What A Spine Looks Like

Yesterday, Democratic Rep. Alan Grayson of Orlando told it like it is:

The usual pearl-clutching and faux outrage began, by the usual suspects who I'm sure believe that talk about "death panels" and "pulling the plug on Grandma" is perfectly acceptable. Not to mention "cut and run," saying that the healthcare bill tells seniors to "drop dead," and of course, "You lie!"

But fortunately for them, Alan Grayson has issued an apology. The best. Apology. Ever.

Calling them out rather than backtracking or cowering--it's really not that difficult.

A Big Primary In The 21st

I just gained a big incentive to register to vote in Tennessee rather than Missouri next year, since there's apparently going to be an exciting Democratic primary in my State Senate district. Bass Berry & Sims associate and longtime Democratic activist Jeff Yarbro announced this morning that he will challenge Doug Henry for the seat:

From the announcement:

Too often, our elected representatives have spent more time playing partisan politics than supporting our schools, creating jobs, fighting crime, and improving our health. The Tennessee General Assembly is failing to address either the short-term economic crisis or the long-term challenges facing our state.

As a state senator, I will strive to end the sideshow politics of recent years and start finding the real solutions to the problems confronting citizens across the state. It’s time for the legislature to get back to the people’s business. We need fewer slogans, and more solutions.

Senator Douglas Henry, Jr. has served the 21st district with dignity and distinction since 1970. I honor his commitment to the state. That same desire to serve Tennessee compels me to commence this campaign at such a critical time. As the senator for the 21st district, I would work to continue Senator Henry’s legacy of safeguarding the financial stability of our state and fighting for Tennessee’s children.

First, to get a couple of concerns out of the way--it's been pointed out that Doug Henry has been in there a long time, has a solid base of support (the Republicans in the district don't hate him) and thoroughly beat his last round of challengers. But I've got a hunch this is going to be VERY different. For one thing, this has the look of a campaign operation that has been quietly gathering support well before the announcement. Already this afternoon, we've seen the list of supporters for his first fundraiser, which includes a bunch of big names with big money. You wouldn't see this if it weren't a serious challenge. Second, I've already gotten two emails this morning--the announcement from the campaign and a media press release. His campaign is clearly already organized and ready to go. This isn't going to be just some liberal activist running and hoping for votes to materialize without putting in the heavy lifting--this is for real.

I also don't buy the idea that Yarbro would run only to be re-districted out if the Republicans win in 2010 (and that's still an "if," it hasn't happened yet!). The only re-districting that's going to happen in the 21st District would actually work in a progressive candidate's favor. What will happen IF the Republicans win is that Belle Meade and possibly Bellevue will be cut off and put into Jack Johnson's district (or maybe put Bellevue into the 22nd District and make it a little more difficult for Tim Barnes, it all depends on how much they want to divide up Davidson County). They'll do that in order to neutralize the Democratic establishment in Belle Meade while making the 23rd into a very wealthy Republican super-district. What would be left is a district based primarily around Green Hills--necessarily more progressive.

I also question the idea that many Republicans would cross over to vote for Henry, taking advantage of the open primary system. The Republicans in Belle Meade and elsewhere may really admire Henry, but are they really more concerned about the legislature than the gubernatorial race? Which would be more important to them--saving a Democrat in the Senate or turning out for Bill Haslam in a desperate attempt to avoid a Zach Wamp nomination for governor?

But we'll cross those bridges when we get to them.

As a resident of the 21st District, I'm looking forward to supporting Jeff Yarbro. Doug Henry has served the district well in his time, his outdated and misogynistic views on rape notwithstanding. But we're never going to beat the younger, more hardline Republicans without fresh blood and fresh ideas. Jeff is brilliant and energetic, and is just the person to kick some life into the party.

I'd met him before, but the first time I really spoke to him was this past summer, at a pro-healthcare rally outside Lamar! and Corker's Nashville offices. He didn't have to be there--he's someone who could have supported from the sidelines or just cut a check, and everyone would have understood given his position. But he wanted to be there, to actively show his support for healthcare reform. It was very admirable and showed his level of commitment. As a candidate and as a Senator, he'll put in 110% into everything he does.

However this turns out, it's going to shake up my neighborhood. And I can't wait!

In re Jim Cooper

In continuation of the ongoing saga from here, here, here, and here...

Honestly, I don't quite know what to say on this topic. There's a very personal element involved. For me, this isn't like criticizing Ford--I interned for his campaign yet he doesn't know me from Adam. But I also interned in Cooper's DC office, and he still knows who I am even though that was more than three years ago. It was the best summer experience I could have hoped for, from the first day when I was briefing him on an article on the new (at the time) House Majority Leader John Boehner and wasn't sure how to pronounce the name, leading to me blurting out "Boner" to my Congressman. But I recovered and learned so much that summer.

Against that backdrop it's hard to criticize, let alone get behind a primary challenge.

Nor do I disagree with my fellow bloggers in believing that such a challenge would not work. A primary challenge would require an organic movement but a heck of a lot of money. Right now, we have neither, and no outside group is going to make them magically materialize. Besides that, we'd still have to contend with our unique approach to politics in Tennessee. I may be an unapologetic partisan hack, but I understand that most voters are not. They like Cooper even if they disagree with him.

Although (and I'm going off-topic here for a bit) I have to disagree with this notion that we should NEVER support primaries, because we should be focusing on going after the Republicans rather than going after "one of our own", and because we would run the risk of giving the Republicans a shot at the seat. What's the point of holding primaries then, if not to gauge the views of "our own"? Wouldn't it save time and money for us to just allow the incumbent to hold the seat until he or she retires, so as not to risk them having to defend themselves? The reason we hold primaries, as I understand it, is specifically so that the incumbent has to answer to their base every two years. And here it wouldn't lead to a huge Republican opening--the Davidson County GOP is too busy arguing among themselves to mount that kind of challenge.

But (and I'm back on-topic now), we're not realistically dealing with that situation here. So I'm not calling for a revolution on the streets of Nashville, because it would be at best useless and at worst counter-productive.

(And now that I've said that, if this post gets on Post Politics, I'm pretty sure that Kleinheider will frame the rest of it as "That crazy shrill liberal Ilissa Gold is calling for a revolution on the streets of Nashville, complete with Jim Cooper's head on a pike." Hopefully enough people will click through to realize I'm saying the exact opposite.)

