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

DOWNLOADS: (918)

PLAYS: (660)

Good thing we've got reporters to fact check these guys when they tell whoppers like this isn't it? Oh...nevermind. John King didn't bother. Rudy Giuliani claims that the Democrat who won the NY-23 Congressional district voted against the House health care bill. You'd think King would have known that not only did Bill Owens vote yes on the bill, he announced that he would vote for it ahead of time and as reported by TPM:

Rep. Bill Owens (D-NY) can be counted on as a "yes" in this weekend's expected vote on the House Democrats' health care bill, announcing his support in a press release.

"This legislation will reform the insurance industry and provide increased access to affordable healthcare without taxing healthcare benefits, cutting Medicare benefits or raising taxes on the middle class, and that is exactly the direction we need to go," said Owens. "There are still changes I would like to make, including raising the payroll exemption for small businesses, but like I said last week, there is a fundamental need for reform and we must act with a sense of urgency."

Owens won a narrow upset victory in this past Tuesday's NY-23 election, defeating the Conservative Party nominee Doug Hoffman who had opposed the bill, and picking up the seat for the Democrats. Owens's position here is in line with his prior statements at a debate held last week, shortly before the election.

So much for Rudy trying to sugar coat the results of Sarah-Barracuda and Dick Armey injecting themselves into that Congressional race.

KING: Let me ask you lastly about, you say you welcome Sarah Palin, you think she's good for the party. What about what happened in NY-23, where you had a candidate -- a moderate Republican candidate who had the endorsement of the party and then conservatives like Sarah Palin came in and said, no, not good enough, not good enough on taxes, not good enough on life, not good enough on these issues. Is that a good precedent for the party?

GIULIANI: Nope, that's not a good precedent for the party. And that's the way you can allow Democrats to win, even if the public has turned against them on certain things. I think in that particular case, I know that district. that's a district that is very concerned about Obama's health care. You can see the Democrat has voted against the Obama health care program. That's a district where we could elect a Republican if we get our act together and let's hope we don't repeat that too often because then we surely won't be a majority party.

KING: Mayor Rudy Giuliani, we appreciate your time today.

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

DOWNLOADS: (1013)

PLAYS: (3080)

From CNN's State of the Union, David Axelrod responds to Mitt Romney's carping that the President is taking too long to make a decision on troop levels in Afghanistan. Axelrod should have told King to ask Mittens when those 'brave sons' of his were going to sign up to go over there the next time he interviews him since he's so terribly concerned about sending more troops.

KING: As you know, conservatives have been critical of the president's policy review, saying, ‘why is it taking so long?’. The former Massachusetts governor and Republican presidential candidate, Mitt Romney gave a speech this week in which he said, not only why is it taking so long for the president to decide, but he also said why is David Axelrod, his top political advisor involved in these deliberations? Let's listen.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

ROMNEY: I find it incomprehensible and inexcusable that this president invites David Axelrod into national security meetings. Polls and politics have no place at that table. [...] He is the commander-in-chief. What has he been doing? Do you realize he carried out more than 30 campaign visits in this last season, for various Democrats? While he can't make up his mind on Afghanistan, or have enough time to meet with generals. He is out there campaigning.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

KING: Let's take them in order. Why is David Axelrod deserve a seat at that table? And why is it taking so long?

AXELROD: Well, first of all, let's be clear. David Axelrod does not have a seat at that table. I have observed these discussions because, as I am today, I have to help communicate the message of the administration. And so it is helpful for me to hear. I have not said a word in any of those meetings.

Now let's take the second part. Governor Romney has to choose one argument or another. Either he has to say he is not paying attention or he has to say he is taking too long because he has been involved in a rigorous review. The president has had hours and hours and hours of meetings with his military commanders, with his national security team, to run through every aspect of this, in order to get it right.

And we've seen in the past what happens when we don't do that; when we don't do the necessary preparations. And he is determined to get Afghanistan right. It is something that Secretary Gates supports. It is something that the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff supports; General McChrystal has been supportive of this process.

You know, I know that Governor Romney has never had responsibility for any decision akin to this, so he just may not be familiar with all that it entails. But I think the American people are being well served by a process that is assiduous and in which every aspect of this is considered. Because, after all, lives of American servicemen are involved here. An enormous investment on the part of the American people, we ought to get it right.

