ONE WOMAN'S LEADERSHIP. I�ll take the bait and jump into the debate about Hillary Clinton. First, I�ll disagree with Ezra: Despite what Kos might say, it�s unclear at this juncture to what extent Clinton�s female-ness and Obama�s blackness will define them in the campaign. This fight is going to get much, much dirtier than it is one year and eight months before the election. And to some extent, supporting the first female or first black presidential prospect as such is a good thing. Remember learning as a child that every American can grow up to be president? Well a Hillary Clinton or Barack Obama presidency would add some proof to that warmed-over pudding. Progressives shouldn�t underestimate the power of symbolism. God knows, conservatives don�t.
All that said, I am far -- very far -- from casting my lot in with Clinton, and for many of the reasons Sam and Matt outline in their print piece: she�s been wrong and wrong again on the war, she�s washed up on health care, she�s not particularly economically progressive, and so on and so forth. But I have to take serious issue with the guys� repeated claims that Clinton has no �long record of leadership on key progressive issues� and �has not stood out on any major progressive causes during her time in the Senate�and has declined to use her name and platform to make any significant issue a signature.�
