I'm not particularly impressed with this piece by Mr. Taibbi (who can be bright, incisive and articulate at times)... mostly because of its reference to "both sides."
Quite a few C.D. posters "get it" that both sides of the aisle are mostly theater. When it comes to big business, state surveillance, war, and ecological exploitation, both parties play for the same corporate donors and thus enact very similar policies.
On social issues including the status of Blacks, the safety of the Black community, the status of women and their right to sovereignty over their own reproductive powers, and global warming (as a viable concern), the Democrats have BETTER positions.
But on anything related to foreign policy, there's not much daylight between these supposed teams since both obviously play for the same donors.
Mr. Taibbi spends more time articulating the seeming differences that make for great theater and/or passionate sport. In so doing, he leaves out the salient factor that Big Money owns both teams and the plays on the part of either reflect that loyalty.