ANYWAY...

Having acknowledged the above, we still need to answer the question of where we go from here.

Is it such a horrible thing to ask a simple question of your elected representatives? Should we not even ask that question for fear that it may make us look fractured, that the Republicans might take advantage of that perception? The tea-baggers aren't afraid of that, so why are we so paralyzed?

Cooper will vote for whatever finalized healthcare bill comes up in the end--just like he voted for the stimulus after crowing against it. There's no real incentive for him to vote against either one. But what I would like him to do in the meantime is to stop trying to fracture the Democratic Party. I know he desperately wants his own bill to be the one under consideration--but does he have to wish for that at the expense of the bills we have now? Couldn't he work to make HR 3200 the best bill we can get, rather than going on TV to serve up warmed-over 1994 talking points?

I'm ready for him to fully answer the question of whether or not he supports the public option. And I don't want to hear that there are 18 different versions of the public option. We have the definition in HR 3200, which is the main bill that is under consideration by the House. I want to know if he supports that. It's a simple yes-or-no question. Jim Cooper is a smart, thoughtful Congressman who is not given to reducing his answers to sound bytes, and I appreciate that. But any answer to that question besides yes or no is tap-dancing around the issue.

To those of you who think it would be the worst possible thing in the world to challenge Cooper even if you disagree with him, that only patronizing carpet-baggers would entertain such a notion--well, what are you doing to help him see that the Fifth District does want real healthcare reform, and wants him now? To the other bloggers, I know the three of you will get more readers in an hour tomorrow than I will all week. Are you calling up Cooper's office to ask him to support the public option, and are you telling your readers to do so as well?

Here, I'll start. If you're reading this and you want a public option, the phone number is 202-225-4311. Ask him to support the public option--better yet, ask him to support HR 3200. Keep calling and don't hang up until you get a good answer.

Because, apparently, that's all we have left. If a primary is not going to work, then all we can do is pressure our elected representatives to vote according to the wishes of their district. And that is of everyone in the district, not just HCA, BlueCross BlueShield, the Frist family, and Belle Meade donors.

Somehow, I don't believe that's a revolutionary concept. I don't think it will lead to a fracturing of the Democratic Party in Tennessee and doom, DOOM us in the state legislature elections next year. It doesn't mean I don't like Jim Cooper or think of him as my enemy--no, I have an immense amount of respect for him and for all he has accomplished. What I want him to do is to be the best Congressman he can be, and that includes listening to what the district wants. We can point to surveys all we want, but the only way to drive the point home is to make our voices heard.

All I know is, if we can't primary him but are unwilling to push the issues for fear of looking fractured or looking like carpet-baggers, then we're going to end up with exactly what we deserve in 2010.

What The Senate Really Needs Is More "Yo Mama" Jokes

Two instances highlighting the issues of gender in the healthcare debate. First, the Best. Exchange. EVER in the Senate. Debating John Kyl's amendment to strike language in the Senate healthcare bill requiring employers to cover certain services, basic maternity care among them:

Sen. Debbie Stabenow (D-MI) argued that insurers must be required to cover basic maternity care. (In several states there are no such requirements.)

"I don't need maternity care," Kyl said. "So requiring that on my insurance policy is something that I don't need and will make the policy more expensive."

Stabenow interrupted: "I think your mom probably did."

The amendment was thankfully defeated.

Oh, but I thought the Republican "pro-life" crowd supported mothers and families?

Meanwhile, in California, a story that so painfully (literally) highlights the need for reform. It makes my chest hurt just to think about it:

When Daly City resident Rosalinda Miran-Ramirez woke up one morning in April to find her left breast bleeding from the nipple, she panicked. The shirt she had been sleeping in was saturated with blood. So her husband took her to the emergency room at Seton Medical Center.

"In my mind I know something serious is going on," said Miran-Ramirez. "I need to see a doctor."

Doctors found a tumor and initially told her she had breast cancer. A biopsy later proved that assumption false; the tumor was benign.

But Miran-Ramirez said the real shock came when her insurance company, Blue Shield of California HMO, which had initially approved the claim for the emergency room visit, reversed course and sent her a new bill three months later requiring her to pay the total charges for that visit: $2,791.00.

Why? Documents from Blue Shield indicate the company had reviewed the case and determined Miran-Ramirez "reasonably should have known that an emergency did not exist."

You know, we've studied the "reasonable person" standard in law school quite a bit. And I can say with a fair degree of certainty that if a reasonable person wakes up to discover his or her nipple bleeding for no discernible reason, they're going to get their butt down to the emergency room as fast as possible. And if the insurance company initially approved the claim before denying it, then that indicates that they understood what an "emergency" means very well, and were just looking for an excuse to deny the claim.

Who wants to take bets on whether a man who woke up to find his "package" bleeding would have been treated the same way?

Feel Good Friday--Jewish Mother Edition

Sick of calling your Jewish mother to say hi, only to be subjected to an interrogation worthy of the CIA or Mossad? Just sign up for Twitteleh!

Although, the friend who sent this to me and I agree that the third question you have to answer should not be "Are you wearing a sweater?" but rather "Are you getting married yet?"

Inscribed For Blessing In The Book Of Jackassery

After the epic fail that was the 9/12 march on Washington, Glenn Beck needed a new publicity stunt. So he's calling on you to pray for the Republic:

Sept 28. Lets make it a day of Fast and Prayer for the Republic. Spread the word.Let us walk in the founders steps.

September 28. What's significant about that day? Why does it ring a bell with me?

Oh yeah--it's Yom Kippur, the Jewish Day of Atonement and, along with Rosh Hashanah, the other High Holy Day on the Jewish calendar. It's a day when Jews all over the world have to atone for our sins from the previous year by spending the whole day....wait for it...praying and fasting!

One thing I'm wondering--to which "founders" is he referring? While George Washington and Thomas Jefferson were men of faith, I'm pretty sure they didn't observe Yom Kippur. And back in the days of the Biblical patriarchs, there was certainly no Republic for which to fast.

But it's all terribly convenient for Beck, isn't it? Maybe he honestly didn't recognize the significance of the date, but regardless, he'll now get to claim that MILLIONS of people all over the world fasted and prayed on that date after he called for it!

