Fun With Regulatory Reform

Huzzah!  This probably will go under the radar in all the health care hoopla, but House Dems passed a regulatory reform bill, which is a gigantic step in the right direction.  The highlights:

The 1,279-page bill creates a new federal agency dedicated to consumer protection, establishes a council of regulators to police the financial landscape for systemic risks, initiates oversight of the vast derivatives market and gives the government power to wind down large, troubled firms whose collapse could endanger the entire financial system. The legislation also gives shareholders an advisory say on executive compensation, increases transparency of credit ratings agencies and sets aside billions in government funds to aid unemployed homeowners.

I love the smell of reform in the morning!

Do not miss Rep. Gutierrez spanking Cons on the House floor:

As part of regulatory reform for the financial industry, Republicans believe Democrats have created a "bailout fund." Rep. Luis Gutierrez (D-Ill.) yesterday decided this is a lie worth debunking in detail.

Gutierrez, who is bilingual, told his colleagues, "I've had the bill thoroughly examined by those who do speak the English language and have only spoken the English language all their life, and they cannot find the 'bailout fund' in the bill."

Ryan Grim added, "What the bill does do, [Gutierrez] explained, is create a fund that major firms must pay into. If banks get into trouble, the fund is used to take them over, break them up and sell off the parts. If such a fund was socialist, Gutierrez said, then so is Geico. But unlike Geico, he said, drivers who crash the economy don't get their bank repaired and returned to them under the Democratic plan."

In the hopes of making this easy enough for his GOP colleagues to understand, Gutierrez explained, "What they won't tell you is unlike everybody in this room who has to go and take out an insurance policy to drive a car, they want Wall Street and Goldman Sachs to be able to drive our economy into the ground without paying a cent of insurance in case they act recklessly. And all we're saying as Democrats is: 'It's simple. If you want to do business in America and you threaten the economic stability of our country, then you've got to pay into an insurance fund.'

We'll see if that was simple enough for Cons to grasp.  I somehow doubt it - he didn't bust out the crayons and construction paper.

And as the cherry on top, Rep. DeFazio and like-minded Dems are trying to get Glass-Steagall back up and running.  If you don't know why that's such a good thing, why, visit the link and rejoice.

Dear Wall Street: Ha ha ha fuck you.  Sincerely, Dana Hunter.

Your Daily Dose of Health Care Reform Stupidity

Well, my darlings, it looks as if the public option is dying a slow and painful death in the Senate.  You can thank Joe Lieberman for that.  He's still being an obstinate ass, even though his own supporters are pounding him over fucking Connecticut over this.  Apparently, Joe Lieberman's need to feel relevant is far more important to him than what his constituents want.

So, if we lose the public option, what might we get?  Well, there's talk of an OPM plan, which would basically create "a national, non-profit health plan along the lines of the Federal Employee Health Benefits Plan, which offers coverage to members of Congress."  And there's a Medicare buy-in on the table.  They're not bad alternatives, as far as I can tell.  Debbie Stabenow, public option supporter, says it really doesn't matter as long as the alternatives accomplish the same goals as the public option.  We'll see if Whining Joe Lieberman can accept that.  Alas for him, if he manages to kill the public option but still wants to throw a tantrum over the alternatives, he may just manuever himself out of leverage, because Queen Snowe could come back into play.

Isn't sausage-making fun?

And, of course, Lieberman's the only idiot in the Dem caucus throwing tantrums.  Ben Nelson's introduced his just-like-Stupak's-Stupidity amendment, and still insists he will settle for no less.  Debbie Stabenow is basically telling him to go fuck himself on that one.

Harry Reid hit the Cons particularly hard over their dumbfuckery:

Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid's office is criticizing the GOP's "fake outrage" in response to comments he made on the Senate floor this morning.

Earlier today, Reid whacked Republicans for attempting to kill health care reform, comparing their obstructive tactics to those used to slow the end of slavery, women's suffrage, and civil rights.

When this country belatedly recognized the wrongs of slavery, some dug intheir heels and said, "slow down."
When women spoke up for their right to speak up--when they demanded the vote--some insisted they simly stop.

When this body was on the verge of guaranteeing equal civil rights to all citizens...some senators resorted to the same filibuster threats that we hear today.

Powerful stuff.  You can tell how powerful by how loudly Cons are crying.  Now if only Harry would hit the Conservadems that hard, we might actually get a decent health care reform bill going.

Cons are busy being upset at Harry right now, but they're really going to be screaming when they see what Al Franken's got in store.  How they'll be able to vote against forcing the insurance companies to spend more of their money on actually providing customers with health care and justify it, I'm not sure.

Insurance companies, on the other hand, are supporting Tenthers in a last-ditch effort to avoid the effects of reform.  Any more evidence needed that they are not on our side?

Grassley's doubled-down on the Cons' failed gimmick, and now wants not only Congress, but the President and White House and everybody else to get the same health care the rest of us end up getting.  I don't think he quite understands that Dems like this idea, the President included.

Oh, and Cons?  Don't get too excited about those polls showing most Americans are against health care reform.  It turns out that many folks are against the current bills because they're not reformalicious enough.  Which means that the vast majority of the country still wants meaningful reform.  Suck it, punks!

Global Warming Dumbfuckery Abounds

My darlings, I have the solution to our energy woes.  We can stop global warming in its tracks by tapping into a source of infinitely renewable energy.  All we have to do is tap into the endless dumbfuckery of the global warming deniers.  We can heat our homes with their fevered imaginations.  We can run our industries on with the dynamos of their denial.  We could recharge our electric cars by holding memos and emails just out of their reach on treadmills.  We'll never need oil, gas or coal again.

They're so fucking desperate they've turned to a life of crime in a pathetic attempt to discredit the science:

Burglars and hackers have attacked the Canadian Centre for Climate Modelling and Analysis at the University of Victoria in British Columbia, apparently in an attempt to further the “Climategate” intimidation of global warming researchers. The Climategate smear campaign rests on the release of thousands of emails illegally hacked last month from the British Climatic Research Unit (CRU). The National Post reports that the Centre for Climate Modelling, a government institution, is also the victim of repeated criminal attacks:

Andrew Weaver, a University of Victoria scientist and key contributor to the Nobel prize-winning work of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, says there have been a number of attempted breaches in recent months, including two successful break-ins at his campus office in which a dead computer was stolen and papers were rummaged through.

As the United States — led by President Barack Obama — prepares to join the world in the fight against global warming, the opponents of reform are resorting to criminal desperation, harkening back to the amoral extremes of Richard Nixon.

Oh, yes.  That certainly adds to their credibility.  That puts them right up there with ALF and murderers of abortion doctors as fighters for truth, justice, and the American way.

