The more time you spend on the Washington Post's On Faith microsite, the more it becomes clear that the standards for "intelligent, informed, eclectic, respectful conversation" just aren't what they used to be. The site regularly features the Islamophobic hysteria of Cal Thomas, provides a platform for bigots like Bill Donahue, and hosts arguments against interfaith marriages.

Then there's Danielle Bean, another of the Post's “distinguished” panelists. When last we checked in on Bean, she was using On Faith to suggest that Barack Obama is not Christian and question his “loyalties” and referring to a column by a Heritage Foundation fellow that first appeared on WorldNetDaily as “unbiased.”

In her latest entry, Bean denounces feminists and birth control:

It is these same things that make old school feminists want to spit nails. They've spent lifetimes fighting nature's plan for their bodies and standing strong for every woman's right to destroy any human life that threatens to grow within her. Traditional family life? Why they've fought long and hard to deny the differences between men and women and to afford every woman the “right” to separate sex from the natural consequences of bringing forth new life.

So … yeah. Respectful!

Bean doesn't do much better on the “informed” front. Here's how she describes Sarah Palin's standing with the public:

An interesting consequence of Sarah Palin's enduring popularity … the rise of pro-life women in politics and Sarah Palin's popularity in particular have left some scratching their heads … Palin is both widely popular and widely despised for the same reasons…

To Bean's credit, she allowed a hint of the truth to sneak in there at the end, acknowledging that many people do not like Palin. The simple truth is that Sarah Palin is very unpopular. The latest AP poll finds that only 38 percent of Americans have a favorable impression of her, compared to 58 percent unfavorable. Similar results can be found in other polls: Sarah Palin is unpopular and getting more unpopular:

The Washington Post can host a “respectful” discussion, or it can provide a platform to the likes of Cal Thomas and Bill Donahue. It cannot do both. It can host an “informed” and “intelligent” discussion, or it can allow its panelists to insist that up is down, black is white, and Sarah Palin's popularity is “enduring.” It cannot do both.