Thanks for the first installment! Hillary advances by marriage, covering up her husband's sexual abuse and punishing his victims and she is the ultimate feminist. Sarah Palin comes from nowhere, takes on the Republican establishment, beats an incumbent Governor, and runs a state with an 80% approval rating and she is "antiwoman."

I disagree with her on abortion. But I can tell you in Pennsylvania, lots of women really think she is the real deal, not a chameleon like Hillary who is a radical feminist one day and a booze swilling redneck the next. Young woman LOVE her, but they are not uber hip here. For shame.

This writer and most white, upper middle class liberals can't handle gritty Sarah Palin and Clarence Thomas. They are not well behaved. They do not conform. They prefer polished and artificial media packages like Clinton and Obama. They just go so much better with my sophisticated lifestyle and my friends all approve.

his election will be won by Barrack if Hillary's supporters can forgive and forget Barrack collective giving Her and them the finger and if Bitter Whites that cling to Guns, Religion, Love of American and believe in our Constitution against Invasion and the rule of Law can be convinced by Barrack that the largest invasion in world history, of any country, at any time, by any means and that is taking their jobs and lowering their standard of living while killing, robbing and raping American citizens by the 10,s of thousands and slowly but surely changing American into an Spanish speaking third world cesspool of Crime, Corruption, Poverty and Misery modeled on Mexico, is a good thing for them and American.

Why he and most Democrats Believe that Article IV Section IV of our Constitution against invasion, enforcement of our Immigration Laws and their Oath of office are all null and void!

He will need to convince them that attending the church of hate, supporting and listening to Hate American, Hate Whites and hate everything but Blacks and Muslims for 20 years while hanging out with criminals, terrorist and racist is no big deal and no harm intended!

...is mainly the headline. When you actually read Traister's prose, there are some good points and ideas in there -- even though they come across as a bit scattered (I imagine Traister herself is a bit scattered if she just flew back from Denver after all that excitement and hoopla).

The weird thing about the article is, almost none of it is about Hillary Clinton, and almost none of it is about whether Obama should have chosen her.

I think the editors of Salon.com jumped at the chance to exploit the situation to get extra page-views by trumping up the headline, and that's unfortunate.

aus296: "Lolcait... please answer Xrandadu Hutman's request of you. Where is your evidence? Oh, you do not have any since it's a complete fabrication?"

Hey aus, thanks for carrying the baton after I was done with it! Lolcait never replied, probably because lolcait is incapable of saying, "I was wrong about that." Personally I think he/she is some sort of GOP operative, but if that's too conspiratorial, I'll settle for simply a very hateful person.

MaBelle: "I was wrong in the criticism of you at another Joan Walsh post. Wow! You have one long memory, bro. I had to do some digging to find the post you were talking about."

It was about a week ago, and it was so bizarre and un-called for that it was memorable. It's about the only exchange I can remember having with you. Thanks for the apology -- that's more than most are capable of around here.

MaBelle: "On the other point, though, about my "sexism": it doesn't feel very good, does it?"

I'm not sure what the point of your rhetorical question is. Are you asking that because people have been accusing you of racism, or something? Because I make it a point not to accuse people of racism unless they really unleash it. (I suspect there is probably some racism motivating some of the people around here, but there's no point in bringing it up because nobody will admit to it anyway.)

I don't really care if you want to call me a sexist, because I have gotten used to that sort of thing on Salon. But I don't find it to be an accusation grounded in anything I've actually done. I argue vehemently with people of all types around here, and half the time you can't tell whether somebody is male of female anyway, considering the names people use. I also strongly encourage people not to criticize or mock others on the basis of their sex. For whatever that's worth. You can check my messages -- I haven't called anybody "bitch," or "menopausal," or whatever, though I am more than happy to call people assholes, since everybody's got one (and let's face it, a few of the female posters around here are as worthy of that term as the males here).

As for attacking Joan Walsh and Rebecca Traister, you might notice that I criticize Alex Koppelman and several of the male writers here too. I have tended to criticize Joan Walsh because I have felt some of her arguments and treatment to be lopsided, and the funny thing is, both Walsh and many of her supporters have admitted this to be the case. Some of them rationalize it by saying that Walsh has acted to counter-balance people like Chris Matthews. I would respect that argument more if Chris Matthews wrote a column on Salon, or if anybody could explain to me why he should be taken seriously to begin with. Most of the media sexism against Hillary Clinton has been from the kinds of twits who are known for all sorts of other garbage, such as the propagandists at Fox-News, and I strongly resent it when people lump Fox-News dillweeds in with sincere Obama supporters who couldn't be ideologically farther away from those asshats if we were hanging out with Antarctic penguins while they were eating cookies with Santa. (Yes, that was a tortured metaphor.)

Anyway, I only ask that you find some other line of attack than groundless accusations of sexism. Like, do you disagree with something tangible? Do you disagree with Obama on his policy or issues? Or something? From my perspective, I don't think it's necessarily about Obama, I think it's about the whole political landscape and about punishing the Republicans for their failure by bringing a whole new administration into office. I am completely sincere and honest when I say that I think Obama's team have the intelligence and vitality to grapple with the country's problems in a way that the Bush administration never could. I will also say that had Hillary Clinton been the nominee, I would have voted for her without hesitation.