Bump And Update: If you live in Manhattan, don't forget to vote tomorrow in the District Attorney's race. Richard Aborn is the candidate who will bring the office into a new era in which the criminal justice system relies less on incarceration and more on prevention and intervention, revamp juvenile justice policies, actively work to reduce racial disparities in the system and provide greater protections against wrongful convictions. He's got great, solid plans, see below. Good luck, Richard!

***

Original Post 9/11/09

The Manhattan District Attorney's race is down to the final week of campaigning. The primary will be held September 15. Since all three candidates are Democrats, the primary winner will get the job.

I'm supporting Richard Aborn. You can read why in my extensive interview of him. [More...]

Jay Leno comes to primetime tonight -- and every weekday night, at 10 pm ET, 9 pm MT. The showpage is here. You can watch backstage setting up on the live webcam now.

The show is said to be different than the Tonight Show in that it will focus more on comedy.

Music tonight will be by Jay-Z, Rihanna and Kanye West. Kanye will also do his big mea culpa for his obnoxious behavior to Taylor Swift last night during the MTV Awards.

Tonight's big guest: Jerry Seinfeld. Tomorrow, Tom Cruise, Wedsnesday will be Robin Williams and Miley Cyrus, and Thursday, Halle Berry and for music, Eric Clapton and Bruce Hornsby.

Break a leg, Jay. This is an open thread for all TV stuff. Updates below:

Over the weekend, I wrote about the trial New York State Senator Hiram Monserrate, accusing of assaulting his girlfriend with broken glass. Jury selection was to begin today. Monserrate has turned down a misdemeanor plea, and he and his girlfriend maintain the incident was an accident. (Which provoked some strong responses in the comments section.) Background on the case is here.

This morning, Monserrate's attorney waived the jury and trial will begin next week to the Court.

Joe Tacopina, Monserrate's attorney (disclosure: he's also a good friend) says he believes the judge can be fair. The NY Times reports Joe said " a jury consultant and polls had convinced the defense that Mr. Monserrate could not get a fair trial before a jury anywhere in the state." He also, according to the Daily News, noted the jury would have had to walk past a gathering of domestic violence protesters every day. Today, one held a sign with a rat featuring Monserrate's head on top. After court, Joe said:[More...]

Sharia Law raises its ugly head again, this time in Aceh, a province of Indonesia. Adultery will now be punished by stoning the offender to death:

The legislation was passed unanimously by Aceh's regional legislature, said assembly member Bahrom Rasjid. "This law will be effective in 30 days with or without the approval of Aceh's governor," he said.

The Governor opposes strict Sharia law but he's powerless to stop it, as is the central Indonesian government in Jakaarta.

The penalty for other non-marital sex: Unmarried people can be sentenced to 100 lashes with a cane.

The FBI today released its report (available here) on arrests for 2008. Here's the table (jpg) for all drug arrests. Ryan Grim at Huffington Post has reviewed the report and writes:

Someone is arrested in the United States for a drug-law violation every 18 seconds, an FBI report released Monday shows. More than four-fifths of those arrests were for possession only and nearly half were for possession of marijuana. Of the 847,863 marijuana arrests -- one every 37 seconds -- 89 percent were for possession alone.

Jeffrey Toobin has a long article on President Obama and judicial appointments in the new issue of the New Yorker. The object: to ascertain whether Obama is appointing liberal judges. The answer is don't count on it.

First, the numbers:

Just eight months into his first term, Obama already has the chance to nominate judges for twenty-one seats on the federal appellate bench —more than ten per cent of the hundred and seventy-nine judges on those courts.”

Toobin writes Obama played it safe and "post-partisan" in his first choices: [More...]

Late in the day on HCR for creative thinking, but Ezra Klein writes:

This, from a smart reader, seems like a better compromise than a "trigger":

Maybe we should be allowing states to choose if they bring in a public option themselves? At least we can get CA, NY, and many of the big pieces into play and see how it works. That seems far better than giving up the whole pie, as they seem intent on doing.

