Very well written, though it's hard to verify some of the statements when it comes to presenting the 'history of progressives'. I disagree that there has been a monolithic, unchanging "progressive" cabal that has been pushing a certain agenda for over 100 years. There seems to me to be some cherry picking in what events he decides to latch on to as far as examples of this in history. I mean, as an example, today 'progressives' are advertised as being in favor of expansion of civil rights (although that term is open to debate these days) but back in the 1960s, today's "progressives" ar ethe Democrats who, in the 1960s were *against* civil rights - at least the Southern Democrats were.

But then there's the distortion when talking about the 'health care push'. The author mentions a list of previous attempts and then says:

"The objective is rather to remove about a sixth of the economy from private control and bring it under the thumb of the state, whose “experts” will choose and ration its goods and services"

I have a lot of problems with this statement.

1) "The objective is". Umm.. Who said so? Was he in on the Secret Progressives Cabal Organizational Meeting And Pot-Luck Lunch? Or is he doing what my ex-wife did - saying she knew the REAL reason I did things, not what I said but what she "knew" I was thinking. He says it as if it were statement of fact. If I were him (with the point of view he seems to have), I would have said "The objective SEEMS to be to curry favor with voters to perpetuate and grow their power base" - or, in short, "buy votes".

2) A sixth of the economy? Umm.. It wasn't always that way. You used to be able to have a baby in a hospital for $20, adjusted for 'normal' inflation, it's a few hundred dollars today. Back in 1987, the MINIMUM was over $5000. *Today* it's grown that big because of the costs - and if the costs weren't so outlandish, it wouldn't be apolitical issue.

3) "...from private control and bring it under the thumb of state". Well, Medicare certainly isn't under private control and reports say that 50% of our health care costs can occur in the last 2 years of life.

4) "whose “experts” will choose and ration its goods and services" - as opposed to insurance company 'experts' who's first loyalties are to the *stockholders*.

That being said...

I certainly DO agree with the writer's opinion that 'the left' very much DID over-read the results of the 2008 election. I've long said that it was more a repudiation of Bush than an embrace of Obama.