Or maybe he did understand it, and is simply trying to draw a parallel between Yom Kippur and his own holiday. The analogy breaks down, though, because Yom Kippur is a time to repent for your OWN sins and acknowledge your OWN moral failings, rather than pointing fingers at other people and praying for harm to come to them because you disagree with their political views.

So, here's what I'd like to say to anyone considering taking part in Glenn Beck's new holiday. If you're going to do it right, then you don't get to do anything you enjoy doing that day. You don't get to go on blogs or Twitter and talk about how awesome you are for fasting and how eeeevil the libs are. No, you have to sit in synagogue (or an old-school church, but certainly not a mega-church with a Starbucks and a gym and an indoor playground) ALL DAY. You have to sit there through morning services, complete with the rabbi's boring sermon, then you have to sit through the Congregants' Hour, the afternoon service, the Yizkor memorial service, and then finally the concluding service. And really, you'd best go to services on Sunday night too, otherwise people will talk. That's when you sing the Kol Nidre atonement prayer--it's really pretty, only you have to sing it three times, reeeeeally slowly (EDIT: To appease the nit-picky jerk in the comments, I will point out that it strictly is about vows). You have to be both repentant and bored on Yom Kippur. You'll have to take off work or school for this endeavor, and be told that it's really not as important as Christmas or Easter. You can't half-ass the fasting part either; you're not even allowed to drink water. And most importantly, you have to actually be sorry for what you personally have done in the last year, not just sorry that this nation is now being run by a bunch of SOCIALISTS.

(H/t)

The First Straw Poll Of The 5770 Election Cycle

I briefly came back to Nashville this weekend to celebrate Rosh Hashanah, the Jewish New Year, with my family. The rabbi gave a fairly non-offensive sermon on the Reform Jewish view of healthcare (everyone should have access to adequate coverage) which nonetheless still managed to offend a few people. 1,000 Jews, 1,001 opinions, etc. But on Saturday night, it was time to leave the spiritual world behind and head back into the political mud-pit, so I headed down to Murfreesboro for the Rutherford County Democratic Party gubernatorial straw poll, the first gubernatorial straw poll of this election cycle.

Before I analyze the results, I just want to give a big congratulations to the RCDP and the MTSU College Democrats for what was a GREAT event. The dinner was sold-out, the program was well-executed and organized, and the crowd was energized and fired up. The media was there to cover it, as were a few other bloggers as the party had graciously offered five free blogger passes. Oh, and they had bowls on the table for people to donate to Ty Cobb (The Sequel) for the District 62 special election, and reminded everyone to fill out a form before donating this time. In short, it was an extremely well-done event, and I'm sure it will be an even bigger event in election cycles to come.

And now the results:

1. Sen. Roy Herron - 119

2. Sen. Jim Kyle - 81

3. Kim McMillan - 58

4. Mike McWherter - 32

5. Ward Cammack - 13

6. Undecided - 12

What this means, the short answer: Not a whole lot. It's still a year out, and straw polls are hardly scientific.

What this means, the long answer: I was rather surprised by McWherter's poor showing. The main criticism of straw poll-type events is that the results are unreliable because campaigns can just bring in a ton of supporters to skew the results. Yet it did seem, to me at least, that McWherter did have quite a few supporters there. I really want to give him the benefit of the doubt, especially given that we know he can raise the money, but he does seem rather awkward on the stump.

Otherwise, the results were not terribly surprising. Roy Herron and Jim Kyle both got strong crowd reactions by throwing out different types of red meat. Herron, befitting his background as a pastor, discussed fighting the notion that people of faith can only be Republicans. He got good applause from the crowd for noting that Republicans would tell you that Jesus did not ride into Jerusalem on a donkey, but on an elephant.

Kyle, meanwhile, went for the Republican jugular, saying that he wanted to remind the GOP candidates who seem to be advocating secession (psst, Zach Wamp, I think he's talking about you!) that Tennessee is in fact a part of the United States of America, and if you feel you have to pander to the most extremist elements in your base, then how can you be governor of everyone in the state? One interesting note about Kyle--his campaign treasurer, Andy Womack, is apparently a big deal in Rutherford County politics. While Kyle could arguably win a low-turnout primary just on Memphis-area turnout, this could be an indication that he's not relying solely on his home turf. More power to him if so.

McMillan had a fairly strong showing given the fact that she did not seem to bring in as many supporters as the other candidates. She certainly showed she can't be counted out just yet. And Cammack showed that he's incredibly smart and has very specific plans for what he would do; unfortunately, being a wonk does not necessarily translate into being a politician. I think he'd make a great Economic Commissioner, but he's just not a great campaigner.

In addition to the candidate speeches, Congressmen Bart Gordon and Lincoln Davis also spoke. Bart Gordon's sole purpose seemed to be to introduce Davis, which was strange considering that it's Gordon's district. But for a Blue Dog, Lincoln Davis can certainly throw out red meat to the base. He may be conservative but he certainly has the populist edge. He got the biggest applause of the night for saying that whenever Republicans claim that only Democrats run up the debt, we can honestly respond with, "You lie!" Even if you disagree with him on issues (and I certainly do), he at least understands that being a conservative Democrat involves actually being a proud Democrat in addition to a conservative, and you have to respect that.

P.S. Who did I vote for? I'm not telling. But it was between two and I flipped a coin. There are things I like and dislike about each of the candidates--while I'm impressed with all of them in different ways, I'm still looking for that deciding factor.

Feel Good Friday--Evil Commercial Edition

This has got to be the most evil commercial ever made. Of course, it comes from New York, where it was made by some mean Yankees. It starts out so cute and sweet, and then...

What kind of sick person would make a sign crash down and wake up the poor sleeping baby animals? Baby animals IN PAJAMAS no less!

It's ok babies, you can come have your slumber party in my apartment. I'll protect you from the sirens and the construction and the once-a-day car crash on Kingshighway.

Obama Wishes You A Happy New Year

With Rosh Hashanah starting tomorrow at sundown, President Obama has released a New Year greeting:

Money quote:

"At the dawn of this New Year, let us rededicate ourselves to that work. Let us reject the impulse to harden ourselves to others’ suffering, and instead make a habit of empathy – of recognizing ourselves in each other and extending our compassion to those in need.

