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

DOWNLOADS: (1034)

PLAYS: (652)

Michael Steele's buffoonery knows no bounds, but I wonder if he's telling the truth this time or just trying to play the race card to save his job.

Republican National Committee (RNC) chairman Michael Steele, who is known for making controversial statements, on Sunday said that white Republicans are afraid of him.

Steele also took aim at some in his own party last week as well, saying that he would "come after" centrist Republicans who support healthcare reform.

The Republican chairman appeared on NewsOne's "Washington Watch" this weekend, a new Sunday political talk show aimed at a black audience. The host, Roland Martin, asked Steele how Republicans could reach out to black voters. Steele responded by talking about issues such as education, small business, jobs and the economy, The rest is in a partial transcript:

MARTIN: But your candidates got to talk to them. One of the criticisms I've always had is Republicans -- white Republicans -- have been scared of black folks.

STEELE: You're absolutely right. I mean I've been in the room and they've been scared of me. I'm like, "I'm on your side" and so I can imagine going out there and talking to someone like you, you know, [say] "I'll listen." And they're like "Well." Let me tell you. You saw in Christie and you saw in McDonnell a door open because they went in and engaged. McDonnell was very deliberate about spending...

MARTIN: Right.

STEELE: I mean, Sheila Johnson was on his team. I mean, that was a big deal. That's because he engaged her and she helped navigate him through that relationship.

Where are the black Congress members?

Michael Steele is saying that because of the color of his skin, his fellow Republicans are afraid of him. He is proving the point that we've been making for a long time. When you look at tea parties, they are predominantly white folks shouting down Obama's race and religion.

If the party Establishment is afraid of Steele, how is there any room for race relations to improve in this country---ever? This poll -- showing that Americans don't think Obama has improved race relations in the country -- first of all makes no sense: How is President Obama supposed to improve race relations when he has white supremacists, birthers, Oathers and militia members filling up the ranks the tea party brigades that are out there in full view of the American people and are smearing non-whites on a consistent basis? How is the president supposed to suddenly ease racial tensions when Republicans and mouthpieces like Fox News are promoting racial division, telling their audiences that the president is a radical black who hates white people? Why isn't Michael Steele using his position in the Republick Party to do something about it himself?

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

DOWNLOADS: (1177)

PLAYS: (3579)

I want to propose a new amendment be added during the conference committee when the House and Senate get together to merge the health-care reform bills. I know the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops will love it, since they are officially members of Congress now. Here it is.

All pro-life male members of Congress who ejaculate without the express intent of making a baby will be considered to have had an abortion. (This will include airport-bathroom encounters.) Under this new rule, the male pro-life members then must fall in line with the same restrictions to health care as women will have to under the Stupak Amendment. Then starting in 2013, all pro-life men in America will be covered under this provision as well.

Remember, sex is for one thing and one thing only. I believe a man has an even greater responsibility than a women does just by the fact that the Congress is made up of mostly men.

Out of the 56 women in the Democratic caucus, only two voted for Stupak. All 17 Republican women voted for it.

What this adds up to is that 97% of the Democrats who voted for the Stupak amendment were male. 90% of the Republicans were male.

I would have to guess that if more than 17% of the congress were women, there would be a little bit less likelihood that women's rights would be so often used as a handy tool to placate neanderthals.

If men want to lead this country in the debate about abortion, then they should show real leadership and take responsibility for their behavior. Are you with me, Bishops? A woman can't just stand around and get pregnant. She needs our seed to be planted in her garden, so why should a woman be held to a higher standard than a man? Is that the democracy and freedom our troops are fighting for?

I'm sure the USCCB will gladly jump on board with this because they are in the sex business and are considered the world's No. 1 experts in that field. They understand better than any living person how a baby is made -- after all, they are Bishops. Imagination is a wonderful thing and can inform and educate people who have never experienced sex. Wow, who knew?

Last week over at StarkReports.com, I began asking Republican opponents of health care reform if they could tell me how many of their constituents are uninsured. I asked Joe Wilson, Steve King, Jim DeMint, Darryl Issa and Virginia Foxx. None of them could answer the question.

Today, after months of debate, the House vote is upon us. Steve King decided to rally the tea-baggers on the Capitol lawn one more time. About 15-25 other Republicans joined him on the stage at various times. I caught several of them as they made their way between their offices, the chamber and the rally. Once again, not a single republican I spoke with knew how many of their constituents are uninsured. The lonely guy in the middle of the video that did know? That's Dan Boren, a Blue Dog Democrat from Oklahoma...

