As an attendee to the Las Vegas debate, what struck me most from the debate was not what was said but what was not said.  When introduced, Howard Dean had the biggest applause, over that of the introduction of the candidates.  People recognize the effort he has put into transforming the party, from a good ole boy network to an honest to god grassroots organization.

I understand that the old guard of the Party in Nevada in favor of Hillary, I was dismayed by the booing of the candidates, but encouraged by the booing of the commentators when they tried to insert their right wing spin.

From this came the thought that left bloggers make up an interest group.  We have common goals, just as corporations, churches, unions, and business have goals and support their candidates.  Unfortunately, the blogosphere has pretty much conceded using its advocacy position in the interest of avoiding an internal flame war.  I would argue that the blogosphere would be wise to establish some ground issues or points that a candidate needs to answer (correctly, I hope) for our support of candidates.   Yes, a litmus test of sorts, one that recognizes that we have an agenda and interests we want.  We are submerging our own interests in interest of not showing a conflict in primary season.  But if the wrong person is selected, will we not be harmed anyway?   What do I want to ask a candidate? Look below the fold.