http://rss.dailykos.com/~r/dailykos/index/~3/h_A9Jmo0Q88/-Reid-and-Carpers-Plan-B:-Put-Two-Really-Bad-Ideas-Together!

So Harry Reid has allowed Tom Carper to come up with the "Plan B" on the public option if he can't get 60 votes for opt-out. Carper's plan? Combine the two worst ideas:

In states where private insurers fail to offer affordable coverage, Carper said the alternative would permit them to set up a non-profit board, likely appointed by the president, to offer insurance.

"That kind of approach might come close to hitting a sweet spot for a lot of people," said Carper, noting the approach "addresses concerns about government-owned, government-run."

The plan would be a form of a so-called trigger option pushed by Sen. Olympia Snowe, R-Maine, and some Democratic moderates. Moderates have been meeting to coordinate some of their efforts on the overhaul.

A triggered co-op! A trigger that's never going to trigger to create a co-op that will never work. Seriously, this is their Plan B? Whatever happened to comprehensive healthcare reform? Whatever happened to providing affordable choices to all Americans?  Which leads to this nugget:

The Democratic aide said staffers have tried to keep Carper’s alternative quiet due to concerns that publicity could draw attacks from liberal activists, which could complicate efforts to line up support from the full Democratic caucus.

Ya think? Yes, liberal activists will oppose this because it's utterly worthless. And we're not the only ones who say so. Remember what the CBO said about co-ops?

(The proposed co-ops had very little effect on the estimates of total enrollment in the exchanges or federal costs because, as they are described in the specifications, they seem unlikely to establish a significant market presence in many areas of the country or to noticeably affect federal subsidy payments.)

They don't do anything. Which under Carper's plan is probably not so big an issue because if he's using the Snowe formula for his trigger, the trigger will never be pulled. Which actually does make it a big issue again, because this option won't do anything. This is not reform. It's got all the substance of wet cotton candy.

I am really hoping that Reid has tasked some more creative thinkers than Carper on a solution to the public option issue. They'd be far better off just scrapping this whole Rube Goldbergian contraption, pass the insurance reforms and pray that they'll work and then spend the $900 billion on expanding Medicaid and Medicare.

Or, getting serious about passing real, substantive reform in form of a public option that provides serious competition to the insurance companies through reconciliation. But don't try to pass this weak shit tea off on us as reform.

For more discussion, see slinkerwink's diary.

I used to work in an independently owned toy store in a very nice upper class town.

A few Halloweens ago a mom was trying to decide on a costume for her toddler. We had two options, both easy pull-overs (poncho style) with a hood and a pocket.

She holds them both up and asks me "What do you think? Is the dragon to boy-ish for her?"

Now, honestly, I loved the dragon costume. It had the cutest little wings. So I'm honest with her: "I don't think so, I would have wanted to be the dragon when I was little."

Her response: "Well, you're goth, so there's no surprise there."

*blink*

Ok, now, yes, I consider myself goth, and therefore wear a lot of black, but I was in my work clothes with were always nice jeans or dress pants and a colorful shirt. O.o

Dear Random Lady WalMart Shopper,

Whining at the nice man in the blue shirt like a toddler who is past her naptime isn't a nice thing to do. When he patiently explains to you that the coupon you are trying to use is no longer valid because the price on said item has come down yet again (it was some leftover Halloween thing) that is not your cue to start whining louder and harder at him about how it's unfair that they brought the price down AGAIN and now you cannot use your coupon. Like the man tried to tell you, it's actually cheaper now. Continuing to whine will not get you what you want.

After walking away from you as quickly as I could, I was dismayed to hear your voice again down in the food aisles. That woman that you cornered, demanding to know if she worked at WalMart? If you'd listened to her instead of once again whining, you would have heard her say that she is a shelf stocker for another company, but that she could probably help you find what you are looking for since she is there quite often and knows the lay of the land. When she told you that she didn't think they had any sugar free cereal bars, but she'd be happy to help you look, that was NOT your cue to start whining at her about how all the sugar free stuff should be in the same aisle. First of all, that's not how it works at most stores I've been in, and secondly, as this worker already told you SHE DOES NOT WORK FOR WALMART! She was nice enough to help you out, but she didn't have to! Whining and snapping at her was completely inappropriate.

