Welcome to The Now

The one thing the liberal base has in common with the conservative base is this semi-constant need to prove your ideological fervor. I've read and watched with amusement countless political-types who get propped up as the Spokesperson for the Liberal America only to get torn down or attacked the moment they do or say something third-wayish. It's no surprise to me that both Howard Dean and Dennis Kucinich -both considered part of the Liberal Gold Standard back in 2004- are subjects of stories that shed them in a less-than-liberal light. Time and events change opinions, and anyone who's ever been in elected office can tell you that complete adherence to your political ideology will guarantee that a chunk of your voters will be isolated (and pissed). So these guys have done what anyone who wants to still be in the game do: they adjust. That means occasionally doing things that piss off the base. The bottom line is people need to stop falling in love with politicians...

Howard "Don't Compromise on Health Care Reform" Dean proposes a... compromise for the whole Not a Mosque That's Not Really At Ground Zero non-story . The lesson, cats and kittens: no one can claim to be the voice/symbol/leader of progressives and every time someone tries to claim that mantle (or has it thrust upon them) someone or something will inevitably come along to prove them "unworthy." Now don't get me wrong; the same can be said for conservatives; especially after they get into office and realize that they'll have to temper some of their "beliefs" if they want to get anything passed, get re-elected or move to higher office. Truly, if there are any pure liberals (or conservatives) those men and women would never run for office in the first place; they're essentially modern-day political Rorschachs and anyone who knows "Watchmen" knows that a Rorschach doesn't ever compromise, not even in the face of Armageddon. And ...

Removing the Medicare Buy-in was the deal-breaker for him.

Feingold doesn't like it but Dean does . These two are as politically compatible as you can get for Democrats, so that's saying something. If it's possible that Majority Leader Reid got a version of the public option that isn't called "the public option , than what's the problem? Let's be honest: the minute progressives conceded the single payer idea (or rather, decided not to press the Senate Dems hard enough to keep it) we were all doomed to have some kind of political goulash.

From the man who successfully implemented the 50-State Strategy.

Former Governor Howard Dean sent me a letter! It was entitled: "4 Years Down, 46 to Go," which I thought was just brilliant: According to the White House, Iraq isn't George W. Bush's Vietnam -- it's his Korea. Last week, Reuters reported that "President George W. Bush would like to see a lengthy U.S. troop presence in Iraq like the one in South Korea to provide stability but not in a frontline combat role. The United States has had thousands of U.S. troops in South Korea to guard against a North Korean invasion for 50 years." The American people voted last November to end the war in Iraq -- not occupy a country engulfed in civil war for decades. A 50-year plan for Iraq is not a strategy and it's certainly not acceptable. But tonight, as the Republicans square off in their third big presidential debate, you can be sure you'll hear the Republican candidates fall in line with their Commander-in-Chief. The 2008 presidential hopefuls are already offer...