I disagree strongly that a bill without a strong public option will be a good bill. A bill that mandates insurance without cost control measures that are effective (such as the public option) will do more to enrich the insurance industry than to cover people, prove unsustainable and confirm the people in the idea that we cannot afford universal care.

Are you implying rape victims are making it up? Have nothing to complain about? What the hell are you implying?

or was it poor word choice?

If so, please promise not to use that phrase again.

We need to worry more about the normalizing of less hyperbolic but no less dangerous eliminationist rhetoric.

And Cuban - a vocal anti-Bush critic - of course they went after him.

There are several liberal proposals to reduce gang violence and many are effective, though often ridiculed and derided in the media. Youth join gangs for socialization and security - offering alternatives works. The much laughed at and ridiculed midnight basketball works. Gun buybacks work. Community policing works. However, these effective solutions are often mocked and are also the first on the chopping block when budget cuts come along.

Additionally, legalization of drugs - a libertarian solution with supporters on the left and the right among civil libertarians would mitigate the drug-related violence. Stronger gun control - also would mitigate violence. There are solutions from the left and from civil libertarians.

African Americans, Latinos and Asians are also actively working on crime prevention and gang violence and have as much desire for safe streets as anyone. I don't know where you get your stereotype of liberals from, do you listen to Limbaugh?

I object to your absolutely false characterization of those who are actively anti-racist. you say, "For the Left, "racism" is not prejudice based on ethnic origin or skin color, it is not the certification in law or institution of the idea that ethnicity or color is superior to other." And yet that is exactly what people are saying that it is.

Mostly, I object to your position because it's the position of apathy. It's the close our eyes and it goes away position. It never goes away.

You seem to think we can swim in a pool and not get wet. I submit that there is no way anyone can come of age in our culture, reading American books, watching American television and attending American schools and not internalize significant racist assumptions that influence our thought processes and reactions - though of course, we temper these with our personal commitments to recognize and overcome these biases.

I think the better solution is to recognize that none of us is free of bigotry and bias and get over our reactive "I am not a racist" defensiveness and instead examine how our biases impair our thinking and influence our actions and work to overcome that.

I agree the working class gets the short end of the stick in our economy, but it's not because people of color are benefiting at their expense. There is too much raw economic data that refutes that to spend 2 minutes on that issue. Yes, the people who are profiting want you to think that, but why allow them to divert you from their legal robbery of this country's wealth and resources with such shallow arguments. That people are so easily diverted from the real scourge of the working class to targeting immigrants and claims of reverse racism only proves the point that racism is deeply steeped in our bones and we reflexively believe and act on racist stereotypes to our own detriment.

I suggest the better measurement is effectiveness - not the lowest salary. I don't like a lot of things about SPLC myself, but this measurement if bogus.

I am so sick and tired of Christians who are the majority in this country and who dominate our culture whining about being persecuted. The fact that you are not allowed to force every single person to kiss your butt is not persecution, it's life. I suggest you get one.