You know, you have to appreciate that guys like Anthony Weiner and Joe Sestak will go on Bill O'Reilly's show to try to bravely counter his nonstop deluge of right-wing talking points. But as he demonstrated last night when he had them on to talk about the New York City terrorism trials, he just proved once again why it's never a winning proposition to go on his show, no matter how hard you try.

O'Reilly only invites liberals on to set them up for a shoutdown, really -- and that's what he did last night. Both Weiner and Sestak pointed out the absurdity of O'Reilly's fears about the civil court system setting the terrorists free -- and worse still, in O'Reilly's view, actually being permitted to stand up and voice their beliefs as part of their defense.

O'Reilly just wound up shouting at them about the four-year trial of Zacarias Moussaoui -- who in fact was convicted. But to O'Reilly, what was intolerable was that Moussaoui was able to use the trial as "propaganda" for radical Islam.

O'Reilly just doesn't believe in the American way of justice, and is afraid to let the world see our justice. Fortunately, many more of us are not so cowardly.

You can view this video right here by getting the latest version of Flash Player!

DOWNLOADS: (76)

PLAYS: (235)

Congressman Anthony Weiner joins Lawrence O'Donnell on Countdown to discuss "whites of their eyes" Michele Bachmann and "You Lie!" Joe Wilson's latest stunts to stall the health care bill being passed.

You can view this video right here by getting the latest version of Flash Player!

DOWNLOADS: (1252)

PLAYS: (3538)

From Think Progress: Rep. Weiner Identifies 55 Republicans On Medicare Who ‘Steadfastly Oppose’ The Public Option

Rep. Anthony Weiner’s (D-NY) office today released an internal study showing that 151 members of Congress “currently receive government-funded; government-administered single-payer health care — Medicare.” Of those 151 members, 55 are Republicans who also happen to be “steadfastly opposed [to] other Americans getting the public option, like the one they have chosen.” Included on Weiner’s list are anti-public option crusaders Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-KY), Sen. Chuck Grassley (R-IA), Sen. Jon Kyl (R-AZ), Sen. John McCain (R-AZ), Sen. Orin Hatch (R-UT), Sen. Richard Shelby (R-AL), Sen. James Inhofe (R-OK), Sen. Mike Enzi (R-WY), Rep. Virginia Foxx (R-NC), and Rep. Peter King (R-NY).

Rep. Weiner talked explained why his office released that study on C-SPAN's Washington Journal.

WEINER: Well it’s more kind of another way of looking at this debate, this discussion about the public option, to put it in focus. We went, just out of curiosity, looked at how many members of Congress get the public option. And I know a lot of people have said, “Well under the new bill, how many of you members of Congress would choose the public option?”

Well there already is one; it’s called Medicare. And we found that 55 Republicans and 151 members of Congress are on Medicare right now. So they’re already getting the same type of public option that we’d like people who are without insurance to be able to get. And I guess the purpose of this list was to kind of point out some of the hypocrisy of this debate.

You have members of Congress thumping their chest how they’re against government health care, against government control of health care, socialized medicine and yet when it’s time for them to accept Medicare, they’re like, ‘Sign me up!’

And part of what I’ve argued in arguing for a single-payer system is that when we have Medicare for those that are 65, why not 64? Why not 24, like, you’re about 24 right?

C-SPAN HOST: Sure.

Weiner: And why not have that type of a system that has lower overhead, lower costs and you don’t have to deal with the 30% of profits and overhead that insurance companies take. So we compiled this list largely to point a bright light on some of the hypocrisy of this debate, but also I hope it gets people thinking—if Medicare is good enough for 151 members of Congress, why shouldn’t a program like it be created for those who want to go out and buy insurance?

I actually did get to hear this live on C-SPAN radio the other day and didn't get a chance to get back to it sooner. I was glad to see Think Progress picked it up. I would have liked for Rep. Weiner to have taken this a bit further and ask if those members of Congress would care to give up their Medicare—since they think that having government administered health insurance is such a terrible thing. I would guess the answer is "No".

You can view this video right here by getting the latest version of Flash Player!