"Let us resist prejudice, intolerance, and indifference in whatever forms they may take -- let us stand up strongly to the scourge of anti-Semitism, which is still prevalent in far too many corners of our world.

Shana Tova to you too Mr. President!

Did Max Baucus Achieve A Bipartisan Victory?

Mike Madden of Salon argues that he did with his "centrist" healthcare plan, just not in the way he intended:

In the end, after months and months of negotiations aimed at winning bipartisan support for a healthcare reform bill in the Senate Finance Committee, Max Baucus was all alone on Wednesday as he announced his draft proposal. He stood, looking lonely, in front of a backdrop that could have accommodated his entire so-called Gang of Six -- if, that is, the talks had worked out. As it was, he showed up as a Gang of One. But don't tell Baucus his work had come to naught. "No Republican has offered his or her support at this moment," he admitted. "But I think by the time we get the final passage in this committee, you'll find Republican support. This is a bill that should enjoy broad support."

Right now, though, it doesn't. Republicans -- including the ones Baucus has been painstakingly courting -- bashed it mercilessly. "This is the most complicated bill any of us have ever worked on," Enzi said in a statement. Grassley, whom Baucus wooed even as he asked Iowa Republicans for help defeating the healthcare bill, complained that no one would guarantee that Democrats would agree meekly to swallow whatever the Gang of Six came up with: "An overriding issue for some time has been the fact that members of the Democratic leadership haven't made a commitment to back a broad bipartisan bill through the entire process." GOP leader Mitch McConnell dismissed the plan outright: "Only in Washington would anyone think [it] makes sense, especially in this economy."

Many Democrats were even harsher.

Baucus has created bipartisan unity--in agreement that his bill is a big steaming pile of a word I probably shouldn't say out loud.

And perhaps in doing so, Baucus has done Democrats a favor. By unintentionally exposing the fact that Republicans are not getting on board no matter how "bipartisan" the bill is or how many concessions the Democrats make, it seems that Democrats are now finally, FINALLY, waking up the game the Republicans are playing. If they're not going to support the bill regardless of what's in it, then why not pass the best bill we can--one that includes a public option at the very least--and let them go on record against it? Why must we "get the Republicans on board" when they clearly don't want to be on board?

Of course, there were plenty of people who could have told, and tried to tell, these more conservative Democrats that this would be the result. We've wasted valuable time coming to this conclusion. But maybe now that the Republicans' hand has been revealed to the point where you'd have to willfully look away in order to not see what it is, we can remember who holds the majority in Congress. It's not too late, but the clock is ticking.

Mary Travers, 1936-2009

Mary Travers of the folk band Peter, Paul, and Mary has passed away at 72 after battling leukemia for several years.

Even though Peter, Paul, and Mary were obviously well before my time, their songs hold a special place in my heart for one particular reason--they're all "camp songs." Hearing their songs triggers memories of sitting around a campfire or in the open-air chapel (this was a Jewish hippie camp, which unsurprisingly played a large role in my formative years) and listening to someone play "Puff the Magic Dragon," "If I Had a Hammer," "Blowin' In The Wind," "Where Have All The Flowers Gone," and of course towards the end of camp, "Leaving On A Jet Plane" on the guitar and everyone singing along. We sang the same songs year in and year out and they never got old. The songs bring to mind, quite simply, a simpler and more carefree time in my life.

R.I.P. in Honalee, Mary.

NJDC Condemns Willie Herenton

Just in case you were wondering where the National Jewish Democratic Council stands on the Willie Herenton-Steve Cohen primary:

“While NJDC does not usually speak out regarding Democratic primaries, we are deeply concerned by the developments in the congressional campaign in Tennessee’s 9th district between Representative Steve Cohen (D-TN) and Mayor Willie W. Herenton,” said Ira N. Forman, NJDC’s CEO. “Herenton’s divisive rhetoric is unacceptable in a Democratic primary or anywhere in our political discourse.”

“Herenton’s apparent campaign strategy and deeply unfortunate, racially-charged comments are the type of tactics that were soundly rejected with the election of President Barack Obama last November,” said Forman. “Herenton must change his tone dramatically, and he owes the citizens of Tennessee’s 9th district—and their member of Congress—a higher level of discourse.”

While there's not really any news here, it does make you wonder if national organizations are going to be less hesitant to get involved in the 9th District this time around, knowing the strong level of support Cohen has.

Next Time Someone Calls Lamar! A "Moderate"

Just remember that he, along with the doctor who was so brilliant he could diagnose medical conditions via grainy black-and-white video, Bill Frist, voted in 2006 to kick victims of domestic abuse when they're down and allow insurance companies to deny them coverage based on their "pre-existing condition," and could be poised to do it again:

In DC and eight states, health insurance companies can deny coverage to victims of domestic violence because they have a "pre-existing condition."

While that statement alone is gasp-worthy, the story gets even more appalling: this issue had a chance to be ended - once and for all - in the Senate HELP Committee in 2006. At that time, an amendment was introduced to the Health Insurance Marketplace Modernization and Affordability Act of 2006 that would have forced insurance companies to stop ignoring state laws that provided protection for victims of domestic violence, specifically when it came to denying them insurance coverage.

Ten Republican Senators voted against it, including Senators Alexander, Burr, Ensign, Enzi, Frist, Gregg, Hatch, Isakson, Roberts and Sessions.

Denying a domestic violence victim coverage over something she (or he, I suppose) could not control amounts to nothing more than kicking them while they're down, punishing them all over again. It's not something a society with any modicum of compassion can allow. The only way you could possibly justify this is if a) you're an insurance executive or b) you believe that domestic violence victims deserved it or had it coming. And honestly, I have no doubt that a few of the so-called tea-partiers fall into that latter category.

Those ten votes killed the amendment in committee. Fortunately, there seems to be movement towards getting that provision back into the healthcare bill. But remember that Lamar! is no moderate where an insurance company's bottom line is concerned.

Metro Passes Non-Discrimination Ordinance

As of tonight, with the third reading and passage of the non-discrimination ordinance, the city of Metropolitan Nashville officially does not discriminate on the basis of sexual orientation or gender identity! What was so controversial six years ago that it failed on the tie-breaking vote of the vice-mayor now passes by a comfortable margin, an indication of how far Nashville has come. I'm just kind of sad that it all seems to have happened since I left for school.