But just in case their thefts don't destroy the science, in case all they can find is evidence for global warming as they rummage through scientists' effects, they've got a backup plan:

"Biased thermometers" are to blame for scientific data documenting a precipitous rise in global temperatures, according to Marc Morano.


Morano was Rush Limbaugh's former producer and a columnist at the rightwing "news" site, Cybercast News Service, before becoming denialist-extraordinaire Sen. James Inhofe (R-OK)'s top aide on the U.S. Senate Committee on Environmental and Public Works. In 2003, Inhofe described global warming as "the greatest hoax ever perpetrated on the American people," a statement which he stills stands by today.

Morano now runs the climate denialist website ClimateDepot.com and is, essentially, the very heart of the entire climate change denialist echosphere.

[snip]


Here's the too-short debate between Morano and Balog, as hosted by CNN's Rick Sanchez, where Morano argues that the earth is actually cooling, despite scientific evidence --- based on "biased thermometers," as Morano argues, "placed near air conditioner outlets, near asphalt" --- showing this decade to be the warmest on record. We'll leave it to you to decide whose got their facts straight, the science photographer or Rush Limbaugh's former producer:

Wow.  "Biased thermometers."  That's novel.  And I suppose the "biased thermometers" are causing the melting of the Arctic sea ice, the drastic loss of Antarctic ice sheets, retreating glaciers, forest fires, droughts, and rising sea levels, because the earth's just that gullible.  It's all a psychosomatic effect.  Brilliant!

But "biased thermometer" man and the happy gang of smash-and-grab goobers aren't the only ones fighting the science of global warming.  Billionaire right-wing fucktard David Koch is pouring tons of cash into the fight:

In an op-ed in the Boston Globe yesterday, I observed that Koch has manufactured a positive image for himself by giving to laudable causes, while at the same time, quietly “funneling tens of millions of dollars to more subterranean efforts that reflect his conservative politics.” Despite his funding of the Smithsonian, Koch has done more to politicize and and undermine the public’s understanding of science than any other single person. Koch has funded the leading groups dedicated to spreading skepticism of climate change:

– Koch’s Americans for Prosperity, the right-wing tea party group which Koch founded in 1984 and continues to finance, has just announced that it will send a team of political operatives to Copenhagen for the United Nations Climate Change Conference. AFP intends to hold a press conference to attack any climate change solution the President promises as a mistake that will “kill jobs here” and “infringe on our personal and national freedoms.”

– Koch has funded the Competitive Enterprise Institute, which has been the most aggressive conservative front group heralding hacked e-mails as proof that climate change does not exist.

– Koch funds the “Hot Air Tour,” a campaign led by lobbyists stopping in cities across the country to call into question the science underpinning climate change. The tour also features an actual hot air balloon to illustrate their beleif that climate change science is just “hot air.”

The National Academy of Sciences, the US Global Change Research Program, and the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change have all come to the same conclusion: “that carbon dioxide emissions from fossil fuel use and the loss of carbon-sink capacity in heavily timbered forests are increasing temperatures and making oceans more acidic.” David Koch’s Koch Industries derives much of its profit from its oil refineries, one of the major emitters of carbon dioxide, and from its George-Pacific timber subsidiary, one of the largest contributors to the loss of carbon-sink capacity.

And if you thought Bush's gang of nitwits were done fucking the country over when Obama took over the White House, think again.

Why are they all so frantic, you may ask?  Well, it could have something to do with the fact that world leaders are meeting in Copenhagen to hash out a game plan for dealing with the climate crisis.  And it could have something to do with the EPA's stark findings:

As expected, the Environmental Protection Agency is poised to formally declare that greenhouse gases are a dangerous public-health hazard and must be regulated by the government. The "endangerment finding" is the result of a study ordered by the U.S. Supreme Court in 2007 on the effects of greenhouse gas pollution on human health and welfare.

Whether Congress approves a cap-and-trade measure or not, the conclusion raises the specter of combating global warming through the regulatory process of the Clean Air Act. As you may have heard, business groups, to put it mildly, aren't fond of that idea.

[snip]

Today's EPA declaration should help crystallize the near-future for polluters: back cap and trade or the EPA won't have much of a choice. It's your call.

That's why they know their only hope is to destroy the science.  Alas for them, there's too much science.  And even if it weren't for the science, we're going to have a lot of Pacific Island nations underwater soon enough who will be happy to put a human face on the cost of global warming.

So, you may ask, what can you, as a person intelligent enough to realize we must do something about global warming, do?  Use your energies wisely.  And some genius inventor needs to get to work on that stupidity-to-energy conversion device.

Your Daily Dose of Health Care Reform Stupidity

I didn't blog this over the weekend because it should've been a foregone conclusion, and I really couldn't get excited over it, but Dems managed to stick together just enough to ensure that the Senate health care reform bill could be debated.  Of course, now, Conservadems are posturing against the public option, and making sure we all know they're still perfectly willing to fuck us over in favor of the insurance companies.  Joyous.

Joe Lieberman has a new excuse as to why he hates the public option.  This month, he's against it because he says we've never done anything like this before.  I somehow doubt that, what with all the public/private competition we've got in this country.

The most important thing to remember about these dumbshit Dems (and the idiot Independent who pretends to caucus with Dems) is not Lieberman's lengthy history of piss-poor excuses.  No, it's the fact that Blanche Lincoln was for the public option before she was against it.  In fact, she was for the public option while she was against it:

But as Igor Volsky noted, as recently as yesterday, Lincoln's own website argued, "Individuals should be able to choose from a range of quality health insurance plans. Options should include private plans as well as a quality, affordable public plan or non-profit plan that can accomplish the same goals of a public plan."

That was the senator's official position a day after Lincoln stood on the floor of the Senate, "promising" to join a Republican filibuster of health care reform "as long as a government-run public option is included" in the bill.

After Volsky's post, Lincoln's office changed the senator's official position, scrubbing the page of any references to allowing consumers to choose among competing plans.

Can't cover your tracks that easily, Blanche.  You are so very, very fucked.  Paging Mike Stark...

Greg Sargent thinks Conservadems will realize the urgency of passing health care reform, and will, possibly, ultimately do the right thing.  Color me skeptical.  But perhaps polls showing that not passing reform murders Dem electoral chances will help clarify things for them. Perhaps not.  They're cunning, but they're not exactly smart.

They're certainly not willing to do the right thing.  Colorado Sen. Michael Bennet is.  And he doesn't care jack diddly shit about the political cost.  I hope he sits the Conservadems down for a long talk.

Let's hope Sebelius's state-by-state impact assessment of health care reform will help a few Dems see the light as well.

