Libertas askes, "Is there anyone in Hollywood with the moral courage to cry, 'What about the Iraqi people?'" and finds one man willing to make a difference: George Clooney.

In 1999, at least:

Of all people, George Clooney starred in a film called Three Kings, that savagely criticized the tragic consequences of Bush I encouraging the Iraqi people to revolt against Saddam after the Gulf War - but then doing nothing to help them. What changed? Are the Iraqs less human today? In less peril? And how in seven years did abandoning the Iraqis suddenly become okay to the liberal establishment? Who’s the liberal now, George? Or, has ‘liberal’ devolved into opposing anything a conservative stands for even at the cost of innocent life?

It would be very tempting to respond with a terse "yes", but that wouldn't be quite accurate. But there's a reason, of course, why Joe Lieberman found it necessary to run as an independent this year, as Democrats "progressed" further and further to the left of mid-century Truman/JFK/LBJ-style moderate liberalism.

On paper at least, the Democrats did tack a bit back towards the center with the help of such candidates as Webb, Schuler, pro-lifer Bob Casey, Jr., along with Lieberman’s decisive win. But it's too early to tell if they'll make any difference at all in the philosophy of the party as a whole, or if they were, as one commentator recently dubbed them, crash test dummies--mere cannon fodder on the way back to future.