The "Aye" Votes:

Greg Adkins, Buddy Baker, Megan Barry, Karen Bennett, Erik Cole, Emily Evans, Tim Garrett, Erica Gilmore, Frank Harrison, Jason Holleman, Walter Hunt, Mike Jameson, Darren Jernigan, Kristine LaLonde, Edith Langster, Lonnell Matthews Jr., Jerry Maynard, Sean McGuire, Bo Mitchell, Sandra Moore, Pam Murray, Anna Page, Ronnie Steine and Carter Todd [props to my Councilman!]

Interestingly, Pam Murray voted "nay" on the second reading, but "aye" this time around. I wonder what changed her mind. Could be because she actually lives in Detroit so wasn't able to properly read the bill last time. Funny how a recall effort can give you a change of heart. Also, Karen Bennett abstained on the second reading but voted aye this time.

Also, Vivian Wilhoite was not actually in the chambers when they took the vote, but says she would have voted for it and still went to the Tennessee Equality Project victory party. Oooooook then. (UPDATE: Apparently, there was a miscommunication about when she needed to be in the room.)

Typical Council weirdness aside, it was a great night for Nashville!

Not To Brag, But...

Every year, right before Rosh Hashanah, the Jewish Legal Society takes a field trip out to rural Illinois to go apple-picking. We used to do it at Cornell too, going from rural Ithaca to even more rural God-only-knows-where, upstate New York. Every year that I've done this, I've gotten it in my head that I was going to bake something really yummy with my apple surplus. And every year, that thought has ended in some sort of disaster. Last year, my attempt at making apple-cinnamon muffins resulted in a flour explosion, a cut finger and multiple broken nails from peeling and chopping the apples, and muffins that came out too crumbly and slightly burnt.

Proving that the definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over and expecting a different result, I made apple-cinnamon muffins again this evening after picking apples this past weekend.

And not to brag, but this time, my muffins came out PERFECTLY. I didn't even mess up the kitchen too badly! Understand, this is a huge step forward for someone who has managed to screw up making spaghetti.

Happy early New Year!

Too Controversial For The U.S.!

Warning: The following movie trailer is not safe for work! This is not safe for the elderly or for small children! In fact, it is so dangerous and controversial that it should not be viewed by anyone ever! Don't say I didn't warn you!

Oh noes, the movie is about Darwin and doesn't depict him as Hitler, so that means it must be inaccurate and therefore this movie cannot be distributed in the U.S.:

Creation, starring Paul Bettany, details Darwin's "struggle between faith and reason" as he wrote On The Origin of Species. It depicts him as a man who loses faith in God following the death of his beloved 10-year-old daughter, Annie.

The film was chosen to open the Toronto Film Festival and has its British premiere on Sunday. It has been sold in almost every territory around the world, from Australia to Scandinavia.

However, US distributors have resolutely passed on a film which will prove hugely divisive in a country where, according to a Gallup poll conducted in February, only 39 per cent of Americans believe in the theory of evolution.

Just so we're perfectly clear--a movie that shows a guy speaking Aramaic slowly being tortured to death is perfectly ok to see, and in fact, you should have your small children see it. But if a movie comes out in theaters about a scientist genuinely struggling with the implications of his life's work, for himself, his family and the world as he knows it--well now, someone whose faith is too weak to ever be exposed to different beliefs might get offended, so all of us godless liberals will just have to wait for Netflix. It doesn't matter that this film appears to feature no violence, nudity, or car chases, no, evolution is in fact the WORST THING EVER.

It'd be nice sometime if the people who claim to support individual liberty would support it for me as well as for thee.

Obama's Healthcare Speech

Now that we've dispensed with THAT issue...

Visit msnbc.com for Breaking News, World News, and News about the Economy

What we saw tonight was the President I voted for, and the President that millions of people voted for as well. The one who takes full command of the issue and steers in the direction he wants it to go. The one who offers that conciliatory hand to the other side, but does not allow them to control the terms of the debate.

My biggest problem with the speech? This is what he should have been doing all along. They made a misstep by sitting back and letting Congress bog it down, and leaving it wide open for all the craziness that went on in August. Obama should have been this forceful and clear about his expectations from the get-go. We may very well have already had a vote on this if he had.

I was encouraged when he said that while he is keeping his door open to new ideas, he's not going to play games with those who are only interested in killing the bill, not improving it. But I hope he recognizes that the latter subset is ALL OF THEM on the other side. Their strategy this whole summer was to use paranoia and scare tactics to kill the bill. Their strategy was to act like tea-baggers even while listening to the President. Charles Boustany (who wants tort reform after being sued for malpractice three times as a heart doctor) laid out very clearly what the Republicans want--to scrap this entire bill and start over. The Republicans are wholly unclear about the concepts of "elections" and "majorities" and how "they lost both." And we're not going to pass healthcare reform if Democrats continue to cling to some fantastical ideal of bipartisanship. It's not going to happen, the Republicans long ago drew their line in the sand.

We saw decisive leadership tonight. We needed to see it two months ago. But it's not too late.

P.S. Did anyone else notice that when he contrasted the plans at the "extremes"--a single-payer plan and a plan that gets rid of employer-based coverage altogether--the former got a smattering of applause but the latter got nothing but crickets? The latter plan is of course Jim Cooper's plan, and Obama signalled tonight that it's not acceptable. Of course, Cooper indicated earlier tonight after seeing a copy of the speech that he would support the President's plan.

He's going to fold in the end. He has nothing to gain by continuing to hold out and a whole lot to lose.

Don't Make Joe Wilson The Story

I'll have more on my reaction to Obama's speech later, but for now I just want to say...don't make Congressman Joe Wilson's angry outburst the big story to take away from tonight. Obama said some important things tonight, don't let that be the headline in the morning. Obviously, the media loves a controversy, and will harp on this, even though he's already apologized. And it does expose to full view why bipartisanship is going to be impossible on this issue, as I'll explain. But let's keep this discussion focused on healthcare, not some heretofore unknown Republican from South Carolina.

If you really want to fight back, instead of obsessing over the outburst, consider making a donation to Rob Miller, Wilson's Democratic opponent for 2010. In 2008, Miller held Wilson to 54-46 in a solidly Republican district, with no help from the DCCC. Miller had only $4,000 in his ActBlue account right after the speech, as of this post he's over $20,000. In just the last hour. This is how you fight the Right.