DOWNLOADS: (2901)

PLAYS: (3872)

Rep. Anthony Weiner did his usual stellar job being the progressive voice on health care yesterday on MSNBC's Hardball with Chris Matthews. In typical Villager fashion, Matthews want to paint the public option as the "ultra liberal" position on health care, and Weiner helped set him straight:

MATTHEWS: OK, let me ask you this. What percentage, do you think, of Democrats in this country are liberals and what percent are moderates?

WEINER: I have no idea. I think...

MATTHEWS: Do you think most are liberals.

WEINER: I have to say...

MATTHEWS: Do you think most are liberals?

WEINER: No, here's what I think. I think when it comes to health care, the moderate position is choice and competition. I don't believe the public option is the liberal position. The liberal position is what I have, single payer for all Americans. This is the compromise position.

Of course, the whole point of painting the public option as the "far left" position is that, in Villagespeak, the liberal position is always doomed to being compromised by "centrist" Democrats. Which was the upshot of Matthews' interview -- namely, that liberals should be prepared to give up the public option to appease "centrists" in their own party.

Weiner had the perfect answer to that tripe:

WEINER: I think that we need to make the argument to my Democratic friends that this is an all-or-nothing strategy for us as Democrats. We run the country right now...

MATTHEWS: OK...

WEINER: ... House, Senate and the presidency.

MATTHEWS: OK...

WEINER: And if we can't do this (INAUDIBLE)

MATTHEWS: I've been talking around the Hill, talking to staffers and some members, and I've gotten to the point of disbelief. A lot of people like you believe that in the end, no good Democrat from wherever they are in the country is willing to be the man or woman who brings down the president's number one political ambition for this year, health care. And in the end, you folks believe that there'll be such tremendous pressure on all the Democrats, Nebraska, North Dakota, Arkansas, Louisiana, they'll still have to vote with the party. Do you believe that?

WEINER: Well, let me...

MATTHEWS: Do you believe that?

WEINER: Let me say yes but phrase it a different way. There's a divide here. Some people think a watered-down health care plan could be a success for us. Some, like myself, believe if we don't get this right...

MATTHEWS: OK...

WEINER: ... we're not going to get another chance for 20 years.

MATTHEWS: You're a good spokesman. Thank you, sir.

Blanche Lincoln, we hope you're listening.

You can view this video right here by getting the latest version of Flash Player!

DOWNLOADS: (1360)

PLAYS: (5981)

Rep. Anthony Weiner on MSNBC's Dr. Nancy show explaining how the AHIP memo released yesterday is making the case for the public option.

Weiner: But it’s interesting in their analysis they’re not 100% wrong. It is true that the Baucus plan doesn’t cover enough people. And it is true—the health insurance says it straight out on your show a moment ago—they’re going to raise the rates. The only thing that prevents them from doing that—and you almost got your last guest to stumble into saying it—some form of competition, but in a strange way the health insurance industry, not standing up and saying “No, no” they’re not doing enough in the Baucus bill, what they really mean is we thought we were going to get all these new customers and you’re doing all these other things to try to hold down costs—“They ain’t gonna’ work. We’re not going to let you do it”.

Which is why the argument is more profound than ever and Chuck mentioned it, we have to have the public option. If we don’t have it—if you leave them to their own devices—the health insurance industry right now is putting us on notice, “We’re not going to lower costs at all. We’re going to keep on raising costs.” Because that’s their business model.

[…]

If you have the health care industry complaining that we’re going to raise costs because of these changes, it is them putting us on notice that we haven’t put enough cost containment in the bill. You know, the health care industry themselves is putting out a whole report saying that. That should be a tell to the Baucus team that “You know what?” maybe it’s time for them to go back and revisit the public option.

But the other thing that’s interesting here is the deal was always going to be for the health care guys, look, you’re going to get all these new customers that are going to be coming in and that’s going to be the reason you’re going to take a hair cut here. But make no mistake about it, the health care industry keeps raising costs and I think what’s going to happen with the Baucus bill is put new requirements on them, they raise costs and whatever subsidies we’re giving people to buy their own insurance, they won’t be able to afford it and we’ll keep on losing people.

This is the whole argument for the public option is right here laid out by the health care industry right now.

