Salon sometimes has some very good political articles and columns, headed by the almost-always-great Glenn Greenwald, followed by the often insightful Michael Lind and others. (That ignores Lind flirting with the skirts of global warming "skepticism" and Joan Walsh, Andrew Leonard and others often being Obamiac-like.) Anyway, there's often good stuff on its politics pages.
Then, it has absolute dreck at times, like this nonsense piece urging Hillary Clinton to challenge Barack Obama again.
Every premise is wrong.
The bottom line, though, given that many of Obama's financial advisers are connected to Robert Rubin and the other Goddam Sachs in particular and Wall Street in general apologists who served her husband, Bill, there would be no difference of major degree between her and Obama.
She might have somewhat more cojones, but, overall, she would be wedded to many of the same neolib domestic policy stances, and certainly to many of the same neocon foreign policy ideas, as Dear Leader.
Contra the article, this Green Party voter has no buyer's remorse for either one.
Now, if say a Russ Feingold primaried Obama, then we'd be talking.
But, Hillary and B.O.? Two sides of the same coin.
"A choice, not an echo," please.