Arthur Silbur and I definitely don't see eye to eye on many things. But he hits the nail on the head when he writes:

Yesterday, in a post decrying the great haste with which the Democrats moved to accede to the administration's demands (which is, I note again, precisely what the Democrats did with regard to the MCA), Digby said -- with "Deep, Heavy, Sigh" (just so we know exactly how distressed she is):

Obviously, I'm not the only one who can't for the life of me figure out why the congress is doing this.

I suggest we take these leading lights of the progressive blogs at their word: they most certainly do not get it, and they absolutely cannot "for the life of [them] figure out why the congress is doing this."

I also note that, following the Senate cave-in, Atrios has dubbed Harry Reid the "Wanker of the Day." Will all this diminish in even the smallest degree Atrios's, or Digby's, or any other leading progressive blogger's efforts to ensure a huge Democratic victory in 2008? Of course not.

The reason for that is very simple, and it goes to the progressives' central articles of religious faith: The Democrats aren't really like this, not in their heart of hearts. The Democrats don't actually favor a repressive, authoritarian state. The Democrats are good, and they want liberty and peace for everyone, everywhere, for eternity, hallelujah and amen.

I say that not because he is lampooning Democrats--conservatives in recent years have been at the very least as bad in excusing Republicans, although the Bush administration seems to have finally exhausted their goodwill. But there's a more general tendency on both sides to posit a sort of metaphysical, platonic party that doesn't seek to give the government it controls ever more power . . . and then act as if that party were in office, or at least one election away from getting there. By which I don't mean that people hypocritically accept tradeoffs--hello, politics. I mean that people on both sides seem to be genuinely surprised when their party turns out to be fundamentally interested in seeking power for its own sake.

By the way, Arthur Silbur's got some medical problems and needs some financial help. After you read his piece, how about hitting the tip jar?

We want to hear what you think about this article. Submit a letter to the editor or write to