But enough about Dems.  Let's talk about Con fuckery.  There's plenty of it.  In fact, the sheer volume of lies pouring from Cons' lips is overwhelming:

Looking over the rapid-response list, the efficiency of the DNC operation is impressive, but the key takeaway is more important: Good lord, Republicans sure do lie a lot about health care.

I mean, GOP lawmakers weren't even close to the truth. Watching the debate as it unfolded, one got the sense that reform's opponents either know literally nothing about the issue at hand, prefer almost pathological levels of dishonesty, or perhaps both.

Over the weekend, Josh Marshall noted in passing that the congressional GOP lied quite a bit during the 1994 reform debate, but Republicans are now "upping their game ... lying even more shamelessly than in round 1."

That's because they've discovered there are no consequences for endless lying.  Teabaggers love it, and most Americans are too fucking clueless to realize they're being lied and lied and lied to.

In fact, the GOP has become so shameless that they feel perfectly comfortable claiming a number they just made up as gospel truth.  They're now saying health care reform will cost $2.5 trillion.  Where did this number come from?  Apparently, Sen. Gregg's ass:

It appears as if the number comes from a press release from Budget Committee ranking member Judd Gregg (R-NH), written the morning after the CBO released its analysis, which reads "American taxpayers are about to see an unprecedented expansion of the federal government that will cost a staggering $2.5 trillion when fully implemented."

 The underlying critique has a tiny bit of merit to it. Democrats did indeed diminish the 10 year cost by delaying the tax-and-benefit provisions for a few years after the bill becomes law--they felt they needed to push some key reforms down the road a year to keep the bill's 10 year cost from exceeding Obama's $900 billion top line. Hence the caveat "when fully implemented." But even if you were to start the clock in 2014, and stop it in 2024, the number $2.5 trillion seems to have been made entirely out whole cloth. Perhaps a projection line drawn arbitrarily on a graph cooked up by a Republican Budget Committee staffer.

And, of course, the critique elides the fact that, whatever the federal responsibility for health care becomes as a result of this bill, it's projected to dramatically reduce the deficit in both the near and long term.

Of course it does, because that's the truth, which is something Cons seem deathly allergic to.

Here's something even more outrageous: Gov. Barbour touting Mississippi as a model of health care reform when it "rates 51 (out of 50 states plus DC) in health care ranking."  Yup.  Sure is a perfect example - of what not to do.

So what are the Cons' allies up to?  Well, the Chamber of Commerce wants to kill health care reform so they have a better chance at killing climate change legislation later on.  The gun lobby's trying to kill health care reform because they have some paranoid fantasy that health care reform means all their guns will be taken away.  And Teabaggers are busy laughing at families who have suffered a tragedy:

From Chicago journalist Kristen McQueary, this deplorable story:

As a journalist covering Chicago politics, verifying information is like climbing a mountain of sand. With each step you take, the deeper you sink.

Last week while researching claims from a local Tea Party activist, I found myself asking a family for proof that they had lost an unborn grandchild.

The family, Dan and Midge Hough, of Chicago, spoke in favor of health care reform and in support of U.S. Rep. Dan Lipinski (D-3rd) at a Nov. 14 town hall meeting in Oak Lawn.

Their daughter-in-law, Jenny, and an unborn grandchild died recently due in part, they believe, to a lack of health insurance. They said Jenny was not receiving regular prenatal care and ended up in an emergency room with double pneumonia that developed into septic shock. Her baby died in the womb, and Jenny died a few weeks later, leaving behind a husband and a 2-year-old daughter.

Catherina Wojtowicz, of Chicago's Mount Greenwood community, an organizer for a Tea Party splinter group, Chicago Tea Party Patriots, falsely claimed that the Houghs fabricated their story. In an e-mail, she called them operatives of President Barack Obama who "go from event to event and (cry) the same story."

When the Houghs spoke at the Lipinski event, some Tea Partiers ridiculed them. They moaned and rolled their eyes and interrupted. Midge Hough began to cry.

Such a credit to their cause, aren't they?  Despicable dipshits.

In case anyone else needed any more proof we need reform, check out the results of the free clinic Keith Olbermann helped sponsor. You know, the one where people with diabetes, heart failure, and breast cancer haven't been able to get any sort of health care until now.

With all of the Con fuckery eagerly aided and abetted by Conservadem fuckery, I haven't been too hopeful about reform.  But here's news that makes me hope that something good will come out of this bill: it appears the Senate version strips Congress of its health insurance and throws them into the exchanges.  Kevin Drum reports it was a dirty trick by Grassley that went horribly awry, since Max Baucus decided it was a great idea and happily threw it into the mix.

I haven't had any inclination to congratulate Grassley or Baucus, but I have to offer them a heartfelt muchos gracias, even though in Grassley's case the good was unintentional.  Because if this resolution stays in, that means Congress is going to have to ensure that health care reform works, as they'll be suffering right along with the rest of it.

It's about fucking time.

Stupid Credit Card Company Tricks

Digby points out the length to which credit card companies go to ensure you rack up plenty of late fees:

I honestly believe that this is the kind of thing that affects people every day and is leading to a populist backlash. People not only blame those who do these things, they blame those who have the authority and power for failing to step in and stop it:

Three years ago, the Haggler’s credit card bill seemed to stop showing up in the mail. Another month went by — no bill. The month after that, still nothing. Each month, the Haggler would call the issuer, Bank of America, and pay over the phone, then ask the same question: "Why did you stop sending me a bill?"

We’re still sending you a bill, came the company’s reply each time.

Guess what? The company was right. It just was sending the bill in a restyled envelope, with no trace of “Bank of America." In other words, it looked like junk mail, and the Haggler kept throwing it away.

Now, the Haggler can’t prove it, but this seemed like a brilliant, low-cost way to pocket a fortune in late fees.

And that's not all:

And that's what people are dealing with all the time as consumers, with their health insurance, their credit cards, their mortgages, their pensions --- overwhelming complexity designed to trip them up and cost them money or deny them benefits to which they believed in good faith they were entitled. And its all perfectly legal --- or at least there's no visible accountability for it.

The late fee tricks we are seeing all over the news is apparently going to go on unabated for as long as they can get away with it. And it goes back to the same central problems that created the financial meltdown in the first place:

The backdrop of this boo-boo is an industry that for the last 10 years has been refining the low art of late-fee shenanigans. Edmund Mierzwinski, consumer program director of the U.S. Public Interest Research Group, says that starting in 1999 — when the repeal of the Glass-Steagall Act allowed commercial and investment banks to merge — credit card companies started looking to late fees for profit.

“It began with regulators allowing banks to say that if a bill arrived on the due date but after a certain time on that day — like noon — then it was late,” Mr. Mierzwinski said. “Now, how many people know when a bank checks their mail?”

