going to change their behavior if there continues to be no price for what they're doing."

Thank you , Glenn. I've been saying exactly that for many years to explain why liberals should support either Ralph Nader or the Green Party candidate for president. I mean, if Dem candidates can do whatever they want to regardless of how conservative, and still rely on liberals' votes, why would they care what liberals think?

It's funny, though, when you say that to people who call themselves liberals they absolutely freak out. Just look at the Salon.com pages of a couple of weeks ago or Katha Pollitt's column in The Nation this week. They all explain for the ten-millionth time that we all must vote for whoever the Dem candidate will be because, well, he or she is bound to be better than McCain. Of course Obama and Clinton ARE better than McCain, but that's not how you move politics in this country to the left; it's how you let it continue moving to the right. If you give Dems no impetus to heed liberal values, issues, policies, etc. why would they? It's the question none of these Dem apologists answer because they can't.

Now where did I get that term?

trails Obama in delegates by a smidgen and the current polls show Ohio and Texas to be dead heats. 24 hours from now we could be talking about how she's wrested the lead from Obama and what all that means. Everyone seems to have bought into the narrative that her campaign is dead in the water, but of course it was after Iowa too.

Look, I wouldn't vote for Clinton on a bet, but she could easily win the nomination, so talk of her dropping out of the race is ridiculously premature.

Democrats can blame Nader for losing. The same thing happened in Florida in 2000 - more Dems voted for Bush than for Nader, but it doesn't keep 'em from trying to cast blame.

wonder why so many liberals no longer vote Democratic.

Right. If Marilyn French has posted on Broadsheet, she's done it pseudonymously. I was just saying where that statement originated. French was interviewed a few months back and she refused to disavow the statement.

It was Marilyn French who said "All men are rapists and that's all they are." Just google her name.

You seem upset by the fact that some of the people giving Nader money are Republicans. Tell us, what research have you done into the sources of Clinton's funds? Obama's? If you haven't, I suggest you do so and then report back and tell us who they're whoring for.

I mean, you do realize that, far more than Nader, the main parties are in hock to special interests. In the case of Dems generally, it's Wall Street brokerages and trial lawyers. Inasmuch as you choose not to mention the fact, it seems that it's OK with you. So why is that? Why are so outraged at Nader's funding but not Clinton's or Obama's? Or maybe you are but have just neglected to mention it. Let us know.