The growing 'authoritarian follower' fringe love her, and from the perspective of that particularly odious and reason-free tribe there simply is no such concept as "wrong-doing" when it comes to any one of their anointed leaders. Whatever the authoritarian leader does is by definition right and good, so she could even declare a fondness for cannibalism and it would not dissuade the authoritarian follower type from continuing to enthusiastically support and rabidly defend her. Her political future really depends more upon the relative size of the rationality-immune (lunatic?) authoritarian follower cadre within the electorate than it does upon whatever she says or does in particular, and she knows and understands this completely.

Yet again, Joan Walsh writes an accurate assessment of the current events surrounding one of the most polarizing figures in contemporary American politics, an incompetent, mean-spirited boob given to self destruct more from her own deficiencies rather than any perceived enemy, and the column once again becomes a troll magnet for all of the cut-n-paste Dittoheads on the right. Yet again, we’re subjected to the same tired talking points about the “Democrat” party, Obama conspiracy theories, numerous references to communism and socialism, and perpetual defense of the utterly indefensible subject.

The letters section is hijacked again, and transformed into something like TableTalk, but in all actuality is much more downmarket… more like TrailerTalk.

When are paying subscribers going to be given a tool to manage this section? It’s much worse than the letters thread to the Opinions section of the Wall Street Journal Online. And that’s really saying something.

Couldn't agree more with Michael Carr. Please, Joan and Salon, edit out the name calling, the adolscent, the ugly, the mean-spirited. This is called "Salon" isn't it? I think that implies a certain level of civilized discourse.

Things have gotten pretty childish here in Salon-land.

Hers is a memory of convenience. A common ailment among republican office holders. If the facts don't fit the story, then they just mis state the facts to their liking long enough for the pundits like Limbaugh, Hannity etc...sell their wares and then fiction becomes fact. Republican facts.

I receive e-mails from various environmental groups that point out Palin's horrible record towards wildlife especially wolves. Her support of hunting by airpalnes and other barbaric ways of killing wildlife proves one point-she has no respect for life-nada-zip. I think that there is something seriously wrong with her-the cheese slid off her cracker along time ago. How can anyone advocate the slaughter of wildlife and yet go on and on about such issues as Roe v Wade? I think that how one treats animals is a very good indication of their true character. Animal abuse is one step away from human abuse. Palin cannot connect the dots and look at the whole picture. If one exposes her true record it will show that she gleefully kills and enjoys it as much as Bush did when he ran Texas. I am truly afraid of this person because she is evil in so many ways . The fact that so many want her is true madness. Then again did not the Germans vote Hitler into office? She lies because that is natural behavior for her twisted narcissistic personality in which everything & everyone revolves around Sarah.

I was responding to Autieslats and Ghost, who were complaining they had seen a post of mine on sexism at Salon at least thrice before on this thread, even though Autieslats admitted Joan had never taken the time to respond to it. I told them that I never expected Joan to respond. Because there was no way she could possibly reconcile the sexism I had researched and referenced. My re-posts, therefore, were meant to lay bare the fact that Joan is NOT a creditable “Editor-in-Chief,” “feminist,” or “journalist” if she continually refuses to be held accountable for the sexism I’ve documented. In fact, now she’s taken to deleting my posts. Which adds even more credence to what I also said in the post she deleted – that Joan tends to throws bombs and then hides from her critics when asked to account for some rather inconvenient truths on the selective use of misogyny here at Salon. Sadly, this is Joan's modus operandi.

But let me give her yet another chance and see if I’m miraculously responded to this time or deleted (again). Here goes.

Joan, you’ve claimed -- "She (Palin) endeared herself to the Republican base by playing the 'liberal media victim card." If that is indeed the case, then as “Editor-in-Chief” and as a "feminist" and as a “journalist” -- how do you reconcile Salon's blatant misogyny against Sarah Palin in the articles I've listed below?

Gary Kamiya has depicted and made reference to Palin as a “dominatrix” and called her a "pinup queen" and "babaliciousness" as well. He has also stated that her “whip-wielding persona was a turn-on” and that her convention address gave the partisan crowd a "collective woody." Not to mention the fact that he also asked: “Hey, did you check out Palin's rack?” Go here for verification:

http://www.salon.com/opinion/kamiya/2008/09/09/mistress_palin/

Cintra Wilson called Palin a “fuckable Christian Stepford wife” in a “sexy librarian costume" who Republicans saw as a "hard-core pornographic centerfold spread." Go here for verification:

http://www.salon.com/mwt/feature/2008/09/10/palin_feminism/index.html?source=rss&aim=/mwt/feature

Finally, Tracy Clark-Flory posted "Sneak Peek: The Palin Porno" on Salon’s Broadsheet page. It’s a clip from a porno video made by Hustler Magazine’s Larry Flynt, using a Palin look alike. Go here for verification:

http://www.salon.com/mwt/broadsheet/feature/2008/10/20/palin_porn/index.html

Any thoughts this time, Joan? I mean, as “Editor-in-Chief,” isn’t it as simple as issuing a zero tolerance policy on misogyny to the Salon staff and your freelance writers? And isn’t “the buck stops here” something implicit in your title itself? Or are you really Salon's Misogynist-in-Chief? I look forward to your response (and not a deletion of my post this time). These are, like them or not, some pretty valid questions.