Couldn't agree with you more. I often wonder what happened to the value of a good argument structured on the merits of the case.

But the real pressure on the economy comes from the fringes on both sides – the Naderites on the Left and the Teabaggers on the Right. Each fringe is only partially embraced by the nominal two parties, but the core messages of each party are not – and will not likely be any time soon – reflective of the activist fringe. Alas, the blosophere is the site of fringe frustration but is more like the various “Leagues” that sprung up around 1900 to confront everything from liquor to prostitution to capitalism to imperialism.

After the Grant Administration ruined what was left of the GOP's moral credentials regarding civil rights- and the Democratic Party's “New Departure” shifted it away from the vitriolic racism of the Reconstruction years – the two party system in America was defined by largely irrelevant personality squabbles. Yes, there were important issues to be debated, including the currency question, a pair of Depressions (1873 and 1893), tariff and trade policy, immigration policy and, after 1898, imperialist policy. But by and large the political system of the late 19th century and early 20th century US devolved into a hyper-partisan and un-ideological morass of personal conflict and press-driven exaggeration-as-entertainment.

What changed this? The Progressive Era finally stepped in to clean up some of the mess (and created some new messes). World War One and the chaos of 1919 briefly channeled the nation's attention on to things that mattered. And some of the issues dithering around among the Third Parties – labor issues, prohibition, feminism, etc. – started to wend themselves into mainstream public policy. But it really would not be until the Great Depression that the political system in America would start to refract on ideologically coherent lines again.

In my opinion, many times the partisan hacks out there try to belittle others for being partisan hacks. I've realized that it's simply a tactic. Don't let it affect you, bro. IMHO, you are the most enlightened and straight-forward writer on TMV. So rise above it, and keep doing what you do best – keeping both sides of partisan hacks honest.

A few months ago, I debated creating a “government not politics” blog and spoke to a couple commenters here who were routinely adding substantive, informed content. The idea is that I do care about governmental policies, but really could care less which party looks good or who won the race to power. However, they didn't bite and I dropped it as well. I knew a couple rules for the site. “No post can use the terms Left and Right unless they refer to directions.” Similar for liberal and conservative. So much discussion just falls into which side is the most corrupt, incompetent, and probably evil.

“It doesn’t matter what the argument is about. What’s important is that once the argument starts, the two sides will automatically coalesce around the various instant-cocoa talking points and scream at each other until they’re blue in the face, or until the next argument starts.”

And here's the very same Matt Taibbi, deriding Fareed Zakaria for being a … wait for it … “milquetoast” guilty of “taking controversial and explosive topics and trying to help rattled readers somehow navigate their way through them to yawns, lower heart rates and states of benign unconcern.”:
http://www.smirkingchimp.com/thread/22506

Mr. Taibbi, heal thyself first.

To be honest I back the current health care bill only because I feel strongly that if it fails nothing will be done. I also believe though that if it is passed it will be tinkered with for thirty or more years but I consider that a feature not a bug of the design. As always their is much sh*t sandwich and some morsels of pure brilliance, Wyden's win for example which I think will greatly increase competition and service. I just think it has the skeleton of good legislation without anything else on the horizon and therefore I support it since I think it will do more good than harm. I also see a good deal of harm though I will admit.

(This may not sound like much of an insult in other social circles, but there it is delivered with the same wild eyed vigor as saying that I probably burn American flags in my back yard while dining on the flesh of aborted babies with a nice Chianti.)

What are you a barbarian? Don't you know that you're suppose to drink a nice Bordeaux with babies flesh, preferably a Chateau Margaux.

The current health care debate is a case in point. The health care reform bills on the table don't actually reform anything. A victory now will be bad for the party in a few months when it becomes obvious that health care premiums continue to rise and more and more people are priced out of the system. The republicans on the other hand are just looking to defeat anything the Democrats do. The smart thing for them to do would be to let the Democrats pass this very bad do nothing bill and then beat them up with it when it becomes obvious that it didn't fix anything.