No love,
another random lady WalMart shopper.

how does it feel: annoyed

http://rss.dailykos.com/~r/dailykos/index/~3/crHDL1QQ0xs/-Tom-Coburn-Continues-To-Oppose-Funding-For-Wounded-Veterans-And-Their-Families

On a day set aside to honor all military veterans, let's take a moment to remember Tom Coburn (R-OK) -- no, not for his military service, because he really lucked out on the draft lottery in 1969 -- but for his one-man roadblock against:

... assistance to caregivers of veterans, to improve the provision of health care to veterans, and for other purposes.

... otherwise known as the Caregiver and Veterans Services Act of 2009, that can't get to the Senate floor because of the hold placed on the bill by Coburn.

Because while Coburn may wave a flag and have a properly pinned lapel when it suits him, he's not interested in the pleas from:

The American Legion, Veterans of Foreign Wars, Disabled American Veterans, AmVets, Paralyzed Veterans of America, Blinded Veterans Association, Military Order of the Purple Heart, Vietnam Veterans of America, Iraq and Afghanistan Veterans of America and Jewish War Veterans, plus the Military Officers Association of America, National Military Family Association and Wounded Warrior Project.

... to get this bill passed, even though:

Thousands of disabled veterans with serious medical conditions and the family members who care for them are counting on this additional support.  [...]

Steve Robertson, legislative director for The American Legion, said delaying the bill hurts families caring for severely wounded combat veterans who would benefit from the stipends, health care, counseling and respite care that would be provided to caregivers in the bill.

“For a lot of family caregivers, delay is costing them their jobs and their savings. It’s having a big impact,” he said.

So, what is Coburn's objection to the bill? He hates "the idea of creating new benefits without paying for them" and wants the funding to come out of the economic stimulus money.

Yesterday, Harry Reid (D-NV) called Coburn's stance "illogical" given that he never raised any objections "when we were spending a trillion dollars on the war in Iraq."

Which is a good point. One that Reid should make while making a motion to proceed to consideration of the bill, forcing Coburn to publicly filibuster against benefits for veterans, rather than continuing to allow him to hide like a coward behind his anonymous hold.

Update: From a VoteVets.org press release:

Over 13,000 petition signatures, raised in a matter of less than a week, were delivered to Senator Tom Coburn, calling on him to end his hold on a veterans spending bill.  The petition, sponsored by VoteVets.org and retired General Wesley Clark's “Securing America,” calls on Coburn to end his hold on S. 1963, "The Caregivers and Veterans Omnibus Health Services Act of 2009."  

We the undersigned call on you to stop this disgraceful move of holding up some very important veteran legislation, S. 1963, "The Caregivers and Veterans Omnibus Health Services Act of 2009." While this is a legal move, we think it is morally wrong for you to hold up any veterans benefits during a time when our men and women in uniform are giving so much to our country.

You are denying veterans a myriad of benefits and services ...

Now is not the time to play petty political games with our veterans. What you are doing is shameful, and those of us who are veterans and support veterans will not stand for it.

http://rss.dailykos.com/~r/dailykos/index/~3/Q89EP2I6Wqs/-Senate-Preparing-to-Act-on-HCR:-Public-Option-Back-on-the-Chopping-Block

Reid has put the House healthcare reform bill on the Senate calendar to begin the Senate's action on the bill. CBO scores on the proposed Senate bill, which melds the HELP and SFC bills, are expected at the end of this week.

Reid filed a motion to introduce the bill on Monday, Nov. 16. Anticipating a Republican objection, the bill would be pushed onto the Senate calendar.

"A motion to proceed to the bill would be in order the next legislative day," said Reid spokesman Jim Manley....

Reid's action late Tuesday sets up a critical vote next week on a motion to proceed to the bill. Such a motion would require 60 votes to succeed — an important, early test of the Democratic caucus's unity on procedural votes. Several senators who caucus as Democrats have expressed skepticism about the bill, while others have expressed a willingness to support procedural votes. Senate GOP Leader Mitch McConnell (Ky.) and National Republican Senatorial Campaign Committee Chairman John Cornyn (Texas) have both warned Democrats that they will target any senators who support procedural votes on the bill.

Republicans are going to target weak Democratic Senators anyway, so that threat is utterly meaningless and will be a completely unacceptable excuse for spinelessness on the part of any Dem.