Dr. Laura: Do you think you’ll get it?

Weiner: I think so. I think in a strange way, and obviously they didn’t mean this, the health insurance lobby today fired the most important salvo in weeks for the public option, because they have said, as clear as day, left to their own devices, according to their own number crunchers, they’re going to raise rates 111%. And that’s why, you know we have a petition at CountdownToHealthCare.com where we’re telling people for the moderates in the Senate, the so-called moderates, and for the White House, we need the public option, and the health care industry is making our argument for us.

You can view this video right here by getting the latest version of Flash Player!

DOWNLOADS: (2656)

PLAYS: (17361)

This was truly a thing of beauty. Betsy McCaughey gets smacked down by Dylan Ratigan and Anthony Weiner on MSNBC's Morning Meeting.

From Think Progress:

Throughout the interview, McCaughey was constantly on the defensive, complaining that she was being shut out of the debate. “Anthony, you are ignorant about health insurance,” she said, before insisting to Ratigan that “this will go down in history as one of the most browbeating interviews in television history.” “I hope that it does,” Ratigan replied. “And maybe you’ll learn at that point then to answer questions as opposed to go on television and cast accusations.”

Continue reading...

And Bob Cesca noted:

Jamison Foser makes a good point: why is McCaughey on television in the first place? While it's frustrating that cable news continues to elevate wingnuts and crazies, there's actually an upside to bringing in people like McCaughey. I'll explain. In the case of this Ratigan segment, he's doing the opposite of what Fox News does all the time. Fox News claims "balance" by including occasional liberals. Weak, barely articulate, outnumbered liberals who are way out of their depth. So the debate is automatically stacked in favor of the conservatives, while Fox News can claim "balance" in a very superficial way. Ratigan, today, lined up a strong liberal against a weak wingnut, and Ratigan is clearly more sympathetic to Weiner's position on healthcare. That meant two pro-reform voices against one weak anti-reform voice. It's a start.

Yes it is.

You can view this video right here by getting the latest version of Flash Player!

DOWNLOADS: (62)

PLAYS: (260)

Ed Schultz talks to Rep. Anthony Weiner about the hesitation from the White House to call out the Conserva-Dems on supporting some real health care reform.

Congressman Weiner encouraged everyone to go to his new web site at Countdown to Health Care and let John Boehner know what he's wrong about support for the public option.

You can view this video right here by getting the latest version of Flash Player!

DOWNLOADS: (87)

PLAYS: (295)

Rep. Anthony Weiner joined Ed Schultz to talk about both Alan Grayson and Eric Cantor's recent remarks on health care reform.

SCHULTZ: Joining me now is Congressman Anthony Weiner of New York.

Congressman, good to have you with us tonight.

REP. ANTHONY WEINER: My pleasure.

SCHULTZ: I want to talk at Eric Cantor with you. He is saying that the Democrats aren‘t with the people. Can you respond to that?

WEINER: Well, I like Eric Cantor. If he had a plan for dealing with health care, maybe he would come on the show and debate it with me. But he doesn‘t have one, nor do his Republican colleagues.

Look, the fact of the matter is people say they want this problem solved, not only people who are not insured, but people who are having their rates go through the roof. Right now, every single year, our insurance rates go up 1,000 dollars a year. Most Americans see that as a Republican tax that they‘re paying because of their inaction on health care.

SCHULTZ: Congressman, did I hear you say you‘d like to debate him on this program? Can we organize that? Can you and I make an invitation to Mr. Cantor‘s office? I will give both you guys, face to face—we‘ll go an hour. I‘ll dedicate an hour with you, Mr. Weiner, and also Mr. Cantor to go at it about health care. You OK with that?

WEINER: Listen, I would certainly love to do it. I like Eric Cantor. And frankly, feel a little bad for him that he has to go out and shop around some of these ideas. When he says at a town hall meeting that if you‘re uninsured, you just go to the hospital, and they‘ll take care of you he must think that the bill fairy pays those bills. I‘m not quite sure what he thinks.

But, look, I admire the idea that someone like Eric Cantor, after six years having Republican control of the House and the Senate and the White House, and still this problem gets worse—I admire him saying anything at all. If he wants a debate, as we say in Brooklyn, bring it on, Chickie.