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

DOWNLOADS: (1219)

PLAYS: (1225)

When asked by CNN's John King about the Republican Party in-fighting in the NY-23 race and if the party can survive in the Northeast region of the country if there is no room for moderates in their ranks, John Boehner tries to blame the “rebellion” going on now on “people who really have not been actively involved in the political process”. Oh really?

While that may be true of those out protesting, it’s certainly not true of the ones organizing them. Dick Armey and Tim Phillips are hardly people that could be called “not active in the political process”. Quite the opposite. And Sarah Palin who has interjected herself into that race was the Republican Vice-Presidential nominee the last election.

John Boehner has a bigger mess on his hands than he’s willing to admit which is evident by his response at the end of the segment when he says this:

KING: Let me ask you, lastly, though, but sometimes does the party need to draw a line?

What's the point of having a party if people in your party will attack your own nominees? I mean, where do you draw that line?

BOEHNER: Listen, I'm a big believer in Ronald Reagan's 11 commandment -- 11th commandment. Never talk ill about another Republican.

KING: That was not followed in this race.

BOEHNER: I know.

Yes and so do the rest of us who have been watching this John.

Transcript below the fold.

Continue reading »

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

DOWNLOADS: (47)

PLAYS: (210)

What do you know? John King decided to almost act like a reporter today when trying to get John Boehner to explain what the Republicans' alternative the Democratic House health care bill was. King held up the two page summary which is what the Republicans have available now on their web site. Boehner said they have eight or nine ideas which they are going to combine and send to the CBO to have scored and present on the House floor for debate.

What the GOP currently has posted on their web site is vague at best, but John Boehner made sure everyone understood one thing it would not do; attempt to cover the 46 million Americans who do not have health insurance. If the Republicans are serious about offering an alternative bill to what the Democrats have proposed, why didn't they put it together months ago? Will they have it posted on line for a few weeks so everyone can read it once it's done? Of course John King didn't ask him for any of those questions for a follow up.

KING: Let's move on to health care and I know you brought something with you, and it's more than 1,900 pages, and that is the House Democratic health care bill. Before we get to that, I want to hold up something else. This is the text of your radio address. It's two pages. Now, this was an effort by the Republican Party to say we have alternatives. It's not a bill, I want to be fair to you, but it lays out a number of things you would like to do in the Republican Party.

What it does not do, and what that does, even though you don't like it, in 1,900 pages, it lays out what they would do. It says how much it would cost. The Congressional Budget Office has said in the end what percentage of people would be covered.

Where is the Republican proposal where you can say to the American people, we'll spend this much over 10 years, it will do this to the deficit, and when we're done, X percent of the American people will have health insurance?

BOEHNER: You can go to healthcare.gop.gov and see our eight or nine ideas about how to make our current health care system work better.

KING: But they're separate pieces of legislation right now...

BOEHNER: There are separate pieces...

KING: But will you have something to stack next to that?

BOEHNER: What I'm hopeful for is to take these eight or nine ideas and put them together in a bill that's being scored right now by the Congressional Budget Office and present it on the House floor during this debate. And I'm hopeful that Speaker Pelosi will allow us to offer an alternative.

But what we do is we try to make the current system work better. We take a step-by-step approach, by allowing people to buy insurance across state lines, allowing small businesses and other groups of individuals to group together for the purpose of buying health insurance at lower costs, like big businesses and unions can.

Continue reading »

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

DOWNLOADS: (1084)

PLAYS: (480)

(h/t Heather)

I've been hearing from my sources that the ConservaDems in the House of Lords (The Senate) would rather have states be able to "opt in," rather than "opt out," of the public option in health-care reform. No matter how you feel about these proposals, the one Ben Nelson supports is a far, far worse plan than the other. Here's what he said on CNN's State of The Union:

KING: If there is a vote and Harry Reid needs 60, have you promised him, even if you disagree with the proposal and might vote no on the proposal, you would give him your vote on the procedural issue?

NELSON: I have made no promise. I can't decide about the procedural vote until I see the underlying bill. It would be, I think, reckless to say I'll support the procedure without knowing what the underlying bill consists of. And it's not put together yet. It's a draft -- it will be a draft bill some time next week, submitted the Congressional Budget Office for the review of the cost. And until I've seen a completed draft...

