Quote of the day

Say anything for a buck, corporate owned, no real beliefs of his own, political hack/carpetbagger Harold Ford Jr. has decided that what New York needs is a Democratic Senator that is not only completely embarrassing, is the Democratic equivalent to Sarah Palin, but also tries to out-Lieberman Joe Lieberman. It doesn't sound like a great campaign strategy to me, but what do I know? I'm probably going to have to choose between Arlen Specter or Pat Toomey in November.

In between declaring how he's a real New Yorker because his helicopter once touched down in Staten Island thus technically qualifying him as having visited all five boroughs, flip flopping on gay marriage, opposing health care, backing large salaries for bankers while not understanding capitalism as a principle, and generally making people question what the hell he is doing and what the hell he is thinking, he dropped this little nugget in an almost 'too bizarre to believe it was anything other than a parody' NY Times interview:

Q. Guns. Let’s talk about this issue.

A: I never got an A rating, like my opponent — would-be opponent — has enjoyed. I don’t own them. I do shoot them, and I shoot them at things that can’t shoot back. And will continue to do that. And by that, I want to be clear, I don’t mean children.

Well, thanks for clearing that up. But I think you might want to soften that stance a little bit. It's New York and the kids there definitely do shoot back.

Still, it's a hell of a political slogan.

Ford '10! Let's be clear: I do not shoot children.

Beats the shit out of 'Hope' or 'Change'.

Everything turns up roses for Diamond J

The big political news of the last day or so has been the news that Democratic Connecticut Senator Chris Dodd will not run for re-election in 2010. All just because he was deeply unpopular and likely to lose to nearly every challenger running in the Republican primary. In his stead will run Connecticut Attorney General Richard Blumenthal, who crushes every Republican challenger in polls. I think this marks the first time in decades where a politician looked at his own electoral prospects, soberly analyzed them, and decided that it was better for the party if someone else ran. I don't know about you, but I think Sen. Dodd needs to be checked for some sort of brain parasite or debilitating neurological disorder. That doesn't sound like typical Senate behavior.

But I'm not interested in all of that. What I am interested in is how, yet again, circumstances have conspired to benefit Joe Lieberman. Let Talking Points Memo explain:

Blumenthal was sure to run against him [in 2012]. And if he did I can't see where there's any way Blumenthal would not have crushed him. As we can see from today's numbers, Blumenthal is very popular with Connecticut Democrats. And since he's polling around 60%, he's popular with a lot of independents too. So he would have taken the Democratic nomination (see this poll to see why that is beyond Lieberman's reach now) and eviscerated Joe in the general.

Now? Well Joe's looking better and better for re-election in 2012. Oh, it's still a long shot, but seeing as how everything always seems to work to his benefit, I'm sure Ned Lamont and several other Democratic challengers will fall dead of heart attacks in the run-up to a primary. Why is that, God? Huh? Must you continue to punish us?

If a meteor struck this earth I can guarantee you the only remaining survivors in North America would be Lieberman and every Victoria's Secret model, who had just happened to Connecticut on their yearly Silk Thong Tour when the sky rained fire rocks. So just a word of warning to your bile sacs and rage centers of your brain, I don't know what will happen over the next few years, but it will almost certainly work out to the benefit of Holy Joe. That's apparently the guiding principal of how the universe works now. Just a heads up.

We need to start a new war

What with the revelation that Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab, the Nigerian terrorist who thought that the US would notice death and destruction in Detroit, had ties to terrorist networks in Yemen, it was only a matter of time before it was made clear to us that Yemen was a place that definitely needed a war started in it. As if on cue Joe Lieberman, a man only good for advocating for new ill thought out wars and stopping things that might benefit actual humans, was right out there telling us all how good America would look in a third war.

Sen. Joseph Lieberman, (I-Conn) a renowned hawk and one of the foremost champions of the invasion of Iraq, warned on Sunday that the United States faced "danger" unless it pre-emptively acts to curb the rise of terrorism in Yemen.

"Somebody in our government said to me in Sana'a, the capital of Yemen, Iraq was yesterday's war. Afghanistan is today's war. If we don't act preemptively, Yemen will be tomorrow's war," Lieberman said, during an appearance on "Fox News Sunday". "That's the danger we face."

Compelling. If we don't start a war in Yemen today, we'll have to start a war in Yemen in the future. Makes sense to me. All I want to know is when we can start calling for a surge in Yemen.

