It is indeed an interesting article, and I agree with much of what he says. I do think it's time not to despair, but to be loud about what I feel is right and important. I also suspect that the Democratic party (even though I'm not a member of it) would be best served by being firm about its ideals -- by for instance, stating unequivocally that it stands for a women's right to choose and fore gay rights, and stop being almost apologetic and wimpy when it comes to these and other social issues.

We shall see on GWB. He has the presidency, and for the next two years at at least, he also has no checks or balances in Congress. We shall see what he proposes and tries to get through. And we need to say so in no uncertain terms when we don't agree.

Yeah, our terminology (left/right, conservative/liberal) isn't used with any degree of relevant mapping to reality of late. There was a time I recall talk of the "radical right." Maybe we need new terms. How do you describe an otherwise libertarian-minded person in favor of ubiquitous high-quality, public schooling and paid job training? You don't. Ok, maybe a "radical" - but a radical WHAT?

On Bush I agree. The country was sold on him as a conservative, but his record and the sound of his forward-going plans are radical indeed.