KING: Well, let me -- let me jump in, can you support...

NELSON: ... I'm not going to...

KING: Can you support a public option where states could opt out so there is a public option in the federal legislation, or will you only support a public option where the state would have to opt in, so there is not a national program already created?

NELSON: Well, I certainly am not excited about a public option where states would opt out or a robust, as they call it, robust government-run insurance plan. I'll take a look at the one where states could opt in if they make the decision themselves.

I understand what the other Senators are trying to do with the opt-out proposal -- which comes down to guaranteeing the public option an uphill, state-by-state battle -- but Ben Nelson in particular continually thwarts every effort to include a robust public option in America. I think he uses health insurance payoffs as a form of roughage to keep his bowels clear. And he still won't say if he'll give us an up-or-down vote. Schmuck.

Nelson must be looking to become a health insurance lobbyists once he leaves the Senate and since he takes the most cash from them---I imagine he has a gig already lined up.

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

DOWNLOADS: (48)

PLAYS: (226)

In between Ben Nelson's hackery which John is going to tackle here, Sherrod Brown on State of the Union did a nice job of calling out Orrin Hatch for the Republicans hatred of Medicare and explaining why it is important, at minimum, to have a public option included in the health care bill.

KING: Senator Brown, let me come to you. A big state, health care's a huge issue. I'm wondering if you share the frustration that many progressives on the House side share when they're told, well, the White House is pushing this idea of a trigger, maybe, because they want to keep Senator Olympia Snowe of Maine, the one Republican who has backed it in the Senate so far. There are many who have said, this is the United States of America, not the United States of Maine. Does the White House have the calculation wrong here?

BROWN: Well, I'll answer the question about the trigger first. The trigger says, let's give the insurance companies two more years after they've had five decades since World War II to do things right. They continue their practices of pre-existing condition. You know, reports recently that a woman that has a C-section, by some insurance companies, will be denied care because that's considered a pre- existing condition. A woman that's been a victim of domestic violence, that's considered a pre-existing condition because her husband or boyfriend or whomever is more likely to hit her again.

I mean, the insurance companies have had their chance to do this right. We need the public option now. We need it in large part because it will inject competition into places where they don't have it. In southwest Ohio in my state, two insurance companies have 85 percent of the market. They need more competition to discipline those companies, to make them more honest, to bring prices down.

Continue reading »

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

DOWNLOADS: (875)

PLAYS: (1811)

From CNN's State of the Union. Looks like some pushback against the Lindsey Grahams of the world from Jim Jones.

National Security Adviser Chides McChrystal:

President Obama's National Security Adviser James L. Jones suggested Sunday that the public campaign being conducted by the U.S. commander in Afghanistan on behalf of his war strategy is complicating the internal White House review now underway, saying that "it is better for military advice to come up through the chain of command."

Gen. Stanley A. McChrystal, who commands the 100,000 U.S. and international forces in Afghanistan, warned bluntly last week in a London speech that a strategy for defeating the Taliban narrower than the one he is advocating would be ineffective and "short-sighted." The comments effectively rejected a policy option that senior White House officials, including Vice President Biden, are seriously considering nearly eight years after the U.S. invasion.

McChrystal's statement came a day after he was challenged by senior White House officials over his dire assessment of the war -- and what it will take to improve the U.S. position there -- during a video conference from Kabul with Obama and his national security team. Obama then summoned McChrystal to Copenhagen the day after the general's speech for a private meeting aboard Air Force One.

Continue reading...

Of course no one in the media is bothering to ask why Obama would have promoted the likes of Gen. McChrystal in the first place given his record.

McChrystal's Pat Tillman Connection:

Now the man who greased the chain of command that orchestrated this great deception is prepared to assume total control of US operations in Afghanistan: Lt. Gen. Stanley McChrystal. It was McChrystal who approved Tillman's posthumous Silver Star, a medal given explicitly for combat, even though he later testified that he "suspected" friendly fire.