I am worried though. How will Joe Lieberman's imaginary war in Yemen affect our imaginary war in Iran? I'm sure Joe wouldn't want a new imaginary war to take away from our theoretical war efforts in Iran that he has advocated for so long, but I'm concerned with the sheer weight, scope, and toll that so many fanciful "brown people go kaboom" conflicts are having. Is America mentally strong enough to have so many hypothetical wars to fight alongside our real ones?

Thankfully we don't have to grapple with such esoteric concerns. No, such serious thoughts are reserved for the very smart men in our government who think that the only solution to any terrorist threat is a bombing run or full scale military conflict in the country that can most easily be linked to said terrorist. Men like Joe Lieberman. Thank God we have him out there, advocating for dozens upon dozens of new wars.

Video of the day

I know you've probably seen this, but doesn't this just make the sun shine a little brighter?



Sure, Lieberman still killed two separately effective parts of he health care bill that would have lowered costs for Americans and seemed to do it purely out of spite, and all that happened here was that Al Franken politely told him to shut his fucking mouth during something that was completely unimportant, but doesn't this make it all a little better? Well, as long as you're healthy and get your health care from work it should make you feel better.

How about Al Franken though? Between this, the anti-rape bill, schooling people on medical bankruptcies, his various and sundry fights on the Senate floor over health care, his correspondence with John Ashcroft, and this Supply Side Jesus cartoon he wrote, he's quickly become one of my favorite Senators. Shame that other Senators aren't this entertaining, it would at least make all the inaction and failing more palatable.

Quote of the Day

Senator Russ Feingold of Wisconsin, reminding us that maybe Joe Lieberman isn't the guy we should be mad at for the underwhelming health care bill.

Sen. Russ Feingold (D-Wis.), among the most vocal supporters of the public option, said it would be unfair to blame Lieberman for its apparent demise. Feingold said that responsibility ultimately rests with President Barack Obama and he could have insisted on a higher standard for the legislation.

“This bill appears to be legislation that the president wanted in the first place, so I don’t think focusing it on Lieberman really hits the truth,” said Feingold. “I think they could have been higher. I certainly think a stronger bill would have been better in every respect.”

First off Russ, I think you underestimate my capacity to hold multiple people in spiteful contempt. Currently I loathe over 6,000 individuals, simultaneously. So it's easy to add Barack Obama in under the subheading "Health Care, fucking up of" without pushing Holy Joe out.

Secondly, are you and Glenn Greenwald trying to intimate that just because Lieberman's demands happened to coincide almost exactly what the Finance Committee passed out of conference, which just happened to coincide with the deal the White House negotiated with insurers and pharmaceutical companies, and just because the only time the President ever interjected himself into the health care debate were to sandbag progressive priorities and tell the vast majority of Democrats to roll over for the Lieberman's, Stupak's, and Nelson's of the world, that it means that the bill is exactly what President Obama wanted?

I mean that's a little conspiratorial, don't you think? They're all just happy coincidences.

We are governed by adults

In case you were worried that our health care debate wasn't consumed enough by childish spite and political gamesmanship when it wasn't being consumed by corporate cronyism, Joe Lieberman, the Only Senator That Matters, stepped in to remind you that the Senate is a serious place for serious thought by serious individuals.

But in the interview, Mr. Lieberman said that he grew apprehensive when a formal proposal began to take shape. He said he worried that the program would lead to financial trouble and contribute to the instability of the existing Medicare program.

And he said he was particularly troubled by the overly enthusiastic reaction to the proposal by some liberals, including Representative Anthony Weiner, Democrat of New York, who champions a fully government-run health care system.

“Congressman Weiner made a comment that Medicare-buy in is better than a public option, it’s the beginning of a road to single-payer,” Mr. Lieberman said. “Jacob Hacker, who’s a Yale professor who is actually the man who created the public option, said, ‘This is a dream. This is better than a public option. This is a giant step.’”

That's right, Joe Lieberman scuttled a plan to expand Medicare that he supported as the VP Candidate of the Democratic party and one that he was advocating as little as three months ago, because he thought some liberals liked it too much. That was the basis for denying Medicare coverage to everyone in this country aged 55-64, making liberals angry. And not only was he so oblivious to how childish that was that he openly gave it as the reason he got the Medicare expansion dropped, the debate and the media coverage of the debate has degraded so much that he'll still be treated as a serious man of principle who has coherent thoughts on important issues.