Continue reading »

You can view this video right here by getting the latest version of Flash Player!

DOWNLOADS: (85)

PLAYS: (212)

Rick Sanchez who's show is generally a mixed bag between trying to act like an actual journalist and just the usual CNN hackery, did something I don't see enough of on CNN, or any of the cable "news" networks for that matter, when interviewing Rep. Anthony Weiner. He asked him about the money flowing from the health care industry into the campaign coffers of politicians.

I'm sorry the conversation didn't lead to a discussion about public financing of political campaigns, which would put a stop to politicians feeling the need to chase after money from wherever they can get it to continue being re-elected. If our system of legalized bribery doesn’t change, I don’t see things getting any better for the average citizen out there any time soon.

SANCHEZ: I don't know what to say.

It appears that you, as a Democrat, as a guy who likes this public option, who likes getting the government involved in this thing, you're losing. And it may be because you began five yards behind the finish line. I mean, didn't you give the health insurance companies a huge big start by beginning the debate with universal health care off the table and the public as something we might do, but we really don't want to do it?

WEINER: Well, one thing for sure is, everything the health insurance industry has asked for in the Finance Committee up to now, they have gotten. It's a good playing field for them. We in the House are going to keep pushing for a public option. And frankly the president, who's our cleanup hitter, ultimately I believe is going to wind up mediating this dispute, and he says he wants a public option.

But you're exactly right. The real easy answer here is Medicare for all Americans. We give it to people who are 65. Why not 55? Why not 45? Why not do it? It's a low-overhead program. Sure, it has a financing problem, but so does all insurance at this point.

But at least we know it has very low overhead. We're not putting any into profits or advertising. So, that really was the smart place to start. We didn't. But we are going to try to get closer to that in the final product.

SANCHEZ: Let me just be real blunt with you real quick.

Continue reading »

You can view this video right here by getting the latest version of Flash Player!

DOWNLOADS: (1602)

PLAYS: (3694)

Keith talked to Rep. Anthony Weiner about whether he'll vote for the horrid Baucus bill that's coming out of the Senate Finance Committee. As Keith notes, what looks like is coming out of the that committee is particularly bad for women and as Anthony Weiner adds, may just be a giveaway to the insurance industry and something that can hardly be called reform.

I'd like to know when Rep. Weiner is going to run for President. He has been one of the honest brokers out there with some straight talk on health care reform and how the insurance industry is taking us all for a ride, and it's refreshing as hell to hear instead of political double talk. If this Baucus bill is as bad as what I've been reading, the progressives in the Congress need to be saying "hell no" and Max Baucus needs to be hearing from all of us.

I'll revert back to what I've said before about agreeing with Howard Dean. If they're not going to get a bill through that at minimum has a public option, then don't put the money into the system, and just regulate the insurance industry and make them change their ways.

OLBERMANN: Rescission… what just might be the most pernicious practice in an industry teeming with it. Insurance companies actively seeking out so-called pre-existing conditions to cancel your health insurance policy after you get sick, even though you have been paying your premiums on time and in full for years. They also seek them to reject new insurance applicants.

Our fourth story on the Countdown, the latest Senate Finance Committee compromise bill would reportedly allow insurance companies to charge most employers more to insure women employees - this while the current system that Republicans are defending includes rescission which itself allows for pre-existing conditions to include being beaten by your spouse or being pregnant.

Every woman in this country supporting the Republicans and the status quo is directly or indirectly also supporting canceling or precluding insurance for battered women or pregnant women.

Continue reading »

You can view this video right here by getting the latest version of Flash Player!

DOWNLOADS: (972)

PLAYS: (2732)

Anthony Weiner with Neil Cavuto on Fox News tells him the White House will lose 100 votes without a public option:

CAVUTO: So you’re saying if the president leaves the public option as just an option, not a drop-dead one, he’s gonna lose, essentially, the House.

WEINER: “Well frankly, right now, as the bill’s constructed, it would be an option for people to choose, no one would be forced into it.

