Digby quotes the Guttmacher Institute:

Abortion: Insurance Coverage Now an Endangered Species [. . .] the complex, politicized arrangements the legislation necessitates militate heavily against the likelihood that [. . .] plans [covering abortions] will be purchased—or even offered.

Paradoxically, the Guttmacher Institute asserts that "taken together, a number of other provisions in this sweeping measure constitute a clear and significant step forward for the reproductive health of America’s women and men." This sounds good. How does it work? The essence is this:

The Left Flank of American politics is always destined to "lose" in the conventional sense. The Left does not "win" elections. But to view the role of a Left Flank through that prism is to misunderstand the role the Left Flank can and should play -- which is to tug "the middle" closer to the views of the Left Flank. In some situations, the Left Flank has a more conducive climate to work in. Such was the case, in my view, in the 2005-2009 period.

Chris Bowers writes:

I spent much of 2008 exasperated by a progressive Internet space that had seemingly reversed itself overnight on things like the value of triangulation, bipartisanship, appearing Fox News, allowing Joe Lieberman to keep his seniority, sending more troops to Afghanistan, retroactive immunity for telecom companies, replacing local state party organizers with ones who answer directly to the DNC, and much more. It seemed as though numerous policies and strategies that had held near-consensus stature within the progressive online ecosystem had been either scrapped or reversed simply because Barack Obama said it was a good idea to scrap or reverse them.

[MORE . . .]

It's just about sundown here, which marks the beginning of Passover. Best wishes to all observing.

This is an open thread, all topics welcome.

Nine people arrested over the weekend believed to be connected to an extremist Christian Militia have been charged in federal court in Detroit.

Nine members of a Michigan-based Christian militia group have been indicted on sedition and weapons charges in connection with an alleged plot to murder law enforcement officers in hopes of setting off an anti-government uprising.

In court filings unsealed Monday, the Justice Department accused the nine people of planning to kill an unidentified law enforcement officer, then plant improvised explosive devices of a type used by insurgents in Iraq to attack the funeral procession.

The Indictment (available here) was returned on March 23 and unsealed today. According to the Times: [More...]

This story has been floating around the last few days but rather than focus on the specific issue - banning denial of coverage for preexisting conditions for children, which I believe will be resolved by a forceful HHS reg and statement, I want to focus on the issue of regulatory capture:

Regulatory capture is a term used to refer to situations in which a state regulatory agency created to act in the public interest instead acts in favor of the commercial or special interests that dominate in the industry or sector it is charged with regulating. [. . .] For public choice theorists, regulatory capture occurs because groups or individuals with a high-stakes interest in the outcome of policy or regulatory decisions can be expected to focus their resources and energies in attempting to gain the policy outcomes they prefer, while members of the public, each with only a tiny individual stake in the outcome, will ignore it altogether.

A cogent rebuttal about concerns about regulatory capture regarding the health bills has never been provided to my satisfaction. More . .

Passover starts tonight.

Here's a funny thing from a recommended dkos diary:

I just found out that in 1798, the fifth congress passed and President John Adams signed into law "An Act for the Relief of Sick and Disabled Seamen" authorizing the creation of a marine hospital service, and mandating privately employed sailors to purchase healthcare insurance. I guess now President John Adams was a tyrant who took away Americans' freedom [. . .]

(Emphasis supplied.) While the argument (the individual mandate is constitutional) supposedly being supported by this historical artifact is unopposable given current jurisprudence, it just so happens that John Adams signed the Alien and Sedition Acts, which did indeed, take away our freedoms. It was a pretty big deal. Maybe rephrase the "took away our freedoms" line? Just a thought.