So when you look back and wonder why a major initiative to take some of the most at risk and expensive people in the insurance market off the private rolls and onto Medicare, reducing risk, costs, and premiums in everyone else's plans, remember that it wasn't because it was a bad idea, or because analysis showed it wouldn't work, or because it was unpopular. No, you didn't get cheaper and better access to health care cause a guy wanted to stick it to liberals an punish them for liking something. Well done, Joe. We're all very sorry voters actually said they preferred Ned Lamont to you in the Democratic party. I can't even think of why they would think that. Well, you sure showed us. Thanks for acting like an adult.

Who could have foreseen?

And it's over. Just as quickly as Joe Lieberman said he'd block a bill with a Medicare buy in, it came out just as quickly. No public option, no buy-in, and nothing to replace it. Liberal Seantors walking around glum faced talking about how "things could have been worse". Yeah, I guess Joe could have released a biological agent in the caucus meetings. That would have been worse. In the end Democrats completely roll themselves, furiously piss off their base, capitulate to a man who is going to o this again and again out of spite, and made a health care bill measurable worse in a way that will bankrupt people and get them killed. Who could have foreseen that this would ever happen?

Joe Lieberman has forced his will on the Senate Democratic caucus and the nation as a whole. After the party reached a compromise last week to effectively drop the public option in exchange for allowing 55- to 64-year-olds to buy into Medicare, that compromise is now in doubt.

Lieberman, an independent from Connecticut, told Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) on Sunday that he will block any bill that includes the buy-in. As the 60th vote needed to overcome a Republican filibuster, he can do that.

Following a caucus-wide meeting Monday evening, the measure was all but scuttled.

So why did they finally cave now? We can blame Rahm Emanuel if we want, but that misses the point. He was just carrying out the wishes of a White House that thinks any bill is a good bill and that they have to pas it nowonwnow so they can turn the focus to fucking up a jobs bill in 2010. The greater source of blame falls to the institution of the Senate, which, as presently constructed, is almost useless in terms of addressing large problems. Or small problems. But they do a good collegial, old boys network, circle jerk like no one else.

And so we finally move to the voting... unless Lieberman wants more cut out and is willing to leverage his sociopathic indifference to humans against 59 other Senators again. Unless some other Senator sees this as an opportunity to strong-arm their way into attempting to get whatever they want in the bill. That'll only probably happen. So congratulations, we all have to buy insurance now and the only things that were going to provide competition to the groups that everyone seems to agree are the problem are gone. I'm sure that and wishing will lower prices. Remember to get out a vote for Democrats in 2010!

Actually, yeah, the health care bill could get worse

Hey, remember that whole point in time last week when everyone was pretty sure that the last painful compromise had been made in the health care fight? When the public option was dropped for a Medicare buy-in and some people were holding out hope that, depending on how things were structured, this might turn out to be better than a weak public option? Yeah... then Joe Lieberman started speaking.

"We've got to stop adding to the bill," said Lieberman. "We have to start subtracting some controversial things."
...
"You have to take out the Medicare buy-in," said Lieberman. "You have to forget about the public option. You probably have to take out the CLASS Act..... If you did that, you'd have an enormous accomplishment. Thirty million Americans who can't afford insurance today would get it. Insurance companies would be more aggressively regulated and costs would be bent down. It's time to get reasonable."

Great news, right? Joe Lieberman wants more compromise, for no discernible reason, and will continue to lie about his motivations for doing so, and the financial and human costs of what his changes will do. So, to the surprise of no one, Lieberman vowed today to filibuster any bill with a Medicare buy-in... despite supporting it when it was part of a little something called the Lieberman/Gore Health Care Plan.

So not only is the Senate health care bill going to get worse, much much worse, it's going to get worse to the point where it's not even a sure thing that it could pass in the House or even keep on some of the Senator who are actually concerned with people's lives; killing reform. Which seems to be Lieberman's actual goal. At what point does catering to his random whims make the bill worse than what going through reconciliation would fashion the bill into? I'd like to find out. Plus, we all found out that the prayers we made to have Joe hit by a flaming sky rock or fall into a wheat thresher... were made to the wrong God. Oh, the indignity.

You know I hate to say it, but I'm beginning to regret electing Joe Lieberman King of the United States and Emperor of Health Care.

The future framework for failure

With the Copenhagen conference well underway, Democrats in the Senate have taken the opportunity that an increased focus on climate change by the media (more specifically: Sarah Palin's ideas on climate change by the media) to release their own framework for a climate bill. Sure, we could discuss what's in it, from 17% greenhouse gas cuts to government loans for nuclear reactors, but why waste time when the whole damn thing will be changed by the time it's passed? No, instead we'll focus on yet another example of Democrats not understanding how the Senate works, the basic concept of negotiations, or just how badly they've set themselves up for failure.

