If only Obama had agreed to that series of town hall meetings, McCain wouldn’t have been forced to lie about his record, his background, and run one of the most dishonest campaigns in modern history.

McCain didn't want to do it. He wanted to run a clean, honest campain on the issues, but Obama forced him to go tawdry, negative, and dishonest. Why can’t people see that it’s Obama’s fault?

McCain as the Incredible Hulk. You make him mad, and you’re to blame for the bad stuff that happens.

The real change I voted for was not bipartisanship, but “accountability”.

We’re told that we cannot prosecute those who tortured, because they were told that it was legal. We cannot prosecute those who opined that it was legal (such as John Yoo), because they were only offering a legal opinion. So, we have a situation where war crimes were committed, but no one is accountable.

We can’t prosecute the telecommunications companies for illegal wiretaps, because they were told that the President declared it legal. We can’t prosecute George W. Bush, because no one ever holds Presidents accountable for their crimes in office (unless it involves lying about sexual activity).

Senator Lieberman didn’t just endorse McCain for President, he actively claimed that Obama wasn’t qualified to be President. He should be held accountable. Will he? Probably not.

to Senator Coleman that what counts is not the number of times one is declared a winner (especially by one’s self), but who is declared winner when all of the votes have been counted.

Besides, he’s been declared a winner at most once, with the certification of the votes. Since a mandatory recount was triggered by the closeness of the vote, it’s arguable that no winner has been officially declared yet.

I would disagree with your contention that the current Supreme Court has a liberal wing. There is a conservative wing and a moderate wing, but no liberal wing.

There are no liberals on the Supreme Court, certainly not to the extent that Justices Scalia, Thomas, and Alioto are conservative. The fact that Justice Kennedy is considered the “swing” vote should tell you that.

We need real liberals on the Supreme Court, in the tradition of Douglas, Brennan, and Marshall. Republicans have not backed away from a fight in supporting the most conservative candidates possible, and President Obama should not back away from appointing the most progressive candidates available. The stakes are too high not to. I remind you that habeas corpus, a basic Constitutional right, was upheld by only one vote in Boumediene.

I have no doubt that the Obama administration will disappoint me and other progressives in many ways. But, if he can clean up the Justice Department and get it back to upholding the law without political considerations overriding everything else, I’ll still consider having supported him worthwhile.

Eric Holder for Attorney General looks to be a positive first step. A lot will depend upon the remaining Justice Department appointments, and the quality of the U.S. Attorneys Obama appoints, but I’m cautiously optimistic.

Well, they did endorse McCain for President. You can’t expect them to be happy.

You apparently only accept one definition for liberal, while listing several definitions of “progressive” and pointing out the perceived problems with each.

I don’t mind being called a liberal. Am I also progressive? Damn straight. My definition of progressivism is that associated with “Fighting Bob” La Follette. That progressivism advocated cleaner and more efficient government, regulation of corporations, support for organized labor, and social justice for a start.

I know what I believe, and it really doesn’t matter what label someone puts on it. But I find progressive more descriptive, because things do change. FDR was a liberal in his day, but bring him forward to today, and he would not be considered liberal at all on some issues, such as race relations.

To me, progressive means always striving to make things better for the country and its citizens. New ideas should be examined and be accepted if they are better, not because they are new. The job will never be finished, because it’s a moving target.

The results of the recount without the challenged ballots looks to be excruciatingly close. The number of challenged ballots already exceeds the margin between Franken and Coleman, so this election is going to be decided by the panel that adjudicates the challenged ballots.

If one side has made substantially more spurious challenges, that side will likely end up the loser.