Yet despite this, both Democrats and Republicans are rushing to heap praise on McChrystal, including Sen. John McCain. It was McCain who rushed to speak at Tillman's funeral and then, when the cover-up became known, pledged to help the Tillman family expose the truth. McCain later turned his back on the Tillmans when they raised the volume and demanded answers. As Pat's mother, Mary Tillman, said last year, "He definitely eased out of the situation. He didn't blatantly say he wouldn't help us, it's just that it became clear that he kind of drifted away."

And now the Tillman family, amidst bipartisan praise for Obama's new general, must once again raise the inconvenient truth.

[....]

What particularly rankles about Obama's choice of McChrystal, whose background is in the nefarious and shadowy world of "black ops," is that his actions in the Tillman cover-up feel emblematic instead of exceptional.

[....]

Clearly President Obama is trying to "own" the war in Afghanistan: upping the troop levels, making it his "central front" in the battle against terrorism and now placing his own general in charge. But the president is also disappointing a generation of antiwar activists who voted for him expecting an end to imperial adventures and torture sanctioned by the executive branch. Now a man who should perhaps be on trial at the Hague is in charge of Afghanistan. Obama needs to know it's not just the Tillmans who are enraged by this terrible choice.

As Siun at Firedoglake notes:

Jones was not the only one to push back on the McChrystal PR campaign this week and it seems that a number of informed voices seem to share my concern that McChrystal is “teetering towards insubordination.”

Transcript below the fold.

Continue reading »

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

DOWNLOADS: (51)

PLAYS: (146)

From State of the Union, National Security Advisor Ret. Gen. James Jones responds to McCain's criticism that he is playing politics with the decisions being made on troop levels in Afghanistan.

KING: But you know you have some critics. Having seen general McChrystal made his case publicly, having spoken to General Petraeus, having been to the region, some Republicans including Senator John McCain say that you, sir, and others in the White House are playing politics with this decision. I want you to listen to Senator McCain.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

MCCAIN: It's well known, it's broadcast all over television, that there are individuals, including the vice president of the United States, now, unfortunately, the national security adviser, the chief political adviser to the president, Mr. Rahm Emanuel, who don't want to alienate the left base of the Democrat Party.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

KING: Is that a factor in the White House, rising Democratic opposition to sending more troops to Afghanistan? Do you, sir, say, "Mr. President, no more troops because of politics," as Senator McCain says?

JONES: Senator McCain knows me very well. I worked for Senator McCain when he was a captain. I've known him for many, many years, and he knows that I don't play politics with national -- I don't play politics, and I certainly don't play it with national security, and neither does anyone else I know. The lives of our young men and women are on the line.

This is -- the strategy does not belong to any political party, and I can assure you that the president of the United States is not playing to any political base. And I take exception to that remark.

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

DOWNLOADS: (63)

PLAYS: (274)

John King asks Mary Matalin what she thinks about Lindsey Graham's statement that Glenn Beck does not represent the Republican Party and Matlin does her best to distance Beck from the party as well. This is looking like a new theme her from them. He may not be willing to call himself a Republican but he sure as hell is doing their dirty work for them.

KING: All right. One more. One more before I let you go. Glenn Beck works for another network here in town. I believe it's the FOX News network. And there's been a great controversy about some of the things he said about the president. It was put to Lindsey Graham, a conservative senator from North Carolina, this morning on another program. Does Glenn Beck speak for you and the Republican Party?

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

GRAHAM: No. I'm not saying he's bad for America. You've got the freedom to watch him, if you choose. He did a pretty good job on ACORN.

What I am saying, he doesn't represent the Republican Party. When a person says he represents conservatism and that the country is better off with Barack Obama than John McCain, that sort of ends the debate for me as to how much more I'm going to listen.

So he has a right to say what he wants to say. In my view, it's not -- it's not the kind of political analysis that I buy into.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

KING: This is the political analysis I buy into. What do we make of this?

MATALIN: Well, full disclosure, Glenn is a threshold author, Simon & Schuster imprint, of which I'm associated with. Glenn has two best-sellers. This has never happened before. Two No. 1 best-sellers in hard cover and paperback, non-fiction. All right. Somebody out there is listening, what Glenn Beck says. I know he doesn't listen and Lindsey doesn't listen.

Glenn Beck is unequivocal in saying he's not a Republican; he's not a Democrat. He possibly has libertarian leanings in a vacuum. So what he has tapped into is really, really what I think is going to be the dispositive future for us. Maligned mothers.