Next up… Rep. Louie Gohmert (also in the first video) tells me my private insurance will be taken from me by this bill:

Finally, and I wish I could say the last video is shocking, but, alas, this is where we find ourselves today ... Representative Steven King, the leader of today’s anti-reform rally, tells a crowd that the Democratic bill requires the government to encourage suicide and/or assisted suicide. Not making it up; he’s explicit ... he uses those very words:

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

DOWNLOADS: (85)

PLAYS: (401)

November 04, 2009 CNN

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

REP. ALAN GRAYSON: What the Republicans have been doing is an insult to America. They`ve been dragging their feet. These are foot-dragging, knuckle-dragging Neanderthal who thinks they can dictate policy to America by being stubborn.

(END OF VIDE CLIP)

BEHAR: You`re the greatest, "knuckle - dragging Neanderthal" apparently voters in New Jersey and Virginia didn`t agree. The governors- elect in both states both Republicans. I`m joined by the man that threw those bombs, Florida Congressman Alan Grayson, congressman. Thank you for joining me. I really do enjoy you, I must tell you.

GRAYSON: Same here. I enjoy you, too.

BEHAR: But you know the governor`s races were won in Republicans in Virginia and New Jersey. And Obama stump for both of them, what`s this say about Obama`s influence these days? Is it waning or is it OK, what do you think?

GRAYSON: Well look, there`s lesson for both parties. For the Democratic Party we have to activate our vote. The Republicans activate their vote. The Democrats this year have not done as good a job as the Republicans in that regard. The voter turnout in Virginia was down by half since last year. Now, I don`t think half of all voters in Virginia disappeared. What happen was some of them felt motivated to vote. And too many of people on our side didn`t feel motivated to vote. And that`s why there was a sharp drop in Democratic performance in both states. So we have to motivate our base.

BEHAR: It was interesting the exit polls in Virginia and New Jersey, all -- both of them said they still like President Obama. That their vote had nothing to do with him. Do you agree with that?

GRAYSON: Well look, people elected Obama, they elected me, they elected the Democrats and put us in charge of the government because they want change. And they need to see more of it. We need to deliver. We need to make sure that the people who voted for us with expectations in mind have those expectations satisfied. It`s that simple. There are lessons for Republicans too. You didn`t talk about the election in New York.

BEHAR: I`m about to ask you about that one because that was one for the team.

GRAYSON: Well listen, I think we`re witnessing the disintegration of a major political party. Something that happens only about once a century. The last time that two of those counties that New York congressional district were represented by Democrats was in 1850. 1850. So I think what we`re seeing is that the tea baggers are no longer obeying the corporate pay masters.

BEHAR: It`s interesting because both Limbaugh and Palin both backed the Republican up there. And it didn`t work. I love that. Does it mean the attack machine -- what is it about the right wing attack machine. That they`re full of bluster and they`re out there all the time voicing their hatred, a lot of it. And it still doesn`t translate into votes, by and large.

GRAYSON: They`re down to 20% of Americans identify themselves as Republicans now. And even at 20% split -- they`re split and splintered and falling apart.

BEHAR: What does it about independent voters, this whole thing, do you think?

GRAYSON: Well the independent voters have a lot of say. They`re the balance of power between the two parties. But I think at this point we`re down to 1 1/2 parties. Because the Republicans just can`t seem to get it together. They have nothing to offer ordinary people. You know you ask what people want for health care, for education, for jobs, the Republicans have no answers for any of that. They`re the party of no, and no don`t cut it anymore.

BEHAR: OK and thank you very much for joining us I hope that you`re going to keep speaking out and saying those wonderful things that you say. We like them.

GRAYSON: Thank you, Joy.

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

DOWNLOADS: (70)

PLAYS: (209)

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: (1807)

PLAYS: (1629)

Looks like someone's trying to out teabag "going rogue" Sarah. Tim Pawlenty's obviously planning on running in 2012 and has decided his best course of action is to throw in with the conservative wing of the party. From The Hill--Pawlenty takes on Snowe:

Gov. Tim Pawlenty (R-Minn.) warned Olympia Snowe today that she's risking her position in the GOP by considering a vote for healthcare reform.

