I registered with Salon just so I could say that.

That Harman letter is positively schizophrenic. I really do believe that the Dems are covering their own illegal complicity; there's no other logical conclusion.

There' s a lot of Obamapologists blogging around. Their opinions of Obama may or may not be nuanced; what annoys me more is that some people believe we must constantly bring up the spectre of a McCain Presidency every time someone makes a critical comment about Obama.

I believe that most people who have decided not to vote for Obama are making a decision based on their own reasoned out political beliefs and don't need to be scolded for not playing the game. It's a presidential election; there's millions of people voting. If there is a safe space for someone to state that their vote for President will not be going to one of the two major entrenched party candidates, I assume it would be in the progressive blogosphere.

I think we all labor under the illusion that our tiny vote makes some big stinking difference in presidential elections. Our vote matters for city council, for school boards, for state and county offices. Obama-- I'll vote for him or not. I live in New York State-- I could vote for Big Bird if I wanted and it wouldn't make a damn bit of difference to Obama's victory here. I just may. This does not disenfranchise me if I'm still a responsible citizen at the local and state level.

It's just a tiny vote. Do with it what you want. I mean come on, how many real progressives are there in this country? 10,000? 100,000?

And please don't argue Nader in 2000. George Bush cheated. That's why Gore lost.

It's very tempting to enter the fray and break down Olbermann's argument, word choice and tone as compared to Glenn's. But I'm not interested in adding fuel to the fire of people who think this is nothing but a squabble between lefty pundits.

What I will say is this: right or left, television news and the pundits that recite it are reductive. The system simplifies issues. It glorifies emotion over reason. I challenge any progressive to take a month off from ALL cable news. Just one month.

This is what I watch during the week: Daily Show, Colbert, and Democracy Now. Daily and Colbert to keep an eye on what the mainstream is telling people nowadays (also because they're so damn funny and these days we all need to laugh to keep from crying) and Democracy Now for what I think of as real news.

Sometimes I feel like I'm in some Eastern Bloc country in 1979, tuning into Radio Free Europe to figure out what's "really" going on in the world.

I apologize for the long, somewhat off-topic comment, especially as a newbie, and I'm aware that this is probably not even preaching to the choir as much as it is preaching to the preachers. I just want this idea of a cable news media strike to take hold. As progressives, we have a responsibility to educate ourselves and to not subject our minds to the river of bilge that flows from our television sets.

Of any reponse I expected to my comment, I certainly would never have predicted "j'accuse!"

I can't accept the argument that it is reductive to call TV news reductive. I think this is simply a fact. Your argument that there are worthier commenters than others is absolutely valid; however, the spectrum of ideas and even actual, raw information is too limited for this to make enough of a difference. You don't have to take my word for it; watch Bill Moyers speak at the Natonal Conference for Media Reform (click sig for link).

It's not helpful to us as progressives (or libertarians for that matter, or really citizens) to watch people yell at other people, no matter what side we're on. It doesn't inform us, it doesn't elighten us, it doesn't inspire us, and we need to turn it off.

The level of discourse on this comment section is probably the highest I have ever witnessed online.

What I struggle with most, and I think what tends to be a leitmotif of the comment section here, is the following: Is it too late? Can we still change this system from inside?

Ironically, as I've witnessed these thugs dismantle the constitution, I have become more and more impressed with it as an indomitable force for democracy and rule of law. The constitution itself is such a powerful-- I don't even know the word for it. It is powerful. It is the Works of Man in all their glory. It is the Pyramids at Gaza. It is the Cathedral of Reims.

But yet, it is falling. Or has already fallen. I don't know. What heartbreaking times we live in.

It's as if we're still pretending to be a democracy, but even the facade no longer functions.

What I'm asking of all these clever people here, is this: What is the limit? When do we as progressives say, okay, you got us. This government is no longer a democracy. Has that point passed already?

Thanks for your responses to my question. RMP, just to assure you that I am participating, donating to ActBlue, petitioning, etc. I haven't run for the hills yet. I just wanted to know how worried other smart people are about the state of our government. And the answer, just about as worried as I am. Jim White, I especially want to thank you for outlining your thoughts. And I do think we are all honor-bound to do everything we can to save the ship. And if direct action is all that's left us, Adnoto, are you working on anything specific; i.e., nationwide strike?

Pyramids at GIZA. Sheez, what a bad typo. I was just getting all emotional writing about the constitution.