He did not -- it wasn't just ACORN. He did the czars. He was instrumental in these tea parties and this rising opposition, again, of people who aren't typically listened to. He doesn't affiliate with either party, or any party, but he has tapped into this mainstream of America who feels otherwise not listened to.

Continue reading »

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

DOWNLOADS: (52)

PLAYS: (163)

From State of the Union, Mary Matalin is asked to respond to Steve Schmidt's comment that Sarah Palin getting the 2012 presidential nomination the GOP could have a "catastrophic election result". I think Matalin knows full well Schmidt is right and doesn't want to admit that this nightmare McCain has inflicted on us would be a disaster for them if she is nominated.

KING: All right. Quick raw politics, before we run out of time. I was asked to moderate a panel the other day at an Atlantic magazine, with the first draft of history conference, they called it. And your old friend, Steve Schmitt was there. He ran the McCain campaign. He worked for Vice President Cheney back in the Bush days.

And I asked him about Sarah Palin's book. As you know, it's -- "Going Rogue" is the title of her book. It's coming out pretty soon. It's already a best-seller, even though you can't buy it yet. And I said, you know, "Steve, how are you going to play out in that book?" Let's listen.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

KING: When we do the index read, the Washington read, and we look up Steve Schmitt, what are we going to find in the book about Steve Schmitt?

STEVE SCHMITT, FORMER MCCAIN CAMPAIGN MANAGER: I think it may say that I was anti-rogue in the -- in the running of the campaign.

I think that she has talents, but, you know, my honest view is that she would not be a winning candidate for the Republican Party in 2012, and in fact, were she to be the nominee, we could have a catastrophic election result.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

KING: Do you agree with that, Mary?

MATALIN: All right. Steve, the Bullet, is a man of many talents, and he -- no one would ever call him the anti-rogue. He is a rogue.

This focus on Sarah Palin is one of these beltway obsessions.

KING: But is he right? Is he right?

MATALIN: Well, she's not going to -- we don't even know if she's running. Focusing on 2012.

Here's what Sarah Palin has become: an iconic expression for people, particularly maligned moms, who feel like they're not listened to, who feel like they're attacked when they express themselves. No one is -- including Steve, who's a friend of both of ours, that she has been pilloried beyond anything that is acceptable in politics.

But to focus on 2012 is irrelevant to what she represents today, which will have an impact on the midterms, which is she's dissed for being an expressive and conservative woman.

CARVILLE: Well, disclosure here. Sergeant Schmitt, who outranks Corporal Carville but not General Jones, came and -- came to Tulane and talked to my students about many of these things. And I would say his comments were slightly more reserved to you than they were in the classroom.

But there's a reason that Sarah Palin is getting all this attention. She's got a book coming out, which is selling, by the way, to be fair to Sarah Palin, it's selling like crazy. She keeps interjecting herself in the national dialogue. She gives a speech in Hong Kong. And yes, people -- and there are a lot of people out there that frankly think that she's -- to put it mildly, not up to the job.

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

DOWNLOADS: (79)

PLAYS: (313)

From John King's State of the Union, James Carville cites the tobacco industry using Betsy McCaughey to plant a story at The New Republic as an example of the "vast right wing conspiracy" that President Obama is facing. Of course Mary Matalin pretends she has no idea who Betsy McCaughey is.

KING: All right. Let's stay for a moment on the -- because I said we would mention it after the break, and Mary brought up that term that we came to know during the Clinton years -- the Clinton presidential years, the vast right-wing conspiracy. It was on his mind.

Let's listen.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

GREGORY: Your wife famously talked about the "vast right-wing conspiracy" targeting you.

GREGORY: As you look at this opposition on the right to President Obama, is it still there?

CLINTON: Oh, you bet. Sure it is. It's not as strong as it was because America has changed demographically, but it's as virulent as it was.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

CARVILLE: Again, this week, there was breathtaking proof that there was a vast right-wing conspiracy. It was revealed in Rolling Stone that Philip Morris paid -- paid a woman named Betsy McCaughey to plant a piece in The New Republic, all right?

This was -- this is not -- in other words, this was a tobacco company paying for a piece printed in a so-called respectable magazine.