Some banks started moving up due dates without notice. Others required that payments sent via overnight mail use a special address, so that if you sent a payment by FedEx to the regular address, you were late.

Getting the picture?

Indeed.

And remember that the Cons think this is all fair and admirable and prevented Congress from stopping these nefarious fucks in their tracks.


That's all we really need to know about the Cons' concern for the common man, innit?

Let's Talk About Boobs

Specifically, the boobs who are throwing a hysterical fit over the new breast cancer screening recommendations:

On Wednesday, a group of women GOP lawmakers held a press conference to denounce a new recommendation by the federal Preventive Services Task Force that women receive mammograms less frequently. “This is how rationing begins,” said Rep. Marsha Blackburn (R-TN). “This is the little toe in the edge of the water.”

[snip]

As the Washington Independent’s Mike Lillis notes, the concern of the congresswomen about rationed mammograms is especially ironic considering that they oppose legislation that “would require insurance companies that cover diagnostic mammograms also to cover routine, annual breast cancer screenings for all women 40 and older.”

Lessee.  Hypocrisy, check.  Ridiculous fearmongering, check.  Failure to comprehend simple words like "recommendation," check.  Pure Con dumbfuckery.

But if you're tempted to fall for a Con, or if you're just confused over what's best for your health, or if you want to see a breast cancer researcher take down the bullshit in stunning detail, you can head on over to Orac's Repectful Insolence blog and read the following:

"Obama's fixin' death panels for your mama," the misogyny gambit, and other idiotic responses to the updated USPSTF mammography recommendations

"Obama's fixin' death panels for your mama": The USPSTF recommendations for mammography used as a political weapon

A two-part takedown that is truly Oracian in scope and insolence.  And if you still want more, there's always really rethinking breast cancer screening.

Funny how Con talking points and fearmongering just don't have the same impact when you're armed with the facts, innit?

Your Daily Dose of Health Care Reform Stupidity

Things are on the move, my darlings.  Sen. Reid has filed for cloture.

In a rare show of sense, Sen. Coburn has decided not to be an absolute ass, and is no longer demanding the entire bill be read.  I wonder if they slipped him some anti-psychotics.

So, what's in this bill that won't be read on the Senate floor?  Steve Benen has a rundown - along with Hatch's promise that this will be "holy war."  The Cons do love using terrorist lingo, don't they?

Here's a side-by-side comparison of the Senate and House bills.

The Center for Budget and Policy Priorities calls it an "enormous step forward." 

That stupid state opt-out is in there, and it looks like states can opt out immediately.  That means that one-third of the population of this country could be fucked over because Cons are too fucking stupid to allow them the choice of an anemic public option. 

And abstinence-only funding oiled its way in there somehow.  Heellloooo, teen pregnancies!

That brings us to the subject of abortion.  The Senate's language on abortion is a lot less noxious than the Stupak Stupidity.  And what does that mean, kids?  Why, it means Sen. Ben Nelson will take the opportunity to play the grandstanding fucktard, and the Cons will lie and lie and lie about how the bill will force everybody to pay an abortion fee, and how a vote to proceed is a vote for abortions.  To hear them tell it, the bill is a veritable mandatory abortion fest.  Dems fought back fast and hard with, y'know, actual facts.  Like, nothing the Cons have said is in any way connected to reality.  Color me shocked.

At least Sen. Bayh's claiming he'll allow the bill to come to the floor.  Look, people, if even Evan "Deficit Hock" Bayh can vote with his party for once, and Coburn's showing a sliver of sanity, perhaps the rest of you foot-dragging, tantrum-throwing, lying, cheating fuckwits can scrape around in the bottom of the barrel and come up with a shred of human decency?  A thread?  An atom, even?

Do we need more incentive?  Yes?  How about realizing that, under the status quo, health insurance companies are perfectly comfortable condemning a little girl to a lifetime of deafness:

One of the worst abuses of the private health insurance industry is its practice of denying claims to pay for necessary care for patients. This practice has become so rampant in the industry that a recent study by the California Nurses Association found that a whopping 21 percent of all insurance claims filed in the first half of 2009 in the state of California were denied by insurers.

As the story of six-year-old Madison Leuchtmann of Franklin County, MO, demonstrates, even children are victims of this insurance company abuse. Madison was born with bilateral atresia, which means she lacks ear canals in both ears. In order to hear, she wears a special device on a headband that allows her to make out sounds. Despite her disability, Madison is at the top of her kindergarten class and is slowly learning to read.

Yet Madison, due to her growth, will soon require a new hearing implant to be able to recognize sounds. Her hearing and speech therapist warns that “if she doesn’t get her implants by age seven, she’s not going to be able to blend her words. … She won’t be able to hear herself [talk].” Madison’s pediatrician, Dr. Randall Clary, also insists that without the implant, the girl may never be able to hear again.

Unfortunately, the Leuchtmann’s family insurer, Cigna, has issued “one denial after another,” flatly refusing to cover the $20,000 bill for the implant. In a written statement to the local news station Fox 2, Cigna explained, “It is not unusual for commercial benefit plans to exclude hearing assisted devices,” prompting Dr. Clary to angrily respond, “This is obviously medically necessary. You have a child that has no ear canals!” Dr. Clary also told Fox 2 that he sees these sort of denials “on a weekly basis.”

Let's have some reform before a six year-old loses her hearing for good, before others face a choice between bankruptcy or death because their insurance companies decided they didn't need treatment, or rescinded the insurance for some bullshit reason.

And let's hope Congressional Dems get the drug companies to explain why, exactly, they've decided to hike prices just enough to negate the savings they promised.

The moment of truth is coming.  We'll see exactly which of our elected leaders have our best interests at heart, and which are telling us to go fuck off and die.

Your Daily Dose of Health Care Reform Stupidity

Lie, obstruct and delay.  It's all Cons can come up with for health care reform.  Now, McConnell's advocating delaying for weeks and weeks because - well, just cuz.

I like Sen. Harkin's response:

Harkin, chairman of the Health, Education, Labor and Pensions Committee, said Democrats have mischief planned for the Republicans if they do that type of obstruction.

"If the Republicans want to stay here this Saturday and Sunday to read the bill, then let them stay here," he said. "We are planning to do something that would require Republicans to be there 24 hours a day, and if they leave the floor, we'll ask unanimous consent to dispense with the reading, and that'll be the end of it."

The big news, however, is that the Chamber of Commerce got caught soliciting funds for a fake study:

Now that the Chamber has been caught trying to finance a phony study on health care reform, the organization's credibility is poised to reach new lows.

The U.S. Chamber of Commerce and an assortment of national business groups opposed to President Obama's health-care reform effort are collecting money to finance an economic study that could be used to portray the legislation as a job killer and threat to the nation's economy, according to an e-mail solicitation from a top Chamber official.

The e-mail, written by the Chamber's senior health policy manager and obtained by The Washington Post, proposes spending $50,000 to hire a "respected economist" to study the impact of health-care legislation, which is expected to come to the Senate floor this week, would have on jobs and the economy.

Now, I know what you're thinking. "Maybe," you'll be tempted to argue, "the Chamber and its allies simply wanted to do a legitimate economic study. How do we know the report would be rigged to bolster a preconceived anti-reform narrative?"

The answer, of course, is that the Chamber's memo already points to the agreed-upon conclusion of the economic review that does not yet exist. From its email: "The economist will then circulate a sign-on letter to hundreds of other economists saying that the bill will kill jobs and hurt the economy. We will then be able to use this open letter to produce advertisements, and as a powerful lobbying and grass-roots document."

They're not even trying to hide their fuckery anymore, are they?  Health care reform supporters shall have a field day with this little bit of con artistry, and I have a feeling the over 5000 medical professionals who are already urging the AMA to leave the Chamber will shortly be joined by many more.

In case you ever wondered who runs D.C., here's the answer: lobbyists are ghostwriting lawmakers' statements on health care reform.

And in case you were wondering if pharmaceutical companies would behave themselves, the answer is no.

In case you were wondering what kind of fuckery Conservadems would get up to next, they're now demanding  they be allowed to gut Social Security and Medicare - or else.

I think Conservadems and Cons alike need to consider the fact that a No vote on health care reform has some rather dire consequences - such as allowing your previously-trailing election opponent to surge ahead of your ass. 

And, finally, CNN may have rid itself of Dobbs, but that hasn't made the rest of its programming any better.  John King decided it's perfectly fine for Giuliani to claim that newly-minted Dem Rep. Bill Owens voted no against health care reform, and let that stand without correction.  For any in doubt, Owens voted Aye.

Health care reform's certainly bringing out the worst in just about everybody, innit?

Catholic Church Sez: Let Us Discriminate or Your Charity Gets It

It seems the Catholic church is making some threats:

I've always found the Book of Matthew rather beautiful: "For I was hungry and you gave me something to eat, I was thirsty and you gave me something to drink, I was a stranger and you invited me in, I needed clothes and you clothed me, I was sick and you looked after me, I was in prison and you came to visit me...."

It goes on to say, "Unless you live in a city where gays can get married, in which case, to hell with it."

OK, it doesn't really say that last part, but the D.C. Archdiocese may be confused on the point.

The Catholic Archdiocese of Washington said Wednesday that it will be unable to continue the social service programs it runs for the District if the city doesn't change a proposed same-sex marriage law, a threat that could affect tens of thousands of people the church helps with adoption, homelessness and health care.

Under the bill, headed for a D.C. Council vote next month, religious organizations would not be required to perform or make space available for same-sex weddings. But they would have to obey city laws prohibiting discrimination against gay men and lesbians.

"If the city requires this, we can't do it," Susan Gibbs, spokeswoman for the archdiocese, said Wednesday. "The city is saying in order to provide social services, you need to be secular. For us, that's really a problem."

Keep in mind, Catholic Charities receives quite a bit of taxpayer money to do social service work -- contracts that existed long before Bush's "faith-based" initiative. The archdiocese is now saying it would abandon its charitable contracts with the city if local officials legalize same-sex marriage.

Or as my friend Rob Boston put it, "Let me get this straight: The church is saying, 'Unless you bow to our demands, we'll stop taking your money'?"

Outrageous little shits, aren't they? It's nice to see somewhat more enlightened religious folks piling on them:

D.C. Clergy United For Marriage Equality, a group of pro-gay marriage religious leaders in the District, released a statement condemning the archdiocese for its threats today. From the statement:

"The Catholic Church hierarchy is at a crossroads: they must decide whether they are in the charity business for charity¹s sake, or if imposing their will on the D.C. City Council and the citizens of the District is their primary interest."

Later Update: More D.C. church groups have been sending us their condemnation of the Catholic position on the city's proposed same-sex marriage law. Bishop John Bryson Chane, head of the District's Episcopal church, emphasized that the charity arm of his church will continue to provide relief to D.C.'s less fortunate.

"Episcopalians understand that none of us has the right to violate the human rights of another individual," he said. "That's the law of the District of Columbia. More important, it's at the core of the Gospel."

I say fuck giving the religious groups government money, and put secular groups in charge, but I'll settle for less bigoted bishops getting involved.  Fuck the Catholic church.  Oh, and while we're at it, Stephanie at Almost Diamonds has a good idea, based on the church's political efforts to send a giant fuck-you to gays in Maine: "Tax 'em."


Too fucking right.

Your Daily Dose of Health Care Reform Stupidity

My, how things change.  And it's just vaguely possible we'll have to stop making "wet Reid' jokes for a while.  Check out who didn't pull the trigger:

As expected, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) hosted a brief press conference this afternoon and announced that there will, in fact, be a public option in the Senate health care bill, though it will give states the opportunity to opt-out of the plan.

Hot damn.  I can tell you that's about the last thing I expected today.

The White House is perfectly happy with Reid's decision.  Queen Snowe not so much, but note she didn't absolutely say she'd join a filibuster.  Interesting.

Sen. Ben Nelson wanted an opt-in, just cuz we couldn't possibly make it easy for folks to get reform, so we'll see how loud he screams.

This is a pretty big moment, my darlings, and it's time to pat yourselves on the back.  The public option wouldn't be here if it weren't for progressives pushing it.  Champagne all round.

Then go have a talk with Blanche Lincoln, who still won't commit to standing against a Con filibuster.  Spank Ben Nelson for good measure.  And cheer on the Dems who are trying to ensure we see some of the benefits of reform before 2013.

It's a banner day, and C&L has an excellent round-up for us.

Elsewhere, the burning stupid still flames:

Eric Cantor wants everybody to do reform over, this time without a public option.  I'm not sure which planet he's currently inhabiting.

Health insurance companies are in full-on panic mode, using dumbass talking points in an attempt to get voters to lobby against their own interests.  I don't know what they're upset about - aside from the public option, which is fairly weak tea, they got everything they could possibly want.  Maybe they're terrified reform means they won't be able to charge women 50% higher premiums just because they're women.

The Cons have at last rolled out some reform proposals of their own!

About a month ago, the Washington Post reported, "After years of trying to cut Medicare spending, Republican lawmakers have emerged as champions of the program, accusing Democrats of trying to steal from the elderly to cover the cost of health reform."

Of course, the idea that congressional Republicans could be Medicare's "champions" has always been a little silly, but the notion gets a little more ridiculous all the time.

