I freely confess to my bias - I am an American muslim, a Shi'a, highly orthodox, and even slightly socially conservative on the issues. I still identify as a liberal because I do not see social consevatism and political progressivism as neccessarily at odds.
That said, here's my beef, below the fold.
I have noticed a disturbing tendency at both kos and mydd to accuse the Shia government in Iraq of being an "Iranian ally". This is presumably a talking point against Bush's foreign policy. Unfortunately it demonizes both Iran and Iraq unfairly and obscures the legitimate security concerns related to both countries. Plus it also subtly damages the image of Islam itself - because the implication is that voting for muslim values is a fundamentalist rather than a socially conservative act.
If Democrats can't make a principled case against Bush on foreign policy grounds, rather than partisan polemical cases, then they will continue to lose elections.
I realize that kos and myDD are designed to be partisan. But can't partisanship be principled, rather than knee-jerk?
More on this topic soon at Dean Nation.