"She's somebody who has gotten into the middle of the healthcare debate in a way that makes Republicans mad," Pawlenty said on Morning Joe. "They make accept that, but they're not going to accept her deviating on many other things."

Asked whether he was glad Snowe was a Republican, Pawlenty hedged.

"There is a process in her state that is broad based that endorses her, and the Republicans in that state say 'we want her to be our candidate,'" Pawlenty said.

Pressed on the issue, Pawlenty made clear he wouldn't offer a definitive answer.

PAWLENTY: "I think Olympia Snowe is somebody who is more liberal than most Republicans would like but she is better than having a Democrat represent me."

SCARBOROUGH: "Is that a yes? I think that's a yes."

PAWLENTY: Well look, the people of Maine have an open process, they selected her. It's different [than Scozzafava]."

Olympia Snowe responded to Pawlenty's criticism...via The Politico:

"I've been a lifelong Republican -- I haven't changed, I don't know what the problem is -- I really don't," said Snowe, speaking to POLITICO at the Capitol. "I know Gov. Pawlenty to be a thoughtful person and i know if he could have rephrased it or re characterized it he would."

But Snowe, who is pro-abortion rights, took serious issue with Pawlenty's underlying argument that some members of the GOP's fast shrinking left flank, including one-time NY-23 candidate Dede Scozzafava, are so far out of the party's anti-abortion, anti-gay rights mainstream they are a "joke."

"All I know is that I've been a life-long Republican, I [spent] 16 years toiling in the minority in the House of Representatives and [was part of] the effort to get us the majority in 1994 -- now were in the minority and I'm still here," she added, with a laugh.

"So, i don't know -- I think they could probably borrow more from me in that sense, in terms of being in touch with your constituents..."

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

DOWNLOADS: (1774)

PLAYS: (1328)

From the great mind that brought us both Sarah Palin and Dan Quayle, Bill Kristol first does his best to build up what electoral successes in Virginia and New Jersey might mean for the Republicans in 2010, even though he claims that’s not what he’s doing. Republicans managing to pick up a Governor’s seat in Virginia or having an unpopular Governor in New Jersey who is a former Goldman Sachs CEO in the middle of this scandal with Wall Street managing to hold onto his seat or barely losing are not exactly bellwether races for what might happen in 2010.

Kristol then tries to downplay the havoc that his girlfriend Sarah Palin is reaping upon the Republican Party with her endorsement of Conservative Party candidate Doug Hoffman in the NY-23 Congressional race.

Kristol: Tim Kaine has said, and this is the favorite mantra now of the Democrats and of the liberal media I would say as you quoted “the divide between moderate Republicans and conservative Republicans” that’s kind of their hope. When was the last time that there was really a big divide between moderate and conservative Republicans? I would say in ’76 when Ronald Reagan ran a primary challenge to go then against an incumbent moderate Republican president Gerald Ford, barely lost, bitterness, divisiveness at the convention, he didn’t even really…give his full fledged, full support to Gerald Ford. In 1978 I remember a friend of mine, a young activist Jeff Bell challenged and beat the liberal incumbent Cliff Case, the Republican primary in Jersey, lost to Bill Bradley, in the general Al D’Amato challenged Jacob Javis in New York, actually won the general election. There was a huge amount of turmoil.

What came out of all of that—Reagan’s victory and a Republican takeover of the Senate in 1980. Turmoil in a party isn’t bad. Obviously it’s problematic. If you’re running a campaign you don’t, you know, it’s easier not to have a primary, it’s easier not to have people grumbling and complaining, but it’s—I think it’s a sign of health, it’s a sign of grass roots activity. It’s a sign of citizens getting involved. I don’t think people are going to go off the deep end. I think you’re going to have…the fact that there were challenges in the 23rd district of New York doesn’t mean that conservatives aren’t going to accept more moderate candidates which they will in Delaware where Mike Castle’s going to be the nominee, where Illinois where Mark Kirk’s going to be the Republican nominee.

The left keeps hoping that conservatives will be suicidal. They’re not going to be I think. But I think you do need the conservative populace’s energy and independence from Washington—and ideas. I think conservatives need that, that Republicans need that. You can’t just be top down, sort of rehashed ideas from inside the beltway, so I’m actually ah…Tim Kaine can console himself with tomorrow’s defeat—it’s going to be a pretty bad defeat and Republicans are going to win all the state wide races and I think pick up six to ten state legislative seats—Tim Kaine can console himself that hoping that the Republican Party will self destruct, but I don’t think it’s going to happen.

