Continuing my train of thought about the progressive mini-civil war and the kill-billers, I have some additional thoughts on this whole conundrum.
While I respect the idea of "getting tough," I can't wrap my head around how that will actually move lawmaking leftward in a Congress that's more or less held hostage by two or three conservadems.
We have to ask ourselves, why are Democrats more willing to cater to moderates? The answer is that moderates exist in mixed, swing districts/states where Democrats only win by narrow margins. So Democrats in those districts have to straddle center-right and center-left in order to be reelected. Political reality.
What does this have to do with progressives? If we want more liberal legislation, maintaining a Democratic majority isn't the only means. We have to make those swing districts more secure for Democrats. That means serious on-the-ground campaigning all the time -- not just during elections. We have to continue to prove to voters why left and center-left policies are better. It worked in 2006 and 2008, and as we make swing regions safer for Democrats, the balance moves leftward.
Ultimately, if there were more securely Democratic districts and states, the White House would've been pushing a more robust public option, if not a Medicare buy-in, etc.
Yet for whatever reason, some progressive activists have decided that it's better to team up with teabaggers and wingnuts, and to yell at even very progressive members like Bernie Sanders.
First, we all know why teabaggers are so incoherent and insane. Because they're motivated by anger, fear, disappointment and an escaped mental patient named Glenn Beck -- not by rationality and logic. This manifests itself in LOUD NOISES, and it's marginalizing the far-right.
Keeping our heads about us gives us a serious strategic advantage.
Second, by teaming up with these wackaloons, not only are we lending our cred to the ridiculous wingnuts while their insanity rubs off on us and reduces our cred (the president didn't want to do town halls with McCain due a similar phenomenon), but we're also doing very little to convince voters that Democratic policies are better than the policies pushed by the teabaggers.
Consequently, those swing districts remain shaky. Moderates get more attention. Progressives lose cred. And legislation reflects this dynamic. But once we secure more swing districts, and once we elect more progressives, we control more votes and, consequently, we get more liberal laws. Without this leverage, we're only making loud noises.