I don't agree with a damn thing about Sarah Palin's political and religious ideology, but I sick and tired of you media dogs skewering her every chance you get!

She might come across as "whip-wielding mistress who wants to discipline a naughty America," but atleast she comes across as something! That's more than I can about Obama who after a year we still don't know what he stands for because he speaks like test book (call it the Gore factor!) and never met a group of words strung together than say nothing that he didn't like.

The liberal elites wanted to "turn the page," "break with the past," and a bunch of other platitudes that never addressed the real issues facing Americans. They wanted to "fall in love" and not put forth the best nominee, just the one that would rankle the ire of their ideological opposites. And now they been "bested." And once again, they lose.

Might as well stick Obama on a wind surf board over Hawaii some place and get it over with.

Word.

I couldn't get past the photo and headline. I can't stand Palin, but yes, this is sexist BS. Please, this is beneath you, Salon.

Gary assumes that people will figure Palin out but I am not so sure. The conservative base that showed lackluster support for McCain is now solidly behind Palin. And independents, although willing to vote Democrat once in a while, are usually Republicans in denial. If it's perceived that Palin kicks ass and takes names then they'll fall in behind her just so they won't be labeled as wimps or losers.

It's not McCain's fault for picking Palin, it's Obama's for picking ho-hum Biden. Obama should have picked a younger, reform minded individual such as Webb, Warner or Kaine.

Where the hell did THAT come from? You know, in the last week I can safely say I've had not the least fleeting image of Sarah Palin dominating anyone. And I suspect I'm not alone.

Which sort of begs the all-too-obvious question: doesn't his analogy indeed say so much more about Gary Kamiya (and those who think it apt) than it does about Sarah Palin and those who aren't terrified of her? I'm just saying.

Ms. Palin is eminently qualified to be vice president and, with the usual staff of presidential advisors, president, if it should come to that.

Judging from the oddness of his sexual analogizing Kamiya apparently has a hidden agender.

I have been a Salon subscriber from the beginning, and reading Salon since before there were subscriptions. I read it because I considered it thoughtful and challenging journalism. At last -- in the midst of the conservative resurgence and the rise of Fox News -- a news source that told it like it was!!

I don't know if Salon has changed, or if I have, but lately I don't see Salon contributing to public life, only to the screaming exchange of nastiness that substitutes for thoughtful opinion. Has Salon become more outrageous and shrill? Or is it just that I no longer agree with its positions that I find it ridiculous and shrill? Did I only think Salon was a good source of information when it reinforced by pre-held beliefs (prejudices)? Was it o.k. to unfairly attack people when I didn't like them, and does it only become wrong when I support them (Hilary Clinton), or when those attacks are so blatantly sexist . . .

This has been the subject of some soul-searching for me, because I think it might be the latter, and I am somewhat ashamed that I was so quick to allow my preconceived ideas to substitute for thought. It makes me no different from the "mindless" right who watch Fox because it gives them the comfort of certainly, without being challenged.

I have been debating whether to renew my subscription, so I suppose that I should thank Mr Kamiya for helping me decide. It doesn't matter if Salon has changed or if I have, I need a source of news that I can trust, and opinionated essays that help clarify the issues through reasoned argument.

I no longer trust Salon, and I rarely find any of the opinions thoughtful, merely designed to preach to the converted. It does nothing to contribute to my understanding of the issues, because its arguments are predictable, and it does NOTHING to help us understand another position because the assumption is almost universal that the ONLY reason someone would disagree is that they are ignorant, evil, deluded, and (apparently) primarily motivated by uncontrollable psycho-sexual libidinal impulses. In other words, Salon contributes no more to public life and discourse than Fox News, in fact is makes EXACTLY the same contribution as Fox News.

I don't care if the crap comes from the left or the right, I don't want my money to support it. Count me out.

Why, Hillary Clinton, of Course, with attacks, insults, and lies.

Who does Salon obsess about? Obama, of course, The Chosen One, the first "post racial" candidate for President.

OBBBAAAAAAAMAA! OOOOHHH! The Chosen ONE is HERE! He's BI-RACIAL! At last, a candidate the country can be proud of!!!!!

Maybe not.

This article, its language, and its lead image are appalling. If anything, such blatant sexism will only promote feelings of attachment to Palin, as it makes so many of us root for her despite her politics. The fact that you have a writer who thinks this is acceptable work and that others above him allowed it to be printed here at Salon.com really make me wonder about the integrity of your publication. You reserve the right to delete reader letters that are excessively rude and violate common decency, but you prominently feature an article that is and does just that. This is so disappointing from a publication that is typically so feminist-friendly. The publication of this article does nothing but fuel the already apparent success of the choice of Palin for VP and further upset feminist allies already disgusted with election coverage. For shock value, you have resorted to utterly disgusting sexist rhetoric.