A theme that stuck with me early in the convention, based on several early convention speeches and less formal addresses at various events, was the so-called "politics of posterity." This is a term I heard Gary Hart use and it seemed to capture clarify a major difference between the party of progressives and the party of the Right.

Gigi's post yesterday touched upon an interesting point - what does it mean to say we're progressives? Is there enough of a common thread among all the competing issues for 'progressive' to truly be a meaningful moniker?

Before I set down some thoughts on this issue, I want to you watch an ad which the Center for American Progress has been playing in a few select media markets the last several weeks. Join me after the jump, won't you?

A couple months ago, I talked a bit about how I wish cadidates (especially presidential candidates) who talk about progressive ideas would sound at least a little passionate about it.  I talked about how tired I am of choosing the lesser of two evils.

I don't know that I feel any differently about any of the current candidates, but the second convening of the 2007 Front Line Leaders Academy definately gave me hope for passionate candidates in the near future.

On Tuesday, the House "officially" started their 100 Hour Plan.  The new Democratic majority has hit heavy issues including the minimum wage, drug reform, and stem cell research.