"We would like to underscore the fact that the framework we are releasing today is a starting point for our negotiations going forward," said Sen. John Kerry, D-Mass.
...
Kerry has for weeks been working with Republican Sen. Lindsey Graham of South Carolina and Sen. Joe Lieberman, I-Conn., on broadening the Senate bill in hopes of gaining more Republican support.
...
But the three acknowledged they are nowhere near getting the votes needed to overcome a certain GOP filibuster threat on any climate legislation. "We don't have 60 votes," said Lieberman.

Graham said the commitment to expand nuclear energy and open new opportunities for new oil and gas drilling both on shore and on the Outer Continental Shelf is hoped to attract additional support from Republican senators.

Christ John, you fell for it again. You actually thing this bill you released is a starting point for negotiations? No, this bill you outlined is the best this bill will ever look. Things will not move forward, they will move backward. You already admit you don't have the votes and already weakened your position in any future negotiations by crafting a bill that already starts off as a massive compromise and will still yet have to be compromised in order to pass. Why? Because you wanted Republican support. Because apparently you haven't been paying attention to the past couple of years. You magically got Graham on board and your only other two options come from Maine. The rest of the Republicans will vote against anything you propose based on general principle.

So let's see here, we have an optimistic Democrat introducing massively important legislation that absolutely has to be passed in order to stave of a giant problem that has been ignored for decades. Because he actually thinks that the other side can be bargained with he starts off by offering huge compromises in order to marshal bipartisan support that will never come. Remind me again, how did this plan of action work out for bailouts, the stimulus, financial reform, and health care? Ah, good 'ole Democrats: fool them once, no offense taken; fool them twice, no worries, you can just keep on foolin' them. I can't wait to see how this all unexpectedly blows up in Kerry's face. I'm sure it'll really surprise him when the has to whittle away this bill into nothing.

The last honest man

If you didn't already really, really hate Joe Lieberman with the fire of a thousand suns, our great newspapers have taken it upon themselves this week to try and take that loathing and crank it up into the two or three thousand sun range.

First there was the Wall Street Journal's epic paen to Joe, in which thousands of words are spent memorializing and lauding self-aggrandizing narcissism, hypocritical self-interest, inflated egotism, spite vendettas, and self commissioned statue building. The story really should become the dictionary definition for fellatio, or at least "media fellatio."

The Washington Post took a different angle, showing why everyone hates Joe Lieberman and attempting a pushback on the large bullshit parade he attempt to lead any time he opens his mouth. It's a nice catalogue of grievances, but at the end of the story, while discussing his disdain for the public option, it drops this little nugget:

“He keeps saying over and over that we can’t afford the public option, but the question is whether we can afford the subsidies,” said John Holahan of the Urban Institute.

Confronted with the cost-saving assessments of a strong public option, Lieberman concedes the point, but he says an aggressive government-run plan would put undue pressures on medical providers and force them to shift costs to private insurers. Put simply, he opposes the public option in any form, regardless of whether it reduces costs.

That's right, his "principled" opposition to the public option fully concedes that it would save money. If he knows that, he knows the stronger a public option is, the more money that it saves. Yet still he opposes one. Yet God is still refusing to hit him with a flaming rock from the sky.

So there, just mull that one over as you get to read over and over that the public option was just removed from the Senate health reform bill. Swish that one around the 'ole palate. Push the rage deep down inside and save it for another day, so when you see the inevitable news story praising him for his "contributions" and "action" during the health care debate you can explode out with an emphatic "THATFUCKINGSONOFABITCH", perhaps directed at a loved one or small child. As you think over how hard this man worked to take money out of your pocket and degrade your health care options, one thought will rattle around in your head: "Thanks Connecticut. Thanks for electing him." They're welcome.

What else didn't he mention?

Over the weekend the President made yet another trip up to the Senate to meet with the Democratic caucus, remind them yet again of the importance of health care reform, and to remind them yet again of the hellfire and wrath that will be visited upon them by the voters if they show themselves to be completely incompetent instead on only mostly incompetent. Is the 17th time the charm? Well, when the meeting was over, the Senators emerged, their faces filled with smiles, and recommitted themselves....to petty political gamesmanship based on and around what the President did and didn't say.

