(Metaphorical, actually synechdocal question) are you one of those progs pissed all to hell that Pelosi won't impeach Bush? How bout climbing down from that soapbox and telling us HOW SHE WOULD ACTUALLY FREEGIN DO IT WHEN SHE'S SO FAR BENEATH THE NECESSARY NUMBERS....In the meantime, how much money would be wasted? How much TIME? How much damage would the fruitless endeavor do, especially amid the carnival of an MSM media blitz which would undoubtedly undermine and pundificate all the pith and life out of not only it but out of any hope for resistance, healing, and future progress in this country...

Trying to be more reasonable now: ... I want all of these things too. So do Dennis Kucinich (my first choice in this and the last election though only for about a split second before I instinctively knew it ain't never gonna happen) and Ralph Nader--------neither of whom had or will ever have a snowball's chance in hell of getting elected to a higher office in this country.

Quit your complaining and your insular isolationism. They not only achieve NOTHING, they set us back because of the intentional fallaciousness of such polarization. Prog values and agendas will never be fulfilled without reaching out to the majority. Denying this is not only living in a dream world, it's narcissistic solipsistic and an epic and oxymoronic waste of good intentions --- worse, actually, in my opinion, for the intentional thwarting of honorable principles and good values.

Mind you, I say that concerning *today's* America. We can get there, or at least somewhere, but not by dividing and denying. Americans will not get out of their cars, stop being so wasteful, shed their fears of spooky spooky socialism enough to adopt single payer, will not elect the majority of representatives needed to raise the taxes to pay for our precious social educational and humanitarian projects and aspirations, etc: they will not do any of things in the majority needed without the right kind of voice, leadership, and citizenship evolution (i.e. PROGRESS) needed to shed the individualist myths and selfish concerns and adopt a new way of thinking.

I write this realizing that individualism is not a myth but a reality, one that has its value (hell, don't we all want to own our home and have a yard and our own space in life for solace and reflection: :never mind that- shouldn't we all work and strive and dream to achieve our best selves, to have the opportunities and freedom to pursue that, to have the capacity of spirit and breadth of self-empowerment to lead autonomous, independent lives?:: and: ideally, isn't it a worthy goal to contribute to the common goal so that all willing to do the work to improve themselves have the mean and ablility to do so? Isn't that waht progressivism, after all, ultimately is?

These are aspects of the American dream that are beautiful and worthy, all the while although these present (1) significant challenges to harmonizing individual paths and social responsibility and (b) significant potential for the corruption of values and responsibility that we are replete with now at this critical juncture of our history. I won't even bring in the racial, social, and identity corollaries here, though be sure that particularly to a progressive, it is here PRECISELY that individualism and social responsibility both assume their own importance as well as the need to achieve an interdependency and reconciliation. That's hard work, and it ain't never never never going to happen through PC thugery, prog isolationism, or libero-mongering.... subverts each one of these purposes actually and presents a demand to ask oneself what they really stand for....)

digressive case-in-point: Clinton, Edwards, and Obama all OBVIOUSLY, so so so OBVIOUSLY want a single payer not for profit health care system. Why do you think those words have never once been uttered on a national stage (YET --- emphasis on yet) since Hillary's crash and burn back in 93?

You want to live in a progressive utopia go move to the Netherlands. Mind you, I am one of the most progressively minded people I know----and i live in SF. But I'm also a pragmatist, and am not so starry eyed and idealized to realize that you have to work with what you have. And Barack Obama has offered the best chance America has had of that actually tasting "progressive" from a viable Presidential candidate.

But yeah, he and his most liberal voting record in Congress are just B.S.

Until you can offer me a realistic achievable plan, I think I'll stick with Obama, and be not only happy and grateful about doing so but also optimistic about his sincere mission to actuate the strategy of grass-roots participation, transparency in govt, and thwarting of special interests needed to but only begin the work. that's only where it begins, and a starting point or commencement is of the utmost importance to any progressive venture. By throwing Wright, who was right in principle but epically wrong in performance and timing 2 days ago, Obama proved he has his eye on one prize at all costs: inviting enough people on board that bus to gain the power needed to empower enough Americans to move us ahead. That's real progressivism. That's pragmatic progressivism... That's why I'm proud to be contributing to and participating in the best chance I've ever seen in my 35 years for real, progressive change in America.