But the math does not support the claim that Democrats who vote like, well, Democrats "are easily outnumbered in the House and Senate -- especially the Senate -- by Bush-enabling and Bush-supporting Democrats."

Though the 22 Senate Dem votes for the MoveOn censure are a travesty, they are outnumbered by those (25) who voted against it.

Given how pathetic the Democrat's "stand" on that vote was, I wouldn't quibble with a minor bit of hyperbole about it. But on other, more important votes, the Bush Dog Democrats (the broader, more applicable term than "Blue Dogs") are a much smaller minority:

Torture Bill (just before the '06 election): http://www.correntewire.com/the_terrible_horrible_no_good_very_bad_day

FISA Bill:
http://www.correntewire.com/fraction_contest

Also, per Congressional Quarterly, Dems are successfully slowing down the Republican freight train, even if -- thanks primarily to the lockstep GOP -- they can't get cloture for any reasonable* legislation:

President Bush’s success rating in the Democratic-controlled House has fallen this year to a half-century low, and he prevailed on only 14 percent of the 76 roll call votes on which he took a clear position.

The previous low for any president was in 1995, when Bill Clinton won just 26 percent of the time during the first year after Republicans took control of the House. If Bush’s score holds through the end of the year, he will have the lowest success rating in either chamber for any president since Congressional Quarterly began analyzing votes in 1953.

A study of House and Senate floor votes, compiled by CQ over the August recess, also showed that House Democrats have backed Bush’s legislative positions this year only 6 percent of the time, making for the strongest opposition from either party against a president in the 54 years CQ has kept score.

http://correntewire.com/fraction_contest_ii

None of this, of course, invalidates your larger point that the combination of the large Bush Dog population and the bloc-voting GOP is having literally deadly consequences.

To me, the most sensible objective for the 2008 election was stated by congressional hopeful Darcy Burner: "More and better Democrats."

http://www.darcyburner.com/

Feinstein does an excellent job demonstrating why "more Democrats" isn't, by itself, enough.

I encourage all who are frustrated by the record of the Bush Dogs to support sound primary challengers, and get better Democrats on the '08 ballots.

___

For example, the Levin-Reed proposal to withdraw our troops from Iraq starting in 90 days, which 44 Democratic Senators, including Feinstein, voted for):

http://thinkprogress.org/2007/09/21/breaking-levin-reed-amendment-fails/

Thanks for choosing activism over the increasingly popular "they're all the same" despair.

A couple of places you'll want to check out...

The Open Left blog is highly focused on the Bush Dog issue:

http://openleft.com/frontPage.do

Blue America highlights the Democratic wing of the Democratic party, and helps you find worthy candidates to support:

http://www.actblue.com/page/blueamerica08

At my own stomping grounds (Correntewire), we're all ears, all-the-time for suggestions on how to get there from here. For example, my blogmate Chicago Dyke got me to toss a few bucks at Mark Pera.

http://www.correntewire.com/got_5_give_it_to_mark_pera

Given that you've posted almost 2,000 comments on Salon alone, perhaps you think there's some value in the written word?

It's always cute to turn the tables with a little equivalation. Greenwald calls turncoat Democrats worthless, so it's "clever" to say he's worthless, despite the fact that he's quickly become one of the leading voices on the essential issues of 21st century America, debunking much of most pernicious mis- and disinformation coming out of the Beltway, and putting many powerful liars on the defensive.

I do hope there's more substance in your other letters.

He-men like Bush and Cheney shouldn't be allowed to weigh in on sissy issues like the environment, health care, and gay marriage.

It's called "equivalation":

http://correntewire.com/equivalating

See this concise, little ad: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GvTp0PYVLZA

I think the two key phrases of this election are, or should be...

1. Darcy Burner's "More and better Democrats"

2. moveon.org's underused "Bush's Third Term"

We may literally not be able to afford another term of Bush (in the guise of Giuliani, Romney, Huckabee, etc.).

Yet there is little we've seen in the past year that says "more Democrats" without "better Democrats" is the cure for what ails us.

Given what the Repubs have done with absolute power these past two terms, I'll be damned if I'll do anything but vote (D) next November. But in the meantime, I'll work hard to see that the best possible names are on the other side of that (D).

Shorter Joe Klein: "Democrats are beyond reproach, so long as they act like Republicans."

The Democratic Party's motto could well be "What part of lesser of two evils don't you understand?"

But the fact is, less evil is less evil. Without the Repubs we've had these past many years, torture and getting rid of habeas corpus, etc., etc. don't become part of the American equation.

Yes, there is a disappointingly small difference between the parties these days, but the difference still exists and it still matters.

In many votes, the vast majority of Dems vote for the right thing, but too many Blue Dogs / Bush Dogs pee in the pool. And, as this piece and the linked ones point out, Dem leadership has been deeply derelict in its duty.

So, what to do?

Go to actblue.com and learn about and support as best you can primary challengers -- Democrats who act like Democrats. The alternative is to abstain or vote for vanity candidates next November, which is a vote for Bush's Third Term and a return to the Rubber Stamp Repub Congress. As Poppy Bush used to say, na' ga' do it.