Way too many arguments like these infected with charts saying “look, see, this graph shows why I’m right!!!” and not nearly enough of talking to people like you’re a normal person. Never mind that right off the bat the writer makes some straw man arguments about Sen. Obama. If he believed that both parties were to blame for our failures, he’d probably be running as an independent and not for the nomination of the Democratic party.
My gut told me that, no charts required.
I am not quite sure what the story in question has to do with liberals losing elections. As far as I can tell, your link to is just a discussion of why a particular writer disagrees with what Obama has said at a particular moment in time.
One may not agree with him (I personally am backing Edwards myself, so I perhaps not as concerned about it as you) but it hardly seems to me to have anything to do with as complex an issue as the title of your article implies.
Some of the conclusions reached may be–by your reckoning–invalid, though as far as I am concerned the intent of the perceived inaccuracy is almost as important as the inaccuracy itself.
By that I mean, oftentimes (and I am generalizing quite a bit here) when Republicans are inaccurate about Democrats, such as the Swiftboating of John Kerry, the intent is a malicious one, designed to destroy a candidate and sow doubt and discord among the voting public (and to increase the apathy of those that don’t).
I am not sure that such ill intent is present here.