Bill, Hoffman wasn’t a primary challenge in case you didn’t notice. He’s a third party candidate propped up by a bunch of outsiders that are not from the state. And if you think this is going to stop with this NY-23 race and that “people aren’t going to go off the deep end”…you might want to go read this--Uncivil War: Conservatives to challenge a dozen GOP candidates.

It's so predictable, isn't it? Every time there's legislation to help ordinary working people, the Republicans hold it for ransom until they get... tax breaks! Is there any illness for which they don't see tax breaks as the cure?

A $20 billion-plus package of homebuyer and business tax breaks was advanced in the Senate Monday, together with a precedent-setting expansion of unemployment benefits to help carry the jobless through the holiday season.

Ending weeks of delay, all but two Republicans joined Democrats on an 85-2 roll call to cut off debate. Procedural obstacles remain, but passage this week appears all but certain. The House is expected to take up the measure next and send it on to President Barack Obama for his signature.

Concessions to real estate and business interests helped deliver the package, a remarkable political amalgam given the pain so associated with the long-term unemployed.

The homebuyer credit, which remains controversial, will apply to houses worth as much as $800,000; and businesses of all sizes stand to benefit from a tax break first afforded this year just to those with gross receipts of $15 million or less.

But the biggest emotional driver for Democrats is the prospect of hundreds of thousands of workers exhausting their benefits before Thanksgiving and Christmas without some extension.

The bill seeks to fill this gap by adding up to 20 more weeks in aid — establishing a modern record of 99 weeks when state and federal benefits are counted together. With new unemployment numbers due out Friday, the measure testifies to the enduring joblessness problem even as the economy shows signs of new strength and recovery.

Rep. Alan Grayson will join us on Monday for a quick chat before he heads back to DC as we enter the final stages of health care reform. Please check out his website "Grayson Has Guts."

As you know, he says what's on his mind and it's usually calling republicans out for their gutless behavior.

The RNC, GOP and every other republican/teabagger group have targeted Alan Grayson as enemy number one and they want him defeated at all costs.

We're participating in a "Money Bomb" for him that takes place on November 2, so it'll be great that he'll stop by and chat with us during his insanely busy schedule.

See you all tomorrow....

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

DOWNLOADS: (56)

PLAYS: (210)

Former Obama campaign manager David Plouffe weighed in on Meet the Press on the role Sarah Palin is now playing in the Republican Party and her interjection into the NY 23 District Congressional race. This was before the news broke that Scozzafava endorsed Blue-Dog Democrat Owens over the Conservative Party candidate Hoffman today.

GREGORY: You talk about Palin. Let's put up what you wrote about her. "It was early morning, Denver time ... when my cell phone erupted with calls." This is when she was selected. "Palin--it took me a moment to place the name. ... Palin was a bolt of lightning," you wrote, "a true surprise. She was such a long shot; I didn't even have her research file on my computer. ... I started Googling her, refreshing my memory while I waited for our research to be sent. ... I thought it was downright bizarre, ill-considered, deeply puzzling. ... [McCain] had been shouting from the rooftops that Obama lacked the experience to be president. ... With the Palin pick, he had completely undermined his core argument against us. ... `I just don't understand how this ends up working out for McCain. In the long term, I mean ... when voters step back and analyze how he made this decision; I think he's going to be in big trouble. You just can't swing--wing something like that--it's too important.'" That was then Senator Obama speaking. What about Palin now? Is she a force to be reckoned with in 2012?

PLOUFFE: Well, I think we should thank John McCain for picking her, in terms of how it helped us win in 2008, but I think we should doubly thank him now. What's going on in the special election in New York 23 I think is a remarkable phenomenon and could affect our politics for years to come.

GREGORY: She endorsed the, the independent, more conservative candidate.

PLOUFFE: Yes.

GREGORY: And now we've got the Republican candidate who's stepped aside.

PLOUFFE: So a centrist Republican has been ridden out of that race. And I think what you're going to see in the coming months, if not years, is Sarah Palin--you know, by the way, she kind of playing the role as pied piper in the Republican Party, which is something I'm quite comfortable with.