As President Obama finished his speech to the Democratic caucus in the Capitol's Mansfield Room on Sunday afternoon, Joe Lieberman made his way over to Harry Reid.

The independent who still caucuses with Democrats wanted to point something out to the Majority Leader: Obama didn't mention the public option.

Lieberman was beaming as he left the room and happy to re-point it out when HuffPost asked him what Obama had said about the public health insurance option, perhaps the most contentious issue still facing Democrats as they negotiate their way toward a final health care reform bill.

Ahh Barry, you can't even throw a pretend bone of support in a private meeting to an idea you championed during the campaign. But I'm sure when the public option is stripped out and replaced with some bad compromise (newest plan: make the public option private run), you'll talk about how you wished it could have been in, but it just slipped your mind to ever fight for it once over a nearly one year period. Also not mentioned: abortion. So I'm sure that bodes well for Ben Nelson's "Silly women, don't you know that old men from Nebraska have more sense about your lady bits than you do?" bill. On the bright side, Joe Lieberman was thrilled by everything that went on in the meeting. So, I'm sure the American people at large are going to be fucked hard, because I can't recall him ever being ecstatic about anything that made my life better.

So now everyone gets to be paranoid and angry over what is and isn't mentioned in 'rally' speeches to cretins. But soon these important battles over omissions and inclusions will be over, and in the next few months and over the next seven times the President heads up to Capitol to rally everyone, the Senate can start arguing on more important things: like his syllable emphasis and voice inflection. Maybe after that, there will be an actual debate on the actual worthiness of some of the proposals being considered.

Arlen Specter's raging hard-on for socialism

The health care debate has brought us many grimly hilarious revelations about the specific way with which our legislative branch has caught fire and is burning to the ground, taking all of us down with it. But there is one man out there valiantly fighting for all that is just and right: committed socialist and leftist agitator Arlen Specter, who went after Joe Lieberman and Susan Collins over the public option.

The trio spoke at an event in support of a cost containment amendment to the health care bill that they hope to introduce shortly. About 15 minutes in, though, Specter, who's tacked significantly to the left since he switched into the Democratic party, put his colleagues on the spot about their public option opposition.

"I continue to support a robust public option," Specter said. "There are differences on that, and my two colleagues have expressed their own reservations."
...
Specter went on: "And when Senator Lieberman talks about single payer, I think he's putting his finger on the pulse of it. That's what people have concluded [but] the public option isn't single payer, and it is not going to add to the deficit, it's going to be a level playing field. So I would like everyone to read the fine print and [for my colleagues] to re-read the fine print."

Oooh, collegial Senate burn! "Re-read the fine print" is the Senatorial equivalent of "Get fucked and die, you hatchet faced cretins."

But it's nice to see Senator Specter so committed to the left fringes that he'll publicly call out the actual dishonesty in both Collins and Lieberman's arguments. Funny though, if his re-nomination for the GOP ticket hadn't been such a longshot and he didn't have to switch parties, he'd probably would have taken to the Senate floor to rail about how Obamacare would have ensured his death at the hands of cancer. Odd what the threat of having to get a real job and a Democratic primary challenge does for one's ideological commitments. God bless the integrity and decency of the world's greatest deliberative body. Thanks for being afraid enough to cheaply pander to us, Arlen. We appreciate it.

One step closer to awful compromise

It's Monday, and if I'm not mistaken, I do recall the Democrats in the Senate voting to officially start the debate of the debate of the debate of the debate over whether to start the debate over health care. By which I mean "debate". Everyone already knows pretty much how everyone is going to vote and there will be very little deliberation in the "world's greatest deliberative body". 40 Republicans will vote against it, 56 Democrats for it, and a collection of 4 Democrats will try to make the bill dumber, less effective, cover less people, and reduce costs less in a bid for relevance and TV time. Yes, because we couldn't even get through a bullshit procedural vote without Democrats rushing towards the mics to announce all the ways they'd kill the bill if they didn't get their terrible, shortsighted way.

There was Mary Landrieu ("D"-LA), telling people that the public option had to be "triggered" -likely in a way that means it'll never be triggered- or she wouldn't vote to over come a filibuster. Ben Nelson ("D"-NE) was out on the Sunday talk show circuit talking about filibustering if the bill had a public option, didn't get all Stupak-y with women's uteri, and get better on costs controls, which, if his past action on the stimulus are any indication, means cutting actual cost control measures. Blanche Lincoln ("D"-AK) said the same on the public option, and Joe Lieberman (Lieberman-CT) popped his head up to remind everyone he's still a rotten douche. They all took care to mention that the public option doesn't have the support of the Senate. But, as we've learned, when 56 Senators support something that means that something doesn't have support.