What happens if you leave out the option? Where’s the competition, where’s the downward pressure on prices, and where is the thing that helps taxpayers, where’s the thing that helps small businesses? You need that, and it was part of the construct of the bill, and frankly the president’s been a couple of different places on it, but tonight we get to see what he has to say. And I think what he’s going to say is not only are we going to keep the public option in there, we’re going to make it a vigorous one so that consumers have a choice.

CAVUTO: But he has said, Congressman, while that’s something he would prefer personally, in the ABC interview, he said there are a number of ways you can get there, this is not necessarily “the” way. So what if he does something in the middle here? He’s a pragmatic fellow, he wants to get healthcare reform passed, and he says something to the effect, all right, to get the Anthony Weiners and all behind me, if the private insurance guys don’t do what I want them to do, or extract the savings I expect them to, then we do Weiner’s public option.

WEINER: Well frankly, the way the present public option kicks in is, what, ten years out? 2013 is Year One of the bill, then there’s a five-year grace period. But the fact of the matter is, we’ve tried the private insurance model and they’re providing unaffordable health care and 15,000 Americans lose their health care every single day. I don’t frankly see the argument for dropping the public option. All it is, is a choice. All it is, is competition.

CAVUTO: Well you know, the fear is that it’s not just an option, it’s a Trojan horse. That once in, the government just takes over everything.

WEINER: Yeah, I’ve heard that, and I’ve heard that a lot of places, and none more than here on Fox. Frankly, CBO say 4% of people would wind up getting in and I frankly think that’s not vigorous enough. I think we should cut out the bank shot and say the private insurance companies aren’t contributing enough. But that’s not where the president is.

Continue reading »

You can view this video right here by getting the latest version of Flash Player!

DOWNLOADS: (903)

PLAYS: (2571)

David Shuster asks Rep. Anthony Weiner what he thinks about this latest talk of a deal being struck on a "trigger" being used if the insurance companies don't behave. As Rep. Weiner points out, the law would not go into effect until 2013 and then there's five year grace period, so there's already a ten year trigger in the existing bill.

He's right. It's already too late to be finally getting some reform passed and there is no reason to believe the insurance companies will do the right thing now because they always say "trust us" and then show they can't be trusted.

You can view this video right here by getting the latest version of Flash Player!

DOWNLOADS: (1326)

PLAYS: (7347)

And the dumb keeps coming. CNBC's Maria, I just met a girl named Maria Bartiromo is so intent on sticking up for her Wall Street fat cat pals that she makes an idiot out of herself when she asks Rep. Weiner how come he doesn't use Medicare if it's all that!

Well, Weiner is half way to fifty so he's not eligible, but as we know facts are useless things when conservatives want to destroy something. Actually I wonder of she got confused with the other conservative talking point that says if the public option is so great, why doesn't the Democratic Congress sign up for it. Can you tell? I know it's hard to pin down the crazy.

Nico Pitney:

Earlier today, MSNBC's Carlos Watson hosted Rep. Anthony Weiner (D-NY) and CNBC anchor Maria Bartiromo for a discussion on health care.

At one point, Bartiromo was critical of the government-managed health care system in the United Kingdom. "How do I know the quality [of health care in the United States] is not going to suffer" with a public option? she asked.

Rep. Weiner reminded her that there already is government-managed health care in the United States -- namely, Medicare, the system created for Americans 65 years and older -- and that patients with Medicare report very high satisfaction rates.

Bartiromo's response to this argument was a true head-scratcher. In a mocking tone, she pressed the congressman: "How come you don't use it [Medicare]? You don't have it. How come you don't have it?"

Rep. Weiner, who turns 45 this week, tried to walk Bartiromo through it. "Because I'm not 65." But she was insistent. "Yeah... c'mon!" she exclaimed, laughing incredulously.

One week ago we started a Netroots-wide action at Blue America, inspired by Darcy Burner's closing keynote speech at Netroots Nation, thanking the 65 stalwart progressives who have promised-- in letters to Speaker Pelosi and HHS Secretary Sebelius and to activists from Firedoglake-- to stick with the public option, even after the bribe-besoted Senate tries to kill it in the Conference Report this fall. Since then more than 6,400 donors have contributed almost $400,000.

