I continue to be be amazed, distressed, and depressed about the nature of the debate among the activist left. In the piece I'm linking to, the main point (or at least what at first seems like the main point is correct and is a must read. When he goes on to decry telling people what they think should be the most important issues, the tune sounds good, but specifics would be helpful.
Then he ties left criticism of the Obama Administration to his original point. He is in large measure correct, but his lst of issues are in some cases poor examples because h'es not entirely right about them and in other cases sarcastic caricatures of what most of the people he's trying to convince believe. He ends up engaging in the exact same kind of argument he is for good reason railing against.
In any case, it's worth a read. http://pleasecutthecrap.typepad.com/...
The specifics of my complaint on the issues are that to the extent anyone actually believes those criticisms as he stated them, he's 100% right on #2 and #s 6-10.
#1: The criticism is correct.
#3: Closely related to something that is correct; the change should not have had punishment as its goal, but the public's mood to punish could have been harnessed for necessary and neglected reform.
#4: Also related to the truth. Overtly saying the single-payer would be preferable but he would work with Congress to find a mutally agreeable format would have put him in a substantially better bargaining position.
#5: Certainly at least arguable, and therefore at least "close to rational."
h/t Barry Schwartz (probably not the one you've heard of)