I like it, too. I am going to be a very bad man, though, now, and mention the B-word again, and not only that, I may not be around to elaborate properly, depending on how thick and fast the response is.
That said, I think it's worth noting, given the conversations that seem to be unfolding. The opening of Badiou's latest Big Work (Logics of Worlds) is a version of what had already seen light beforehand as a critique of what he is calling "democratic materialism" and that sounds to me an awful lot like (at the least) shag's liberalism #2 (interpretive), and really very much like the methodological liberalism she comes to: its main thesis, he says, is that there are only languages and bodies. And so we are left with juridical relations where all bodies and languages are allowed except the ones deemed to violate the consensus that all bodies and languages are allowed (these are "totalitarian"). But there is of course no objective anything against which they are measured -- no god, as shag points out, and, as badiou puts it, no truths.
http://www.lacan.com/badbodies.htm
this very simple observation of his has seemed to me -- ill-read in much of the social theory of liberalism as i am -- one of his more interesting contributions, and i am pleased to see it echoed here, because I had not entirely trusted my gut on it.