. . . This would be particularly true if states could choose whether or not to tie their public option to Medicare rates, thus creating an insurance alternative that would actually work to provide savings. . . .

If you allowed states to band together in "public option co-ops" and only imposed an individual mandate in states with public options, you would have my support, FWTW (nothing.) This way, the red states could be happy with lousy health care and blue states could be happy with real health care reform. Of course, that's abandoning a lot of Dems in red states (and a lot of Progressive Caucus members hail from some of those states, CBC members especially.) They'll rightly protest. But "incrementalism" is the watchword right?

Speaking for me only

Greg Sargent and Matt Yglesias appear to fundamentally misunderstand the dynamics of midterm elections. While Sargent and Yglesias trumpet the fact that the GOP is polling badly, they misunderstand that the GOP is fired up and Dem plans to jettison a public option will demoralize the Dem base. More than any other, midterm elections are determined by the respective bases. This year, the GOP has Obama to fire up their base while democrats do not have Bush to fire up theirs.

Couple that with the fact that Obama and Dems are not doing well with seniors (maybe Hillary should have pointed out that that problem would come home to roost in 2010) and that the Emerging Dem/Obama Majority of 2008 are not reliable voters, then it is clear that Dems are in a world of trouble in 2010 IF they can not energize their base. The public option would do that. A booming economy would too. Is either likely at this point? Time will tell. More . . .

Beltway insider Mike Lux:

[T]here is still one counterweight that might save the day, the same counterweight that progressives have been hoping will stand strong since this debate started: progressives in the House. . . . What progressives in the House have to do is hold strong and hold together. Negotiating as a block of 60 members makes you a thousand times stronger then letting yourself get picked off one by one by one. If progressives hold strong and hold together, we can still get comprehensive reform with a decent public option. If they don't, the all-important details of this legislation will get worse and worse.

This is what it was always going to come down to: how much courage and moxie House progressives would have in the final negotiations on this bill. The end game has arrived. It is time to stand and deliver.

If they do not hold strong, the Progressive Caucus may as well shut down. No one will ever listen to them again.

Speaking for me only

Fun fact of the day - Florida opened as a 28.5 point favorite over Tennessee for the Saturday game at The Swamp.

Second fun fact of the day - even Ezra Klein says "[a] solid 55 percent of the country supports 'having the government create a new health insurance plan to compete with private health insurance plans.' That supports jumps to 76 percent if the option is reserved for those unable to get health insurance now." (Emphasis supplied.) Can the Village (with an assist from the "progressive" blogosphere) really stymie 76% of Americans? Time will tell.

This is an Open Thread.

Brian Beutler:

According to the New York Times, the Pharmaceutical Research and Manufacturers of America will spend $150 million specifically boosting for the health care reform proposal introduced last week by Sen. Max Baucus (D-MT). PhRMA has already spent millions on ads supporting the idea of reform more generically. But now that Baucus has come forward with an industry friendly proposal of his own--one that's significantly less progressive than the other proposals in Congress--PhRMA's throwing it's weight specifically behind his plan.

I'm old enough to remember when candidate Obama railed against special interests and taking lobbyist money. Those were the days . . .

Speaking for me only

While the Village and some in the "progressive" blogosphere are spinning as hard as they can against the public option, it is worth noting that the Washington Post poll they are using for this purpose actually shows 76% support the current public option proposals. Question 22A of the poll asks the 42% who are opposed/no opinion on a "public option" (55% support s "public option") the following question:

22a. (IF OPPOSE/NO OPINION FOR A GOVERNMENT PLAN) What if this government-sponsored plan was available only to people who cannot get health insurance from a private insurer - in that case, would you support or oppose it?

Support - 47, Oppose - 47, No opinion - 6

Since the plan described in Question 22A is in fact what is on the table, this means 76% (55% who support a "public option" plus 47% of the 45% who oppose or have no opinion on "public option = 76%) support the public option currently being proposed in Congress. That is a fact you won't hear in the Village, or apparently, in the "progressive" blogosphere.

Speaking for me only