Speaking for me only

Here is a dkos diary that really exemplifies the transformation of the once Left blogosphere into the Democratic blogosphere. It riffs off of quintessential Beltway insider Al Hunt's article that equates Left wing criticism of President Obama with the irrational teabagger hate:

Obama Transcends Ideology by Riling Both Flanks

Barack Obama, charges former Florida Governor Jeb Bush, is “the most liberal president” in modern times, pursuing “an agenda that really is foreign to mainstream America.” Other Republicans routinely talk about the president’s “socialist” agenda. Simultaneously, the left wing says he’s a traitor to their cause. Liberal bloggers regularly accuse him of selling out to corporate interests, claiming that he has failed to keep his campaign commitments. Former Democratic Party Chairman and ex-presidential candidate Howard Dean has echoed some of these sentiments. A left winger who betrays left-wing causes? Ideology isn’t the ideal prism to evaluate the Obama presidency.

This vapid Broderite Beltway analysis would have once been mocked in the Left blogs. It means precisely nothing, other than the typical Beltway Media "if both sides hate you, I must be dong something right" silliness. Today, it is the height of insight in the Left Democratic blogosphere:

Women suicide bombers attacked two Metro subway stations in Moscow at rush hour this morning, killing at least 34 people and injuring many more.d

No group immediately took responsibility for the blasts, but suspicion is likely to fall on Chechen militants and other groups from Russia's North Caucasus, where Russia is fighting a growing Islamist insurgency.

In 2004, an attack on the Moscow Metro killed 39. President Vladmir Putin blamed Aslan Maskhadov, the fugitive Chechen rebel leader. In 2003, women suicide bombers July 5, 2003 - Two women suicide bombers killed 15 people at an open-air rock festival at Moscow's Tushino airfield.

More here and here

I'm doing too many things at once tonight, trying to blog while watching TV, while cooking dinner. I had a whole post on "60 Minutes" and the Nada Prouty segment, but accidentally closed the window and it's gone. Too bad, because the segment prompted me to access the court documents on PACER which are very interesting. She has no legal remedies so she's trying to make her case in the media, in hopes of getting Congress to somehow restore her citizenship. Her lawyer is also planning to sue some bloggers:

[Attorney] Zaid is preparing to sue bloggers and news media outlets who that persist in calling Prouty a Hizballah spy and is contacting members of Congress and the Obama administration in hopes of restoring her citizenship or permanent resident status.

I'm also trying to follow Pacific and decide whether to give Breaking Bad (on AMC) another chance. It may just be too depressing. I'll probably watch Celebrity Apprentice instead, to see whether Poison's Brett Michaels and Rod Blagojevich survive another week.

What's on your mind tonight? This is an open thread, all topics welcome.

I thought the militias were in Northern Michigan (which made me think of this Kid Rock song from his Rock and Roll Jesus album), but it appears they are also in Ann Arbor and Southern/Southeastern Michigan. The feds were busy doing raids this weekend.

Seven people were arrested, some on gun charges. One group assumes the target of the militias is American Muslims. [More...]

On Tuesday, the Supreme Court will hear oral arguments in a crack cocaine case. The case is Percy Dillon v. U.S., and the issue is whether the two level reduction in federal sentencing guidelines for crack cocaine implemented a few years ago allows judges, when implementing the reduction, to conduct a complete resentencing.

Many defendants were sentenced to huge terms of imprisonment for crack when the guidelines were mandatory. Since Booker in 2005, they have become discretionary. So when a defendant files a motion to have his or her sentence reduced under the guideline amendment, shouldn't the Judge be allowed to resentence under current law, treating the guidelines as advisory only? Put another way, shouldn't Booker be followed for sentencing modification decisions?

The case could have big ramifications: [More...]

A new study finds fatty foods and junk foods cause rats to overeat, triggering the same mechanism in the brain as cocaine.

Doing drugs such as cocaine and eating too much junk food both gradually overload the so-called pleasure centers in the brain, according to Paul J. Kenny, Ph.D., an associate professor of molecular therapeutics at the Scripps Research Institute, in Jupiter, Florida. Eventually the pleasure centers "crash," and achieving the same pleasure--or even just feeling normal--requires increasing amounts of the drug or food, says Kenny, the lead author of the study.

[More...]