So sez GOP huckster Ras. Now I certainly do not hope Lincoln loses to a Republican. But I am not one to be an outside interloper.

Let the local blogs handle it. Wake me up when the results come in next year.

Speaking for me only

Finance is going to report a no-PO bill but then Senate leadership has to merge it with the HELP bill. The ConservaDems will threaten not to vote for cloture. Will Reid call their bluff? What if PO supporters start making the same threat? All it takes is 1 or possibly 2.

If Senate leadership reports a PO-included bill to the floor, then the PO game is won. If it is not, then we should whip Progressives in the Senate to filibuster it (just like the Progressive Caucus in the House.) Suppose they do not?

Then we are back where we started - depending on the CPC to hold the line and get the PO in the conference report. Honestly, the public option is in better shape now than I would have imagined. And no, I do not credit Obama's 11 dimensional chess for that. I do credit his Bystander Presidency for allowing this to happen though. There is something in that at least. NOTE: One wildcard is Snowe voting for BaucusCare. The Village will get all whipped up in that case.

Speaking for me only

While Max Baucus continues to look like a fool, the smoke has certainly cleared on Kent Conrad - he is a vehement opponent of a public option and always has been. All his protestations to the contrary, in the words of Don Corleone, it was always Conrad.

The interesting news, after the Schumer Amendment failed by 10-13, is that 10 (11 if one is to believe Baucus' rationalizations) of the 13 Democrats on the most conservative committee in all of the Congress, the Senate Finance Committee, support some form of a public option.

What's left of interest in the Finance Committee? To me a declaration when the final bull (Freudian slip, "bill" for "bull") is voted on that in fact BaucusCare is DOA. Indeed, I would love for Rockefeller to vote No on it and intone, in open mockery of Baucus, that he is voting no on the bill because it does not have 60 votes.

Not a winning day today, but, all in all, not a terrible day either.

Speaking for me only

Director Roman Polanski has filed his request for bail. A Swiss official said it could take a few weeks to decide, and the decision can be appealed.

The D.A.'s office in Los Angeles denied the recent appellate ruling (or the current round of pleadings attacking the validity of the guilty plea and arguing over whether Polanski had to be present for a ruling) were the reason for the extradition request. They say it was simply a matter of opportunity, they had enough advance notice of when he would in Zurich via the film festival's press releases.

Ms. Gibbons, the district attorney’s spokeswoman, said the appellate court ruling had nothing to do with the extradition request, which, she said, was handled by David Walgren, a deputy district attorney assigned to Mr. Polanski’s case.[More...]

Najibullah Zazi pleaded not guilty today to a charge of conspiring to use weapons of mass destruction. He will be detained pending trial. The Court declared the case complex, taking it outside of speedy trial limits. The next hearing is December 3, 2009.

Zazi's lawyer, Michael Dowling of Denver, who is licensed to practice in New York state and federal courts, told the media after the hearing (video here)that he hasn't seen any evidence that Zazi conspired with anyone else to commit an unlawful act. He said that traveling to Pakistan and buying products which contain chemicals that allegedly could be used to make explosives do not establish a conspiracy. He said while he hasn't seen all of the Government's evidence, he hasn't seen anything identifying any individuals with whom Zazi allegedly conspired. [More...]

I always hate those "who owes Rahmbo" stories. The fact is no one owes Rahmbo anything. But if anyone does, it is the Blue Dogs. Let him go twist some Blue Dog arms. But it is good to see some "Senators owe Schumer" stories:

Sen. Charles Schumer has revived the prospect of a public insurance option in the Senate’s version of healthcare reform. Whether it ultimately passes may depend on a handful of first-term Democrats who owe their seats, in significant measure, to the support they received from Schumer (D-N.Y.) when he headed the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee (DSCC) in 2006 and 2008.

Is this true? Who cares. Just good to see some stories that give Schumer the juice, given the fact that his performance was actually stellar, as opposed to Rahmbo's lackluster work in 2006, which has been magically transformed by the Rahmbo PR machine into some political miracle.

Speaking for me only

I hope the public option amendments to Senator Max Baucus' atrocious proposal succeed in the Finance Committee, but I am sanguine about that. Assuming the worst for a moment, How the bill is voted out could be important.

First, it is important that the Democrats on the Finance Committee be put on the spot on the public option amendments. Let's find out who is for it and who is against it. For example, Baucus himself, Kent Conrad, and Blanche Lincoln will be No votes and no more hiding that fact. Let them take the consequences for their opposition. Second, even if, for procedural purposes, certain Dems vote Yes, let it be a Yes/No vote. The Hill describes what I mean:

Najibullah Zazi has his first court appearance in U.S. District Court in Brooklyn, NY tomorrow.

Free Roman.

I'll be out tonight, it's my birthday and the TL kid and I have a great dinner planned. Here's a picture of the flowers he just brought me.

This is an open thread, all topics welcome.

Free Roman. His lawyers say he will fight extradition and seek immediate release on bail. Both France and Poland are requesting for his release.

France's French Culture Minister Frederic Mitterand says:

"In the same way that there is a generous America that we like, there is also a scary America that has just shown its face."

If you have a streaming Netflix account, the film Wanted and Desired is available for immediate viewing.

Once again, here's his motion to dismiss filed in 2008. Here's the victim's declaration.

Roman Polanski is one of my favorite directors. And that's all I am going to say about that.

This is an Open Thread.

After NYTimes story reported that anonymous Senate aides said that Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid was going to kill the public option when he merged the BaucusCare bill with the Senate HELP bill, Reid's office pushed back, via Greg Sargent:

A spokesman for Harry Reid is aggressively shooting down this morning’s Times report that Reid has decided not to include a public option in the bill that will ultimately be voted on by the full Senate. The Times quoted senior Senate aides — though not necessarily from Reid’s office — claiming that the health care bill he creates by merging the bills created by two key committees won’t ultimately have a public option in it.

But Reid spokesman Rodell Mollineau strongly disputed the story, saying there had been no decision and indeed that the process wouldn’t permit for a decision to have been made already. “It would be wildly speculative of me to say that has been predetermined,” Mollineau told me in an interview.

Is it ok to have doubts about Reid on this? Or should we be applauding Reid's "formlessness?"

Speaking for me only

I found this exchange from Nashville bloggers defending Blue Dog Jim Cooper quite funny:

It’s really amazing how much effort national progressives are putting into going after Jim Cooper. . . . A political operative, the city’s feminist conscience in the blogosphere and a former Music City Democrat have all picked a side — against the national interlopers. Is Coop the most progressive congressman Nashville could produce? Certainly not. But is that enough a reason to turn him out?

If you are a progressive it is. But what is funny to me is the language - "outside interlopers?" (And this blog really seems clueless. Lost Cause anyone?) You would think someone in the South would have a little more tact with their language (think "outside agitators" during the 60s.) In any event, the "city's feminist conscience" (though note the walkback here) seems not to exactly have her finger on the pulse of Cooper's district: