Here's something you're never going to see from any of our so-called "liberal media" -- a debate between progressives and those that could actually be labeled the "far left," which is not the same as Bill O'Reilly's definition of "far left," a.k.a.. as a corporate Democrat or that mythical creature that we believe once existed, called a moderate Republican.

Democracy Now's Amy Goodman spent the better part of the hour this Monday hosting a debate with "Joe Conason, editor-in-chief of The National Memo, co-editor of The Investigative Fund, and author of "The Hunting of the President: The Ten-Year Campaign to Destroy Bill and Hillary Clinton"; Michelle Goldberg, senior contributing writer at The Nation; longtime journalist Robert Scheer, editor of Truthdig.com and author of many books; and Kshama Sawant, a Socialist city councilmember in Seattle and member of Socialist Alternative, a nationwide organization of social and economic justice activists."

I thought it was one of the more interesting conversations I've watched in a while when it comes to whether or not progressives ought to back Hillary Clinton and her run for president this time around, and what it means for the party and the future of the country for anyone who decides to sit this one out -- or to back the likes of a Rand Paul, as Robert Scheer indicates he might be inclined to do..

They discussed everything from what it's going to mean for Supreme Court nominations, to what progressives gain or lose when you vote for the so-called "lesser of two evils," to the need for building infrastructure within the Democratic party from the ground up, to the realities of dealing with the Democratic party you have, and not the one you'd like to have, that sadly just does not exist across most of the country right now.

If you've got the better part of an hour to spare, it's well worth the time. If you don't watch the entire clip, at least check out the back and forth between Conason and Scheer over Rand Paul. I don't know how anyone could support that flip-flopping opportunist and still call themselves a liberal, and Conason let Scheer have it for his idiocy with supporting Paul, and for his doublespeak in saying he'd support Kerry for president just after trashing Clinton for her vote on Iraq when Kerry voted the same way.

Full transcript is available here.

[ad]