Of course Bernie Sanders (Socialist~!-VT) and Roland Burris ($50 or best offer-IL) tried to point out that they'll block passage of a bill without a public option, but they were laughed out of the room because they were advocating for a liberal position and will be expected to cave without getting anything.

So there we are: "debate" has started. Soon the last remaining gasps of life the bill has will be compromised out by the same cast of characters you wish would die in a plane crash. Then after the reform bill passes without a public option and featuring a requirement that makes all women get a signed permission slip from Ben Nelson before taking an aspirin, it moves to the conference committee where we'll all pretend that he bill might get better...and it won't. Then the bill will be signed amid claims of "history" and "no, really, this is a good bill", as people try to subsume their rage as yet another opportunity to fix a large problem was squandered by our elected betters. In other words: the way it was pretty much expected to go at the start of the whole process. God bless this great land.

That's good to know

In this entire health care reform debate there have been many areas of concern and worry for Americans watching the progress and seeing what would be in the bill. I think the one thing that most of us has been worried about, the thing that keeps most of us up at nights drenched in a cold sweat, is concern over how Democrats who try to kill health reform legislation will feel after they kill it. I mean the thought of one of them actually feeling bad over the decision to deny millions of Americans reform and coverage would just be too much to bear. Thankfully the last honest man, Joe Lieberman, has assured us he won't feel any remorse. Now, Ben Nelson has stepped forward to let us sleep easier knowing that he won't feel remorse over the prospect of killing health reform.

Ben Nelson, a key conservative Senate Democrats, said on Wednesday that he was pleased with the changes party leadership had made to health care legislation, specifically on matters of deficit reduction. But the Nebraska senator, whose vote has been elusive to pin down so far, said he would be comfortable being the lone Democrat to prevent the bill from overcoming a Republican filibuster.

"I'm very comfortable having my vote, whatever it is, whichever way it goes," Nelson said, in response to a question from the Huffington Post. "I've said that from the beginning. There are other ways. I just have to make a decision based on what I think is best for the people of Nebraska and the people of our country. And then we will let the chips fall wherever they fall."

Oh thank God. I'm so glad he isn't going to be plagued by the dreaded scourge of conscience. I think we're all glad he's comfortable with the possibility of voting against health reform. Because I have become comfortable with the fact that I'll be bankrupted by the slightest illness or stubbed toe.

That's why it was so heartening to see Nelson and Lieberman come out and say that not only will they be able to fuck over everyone on health reform, but they won't have to miss a meal just because they doomed tens of millions of people to have no access to health care and ensured health costs would continue to rise unsustainably. That's why it was so disheartening to see Mary Landrieu soften her rhetoric in the face of intense criticism over her dalliances with killing reform. Mary, this is the time to follow Joe's way. Stop being so concerned with us, this is a time to think only of yourself. We'll muddle on, we just don't want you feeling bad about it.

Because isn' the personal well being and feelings of Senators what health care reform is all about? That was a serious question, because it certainly isn't about providing the best reform possible or the problems facing the American people. So I think the emotional state of our elected betters is all that's left.

Kristof, you poor naive bastard

Ahh, Nick Kristof. Nicholas, Nicholas, Nicholas, what to do with you? You're a good man, write good columns on important things, and you seem to be respected. But Christ are you naive. I bet you thought you were pretty damn clever when you pointed out the eagerness of celebrity seeking political degenerates like Joe Lieberman to spend hundreds of billions and thousands of lives in pointless wars, but unwilling to spend billions on health care and saving thousands of lives. Hell, I've made that point a few times here on the Internet's only political commentary and fake news blog, These Bastards.

While I am accusing you of stealing my thoughts and a lawsuit is forthcoming, where your fault lies is in the fact that you actually expect a reasoned answer for the disconnect and think that by pointing out this seeming incongruity you can somehow shame our elected betters, or mainstream media betters, or apathetic voters into noticing and punishing those who transgress this hypocrisy. You poor poor bastard.

So if President Obama dispatches another 30,000 or 40,000 troops, on top of the 68,000 already there, that would bring the total annual bill for our military presence there to perhaps $100 billion — or more. And we haven’t even come to the human costs.

