TODAY IN TAP ONLINE. Ezra weighs in on the Hillary Clinton health care plan, which he notes would have never been this bold if John Edwards hadn't already released an extremely progressive health plan:

The mixture of a progressive, transformative health care plan and a credible candidate instantly reshaped the politics of health care in the Democratic primary. Any politician who proposed an overly cautious or incremental plan would lose voters to Edwards. Barack Obama's plan, which was decidedly broad and ambitious by the standards of 2004, received criticism (some of it from this writer) for merely getting near to, rather than actually achieving, universality. In the absence of Edwards' plan, it would almost undoubtedly have been lauded for its vision. (Though without the leftward pressure exerted by Edwards' plan, Obama's proposal may have been yet more cautious than what he released.)

Hillary Clinton was the wild card. After failing to enact health care reform in 1994, many speculated that she'd be too cowed to try again. Further evidence appeared to come from her Senate career, where she didn't attach herself to many high profile initiatives on the subject, and said things like, "I [have] learned some valuable lessons about the legislative process, the importance of bipartisan cooperation and the wisdom of taking small steps to get a big job done." To most, that sounded like an admission that she'd push for the safe changes but avoid the transformative battles. Meanwhile, she became the second largest recipient of medical industry money in the Senate -- a record that seemed to fit with her apparent reticence on the issue. While Edwards released his plan in February and Obama offered his in May, it was only in September that firm word emerged from the Clinton camp that there would even be a plan.

Yesterday, the details came out, and lo, they are good.

Read the whole thing here. Also check out Ezra's previous commentary on the Obama, Giuliani, and Romney health care proposals.

Plus, Spencer Ackerman writes that last week's intense focus on whether the surge was working obscured the real Bush agenda -- a long-term U.S. presence in Iraq.

Kay Steiger reviews Paul Haggis' new film, In the Valley of Elah, a portrait of returned Iraq soldiers which critiques not just the war, but the way we treat our veterans.

And, from our September issue, Jared Bernstein offers his take on Bryan Caplan's Myth of the Rational Voter and Richard Freeman's America Works: Critical Thoughts on the Exceptional U.S. Labor Market.

--The Editors