Every member on the list has received over $3,000 from grateful donors, but some have been given way over that. People have asked me why some congressmembers-- like Barney Frank ($11,717), Lloyd Doggett ($9,173), Anthony Weiner ($9,836), Dennis Kucinich (7,622), Donna Edwards ($7,457)-- have wound up with so much more money than some of the others. After all, 60 of them signed Grijalva's letter to Sebelius clearly stating that they "stand in strong opposition to your statement that the public option is 'not the essential element' of comprehensive reform. The opportunity to improve access to healthcare is a onetime opportunity. Americans deserve reform that is real-- not smoke and mirrors. We cannot rely solely on the insurance companies' good faith efforts to provide for our constituents. A robust public option is essential, if we are to ensure that all Americans can receive healthcare that is accessible, guaranteed and of high-quality. To take the public option off the table would be a grave error; passage in the House of Representatives depends upon inclusion of it... a final proposal for the President's signature, MUST contain a public option."

Generally speaking the members with the most donations and the highest totals are the ones who have spoken out the most forcefully during the recess. Barney Frank's contributions shot to #1 after a Larry King Show YouTube went viral (over a million views) showing him answering a crazed and delusional teabagger comparing President Obama to Hitler. GOP propaganda whore Rush Limbaugh pushed Barney's donations even higher when he went off on a snide homophobic tirade the next day.

Similarly, the way Lloyd Doggett handled a disruptive mob of teabaggers at his town hall meeting early in the month won him a great deal of admiration from progressives, not just in Texas but across America. Anthony Weiner's aggressive and spirited defence of the Public Option on Morning Joe bumped him through the roof.

Donna Edwards' unimpeachable record of leadership has been an inspiration for progressives inside and outside of Congress. Last week she reiterated her commitment to real healthcare reform:

I just want to be absolutely clear-- comprehensive reform must include a robust public health insurance option. Otherwise, we're just tinkering around the edges and run the risk of giving even more power to the already too powerful insurance and pharmaceutical industries and their overpaid CEOs. I am unequivocal, unwavering, and unapologetic about my support of a robust public option-- in and outside of the Congress. Indeed I appeared on the CBS Evening News just this week urging Democrats to move forward on healthcare reform, including a robust public option, with or without Republican support since they seem more interested in the politics of taking down President Obama than healthcare for millions of Americans.

It is important that we stay focused on getting a robust public option included in the House version of the bill-- nothing watered down. As a progressive member of the House of Representatives, I can't spend time guessing or speculating about what the Senate will do. I do know that if we don't do our work to get a strong bill out of the House, we won’t be able to beg, borrow or steal a robust public option from the Senate. And, the naysayers and opponents of reform know this-- they know what's at stake. That's why they've tried to use August to kill reform. With your help, it hasn't worked and it won't work.

To accomplish our goal, we must be vigorous advocates for a public option that uses the Medicare provider network, starts immediately without triggers, and has a payment system that encourages quality patient care. We're almost there, and that's why it will take your voices outside of Congress and those of us inside to encourage our colleagues and our President to be courageous to the end. I hope you will continue to join me in this fight for comprehensive health care reform.

No more tinkering.

No more dictates by the big insurers and pharmaceutical companies.

No more deceptions and distractions.

Let's fight for a robust public option to ensure quality, affordable healthcare and lower costs for everyone and provide transparency and accountability. I know we can do this. I will keep fighting, but I need you to keep fighting with me.

Friday Steve Kornacki at PolitickerNY emphasized how powerful Jerry Nadler's message on health care has been and Nadler is assigning credit to the grassroots efforts inspired by Darcy Burner's epic speech.

“If they try to get a bill through the Senate with 60 votes without a public option, it won’t pass the House,” he said. “We will make sure it doesn’t pass the House.”

Other House progressives have been making similar threats, and Nadler admits he’s not sure how seriously the House leadership and the White House have been taking them-- until now.

He described a conference call this week for all House Democrats in which “people who you’d be surprised at” spoke up and told Pelosi they’d reject any bill without a public option. It was only a few weeks ago, after she struck her deal with the Blue Dogs, that Pelosi seemed to sneer at the threats of progressives.
But now, Nadler said, “I think she’s probably going to take that more seriously.”