UPDATE: A statement and more on Rob Miller.

Healthcare. There's An App For That.

Speculation as to what Steve Jobs will announce at the Apple "It's Only Rock and Roll" media event tomorrow is at a fever pitch. Will the iPod Touch get a digital camera? Will they discontinue the iPod classic, or just maintain the larger ones? Will they move your iTunes library into the cloud so that you don't have to keep it on your hard drive (and thus go through a lengthy transfer process every time you get a new computer? Will we finally see a Mac Tablet? And most importantly, given that tomorrow is ALSO the release date for the remastered Beatles albums and Beatles Rock Band video game, will they use the timing to finally finally FINALLY release the Beatles catalogue onto iTunes?

I don't know. But I have my own prediction to make. Given Steve Jobs' uncanny ability to shape consumer opinion and convince customers to not only buy cool gadgets but to buy new ones every year, not to mention his own brush with the healthcare system earlier this year, I think he's going to go along with the national trend and announce his own healthcare plan. It will be an option for consumers that will provide a unique healthcare experience, just like Apple computers do.

The "iOption", if you will.

PROS:

• All the treatments and medications you need, purchased a la carte. Most medications will cost $0.99, with the most popular ones, such as Viagra, costing $1.29. Treatments will be priced like apps. Some will be free, you'll just have to watch ads before you get treated. The most complicated ones, like bypass surgery or transplants, will cost $10+.


• All treatments and medications can be downloaded from the same convenient store, iTunes.


• You won't be judged harshly if you have pre-existing conditions such as Windows use, just as long as you fully accept that PCs are evil and corporate and that Steve Jobs has helped you see the error of your ways.


• No mandates, it's your decision whether to opt in or not (that's why it's called an "option"). However, if you don't opt in, you'll look totally lame.


• No need for lengthy recovery periods or downtime that cost money beyond the initial treatment. Just hook your body up to the computer through a dock or USB cable, back yourself up, then sync yourself to iTunes, and then you're good to go.


• Everything you download will go into "the cloud." That way, should you need medication or treatment when you're on the go, you can get it from your iPhone or iPod Touch (note: $100 yearly subscription to MobileMe required).


• You won't get nearly as many viruses as you did before, and you also won't crash as often.


• You'll just look prettier and sleeker with the iOption than you would with a comparable PC option. What that has to do with healthcare I'm not sure, but it will get enough people to buy into the iOption to make it worthwhile.

CONS:

• You must actually have an iPhone or iPod Touch to get the full benefits. And God help you if you jail-broke your phone. You could still use iOption through iTunes if you have a PC, it just won't work as well.


• The treatments you download will not be compatible with any other type of body except for ones made by Apple. Any attempt to get around this rule by hacking into your treatments will be severely punished.


• You'll have to update your body with a new version every few months. This will take some time out of your day and will be quite annoying. And there will likely be a glitch or two at first. But you won't be able to download new types of treatments until you update.


• About once a year or so, a new type of body will be released. There will be nothing wrong with your old body, it will still work just fine. But you will be led to believe, through copious amounts of peer pressure, that your body is now obsolete, and you will rush to the Apple store to buy a new one. As soon as you buy your new body, Apple will announce a price cut. You will be annoyed, but you will repeat this cycle indefinitely.


• Apple will only stock a few different models of new bodies, with the prices (before the inevitable cut) starting in the low $1000s. But they'll all look pretty.


• If your body stops working properly, and resetting it or restoring the factory settings isn't working, you'll have to take yourself down to the Apple store. Those people who seemed so cool and nice when you were buying your body will now treat you like a moron. They'll ask you why you didn't book an appointment through the Concierge system, you'll say you tried to but they didn't have any available appointments for another week, but this is an emergency because you can't live if your body isn't functioning properly. They'll roll their eyes and put you in the standby line. You'll still get seen, you'll just be waiting there all afternoon while the other Apple employees try and convince you to buy your body new accessories instead.

Huh. Maybe this isn't so different from how our healthcare system (waiting periods! Just go to the emergency room!) is now.

What Newscoma Said

Our Lady of Hoots preaches it, asking where our Democratic leadership in Tennessee has been on this school speech issue:

Where are our local elected leaders on this? It’s a bigger deal than they might think. This will be remembered on both sides of the political aisle for a long time despite the outcome but in many ways, it was brought on by political fears.

UPDATED: It was announced that the local school system will be playing the president’s speech tomorrow after initially citing that they might not. Good!

You guys are in leadership positions, make a decision and stick with it and there isn’t any easy way out. As I said, it will be remembered. I want my nieces to see their president encouraging them. He was elected our president, just as George Bush, Bill Clinton and Ronald Reagan were. I’m just one person and that is my one opinion, but there are more of us out there.

United we stand. So, as the debate rages on about whether a president can give an 18 minute speech to kids as MSM gives more time to this than other pressing issues our country is facing while throwing gasoline on a fire, my family is thinking of more localized issues this morning.

Where are the democrats? We didn’t start this, but it’s a good question.

I had a long conversation about this yesterday with my Union Thug friend, and I wondered the same thing. He wasn't too concerned about it because he never would have expected the Democratic leadership to take a stand anyway. The support for the President, and of course for education in general, is there in the rural counties he works with; but those folks have learned that they can't rely on the higher-up party leadership to help them out. They don't ask where the higher-up Democrats are because they don't expect them to get involved anyway.

Maybe it's true that all politics are local. But it still begs the question, why the hell do we have that expectation? Why shouldn't we expect them to show a backbone?

Is this really such a hard issue? It's not like we're dealing with guns or abortion or any other issue that silence can be justified (sometimes legitimately, sometimes rather disingenuously) by the "well, those districts are more conservative" line. This isn't that complex--either you think that a speech advising students to do their homework and stay in school is worthwhile for the students to hear, or you don't. Even if someone's district didn't go for Obama, even if it is more conservative, aren't Democrats supposed to be all about education? Isn't THAT supposed to be one of the areas in which we differentiate ourselves from Republicans in a state like this, where those lines might be blurred in other areas?

I don't know. I just don't think this is that complicated.

NASCAR In On The Obama Conspiracy!