Adding to the problem of scared Dems is the Dems who insist upon being catered to. Lieberman has now been joined by Ben Nelson in a vow to block a bill with a public option. (H/T TWI)

"Well, first of all, it [the House bill] has more than a robust public option, it's got a totally government-run plan, the costs are extraordinary associated with it, it increases taxes in a way that will not pass in the Senate and I could go on and on and on," Nelson said in an interview that is part of ABC News' Subway Series with Jonathan Karl.

"Faced with a decision about whether or not to move a bill that is bad, I won't vote to move it," he added. "For sure."

Note that Nelson didn't go quite as far as Lieberman in saying he'd block any bill with a public option, leaving himself room to do what he thinks his role is--negotiate something else. But his arguments are just as disingenuous as Lieberman's. The public option is not government run--it will operate on premiums paid into it, just like any insurance, after the initial set up investment. The tax increases on the wealthy--make that very wealthy--in the House bill are far more equitable than the excise tax on high-value insurance plans in the Senate Finance bill. So here's Ben Nelson, sticking up for insurance companies and the wealthy.

All this thanks to the stunning display of leadership by Reid and concerted arm twisting and lobbying by the White House after Lieberman pulled his shit. Yeah, right. Reconciliation, anyone?

http://feeds.theonion.com/~r/theonion/weekly/~3/ucbiXjQwXWc/30420

http://www.theonion.com/content/node/30420?utm_source=onion_rss_daily

PALO ALTO, CA--Scientists insist the collider is important to study of the universe, as no one knows for certain what happens when monkeys collide.

http://feeds.theonion.com/~r/theonion/weekly/~3/nLI1-3llCa0/whats_worrying_our_parents

http://www.theonion.com/content/statshot/whats_worrying_our_parents?utm_source=onion_rss_daily

My husband and I have been experimenting with some fudge recipes. We've got a basic fudge and an orange creamsicle-like fudge down. I'd really like to experiment further with flavors (such as chocolate-mint). I'm fairly positive I can simply alter the flavoring added into the orange recipe to get the different flavors I want.

My problem is that I really like the swirled fudge you can find in the stores. How does one accomplish this task? Doesn't the fudge set up too quickly to make the colored/flavored part seperately from the chocolate part?

We only have one sauce pan at the moment and I'm not sure I'd want to juggle not scorching two pans of fudge anyway.

Thanks!

how does it feel: bored

There's a sale on butternut, acorn, buttercup, and spaghetti squash at the supermarket and I'm interested in adding some variety to my diet. Does anyone have some tried and true recipes for these types of squash, and the best way to economize on the whole gourd (i.e. using skin and seeds and all)? Thanks!

http://rss.dailykos.com/~r/dailykos/index/~3/OzHLYjB2BrE/-Economic-Outrage-du-Jour

Yves Smith at naked capitalism asks "Do Businesses Hate Their Workers?":

In America, it isn’t hard to answer the question in the headline "yes." The oft recited, "Our employees are our greatest asset" is pure Orwellian prattle; most companies treat employees as liabilities, doing everything they can to minimize labor costs, getting rid of workers whenever possible. And this now extends well up into the management ranks, with most people who are still on the corporate meal ticket assigned responsibilities that would have constituted 1.5 to two jobs a decade ago.

And before readers argue that this is a necessary response to globalization, the evidence does not support that view. If companies were simply responding to tougher competition (in this case, lower cost suppliers from overseas), you’d expect to pressure on wages AND profits. Instead, we’ve seen wage stagnation (save at the very top) with (pre bust) record profits.

If you look at past post-war expansion periods, the vast majority of GDP growth went to labor, in the form of increased hiring and higher wages. The post war average (pre the last upturn) was close to 60%; the low was 55%. The jobless recovery lived up to its billing, with under 30% of GDP gains going to workers. By contrast, the portion of GDP growth that went to profits was an all-time record.

masaccio at Firedoglake chimes in:

On Friday, a group of Trade Associations ran a full-page ad in the New York Times demonstrating their loathing for the employees of their members:

   

Expensive new mandates on businesses will result in lost jobs, lower wages, less flexibility and higher health care costs.

Let me translate that from scary talk to plain English. Business will dump every last cent of the costs of health care on employees. No business will give up a single penny of its profits to keep its workers healthy. Anyone who wants health care has to pay for it at whatever price the insurance companies want to charge, and business will cooperate in shifting costs to workers. And there is nothing you can do about it. The profits we suck out of your labor belongs to us, and you don’t get any.