“We’ve got to draw the line somewhere,” he added. “And this is where we’re drawing it. And we have to draw it here. We probably should have drawn it a little closer in.”

So what happens, I asked Nadler, if the House is ultimately presented with a bill with a cop-op provision instead of a public option-- and if the White House and House leadership then tell progressives that it was the best they could do and that if it fails, the Obama presidency might be sunk?

“They can’t allow it to come to that situation, because I’ll vote no,” he replied. “They cannot allow it to get there, and that’s what we’re telling them now. If it comes to that, enough members, I think, will vote no. And they certainly don’t want to test that.”

Strong stuff, huh? Yesterday's biggest recipient of netroots money on our page was Maxine Waters, who sent an unequivocal message to the Democratic Leadership that the line in the sand is for real. She spoke at a town hall meeting in a part of L.A. where teabaggers and nightriders don't venture and she made it crystal clear that without a public option she will oppose whatever the Insurance Industry and their congressional shills try shoving down our throats. I doubt there's much Emanuel can do to her-- except take her off the White House Christmas card list. Addressing President Obama directly, she reminded him that "[t]he people of this country elected you and gave you a Democratic majority in the House and the Senate... Yes, we know that you are a nice man, that you want to work with the opposite side of the aisle. But there comes a time when you need to drop that and move forward. We're saying to you, Mr. President, 'Be tough. Use everything that you've got. Do what you have to do. And we have your back.'" As for the corrupt members of the House of Lords... I don't think Rep. Waters will have their backs any time soon.

"Not only are we going to do everything we can to organize and put pressure on the senators-- some of whom are Neanderthals-- we're going to say to the president, 'We want you to use every weapon in your basket in order to get those senators to do what they should be doing,' " Waters said.

So... if you haven't said thanks yet, I'd recommend today would be a good day to think about Maxine Waters, Jerry Nadler, Donna Edwards, Barney Frank... and any of the other members you've heard speaking out forcefully about the public option. You can donate to one or two or as many of the 65 members of the House who have promised to stand firm as you'd like at the Blue America page.

You can view this video right here by getting the latest version of Flash Player!

DOWNLOADS: (823)

PLAYS: (4797)

Someone mentioned today that Rep. Anthony Weiner was Jon Stewart's college roommate. Imagine what that duo was like. This guy is smart, passionate and willing to go the extra mile on healthcare reform. I'm glad he's doing what he does.

Now watch how upset Tweety gets when Weiner says he'd use reconciliation to ram the healthcare bill through with 51 votes. He seems to take it as a personal affront:

MATTHEWS: But you never... You would be willing to blow up the Senate rules and basically push it through that.

WEINER: What do you mean, blow up the Senate rules? Look, there's a reason that there's a Democratic House, a Democratic Senate and a Democratic presidency. That middle bloc of Americans want us to get this done.

MATTHEWS: What do you think the Republican reaction would be if you ignored the rules and pushed through a bill?

WEINER: Honestly, waiting for a Republican senator to be pleased with this process is something I'm not prepared to do.

MATTHEWS: No, what would they do? No. When war begins... Look, we've been through goddamned wars in this country, they're easy to start, it's tough to end them. How do you stop a war that starts in the United States Senate right now because you jammed through a bill with less than 60 votes?

WEINER: What do you mean, jammmed, started a war?

MATTHEWS: What are the 40 Republicans going to do? What are they gonna do?

WEINER: Look, outside of this town, the American people really don't care about whether Grassley voted for it or not.

MATTHEWS: Will the government still function if you try to jam this through with 51 votes?

WEINER: I think it will.

MATTHEWS: You think Republicans will put up with it.

Now, you notice anything there? Tweety thinks the Republicans aren't at war with the Democrats! How much worse does he think it's going to get? Arlen Specter told us at Netroots Nation that the Republican caucus decided - before the inauguration - that they wouldn't support any stimulus bill at all in order to break Obama.

During the Bush era, the Republicans wouldn't even let the Democrats sit in on their committee meetings and used every procedural trick in the book to shove legislation through.

Don't you think it's about time the Democrats stopped playing "Mother, May I?"