So Sarah Palin, the other Republican candidates who are likely to run, the Limbaughs and Becks of the world are basically hanging a "moderates need not apply" sign outside the Republican National Committee headquarters. And for a party that has historic lows right now, because centrists and moderates are leaving them in droves, they have catastrophic problems with younger voters, Hispanic voters and African-Americans, it's a various curious strategy to kind of repair this damage. So I think they're becoming more a very motivated corps, but a small corps of about 23 percent of the country.

Steve Singiser has more over at Daily KOS on the latest turn of events in that race--NY-23: Did Doug Hoffman Throw The Democrats A Lifeline?

With the battle between Democrat Bill Owens and third-party insurgent candidate Doug Hoffman within the margin of error, Hoffman should have picked off the bulk of the Republican vote from Scozzafava's remaining core group of supporters, and that should have been the ball game.

Few people suspected that in an historically Republican district, Owens could survive without split opposition.

But, then, by virtue of his own gracelessness, Doug Hoffman complicated matters...for himself. [...]

To give a succinct recap: Owens praised Scozzafava and promised to work for upstate New York. Hoffman cackled a quick "I told you so" before returning on the attack.

That might explain why a large number of Scozzafava supporters, from the head of the state's Independence Party to several voices within organized labor, immediately turned to the Democrat Owens rather than her fellow Republican, Hoffman. This morning, one of the more prominent newspapers in the district, The Watertown Daily Times, followed suit, switching its endorsement from Scozzafava to Owens.

And then, in the second shocker from her in as many days, the Republican nominee endorsed the Democratic nominee. [...]

In the final analysis, it might not matter, of course. Owens is still fighting upstream in a GOP district against what is now for all intents and purposes a single GOP opponent. But Hoffman's own lack of class might have made this a lot of harder on him than it could have been.

I can draw only one of two conclusions: Either the Obama administration's economic advisers and their Congressional enablers are as dumb as a box of hammers and completely oblivious to the history of the first Great Depression, or they do know and are gambling with the nation's economy anyway - because they're afraid the Republicans might draw blood in the next election cycle:

WASHINGTON — Faced with anxiety in financial markets about the huge federal deficit and the potential for it to become an electoral liability for Democrats, the White House and Congressional leaders are weighing options for narrowing the gap, including a bipartisan commission that could force tax increases and spending cuts.

But even the idea of a panel to bridge the partisan divide has run into partisan objections. Many Democrats, including in the White House, are loath to cede such far-reaching decisions to a commission and doubt Republicans’ willingness to compromise. And most Republicans remain adamantly opposed to tax increases, leaving the prospects for any bipartisan approach limited at best.

The proponents, however, are pressing for a Senate vote this month. “If we have the same process and the same people, we are going to get the same results,” said Senator Evan Bayh, Democrat of Indiana, who recently met with Mr. Obama to discuss the idea. “The Democratic Party wants to spend more than we can afford, the Republican Party tends to want to cut taxes more than we can afford. So we are stuck.”

And of course, the grandstanding Mr. Bayh is the man who loves to agree with the Republicans.

Concerns about the deficit are building even as the White House and Congress continue to add to it with tax cuts and spending to stimulate a still-fragile economy. Yet those one-time costs do not trouble most economists and market analysts.

The main driver of long-term deficits is the chasm between the benefit programs Medicare and Medicaid, which are growing faster than the economy, and federal tax collections, which are at one of their lowest levels in many decades relative to the size of the economy.

Mr. Obama’s budget director, Peter R. Orszag, now at work on the president’s next budget, due in February for the 2011 fiscal year, declined to comment about a bipartisan commission and instead promised that the coming budget would propose additional ways to reduce the deficit beyond next year, when the economy is fully recovered.

Paul Krugman referred us to this just the other day:

Matt Yglesias makes a good point:

A lot of politicians and political operatives in DC are very impressed by polling that shows people concerned about the budget deficit. I think it would be really politically insane for people to take that too literally. If congress makes the deficit even bigger in a way that helps spur recovery, then come election day people will notice the recovery and be happy. If, by contrast, the labor market is still a disaster then people will be pissed off. It’s true that they might say they’re pissed off at the deficit, but the underlying source of anger is the objective bad conditions.

But the political argument against focusing on the deficit is even stronger than he realizes — because there are very good odds that even if Obama exhibited iron fiscal discipline, voters wouldn’t notice. There’s a remarkable, depressing paper by Achen and Bartels that includes an analysis of voter views of the deficit in 1996 — by which time the huge deficit that Bill Clinton inherited had been drastically reduced.