There used to be an unspoken deal between labor and capital that profits from productivity increases would be split, wages would rise as productivity increased. That deal was broken in 1980, and since then, capital has taken all the money, at least the part that didn’t go to pay bonuses on Wall Street. Wages have been stagnant.

And every day in every way, we're told this is the natural order of things, not to be tampered with if we know what's good for us.

http://rss.dailykos.com/~r/dailykos/index/~3/vl5nsi5cWhY/-Three-Versions-of-Financial-Reform

There are currently three rough versions of a financial reform bill, the Obama administration's, a House bill, and one in the Senate. The latter may be the most comprehensive:

The Dodd proposal would likewise strip the existing regulators of their consumer-watchdog role, putting that authority in a new, separate body, the Consumer Financial Protection Agency (CFPA). In this Dodd, Frank and Geithner agree that a single agency should not be responsible for both ensuring bank stability (read: profitability) and protecting consumers. The CFPA would have rule-making, supervisory and enforcement authority to hunt abuses in lending and fee-setting. The FDIC would continue to exist as an insurer of deposits, while the Fed would continue to control monetary policy and oversee national financial stability.

Currently, there are a hodgepodge of overlapping regulatory agencies in the financial sector at national and regional levels. They range from the FDIC to the Securities and Exchange Commission to 50 separate state insurance boards, just to name a few. Where the domain of the proposed CFPA will begin and end in that mix, along with how effective it will be in actually protecting consumer, will be determined by civil service turf battles, no small amount of fascinating political horse trading, and plenty of unsightly sausage making.

http://feeds.penny-arcade.com/~r/pa-mainsite/~3/rB06h0EE1d0/

New Comic: The Minutia-men

http://feeds.theonion.com/~r/theonion/weekly/~3/1OHjd5FRKEQ/nicolas_cage_broke

http://www.theonion.com/content/infograph/nicolas_cage_broke?utm_source=onion_rss_daily

Owing $6.3 million in back taxes and facing financial ruin, Nicolas Cage, star of such hit films as Ghost Rider,...

http://rss.dailykos.com/~r/dailykos/index/~3/n0VnIQ2cntw/-President-Obama-salutes-fallen-at-Fort-Hood

What better way to start off Veterans Day than with President Obama's eloquent speech at yesterday's memorial service for those killed at Fort Hood last week.

And the reviews are in:

John Dickerson:

President Obama's speech at Fort Hood, Texas, was a small masterpiece—less than 15 minutes—in part because it was so modest. The president had great material and he knew not to get in its way.

Less than three minutes into the speech, the president was telling the story of each of the 13 people who had died. The news has been full of every last detail about the shooter. Obama corrected that balance. If the shooter committed the ultimate act of selfishness, then the president took it as his task to bear witness to the selflessness and hard work of the shooter's victims.

Marc Ambinder:

Today, at Ft. Hood. I guarantee: they'll be teaching this one in rhetoric classes. It was that good. My gloss won't do it justice. Yes, I'm having a Chris Matthews-chill-running-up-my-leg moment, but sometimes, the man, the moment and the words come together and meet the challenge. Obama had to lead a nation's grieving; he had to try and address the thorny issues of Islam and terrorism; to be firm; to express the spirit of America, using familiar, comforting tropes in a way that didn't sound trite.

Chuck Todd:

That's going to be a speech that's remembered and quoted from for quite some time; struck a balance of commander and consoler; not easy.

Taegan Goddard:

President Obama's speech at Fort Hood may go down as one of his best ever.

The president was able to balance his duties as Commander in Chief while consoling a nation in the aftermath of a terrible tragedy. That he was able to do this while taking away the focus on the shooter's religion was even more impressive.

It was one of those speeches that makes you especially proud to be an American.

The text of the speech can be read in full beneath the fold or at the White House website.

http://journal.neilgaiman.com/2009/11/murder-re-enacted.html

The Graveyard Book just won a literary award, which never gets old, and this one came with a medal, and also with a cheque. I thought, Hm. I have to get myself something with the cheque and I have to do it immediately, otherwise it will simply vanish into the day to day bank account of life, and I will never look at anything and go "Ah, that is the thing I got with my Graveyard Book Award."