As for health care reforms, the 10-year cost suggests an average of $80 billion to $110 billion per year, depending on what the final bill looks like.
...
On the other hand, the health care legislation pays for itself, according to the Congressional Budget Office, while the deployment in Afghanistan is unfinanced and will raise our budget deficits and undermine our long-term economic security.

So doesn’t it seem odd to hear hawks say that health reform is fiscally irresponsible, while in the next breath they cheer a larger deployment of troops in Afghanistan?

My God, what is this? Is it your first year covering politics? Doesn't this seem odd? No, it seems perfectly normal. You want to know why we're so eager to spend a trillion dollars a year on defense spending and wars? Because that money doesn't count. Yup, no matter how much money we spend on blowing up brown people and building aircraft carriers, it never, ever, ever counts as spending money. In fact there is no logic ascribed to any dollar spent on defense. I mean that's why President Obama can cut the rate at which military spending increases and still everyone pretends like he's actually cut military spending. That's why $100 billion more for a war that's already costing hundreds of billions a year is perfectly fine, while $90 billion a year for health care is a crippling debt that we're foisting on our children, who'll have to give 5 cent handjobs in alleys to Chinese businessmen just to pay off the interest. The same principle works for tax cuts for the rich. Those don't count either, no matter how much they increase deficits.

But this is the key reason that politicians love spending on wars but hate spending on improving the lives of people, Nick: there is no part of the health care bill that will make a politician feel like his dick is huge or that he is, in fact, the manliest, burliest fucking manly man on the planet. Even the smallest defense appropriations bill does that a million, or should I say trillion, times over. You ever tried to chestbump a dude after cutting heealth care costs for Americans? Awwwwkwaaaaard. On the other hand nothing is better than a high five after a predator drone wipes out some mountain village.

The reason people like the world's greatest man, Joe Lieberman, won't vote for decent health care reform, I mean besides petty spite, is because it just doesn't get their cocks rock hard. No one gets their cocks hard over health reform, except maybe Ron Wyden, he's.....a little weird. This is the biggest failing of the health reform movement. Obama never walked around talking about the wood he got when he thought of saving 45,000 lives a year. There were no high fives and screams of "Boo-yah" when CBO estimates came in projecting a decrease in the deficit, and the fight to improve people's health was never described in terms of an comprehensive international effort to wipe out brown terrorists that live inside our bodies.

So I'm sorry Nick, this is just standard operating procedure. It is the way things will always be: fiscally irresponsible. Now I only hope we can spend the $90 billion we would have used on health care to fund some even larger TOW missile that shoots out a giant fireworks explosion in the shape of a large dragon every time we hit a suspected terrorist. That, and only that, would show the fiscal seriousness of our Senate.

Bubba hits the Hill

The big news in the health care fight today? Bubba is heading to the Hill to have a lunch with the Democratic Senate caucus in an attempt to rally support/knock heads over the fight to pass health care.

Senate Democrats today are huddling for their first weekly lunch since the House passed its version of the health care plan and they have a special guest with firsthand experience of what can happen when legislation fails.
...
Another source tells us that Clinton is attending the lunch at the request of Obama Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel (who worked in Clinton White House) and Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid.

As of yet there's no confirmation of the rumor that Reid called up Clinton and said "You fuckin' talk to these people, 'cause they're fuckin' hopeless," but as part of the deal to get Bill in there the White House will be sending Hillary away on more foreign policy excursions.

No one is sure what exactly Bill is going to say to rally the Democrats. Hell, most of them are already rallied. It's the last couple of spineless holdouts that need to be coerced and I'm not sure a group lunch is going to do it. Still, Bill is probably going to remind everyone of his own fight for health care...in a not so subtle manner. He's then going to remind Democratic Senators how his bid to reform the system was derailed by Democrats. He's then going to look around the room, see that many of those same sons of bitches that screwed him in the nineties are still sitting there and he'll probably go apeshit.

Sources say he has an elaborate speech worked out about baseball and teamwork, which he will give while holding a Louisville Slugger he got signed by Albert Pujols. Then as the speech climaxes as he's talking about individuals not succeeding without the team succeeding and "hot-dog Senators playing by their own rules" he beats Joe Lieberman to death with the bat as the Ennio Morricone score blares. As everyone is horrified by the bloody scene and Rahm is ordering a dozen roses sent to Lieberman's widow, Bubba rushes Ben Nelson, puts a gun in his mouth and asks him if he's got any more bright ideas. He then puts the gun on the table, remarks that anyone wanting to oppose health care better use the gun on themselves, before tersely muttering something to Rahm about that being "the Arkansas way" and noting that it was easier dealing with Kim Jong-Il.