Now, I don't know that, in The New Republic in 2006, that, oh, gee, the whole thing was, kind of, a mistake after they went through all of that. I don't know if The New Republic has called the president to apologize, but I suspect, as we go through, we're going see more and more instances of this.

And every Clinton person, when the president told us the stuff with Taylor Branch, it felt good. And you know what really made us feel good, is Bill Clinton's doing a whole lot better than The New Republic is. They're sitting there at the CGI, and everybody went "Yes." That was a great moment to be a Clinton person.

MATALIN: I don't even know what he's talking about, but I'll say...

Continue reading »

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

DOWNLOADS: (68)

PLAYS: (152)

Good old Mitch McConnell. You can always count on him for the IOKIYAR argument. He seems to have a bit of a memory problem when it comes to the use of reconciliation. Of course we can count on John King not to ask him about it either. Sadly that is all too typical of the media.

From Media Matters--LA Times reported McConnell's criticism of reconciliation without noting his past support of process:

The Los Angeles Times reported Sen. Mitch McConnell's criticism of Democrats' potential use of the reconciliation process to pass health-care reform without noting that he repeatedly voted in favor of using reconciliation to pass the Bush tax cuts.

Transcript:

KING: Well, I want you to listen, not to the president, but I want you to listen to your own voice. You spoke here in Washington on Friday to a conservative gathering about the health care debate and you voiced quiet confidence about the Republican position. Let's listen.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

MCCONNELL: We're seeing it today in the debate over health care. Ordinary Americans speaking their minds, dismissed and ridiculed by people in power. The reason they are doing this is clear, because we're winning the argument.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

KING: Define "winning" for me. Is winning blocking the Democratic plans and ending this year without a health care reform bill reaching the president's desk?

MCCONNELL: No, winning is stopping and starting over and getting it right. I don't know anybody in my Republican conference in the Senate who's in favor of doing nothing on health care. We obviously have a cost problem and we have an access problem.

But there's a very big difference about whether or not it's appropriate to have a major rewrite of about one sixth of our economy in the process. My members just don't think that's the right way to go. We want to fix the health care system, but we don't want to do or have a $1 trillion over 10-year cut in Medicare, not to make Medicare more sustainable, but to start a new program for others.

We don't think it's a good idea to raise taxes on small businesses and on individuals in the heart of a recession. There are some serious differences about what ought to be done. KING: I saw your speech just before I went over to see the president. So I asked him about it. Listen to this exchange.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

KING: Mitch McConnell told the conservative group, we're winning the health care debate. What do you think of that?

OBAMA: Well, you know, they were saying they were winning during the election too.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

KING: A confident president there, saying he will get health care. He also said in an interview with Univision that's airing this morning that he would love Republican votes, but I don't count on them. I don't count on them. Mr. Leader, let me ask you, if they go forward and they do this with all Democrats, what does that do to the environment down the road? Some Republicans have said well then don't expect our cooperation on financial reform. Don't expect our cooperation on Afghanistan. Is this one issue health care, or could it poison the well?

MCCONNELL: Look, it's not about winning or losing, it's not about the president, it's about American health care and getting it right. And if they try to use this legislative loophole called reconciliation, what they'll be doing, in effect, is jamming through a proposal to rewrite the economy with about 24 hours of debate.

Basically, a legislative loophole to do a massive rewrite of one sixth of our economy. I think that that will produce a very, very severe reaction among the American people, who are already, according to the Gallup poll, not in favor of the direction we're taking on this very important issue.

KING: Help me understand if there's a gap between the audience in the sense that you say here, it's not about winning or losing, but you were very clear to that conservative group, we're winning the argument.

MCCONNELL: Well, by winning, the definition of winning is to stop and start over and do it right.

Politico:

A Democrat, amused at the shots of Eric Cantor working his Blackberry as the president talked about the cost of health care a few minutes ago, passes on this item from last week headed, "Cantor: GOP will be 'attentive' during Obama speech":

Cantor and I talked about how Republicans would behave, and I asked if it would be like a State of the Union when they sit on their hands or hiss for parts they don't agree with.

I also asked Cantor if there were going to be any "no Tweeting" rules for Republicans, since some of them had busy thumbs during Obama's winter quasi-State of the Union address.