On Wednesday, Rep. Paul Broun (R-GA) introduced his own health care reform plan. Broun, one of the most vocal and persistent critics of comprehensive health care reform, calls his legislation the "only true free-market reform alternative." And free-market it is. While most of his legislation mirrors other Republican proposals, Broun's plan for Medicare seems rather revolutionary. He wants to completely get rid of Medicare and replace it with vouchers....
Presumably, seniors would then use their vouchers in the private insurance market.

Unfortunately, since nothing in Broun's OPTION Act deals with the issue of preexisting conditions, insurance companies would deny seniors, who are more likely to have a chronic health problem, left and right.

[snip]

It's worth noting that while the RNC and congressional Republican leaders have feigned outrage about Democratic efforts to find cost savings in Medicare, no GOP officials in Washington have denounced or distanced themselves from Paul Broun's privatization plan.

So much for the champions of Medicare, then, eh?

Oh, and remember how they keep telling us that all we need in order to reform health care is to let the private companies have their way with us across state lines?  Um, yeah, the private companies say that won't exactly work...

Imagine my surprise when Mike Tuffin, Executive Vice President for America’s Health Insurance Plans (an insurance lobby), made the following comment during this exchange on “Fox News Sunday”:

WALLACE: Mr. Tuffin, your group, the AHIP, the American Health Insurance Plans, issued a study and ran some ads opposing one version of health care reform. The White House said some of the data in your study was misleading. Here’s how President Obama reacted generally to the efforts of AHIP.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

OBAMA: The insurance industry is rolling out the big guns and breaking out their massive war chest. They’re earning these profits and bonuses while enjoying a privileged exception from our antitrust laws, a matter that Congress is rightfully reviewing.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

WALLACE: Question: Do you review — do you view that reference to possibly taking away your antitrust exemption as a threat, as punishment, for the fact that you’re opposing the president and Democrats?

TUFFIN: No, we don’t, Chris. That is a very limited federal exemption. It has nothing to do — every analyst who has looked at this has said it has nothing to do with competition or costs.

REALLY? Can we quote you on that? After more than a year of Republicans insisting that all we need to do is repeal their anti-trust exemption and the “free-market” would magically lower prices, the VP of AHIP is telling us that it “has nothing to do with competition or costs.” G.T.K., buddy.

If we can revoke their anti-trust status and hit 'em with a public option, the howls should be sweet music to all our ears.

Hold on tight, my darlings.  The next few days should be interesting indeed...

Your Daily Dose of Health Care Reform Stupidity

You know, I rather think the romance is over:

Well, I guess it's safe to say private health insurers have no intention of rebuilding burnt bridges. Suzy Khimm noted the other day, "Activists on the left have long insisted that insurance companies aren't to be trusted. But up until now, it's been hard to make the charge stick, since the insurance lobby -- a.k.a., America's Health Insurance Plans -- has been cooperating with the White House and its allies."

That cooperation is officially over.

It started last week with a deceptive report on health care premiums. Soon after, insurers launched a new round of attack ads. Now, Sam Stein reports on the industry's message to Republicans.

A top lobbyist for the major private insurance industry trade group, America's Health Insurance Plans (AHIP), urged Congressional Republicans to not even consider helping Democrats pass health care reform lest they aid an "enemy who is down."
Steve Champlin, a lobbyist for the Duberstein Group who represents AHIP, declared that the road to a bipartisan health care reform bill was, essentially, dead. And he urged GOP members to keep it that way.
"There is absolutely no interest, no reason Republicans should ever vote for this thing. They have gone from a party that got killed 11 months ago to a party that is rising today. And they are rising up on the turmoil of health care," said Champlin. "So when they vote for a health care reform bill, whatever it is, they are giving comfort to the enemy who is down."

Chaplain made the remarks at an annual AHIP conference. He added that he expected reform with some kind of public option to pass, though he emphasized the importance of Republicans standing firm in opposition.

This comes right about the time AHIP shyster-in-chief Karen Ignagni is pinky-swearing they weally weally still do totally want reform.  Riiiiggghhhttt.  What's an ark?

Steve Benen explains conversation enders on his way out to the woodshed to discuss same with Rep. Todd "I Totally Believe Debunked Talking Points About Canadian Hip Replacments" Akin.  Might I just say: One of us!  One of us!

Queen Olympia Snowe is trying to put the public option on ice, even going so far as to threaten to stand with Cons on a filibuster (was there ever any doubt?) if the Dems put in even a public option with opt-outs.  Unfortunately for her, she did so when the Maine AFL-CIO was having a confab.  They suspended their convention so that everybody could make a few pointed phone calls.  I wish I'd been there when the calls started flooding in...

Speaking of opt-outs, that idea's gaining so much steam poor Ben Nelson's afraid we're going to end up with that icky old public option.  Steve Benen's take was, as always, interesting and enlightening.

It's rather pathetic that Arlen Specter needed to have the connection between health care reform and people willing to take risks for the American entrepreneurial dream.


Mary Landrieu's drawn a line in the sand on the public option - and is standing squarely on the wrong side of it:

As for Sen. Mary Landrieu (D-La.), who opposes the public option for bizarre reasons, and doesn't seem to understand precisely what the public option even is, she told NPR this afternoon that the polls showing strong national support for the idea don't matter, because Americans are wrong.

"I think if you asked, 'Do you want a public option but it would force the government to go bankrupt,' people would say 'No,'" Landrieu said.

Now, I'll gladly concede that popularity does not always denote merit. In other words, sometimes polls will show public attitudes pointing in one direction, but that doesn't make the direction necessarily correct.

But Landrieu's arguments are getting increasingly incoherent. Yes, if you asked people if they want the government to go bankrupt, chances are pretty good the poll results would be one-sided. But why on earth does Landrieu think a public option would bankrupt the government? Does she realize that the public option is a way to save money?

I don't think anyone who's as demonstrably stupid as Landrieu can realize simple facts like that.

You know what Americans like as much as the public option?  Subjecting the insurance industry to anti-trust laws.  Damn skippy!

Elsewhere on the public option front, Nancy Pelosi says the President has been quite clear enough on his desire for the public option, thankyousoverymuch, and moreover is hunting down the votes she'll need to make sure we get a public option.  I'm liking her more and more every day.

Rep. Weiner reminds his colleagues that there is no chance for a do-over.  Hopefully, he'll manage to hammer that through a few thick skulls.

And, finally, Nate Silver believes the momentum's shifting in favor of the public option.  Of all the things that have given me confidence that this could, indeed, happen, his assessment gives me the most optimism.

Strange feeling, that.

Hey, Look! Consumer Protections with Huge Fucking Holes!

