You also edited the sentence and quoted it out of context.
"Liberals tend to whine and complain about corporate greed but are timid when it comes to advocating actual solutions."
He's right. They attack the GOP aggressively to seem like an opposition but in many cases the policy is so close it's obviously just theater. WWE politics slam fest.
"We changed the control of congress through action."
Action on corporate greed? Do tell... Like the OP said, their fixes if they have some, will be like a bandaid on a cancer. They won't touch the root of the problem. They'll work about as hard as the republicans, corporations and media to keep it out of public discourse.
Edit: I don't intend to direct all this at you, but I got to thinking so I'm writing for the audience.
I'll be happy to be proven wrong, but I think the most surprising thing about possible democratic control of the government in the near future, to some of us at least, will be how few real important changes are on the table and how many democrats won't seem to have much problem with that (or will get hostile when it's mentioned). Both political parties are well to the right of the public on most issues, as long as the democrats are republican lite instead of opposition these will continue to be valid criticisms.
Most of these suits have about dick in common with me or most people I know or their interests. Unless you are part of the ruling/owning class, they probably don't really have much in common with you either. On the other hand, if I wasn't hopeful (well, I don't know about hopeful, maybe just aware of the importance) that the people could get some sort of control of their government I wouldn't be here.
I'd recommend most people interested in the topic to go to www.democracynow.org and watch pretty much every show this week. This week alone they played speeches by historian Howard Zinn, linguist and scholar Noam Chomsky, former UN weapons inspector Scott Ritter, and journalist Seymour Hersh.
Googled and found an interview where Noam Chomsky talks briefly (or as close as he ever is to it :) ) about the subject:
Geov Parrish: Is George Bush in political trouble? And if so, why?
Noam Chomsky: George Bush would be in severe political trouble if there were an opposition political party in the country. Just about every day, they're shooting themselves in the foot. The striking fact about contemporary American politics is that the Democrats are making almost no gain from this. The only gain that they're getting is that the Republicans are losing support. Now, again, an opposition party would be making hay, but the Democrats are so close in policy to the Republicans that they can't do anything about it. When they try to say something about Iraq, George Bush turns back to them, or Karl Rove turns back to them, and says, "How can you criticize it? You all voted for it." And, yeah, they're basically correct.
GP: How could the Democrats distinguish themselves at this point, given that they've already played into that trap?
NC: Democrats read the polls way more than I do, their leadership. They know what public opinion is. They could take a stand that's supported by public opinion instead of opposed to it. Then they could become an opposition party, and a majority party. But then they're going to have to change their position on just about everything.
http://www.chomsky.info/interviews/20051223.htm">More...