I'm a Liberal, Hear me Roar!

You should definately give this Nation column by Eric Alterman a read. The fact is, as Alterman points out, that the positions most Americans hold on the major issues are often on the liberal side of the coin. While I don't have a huge problem with the word "progressive", in fact I like it, and its meaning very much, the word that describes the politics of a center-left Democrat is "liberal". In other words, I agree with Matt Yglesias when he says that "liberalism" is a political philosophy, whereas, "progressive" is a word for a coalition that puts liberalism into action. That being said, it's comforting that in this election Democrats are comfortable calling themselves progressives, as opposed to 2004 when Kerry and Edwards were going out their way to explain how conservative they are.

"We've got to give them some stimulus. We've got to give them some tax relief."

That's St. McCain on the campaign trail recently, lending his thoughts on the economy. Well St. McCain of Arizona was the only flipping Senator that neglected to show up to vote for the "green" stimulus package last night. He had recently pointed out that a stimulus bill was needed desperately. John McCain should be hammered for this. He has been proclaiming himself the frontrunner since Supercalifragilistic Totalitarian Tuesday, wouldn't that enable him to free up some time to get on a fucking plance and vote for the package. My understanding is that the stimulus package failed by a single vote. This bill would've increased the amount of people getting tax rebates (actually lifting the cieling, therefore more rich people would get rebates, shouldn't the GOP like that), provided incentives for renewable energy, and increased unemployment benefits. Once again, it failed by a single vote. Brad Plumer has got a great post over at the The Plank detailing some of the other votes that St. McCain, son of God, heir to the throne of the Lord, has missed. The real tragedy is that the media will most likely let this slip by. The Chris Matthews', Anne Kornblut's, and David Gregory's of the world (not to mention countless others) will ignore this completely in order to continue their fawning coverage of the heroic and manly St. McCain.

Enough has been said. God help us all...

Shaquille O'Neal: World's Greatest Irishman

Marion and Banks for Shaq? Um...what? This seems like pure lunacy to me. A team that had previously prided itself on its fearless and adrenaline charged style of play has ditched Shawn Marion and Marcus Banks for a 325 pound, injury prone, old man. I don't understand this one bit. Over at ESPN J.A. Adande has this gem, where he attempts to understand Phoenix's intentions with this trade. When theorizing that Suns are trying to buy a ring he laments:

I'd rather see them go out like Tom Hanks in "Saving Private Ryan," pulling out his pistol and firing away at the German tank in a last desperate effort to save the bridge. Or show some of that same defiance as Denzel Washington in "American Gangster," making one last trip to Asia to import more heroin even though everybody's telling him the game is over.

Bravo! The Suns were the team in the West that I always really liked. I always felt that despite having a number of extraordinary players: Nash, Stoudamire, Marion, etc.; that what really drove them was there chemistry. Shaq has an ego the size of Rhode Island and that's exactly what Phoenix doesn't need. Plus, this trade is going to create a plethora of annoying headlines about Shaq and Kobe duking it out for the crown in the West. This is a tragedy folks, a down-right crying shame!

OK, so maybe Webb shouldn't be VP

Perhaps I spoke too soon when advocating for Jim Webb as the VP nom. Ezra has a great post detailing how the Senate plays to Webb's strengths. His military knowledge and passion for ordinary soldiers is unmatched in the Senate. Anyways, check out the post.

Death to the DLC

There are at least two points I disagree with in this post. First, Stephen Suh condemns the Democrats for their DLC-advocated move to the center (aka right). Before he makes this point he criticizes them for running away from Bill Clinton. However, last I heard, Bill Clinton was the poster boy of the DLC. The DLC, for those of you that aren't familiar with it, is the Democratic Leadership Council. They frequently advocate for the Democrats to embrace the business wing of the party and move towards the center. Bill Clinton's strategy of triangulation was a move to the center. Don't get me wrong I think Bill Clinton was a great president but he certainly wasn't a liberal. Running away from the labor movement and insisting on welfare reform seems to be exactly the type of thing that the GOP could embrace, and they did, while Clinton was in office. Therefore, Mr. Suh is contradicting himself when he argues that the party should not run away from Bill Clinton and should embrace thier progressive roots. Personally, I don't think you can do both. If you want to be another Bill Clinton, you have to embrace the center and distance yourself from the base.

The other point I disagree with is Suh's suggestion that Barack Obama is running away from the Democratic party:

And Obama has already begun running away from Clinton and away from the Democratic party. This kind of thing, once started, won't stop here. Hillary and Obama are tied, and the gloves are going to come off - even Mr. Nice-and-Civil is going to get rougher as time goes on. This kind of thing also cannot be undone. We can't make this rhetoric, these flyers, go away during the general election. Every time Obama makes this campaign a referendum about Bill Clinton's presidency and/or personal characteristics, he's playing along with the GOP's favorite strategy.

And he will lose in November - to McCain, to Romney, to Huckabee or to a handkerchief with George Bush's morning noseblow on it. Because those Americans who don't live in DC, who aren't addicted to political coverage and who don't attend Georgetown cocktail parties want a choice - a real choice, not one between McCain's crazy brand of Republicanism vs. Obama's more genteel and civil brand of Republicanism-lite.

Stephen should've read this fantastic article by Ezra Klein. Both Obama and Clinton have embraced the progressive cause. They have both utilize rhetoric that has sung the praises of positive government action. Barack Obama is not running away from the Democratic party, and neither is Hillary Clinton. Both candidates are far more liberal than Bill Clinton. Democrats should be excited that their nominee, whether it's Obama or Clinton, will be a standard bearer for the progressive movement.

Ireland is NOT part of the UK!!!

I originally saw this over at TAPPED when Dana Goldstein posted it. After Matt Yglesias posted it as well, I had to jump on the bandwagon. In my sophmore sociology class my professor, whom I held otherwise in high regard, said that Ireland was a part of the UK. This is unacceptable. I'm not going to go into a republican (notice the small "r") rant about the independence of Ireland, other than to say that it is, in fact, independent.

The Reverse Kirkpatrick

Check out this great article by Spencer Ackerman at the American Prospect. Jim Webb would be a near perfect running mate for Barack Obama. While my preferred ticket would be Obama and Kansas Gov. Kathleen Sebelius, it seems that an Obama-Webb pairing would be much more electable. Webb is an authoritative voice on the war and a good progressive. Even if he's not the VP nom, a speaking slot for him in Denver would be electrifying.