"I don’t think we’re going to be guiding the caucus to boo or applaud or whatever. We’re all going to be very attentive," he said.

He was not, for what it's worth, Twittering. But his office did get a statement out immediately after the speech, which he says he found "overhyped" and of "strangely unclear" purpose.

Hate to break this to you, Cantor, but the only thing truly "overhyped" and "strangely unclear" is Obama's need to reach across the aisle to you pathetic bunch of un-American obstructionists. As the DNC's new ad states: "Republicans Just Say No"

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

DOWNLOADS: (1464)

PLAYS: (1602)

Tim Pawlenty apparently has a new rule. When the United States either goes to war with or invades another country, we or they depending on where you live, never lose. Sorry Tim but reality has a way of biting that sort of revisionist history right in it's ass. I would say why didn't John King bother to point out that obvious fact to you, but we are talking about John King here...lol. That man hasn't found a Republican he couldn't give a softball interview to since he made Wolf Blitzer's show Sunday into more of a joke than it was before he took it over.

KING: Let me move on to another issue, another big issue on the president's plate, where, in Congress, he's largely getting more Republican support than Democratic support, and that's Afghanistan.

George Will, a very influential conservative columnist wrote this earlier in the week, "Forces should be substantially reduced to serve a comprehensively revised policy. America should do only what can be done from offshore, using intelligence, drones, cruise missiles, air strikes, and small potent special forces units concentrating on the porous 1,500-mile border with Pakistan, a nation that actually matters."

Is it time for the United States to pull almost all of its troops from Afghanistan?

PAWLENTY: No. I recently returned from my fourth trip to Iraq and my second trip to Afghanistan. The administration has defined the mission in Afghanistan as to to disrupt and destroy the Taliban and Al Qaida and other terrorist forces that represent a threat to the national security interests of the United States.

We need to make sure that mission is successful. And the rule needs to be, when the United States goes to war, the United States wins, and so we need to make sure we do those things to complete that mission successfully, and that includes putting more troops into Afghanistan if needed.

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

DOWNLOADS: (858)

PLAYS: (653)

The Hill:

Sen. Orrin Hatch (R-Utah) said on Sunday that Vicki Kennedy should be considered to replace her late husband in the Senate.

Hatch, one of Kennedy's closest friends in the Senate, said on CNN's State of the Union that Vicki Kennedy is well-qualified to serve, even if only until a January special election to fill the rest of the term.

"I think Vicki ought to be considered. She's a very brilliant lawyer. She's a very solid individual. She certainly made a difference in Ted's life, let me tell you. And I have nothing but great respect for her," Hatch said on CNN.

Another close friend of Kennedy, Sen. Chris Dodd (D-Conn.), acknowledged that Vicki Kennedy has not expressed much interest in filling in for her husband, but said he would support her next step.

"Whatever Vicki wants to do, I'm in her corner," Dodd said on State of the Union. "She knows that. And she's expressed to me her own sort of reluctance to [fill in for Kennedy], but she could change her mind. If she did, I'm for it. I think she'd be great."

"She brings talent and ability to it, and to fill that spot I think is something the people of Massachusetts would welcome. We could certainly use her in the Senate," Dodd said. "But I leave that up to her. She's got a lot on her mind right now, and frankly, I'll leave it up to her decision-making process."

Massachusetts lawmakers, spurred by a letter from Kennedy himself, have begun discussing new legislation that would allow Gov. Deval Patrick (D) to appoint a temporary replacement to serve until an election. State law passed when Gov. Mitt Romney (R) was in office took the power to appoint a replacement away from the Republican when Sen. John Kerry (D) appeared in strong position to win the presidency.

Kennedy was reportedly worried that the Democrats would fail in their health care reform push without that 60th vote and wanted to make sure that Patrick could appoint someone before that January special election. You gotta love that about Teddy, optimistic 'til the end that the Dems would find their spines.

Meanwhile, BoldProgressives has started the Honor Senator Kennedy petition:

PETITION TO THE SENATE: "Ted Kennedy was a courageous champion for health care reform his entire life. In his honor, name the reform bill that passed Kennedy's health committee 'The Kennedy Bill' -- then pass it, and nothing less, through the Senate."

Sign it, it's getting passed on to the Senate today as they come back from recess.