At least that's the way it goes in my dreams.

Quote of the Day

Joe Lieberman (Scum Fuck-CT), moving beyond merely lying about the public option and health care reform to openly advocating for you to heap your loathing and disdain on him as well as begging you to test out any type of voodoo doll on him.

BOB SCHIEFFER: But is what you're also saying is that nothing is better than a government health insurance or a gov- health insurance reform that includes a public option. Nothing is better than that?

SENATOR JOE LIEBERMAN: Well, the truth is that nothing is better than that because I- I think we ought to follow, if I may, the- the doctors' oath here. In Congress says we deal with health care reform, do no harm.

I don't know Joe, I think maybe to the 45,000 people each year who die because of a lack of health care, nothing isn't really a great option, though they do appreciate how relevant you now feel. To the countless thousands who are bankrupted each year because of medical costs, I'm sure that the option of doing nothing isn't that great either, thought they do really sympathize with just how sandy your vagina is after Ned Lamont beat you in the Democratic primary way back when.

But not content to merely play with people's lives because he wasn't getting enough media attention, Joe decided that he wanted to up the ante and blame everyone else for forcing him to join with Republicans to filibuster health reform.

SENATOR JOE LIEBERMAN: Yeah, but I'd say to the people who are all of a sudden making the public option a government health insurance company, the litmus test here, they're stopping us from getting something done.
...
I'd say to them, don't stop us from getting something important and good done for the Americans.

Joe, when around 57-59 Senators are all in agreement about a public option, they aren't the ones holding things back and stopping things from getting done. I know around 60% of the populace would like a public option too, but you've already explained that: we're not as smart as you, the man who doesn't understand anything he's actually saying about health care.

I'll say this for Joe, he may be a contemptible, back stabbing, self important, third rate liar, but he lets you know just how badly he wants to fuck you over and lets you know where he stands. Even if it is the opposite of where he used to stand.

Pretty much

Chart of the day

As if you needed a graphical representation that the event of yesterday were in no way good for you, ThinkProgress stepped to the forefront to shove a chart in your face and make it clear.

The first part of the graph charts the stock performance of WellPoint, United Health the Connecticut based Aetna when news of Reid including a public option on around 11AM of the 26th. Note the downward trajectory.

The second part is where Joe Lieberman announces his opposition to voting on health reform with a public option at around 1:30 on the 27th, whereupon the health industry stocks shoot up.

God bless the stock market, it's always there to tell you in the starkest dollar and cent terms just how well founded your suspicions were that something bad happened. Not that we needed a reminder beyond the beginnings of the phrase "Joe Lieberman said..." to know we were getting screwed, but it's nice to be able to measure it in terms of a stock price.

Harry has got problems, man

Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, gettin' all third person when discussing Joe Lieberman deciding he'll filibuster health care reform

"Joe Lieberman is the least of Harry Reid's problems," Reid told reporters at his weekly press conference.

I'll say. I can think of a few expletive filled ones off the top of my head. Not that I want to pile on Harry Reid and his mistakes after his latest staggering failure. These are, after all, mistakes we all made when we heard him say that a public option was in the Senate bill. I mean when we all heard him announce it a few days back, I made the assumption, like most others, that he had made some hoary, evil blood pact with the pig molesters, avowed pederasts, and spineless insects that populate the Nelson/Lincoln/Landrieu/Bayh/Lieberman end of the caucus to actually do something crazy, like letting a bill with the overwhelming support of Democrats in Congress get voted on. No, that seems like it was a bridge too far.

But that isn't Reid's problem. No, the problem Reid has that's bigger than Lieberman, is his staggering inability to count. Or, at least be able to count to 60. We've all been there one time or another, where our massively important plans were ruined when the lack of basic counting and math skills conspired to derail them. Granted, it was when we were four, but there we are. And it happened to Harry Reid too, when he announced he was moving forward on legislation without checking to see if the waffling cretins in his caucus were on board. Naively thinking that people who were elected as Democrats would actually find Democratic priorities important. But that's the sad end point we've reached with Democratic leadership: we can't even rely on them to have basic counting skills. Abilities that five year olds possess are just out of the reach of our elected betters.

So sorry, we don't get to move on to other things, like climate change, getting angry over the same cast of characters fucking up on that bill. Nope, still stuck on health care, as the Senate decides that the compromise of a compromise of a compromise......probably needs two or three more compromises in there. Maybe four. Get excited!