Here’s what voters thought they knew... Yep: after one of the biggest moves toward budget balance in history, a majority of Republicans, and a plurality of all voters, believed that deficits had increased.

Not to put too fine a point on it: if Obama succeeded in reducing the deficit, would Fox News or the Washington Times report it?

The truth is that the truth about budgets plays almost no role in real politics. Right now, Meg Whitman is campaigning for Governor of California on the claim that state spending has exploded over the last decade — when the fact is that it has fallen drastically in real per capita terms. Will she pay a price for this? Probably not.

So if I were a politician, I’d focus on providing real improvements in peoples’ lives, rather than seeking deficit reductions the public won’t even hear about.

Not to mention that in 1937, when FDR, under pressure from the Blue Dogs of his time, cut taxes and spending, it deepened and prolonged the Depression by driving unemployment back into double digits - and led to a major defeat in the 1938 mid-terms for the Democrats.

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

DOWNLOADS: (1434)

PLAYS: (3031)

Bill O'Reilly is "fascinated" with Sarah Palin, and has been featuring segments on her a lot of late. He had Glenn Beck on The O'Reilly Factor on Thursday night to talk about her prospects.

They agreed that her upcoming book tour is a "make or break" situation regarding her political future -- but that if she fares well with the media, she'll be well positioned for 2012. They also agree that resigning as governor before had even completed her first term was a "smart move."

Which gave Beck a launching pad for his prophesying mode:

Beck: Smart move. And I think she's also positioning herself for a third party. By the time this election runs around for the president, I'm sorry, but unless the Republicans and the Democrats wake up, a third party will win.

Presumably, by "wake up" Beck means "embrace the tea party philosophy of small government and big wingnuttery". The Democrats won't, but most likely the Republicans will. But I don't think it's going to be the recipe for victory Glenn Beck thinks it will be.

Is it really as simple as "I don't know anyone like that"? Because this is a huge crisis for millions. The longer the Republicans bottle up the unemployment benefits extension (for no other reason than they can), the more people without other options fall off the unemployment rolls.

You'd think someone in the media might see that as an important story. But maybe when journalists started getting hired from Ivy League schools, they lost any interest in what happens to the paycheck class.

Gee, I hope not. But I'd love to see some evidence to the contrary. The media should be out front, shaming these people:

In a conference call with reporters today, three Democratic Senators charged Republicans with obstructionism in all aspects of public policy, particularly stopping the Senate from passing a bill that would extend unemployment to millions of Americans, at a time when 7,000 Americans a day are losing their benefits.

Sens. Debbie Stabenow (D-MI), Jeanne Shaheen (D-NH) and Amy Klobuchar (D-MN) vowed to move forward with a motion to proceed on the unemployment bill, tied up with non-germane amendments (about things like ACORN funding and E-Verify which have already been voted on in the Senate in other forms) from Republicans that “amount to a political agenda” in Stabenow’s words, as soon as tomorrow. “The votes are there to pass this bill,” said Shaheen. Stabenow said that the bill could have passed a few weeks ago.

Asked by Mike Lillis of the Washington Independent, who has a writeup on this up, why the Senate cannot just plow forward on this bill, given their 60-vote majority in the Senate, Stabenow answered that “you can only do this one at a time.” She countered that Republicans have slow-walked practically all critical legislation since 2007, forcing cloture votes on ordinary measures to take up floor time and generally obstruct the legislation. Obstructionism in the Senate is not limited to filibusters, but also procedural actions when filibusters can be overcome. The result is a slow crawl that creates anxiety among Democrats and liberals and emboldens Republicans to claim that Democrats are running a “do-nothing” Congress. It’s a neat trick.

Democrats hope for a final vote on this bill by the end of the week.

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

DOWNLOADS: (1312)

PLAYS: (1498)

Chris Matthews cites a recent Gallup poll in the beginning of the segment—Conservatives Maintain Edge as Top Ideological Group—which shows those who would describe their political views as conservative at 40%, moderate 36% and liberal 20%. He goes on to take this leap about just what that poll means later in the segment which Bob Herbert rightly calls him on.