That's Congress, watching out for (their own) interests:

The House Financial Services Committee approved a controversial amendment, opposed by Chairman Barney Frank, to exempt auto financing from independent dealers from the oversight of the Consumer Financial Protection Agency. The vote was 47-21, with a large number of Democrats joining with Republicans. I’ll have the full committee breakdowns for you when I get them. The panel did approve the creation of the CFPA by a 39-29 count, ignoring the massive lobbying campaign trying to kill it outright.

The auto dealer exemption is probably the worst amendment in the entire Financial Services Committee markup on regulatory reform. You can make a case for some of the other amendments, and Rep. Frank said on Rachel Maddow’s show last night that the committee will pass the reform bill today that gives Democrats and the Administration “90% of what we wanted.” But this is part of that other 10%. Auto financing is typically the second-largest purchase a family makes, behind housing, and the horror stories of auto loan customers being ripped off are voluminous. The amendment was authored by Rep. John Campbell (R-CA), a former auto dealer who has been ripped by consumer groups for having major conflicts of interests.

The consumer groups, which also include organizations that want election reform, say that Campbell should walk away from his amendment for two reasons. First, because six auto dealerships pay him rent and would benefit from his amendment and he would benefit. And second, that Campbell received $170,000 in campaign contributions from auto dealers since he’s run for Congress.

The groups say Campbell’s personal financial disclosure forms show he received between $600,000 and $6 million in rent last year.

Campbell’s “defense” is that four of the six properties are no longer car dealers, having gone out of business – so two still are, and the amendment will directly shield them from oversight. He also says that the House Ethics Committee approved him authoring the amendment, without giving details. It turns out that Campbell recused himself from a vote last year on bailing out the automakers, based on a conflict of interest, but in this case, writing the amendment exempting them from oversight is OK with him.

And okay with a rather distressing number of Dems and Cons.  Methinks we need to sit Congress down for a long talk about ethics, public service, and votes.

Your Daily Dose of Health Care Reform Stupidity

I know.  It's a big dose, and it doesn't taste very good, and you'd rather have some nice ice cream instead.  But if thee takes their medicine, thee shall have a treat afterward.

We won't begin with stupidity, though.  For those who want to stop, take a breath, and get a lay of the land, Steve Benen's provided us an assessment of where we are in both the Senate and House.  Useful stuff.

Now, on with the stupid.  And connoisseurs of batshit insane stupid really must not miss Bachmann and Ingraham blathering about how health care reform opposition is the "pro-freedom agenda."  Seriously.  They think that freedom means living in fear of getting a hideous illness, losing health insurance, and having to make the choice between death for one and bankruptcy for the whole family.  Mmm, smell the freedom!

The latest dumb GOP anti-health care reform attack: using a CBO report on a bill that no longer exists to attack reform as too expensive.  They surely do love them their out-of-date attacks, don't they?

On the Dem front, so-called centrists could still screw us all.  How they can be considered centrists when they're standing against the wishes of the vast majority of the country is beyond my comprehension.

Jay Rockefeller's showing signs of going jello again.  If you're a constituent, you might want to tell him that repeating that "public option's not the most important part of reform" talking point the White House is so enamored of is a bad idea.  And you might, while you're at it, ask why opt-outs are such an attractive idea.  I'm still not too sure about that one.

There's still some signs of life in the Dems, though.  For one thing, there's a movement afoot to stop talking about the public option and start talking about Medicare Part E.  Nice one.

Grayson put up a memorial to the 44,000+ folks who die every year due to lack of insurance.  Too bad the site got punked.

Nancy Pelosi's thrown down the gauntlet on the public option.  And Rep. Grijalva says she only needs 8 more votes to make it happen.  So close we can taste it, my darlings.

Time, then, we gird ourselves for the last battles of the war.

Here's "the best health care system in the world" in action: a man dies of swine flu after getting kicked out of the ER.  What was that about all Americans being covered because we can all get treatment in the ER?

And our insurance companies are fantastic - if you're not sick, will never get sick, and moreover aren't female.  If you are female, you're fucked.  Here's one insurance company demanding that a woman get sterilized before they'll cover her (h/t).  And it looks like I'm out of luck if I ever lose coverage through my employer, seeing as how I not only have asthma, but being a rape survivor is also a pre-existing condition:

The most recent example of this is recounted at Womenstake.org about a rape survivor from Tampa, FL named Chris Turner. When Chris began looking for health insurance after her sexual assault, the insurance companies she contacted told her they would deny coverage to a rape survivor. Chris had described to them a hypothetical rape victim (which was actually her), and told them of being proactive following her assault, by seeking preventative anti-HIV medicated and counseling. Apparently, that was a little too pro-active for insurance companies.

After her rape, Chris had been so afraid that she had been unable to leave her house for some time. Chris had no choice but to seek help. The steps she took to heal after her sexual assault became obstacles to her future health and well-being, and these were cited for reasons why insurance companies refused to insure her.

So what would Chris have had to do in order to not be rejected from receiving coverage after being raped? Get into a time machine and undo this terrible experience that was out of her control? Almost. In order to qualify for insurance coverage at all, Chris would have had to have tested negative for HIV for two to three years, along with completing one to two years of intensive counseling (depending on the specific insurance company and plan).

Isn't that special?  No one told me when I reported my rape that I'd not only have to relive the experience in front of a courtroom full of strangers, but also have to jump through hoops for insurance companies so that maybe, possibly, they'd decide I'd been a good little rape victim and could have some health insurance after all.  This makes me want to go looking for private coverage, actually.  I'm good at shouting at people.  I'd seriously enjoy shouting at insurance company fucktards for turning down rape survivors.  I'd graphically describe for them the unhappy event and its aftermath, forcing them to suffer through every detail, and then hammer them over their infliction of further trauma.  I'd bring cameras.  It would be awesome.

If anyone's wanting to make a film, do let me know.

Now.  I promised thee a treat, and a treat thee shall have.  Nothing tastes better than Al Franken delivering the truth to fucktards:

Yesterday, the Senate Judiciary Committee held a hearing titled “Medical Debt: Can Bankruptcy Reform Facilitate a Fresh Start.” The hearing examined medical bankruptcies in America, and witnesses included CAP fellow Elizabeth Edwards and Kerry Burns, a Rhode Island mother who was forced into “financial ruin” by her late son’s medical bills.

One of the highlights of the hearing was when Sen. Al Franken (D-MN) questioned Hudson Institute Senior Fellow Diana Furchtgott-Roth about medical bankruptcies. Franken asked Furchtgott-Roth — who claimed that moving towards a European-style system of universal health care would increase bankruptcies — about how many medical bankruptcies there were in countries that have universal health care, like Switzerland and France. Furchtgott-Rott repeatedly told Franken that she didn’t “have that number,” and Franken informed her that the number was actually zero:

FRANKEN: I think we disagree on whether health care reform, the health care reform that we’re talking about in Congress now should pass. You said that the way we’re going will increase bankruptcies. I want to ask you, how many medical bankruptcies because of medical crises were there last year in Switzerland?