When you've lost NASCAR, then you know you are alone in the world. It's time to gather your loved ones and move into the bomb shelter. A video taped when the Sprint Cup drivers visited the White House:

Jeff Foxworthy once said that the reason why so many NASCAR fans don't like Jeff Gordon is because Jeff Gordon enunciates, and there's just no place in NASCAR for that kind of behavior! It looks as if he and his fellow drivers are trying to spread that immoral, fascist, Communist idea that getting an education is a good thing!

NASCAR is in on the conspiracy to indoctrinate all of our children into liberal zombies! I guess all the tea-baggers will now have to go watch a more 'Murican sport. Like pro-wrestling.

Feel Good Friday--Bugs Bunny Edition

Because they don't make cartoons like this anymore...

A Calm, Rational Healthcare Discussion?

I personally doubt it's possible, but I know just the guy to try and make it work.  Because the actual Congressman from the Chattanooga area is too busy running for Governor and making wild claims about healthcare, Senator Andy Berke is going to bring the grown-ups together to have a rational discussion.  Perhaps he's prepping to step up into that role, or beyond?  (Oh Lord please yes!)  Via e-mail, here are the details:

On the federal level, there has been a lot of shouting and yelling on both sides of the aisle about healthcare without much productive discussion of the facts. That is why I have decided to bring together a group of doctors, lawmakers, local and state officials, as well as insurance and hospital representatives to participate in a hearing about healthcare in Tennessee. My goal is to sort through all of the noise and identify the real problems so that we can offer innovative solutions to provide quality healthcare at a price Tennesseans can afford.

The hearing will be held on Friday, September 11, 2009 from 9:15 a.m. until 2:30 p.m. in the Hamilton County Commission Room in Chattanooga. For the most part, the day will consist of roundtable discussions by state healthcare experts. See below for the schedule. Please come join me if you are available.

And here's the schedule.  Sounds like a good time with a bunch of thoughtful, intelligent people:

9:15-9:30 Introduction by Sen. Berke

9:30-9:45 Presentation of Local Health statistics
David Eichenthal, President and CEO of the Ochs Center for Metropolitan Studies

9:45-10:30 Panel on State Level Health Care Policy
Darin Gordon/Susie Baird (TennCare Director/Director of Policy), Senator Bo Watson, Dr. William Rowe, co-chair of legislation and public policy for the Medical Society of Chattanooga & Hamilton County, Dr. Michael Caudle, Vice Chancellor for Health Affairs & Government Relations at the University of Tennessee-Memphis

10:30-10:45 Break

10:45-11:30 Panel on Access to Care

Rae Bond, Executive Director, Project Access, Chattanooga & Hamilton County Medical Society, Bill Hicks, Executive Director, Erlanger Community Health Centers, Doug Fisher, Vice President of Governmental Relations and Community Affairs, Erlanger

11:30-12:15 Panel on the Health of Tennesseans
Dr. Veronica Gunn, Tennessee Department of Health Chief Medical Officer. Dr. Vincent Viscomi, President of the Chattanooga & Hamilton County Medical Society, Dr. Wendy Long, Chief Medical Director of TennCare, Professor Greg Heath, University of Tennessee-Chattanooga

12:15-1:00 Lunch

1:00-1:45 Panel on Medical Insurance and Business
Laurie Lee, Executive Director of Benefits Administration for the Department of Finance and Administration for the State of Tennessee, Jed Marston, Vice President of marketing and communications, Chattanooga Area Chamber of Commerce, Dr. Steven Coulter, President of Government Business and Emerging Markets, Blue Cross, Blue Shield

1:45-2:30 Panel on the Future of Healthcare in Tennessee
Dr. BW Ruffner, President-elect of the Tennessee Medical Association, Dr. David Seaberg, Dean of the UT College of Medicine Chattanooga, Dr. Chris Young, Trustee, Tennessee Medical Association.

A Fair Trade Tea Party At Whole Foods

It's a weird, weird state of affairs in this country when liberals are praising Wal-Mart (for dropping their sponsorship of Glenn Beck) and conservatives are going to Whole Foods because the CEO opposes healthcare reform:

This evening, the St. Louis Tea Party Coalition, a conservative-leaning group that opposes President Barack Obama's health care reform proposal, is formally launching a "buycott" of Whole Foods, urging its members and supporters to shop for their groceries at a store known for its progressive green-and-granola image.

"There's definite irony," said Bill Hennessy, head of the coalition in St. Louis, adding, "This is a group of people who might have driven right by before."

The decidedly anti-tofu-and-fancy-cheese crowd plans to buy a week's groceries at Whole Foods' Town and Country store, followed by dinner amidst the recycling bins.

I support this action wholeheartedly.  After buying a week's worth of groceries at Whole Foods, the Tea Party Coalition will be too broke to hold another protest.

Personally, I didn't make a conscious decision to boycott Whole Foods, but I haven't been there in awhile and I don't know when I'm going back.  It pains me to not go there--I love Whole Foods.  I especially love getting fresh local blackberries from the Nashville Whole Foods in the summer.  And I do appreciate the commitment to organic, sustainable, higher quality food.

On the other hand, I went across the Brentwood Boulevard war-zone last week to shop at Trader Joe's.  I've gone to Trader Joe's in the past for the odd item, but had never done a full grocery shop there.  I was amazed to find (and I'm sure this is going to get a couple face-palms and "Duhs") how much cheaper Trader Joe's is than Whole Foods.  As much as I want to shop at Whole Foods, that reason alone is enough to keep me coming back to TJs.

But maybe this is an opportunity to find common ground with our conservative friends.  Even if they're wrong on healthcare, maybe after shopping at Whole Foods, they'll come to better understand the problems with our food system in the U.S., and agree that organic, grass-fed beef is better for everyone than ground beef from a filthy facility, treated with ammonia.  Maybe they'll see that higher quality food is not a socialist Marxist plot.

Just sayin'.

UPDATE:  But thinking about it further, that's the most ironic thing about this, isn't it?  The people who say that ANY form of government regulation is evil are going to patronize a company that attracts customers to organic and premium-quality food precisely BECAUSE of the lack of regulation in the food system!  The conservatives may agree that ammonia-treated ground beef sounds gross, but they would consider any attempts to ban the beef processor from doing that to be evil socialism!

Kos V. Kleinheider

Blogger fight!  Woo-hoo!

