a feminist would revel at boys, who should and could be strong, lean, and quick and rejoicing in their strength, turned into Pillsbury Doughboys.

She's right.

A pitbull for Jesus.

Jesus, who urged us to turn the other cheek.

Well, turn the other cheek on Palin and she'll tear that one off too.

Palin is a terrorist. Many Palin supporters are also terrorists. Here's why:

Terror doesn't kill you. Terror is just fear cubed.

Imagine if I were to go to some kids and say, "That man over there is the devil."

That's terrorism. The imaginations of those children will do the rest. Their fear will ferment and rise into terror.

Well, this is what Palin has done to her acolytes.* She has told us that Obama hangs with terrorists, implying that he got some bad man cooties. She doesn't want Bush voters to be afraid of Obama. She wants Bush voters to feel terror, sufficient terror that they'll vote again for the party that's crippled America.

And their language, such as the dehumanizing "that one" and "whip" and "not one of us" appeals to masters' old fears of the slaves getting to live in the big white house. More terror.

Bin Laden was successful as a terrorist because, with the Republicans' monstrous help, we've managed to be terrified since 9-11. I'm sure that Bush misses the old days when they issued their regular Dark Magenta with Olive Undertones Warnings.

Ms. Lamott is right. Let's all go outside and love someone. For your sexy cats, perhaps your loving is best done inside.

*It's also what her acolytes have done to each other, forwarding those emails that assert Obama is a terrorist or the anti-Christ. That's the distribution of terror. Do it and you're a terrorist.

And so is her mau-mauing.

Hey, cheer up. Return the book!

Wait. You can't. You can't return the book because you didn't buy the book. And you didn't buy the book because you're a Republican operative, who spends her days registering for accounts and pretending to be this person and that, all of who, coincidentally, happen to love Sarah Palin! And you do your subterfuge for Jesus, don' cha? Well, bless your heart!

MoDo!?! Me likey!

MoDo can't be published because she circumlocutes and is underwhelmingly schoolmarmly. Professional grade prose is clear and compact.

She could do a blog and have four people try to untangle her sticky strings of syllables.

Now, MoDo, I'll have to be your schoolmarm. Of course, we all know about the Mau Mau, but you lectured on the noun. There's also the verb, which applies to you.

The verby definition of Mau Mau: to intimidate by hostile confrontation

Mau Mau, there are many reasons you perturb good folks, but your prose is primary for me. Here's an example. It's a clanking train of prepositions:

"I ignored your obvious ignorance of world affairs the other day when you crowed with delight at your own wit in distorting my name."

You need some semantic discipline!

I wish more people would differentiate terror and murder. 9-11 was murder. The aftermath is terror. Bush and Bush voters are party to terror, with their orange/yellow/red/periwinkle alerts and their the-dems-love-the-terrorists hyperbole.

FDR was right in asserting that it's fear we should fear. Terrorists are people who play upon our fears. By this precise and accurate definition, Palin is a terrorist.

What you just wrote is awful. For your sake and for the sake of decency, I hope Salon deletes it.

If I'm wrong about you, I apologize. Single-posting Palin-lovers tend to clot Palin threads. I do hope you're an exception and if you are, welcome to Salon!

When you urge me to bite you, you mean like a wolf, right?

You got me thinking.

And thanks for that.

I won't half-wolf bite you. I won't even bump you. Maybe a wolfy nuzzle for assuming the worst.