FURCHTGOTT-ROTT: I don’t have that number in front of me, but I can find out and get back to you.

FRANKEN: I can tell you how many it was. It’s zero. Do you know how many medical bankruptcies there were last year in France?

FURCHTGOTT-ROTT: I don’t have that number, but I can get back to you if I like.

FRANKEN: Yeah, the number is zero. Do you know how many were in Germany?

FURCHTGOTT-ROTT: From the trend of your questions, I’m assuming the number is zero. But I don’t know the precise number and would have to get back to you.

FRANKEN: Well, you’re very good. Very fast. The point is, I think we need to go in that direction, not the opposite direction. Thank you.

Sen. Franken, you are a thing of beauty.  Thank you.

Oh, Dear, He's Gone Shrill Again

And when Paul Krugman goes shrill, it's time to brace for impact (h/t):

It was the best of times, it was the worst of times. O.K., maybe not literally the worst, but definitely bad. And the contrast between the immense good fortune of a few and the continuing suffering of all too many boded ill for the future.

I’m talking, of course, about the state of the banks.

[snip]

But it’s not a simple case of flourishing banks versus ailing workers: banks that are actually in the business of lending, as opposed to trading, are still in trouble. Most notably, Citigroup and Bank of America, which silenced talk of nationalization earlier this year by claiming that they had returned to profitability, are now — you guessed it — back to reporting losses.

[snip]

But there’s an even bigger problem: while the wheeler-dealer side of the financial industry, a k a trading operations, is highly profitable again, the part of banking that really matters — lending, which fuels investment and job creation — is not. Key banks remain financially weak, and their weakness is hurting the economy as a whole.

You may recall that earlier this year there was a big debate about how to get the banks lending again. Some analysts, myself included, argued that at least some major banks needed a large injection of capital from taxpayers, and that the only way to do this was to temporarily nationalize the most troubled banks. The debate faded out, however, after Citigroup and Bank of America, the banking system’s weakest links, announced surprise profits. All was well, we were told, now that the banks were profitable again.

But a funny thing happened on the way back to a sound banking system: last week both Citi and BofA announced losses in the third quarter. What happened?

Part of the answer is that those earlier profits were in part a figment of the accountants’ imaginations. More broadly, however, we’re looking at payback from the real economy. In the first phase of the crisis, Main Street was punished for Wall Street’s misdeeds; now broad economic distress, especially persistent high unemployment, is leading to big losses on mortgage loans and credit cards.

And here’s the thing: The continuing weakness of many banks is helping to perpetuate that economic distress. Banks remain reluctant to lend, and tight credit, especially for small businesses, stands in the way of the strong recovery we need.

[snip]

[W]e desperately need to pass effective financial reform. For if we don’t, bankers will soon be taking even bigger risks than they did in the run-up to this crisis. After all, the lesson from the last few months has been very clear: When bankers gamble with other people’s money, it’s heads they win, tails the rest of us lose.

So, Mr. President, how's about listening to a fellow Nobel laureate instead of the stable of assclowns currently advising you on economic policy?  Before, y'know, it's too late.

Your Daily Dose of Health Care Reform Stupidity

Yup.  Cons are still stupid.  And still being an enormous bunch of hypocrites:

Just two weeks ago, Rep. Alan Grayson (D-Fla.) generated widespread Republican outrage with a speech on the House floor about health care reform. "It's a very simple plan," Grayson said about the GOP agenda. "Don't get sick. That's what the Republicans have in mind. And if you get sick America, the Republican health care plan is this: die quickly."

GOP lawmakers were incensed. Rep. Jimmy Duncan (R-Tenn.) called Grayson's comments "about the most mean-spirited partisan statement that I've ever heard made on this floor." Rep. Tom Price (R-Ga.) immediately began work on a resolution condemning Grayson for his remarks.

Maybe Rep. Louie Gohmert (R-Texas) missed the story?

Speaking on the House floor last night, Rep. Louie Gohmert (R-TX) became the latest Republican lawmaker to play the "death card," suggesting that reform advocates would allow seniors to "die off more quickly":

"I was talking to a senior that I consider a very wise individual, and this weekend she said, 'You know what concerns me about the 500 billion in cuts to Medicare? Maybe not, but I can't help but think they know that as seniors we've been through World War II, we've seen the evils that lurk in this world, we have gained great wisdom from our years, and they're willing to let us die off more quickly so that we're not around to try to get our wisdom across to the young people of what is at risk by this government takeover.'"

IOKIYAR strikes again.

At least John Boehner can no longer say he hasn't heard from public option supporters.  Heh.

Alas, we're going to turn away from Con stupidity for a bit and bash on Dem stupidity instead.  Here we have Al From, centrist Dem dumbshit extraordinaire, arguing that Dems should drop the public option so the Party of No will have less to say no to.  Apparently, he hasn't been listening to the Cons who've said over and over that there's no Dem reform plan they'll say yes to, even one virtually written by Cons.

And no, Queen Snowe doesn't count, even though the White House appears to be fawning on her.  Harry Reid doesn't appear to quite share the bipartisan fetish, considering he hasn't invited her to the negotiating table.  Maybe he's trying not to give the progressive groups ready to spank him over his wimpy leadership any more ammunition.  Maybe he's just sick of letting one fucking Con rule reform.  Either way's fine with me.

Sen. Tom Harkin asks a very good question:

"The vast majority of the Democratic caucus is for the public option that is in the HELP bill," he said. "Should the 52 [in favor] give in to the five, or should the five come along with the majority?"

I think we all know the answer to that one.  Too bad so many lawmakers don't.  

I don't know if this will comfort you or make you laugh yourself into a hernia, but Joe Lieberman thinks he's "inclined" to oppose a GOP filibuster.  I'll believe it when I see it.

If you're one of Blanche Lincoln's unfortunate constituents and have wished to hit her with a clue-by-four, you have your chance this Sunday.  Hit hard.

Here's today's motivation to fight for a strong public option that'll help keep rapacious insurance companies in line: a woman who's not only fighting for her life against brain tumors, but fighting CIGNA to cover her treatment.  I thought this bit was particularly classy: "After paying out-of-pocket for care in one instance, CIGNA nearly doubled her premiums anyway."  So, it appears, they want her to pay more for insurance that they won't let her use.  Awesome.

And, finally, your ray of hope: Pelosi and her allies are still fighting hard to bring you a strong public option.  Never give up, never give in.