TN-05: Local columnist says that primarying Jim Cooper would be "fool's errand". How come every time we gear up to primary anyone, we hear the same thing? Remember how primarying Joe Lieberman would be a fool's errand, and that we were dooming the party by pushing it to the Left on Iraq, and how Jews would abandon the Democratic Party as a result? Heck, even Sestak was silly, since Specter has the party establishment and Obama and labor and blah blah blah.

At the end of the day, people vote. And the voters in TN-05 are looking for an alternative. That's the bottom line. Assuming we get a top-tier challenger for Cooper's seat, it'll be a tough race and Cooper will have the upper hand. That's the whole point/problem with incumbency. But primaries can be won, particularly when the numbers show the incumbent is out of touch with his (or her) constituents.

The guy has a point.  The sky didn't fall after the Lieberman primary.  There's an argument to be made that it was a moot point since Lieberman ultimately won the race (although it was due less to Democrats not rallying around Lamont than to a underestimate of the extent to which Republicans would support Lieberman).  But it did give Democrats elsewhere a cause celebre to rally around.

But I'm sure Kleinheider won't mind.  This means he gets page views, after all.

September 1st, 1939

Seventy years ago today, Nazi Germany invaded Poland, thus triggering World War II.

Just so we're perfectly clear, the Nazis went into Poland and other countries, intent on conquering Europe and killing Jews.  The Nazis did not go into Poland to start a socialist healthcare system.

Well, Bless Her Heart

(H/t Feministing)

The conservatives have seen a problem among college-age women (a subset in which I still consider myself to be, even though I was dragged against my will to graduation over a year ago).  You'd think their issue would be that women are going to college and getting educated in the first place, but in fact, it's that we're not acting ladylike enough:

As our society abandons the conservative values that make women into ladies, women with grace and dignity have become an endangered species—especially on today’s college campuses. The kind of woman who inspired Tom Jones’ song “She’s a Lady” has become an antiquated figure from America’s past. Most popular songs about women today are more like “Youse a Ho” by Ludacris.

Not to nitpick, but "Ho" (which is the actual name of the song) came out in 2000--when I was still in MIDDLE SCHOOL.  I know this because I remember illegally downloading the song from the original Napster.  One big hip-hop song all those kids are listening to today is "Best I Ever Had" by Drake, which is actually quite a positive take on relationships.  Ms. Molina should try trading in her Walkman and CDs for an iPod sometime.  

But I digress.  Fortunately, Ms. Molina can tell us just how a "lady" should act:

A lady does not tell dirty jokes along with men and she does not tolerate men telling dirty jokes in her presence. She does not swear, and she is not considered “one of the guys.” In spite of new fashion trends, a lady always dresses appropriately, leaving a lot to the imagination. When at a social gathering, a lady does not do things she will regret the next day. Above all, a lady is well-mannered, dignified, gracious, and kind.

That last part is ok, but the rest of the definition just sounds boring.  I'll be well-mannered, gracious, and kind--unless you're a Detroit Red Wings, Baltimore Ravens, or Tennessee Volunteers fan, in which case you may kindly kiss my fat ass.  I may not have had the best year in my fantasy football league last year, in which I am one of only two girls, but I will totally dominate the guys this year.  And there's no point in living in an alcohol-loving city like St. Louis if you're not going to get crunk on the weekends.

By the way, if you're a feminist who objects to hearing misogynistic jokes, does this now mean that you're a well-behaved lady for doing so?  Because I was always told that meant you're a frigid femi-nazi with a stick up your ass.

In all seriousness, I do things that are probably considered "ladylike."  I wear skirts, dresses, and high heels.  And occasionally, I even wear pearls with these outfits.  I wear makeup and paint my nails pink.  I can cook--passably.  I know how to entertain at a party.  I know you always bring a hostess gift when going over to someone else's home for dinner (usually flowers, because the hosts may not drink wine or eat chocolate).  I know that thank-you notes should be hand-written, on your GOOD stationary.  And I would add to her list, a lady does not act catty by accusing other women of acting slutty.  A lady knows we left that behavior behind in high school.

But I do these things because I either enjoy doing them (as in the clothes) or simply because it's the right thing to do, gender notions aside. Isn't that the most valuable thing we can teach young women--not that they need to conform to a set role, but that they should be compassionate and thoughtful in all circumstances?

And also, that they should have enough respect for themselves to not settle for any old jerk who comes along?

I have heard many of my male peers place women into three categories: “the ones to mess around with, the ones to date, and the ones to marry.” Though this is a rather crude way of categorizing women, it shows that men do recognize and value the qualities that make a woman a lady. Ladies are the kind of women that men can take home to Mom and Dad and that most men want to marry. Being considered “marriage material” is an indicator that a woman is to be respected; most men who deem a woman as such treat her with the utmost respect. For men, ladies are at the top of the female totem pole, and conservative women need to take pride in the fact that they are worthy of time, love, and commitment.

No, it shows that her male peers are assholes.  So are we going to see an article about how to be a gentleman that includes the phrase, "A gentleman shows respect for all women," regardless of whether he'd want to marry her or not?

As in other instances, I reject what this implicitly says about men--that they're all wild beasts incapable of controlling themselves, so it's up to the "ladies" to tame them by keeping their legs shut and not giving in.  It makes for a nice talking point with which to chastise women, but the constant drumbeat of it guarantees that younger men will internalize it and believe that they have to act that way in order to be "manly."

I refuse to believe that men are inherently that way.  The men in my life do not act that way.  Their mamas all taught them better than that.

There's another strange implication in that passage--that men consider the women they enjoy having sex with in a separate category from the women they'd want to marry.  Does that mean that some conservative men deliberately marry women they DON'T enjoy having sex with, simply because she's considered to be more "marriageable"?  And doesn't that just set the stage for infidelity later on?  If so, that completely explains Mark Sanford, John Ensign, David Vitter, Newt Gingrich, etc.  Is it so hard to accept that having a healthy sex life should be part of a successful long-term relationship?

I will continue to be a lady--a lady who feels equally comfortable at a party in a dress and high heels as she does sitting on the couch, watching football, drinking beer and eating hot wings.  I will continue to give my love to men who do not feel threatened by strong women.  And I will tell Molina the most ladylike thing I can without swearing--bless her heart.