Matthews: There’s a big disconnect here in the polling and I’m looking at the NBC poll, we’re going to have it more here tonight, I’ve looked at the Gallup numbers—here’s the disconnect—the Republican Party is a lousy brand name right now. It is way down below one in five, but on every issue from semi-automatic weapons to traditional values to abortion to every…regulation of business…

Buchanan: Immigrants…

Matthews: …every issue the country is lurching to the right in ideological terms at the same time as the base of the Republican brand. How do you explain that Rob?

Herbert: Are you saying the country’s lurching to the right?

Matthews: On every issue—look at the Gallup polls.

Herbert: I completely disagree with you on that.

Matthews: Ugghh…

Herbert: You’re giving too much credence to this poll. Pat just said a moment ago…

Matthews: Why don’t you look at the polls?

Herbert: …that the Republicans can unite behind all these issues for the off year elections—they can’t even—they haven’t even been able to unite in this upstate Congressional district in the Congressional election that’s coming up next week. You’ve got Republicans lining up behind the Conservative Party candidate who’s putting the knives in the back of the Republican candidate. So where’s the unity?

Never one to let logic get in the way of his preconceived notion Matthews asks if this means the conservatives are more “powerful than ever” if they’re the spoilers in Republican elections. Herbert reminds him that turning the Republican Party hard to the right is not good for them winning elections nationally. Earlier in the segment he also reminded Matthews that Republicans are not leading in a related poll about who Americans trust to run the country.

Of course Pat Buchanan, ever the staunch Sarah Palin fan-boy thinks the party needs more ideological purity and goes on to call the Republican candidate from NY-23 a liberal. As Herbert notes, Buchanan's got a pretty strange notion of who should be called a liberal these days. I would imagine the false memes continually put out by or MSM has a lot to do with people's perception of whether they are liberal or conservative or not, as was reflected in that poll. When people continually hear unions bashed and liberal treated as though it were some sort of dirty word, it's little wonder they might shy from the label.

So the pressure we brought to bear on Harry Reid's office over the weekend did have some effect. The bill does have a public option, despite mutterings from unnamed sources that the mythic and coveted 60 votes would be a whole lot easier without the public option. But we're not out of the woods yet, not by a long shot.

Now we get to see the Republicans really ramp up the scare tactics--telling the gullible and easily frightened that this is just one step behind the evil Soviet Empire that St. Ronnie slayed, with its government-run health care, all evidence to the contrary. Up until this point, Obama has kept the Senate dealings at arm's length, a political calculus that made some sense, looking at what happened to Clinton's attempt to get health care passed. But it's going to take some seriously strong political leadership now to make it untenable for any member of the Senate to vote against health care reform. As Mike Lux says, "Game On":

We don't yet know whether we will get the best version of the public option in the House bill, and the Senate version is not as strong as progressives have been pushing for. But strengthening the form of the public option can be negotiated over in conference committee, once we get there.

For now, we can thank Harry Reid (HCAN has a page here) and Nancy Pelosi for their gutsy leadership, and fight like hungry dogs to win the floor fight and deliver on this hope. In the coming weeks we will have an all-hands-on-deck, all out public war with the insurance industry over whether we finally pass comprehensive health care reform or once again fall short at the bitter end after coming so far.

Here's where things are as we head into the floor fight:

1. White House staffers confirmed for me this afternoon that they are backing Harry Reid's decision "100 percent." Now that's not to say they aren't a little nervous about it. I suspect that there are still some feelings by some people working in that building that progressives should have given up and rolled over, and let them cut a deal with Olympia Snowe on her trigger-written-never-to-trigger. That would have been easier than sweating what will undoubtedly be a very tough battle to get all 60 Democrats to go along with the rest of the party. But us irritating progressive folk got in the way of doing that, and now Obama knows it's time to stand and deliver. I believe my friends at the White House when they say they will do an all-out fight for this bill. They know that starting down this path, and not being able to pull it off, would be a huge embarrassment and destroy all the momentum we've built by making it this far. They are all-in, and know how much is at stake. Rahm Emanuel and Jim Messina are famous for twisting arms and doing everything in their power to get the votes that are needed, and now is their time to deliver.

That's where you come in. Progressive Change has a petition for you to sign to ask President Obama to stand firm and fight:

"Every day, insurance companies deny care and let people die. Getting one Republican senator's vote is not worth delaying reform -- too many real lives are at stake. We need you to fight and state clearly that anything less than a strong public option is not change we can believe in."

Go. Sign. Make phone calls. Let your voice be heard.