But I do believe that, by and large, the current conservative/tea-party movement IS mean-spirited.

The number of uninsured Americans now exceed 50 million! Yet the conservatives rail on against “Obamacare.”

Yes, the poll numbers for the health care bill have dropped considerably since initial passage. Should we change public policy month-by-month based on fluctuating poll numbers rather than elections?

Most of the really useful provisions of the health care bill don’t go into full effect until 2014, so most people don’t feel the positive benefits yet. And shame on the Democrats for leaving all the talking points to vacuous tea partyers while running away from the issue in the November elections.

Democrats who don’t have the courage to stand by the principle that the richest nation on earth should ensure all its citizens health insurance deserve to lose in November.

Why don’t the tea partyers go after public roads paid for by taxes next? All I see from the tea party is hate, demagoguery and misinformation. The whole lot of them seem less interested in actual facts and civil discourse than they do in stirring up base, ugly human emotions. Which is always easy for demagogues to do.

Sarah Palin, Sharron Angle, Rand Paul, Christine O’Donnell, Glenn Beck and and the whole Tea Party crowd actually seem to revel in their ignorance.

And I don’t see Democrats really forcefully fighting back out of fear of the ugly public mood stirred up by these modern-day equivalents of the “Know Nothing” party of the 19th century.

Maybe a group to counter the tea party is needed.

Supporters say he is a “libertarian.” But he’s not that either. He’s really just a fringe, right-winger with an inconsistent, somewhat loony mixed bag of personal opinions.

Some examples:

doug

And opinion polls already show more people in favor of the new law than opposed:

http://www.usatoday.com/news/washington/2010-03-23-health-poll-favorable_N.htm?csp=usat.me

doug

“It’s time for something completely different and we’re going to bring it to them,” Mr. Steele said. “We’re going to bring this party to every corner, to every boardroom, to every neighborhood, to every community. And we’re going to say to friend and foe alike, ‘we want you to be a part of us, we want you to be with us and for those of you who are going to obstruct, get ready to be knocked over.’ “

What on earth kind of a statement is that? It sounds like a statement the Gestapo would issue.

doug

I can’t believe Chief Justice Roberts messed up the oath of office!

I thought Obama’s speech was “ok”. Typical Obama rhetoric. A little disjointed. If *I* were the speechwriter I would have book-ended his statement at the beginning about there being a nagging doubt that America is in decline with a declaration that he has no doubts that America is on the rise. But nobody asked me.

I watched some MSNBC live streaming before going into the next room to watch the main event live on CNN on a regular TV. I really haven’t watched MSNBC much before and was surprised to see how it is true what people say about them being “in the tank” for Obama. They don’t even pretend to be unbiased.

For example, one person commented that, “it must be a bittersweet moment for Bush considering all the calls for change” and the anchor said, “Bittersweet? The Bushes must feel like the Romanoffs today. ”

After he repeated the Romanoff comment the other co-anchors tried to get him to back off of that. Apparently that was a bit much even for MSNBC.

But they were basically completely in the tank for Obama. The anchor was even saying Bush probably would not be revisited in history as an interesting president. I don’t think history will treat Bush well, but I doubt he will be ignored. He made so many disastrous decisions it would be hard to ignore him.

Andrea Mitchell was trying to get NY Governor Paterson to say who he selected to replace Clinton. He was saying he didn’t want to distract from today to say who he decided on and Mitchell basically ignored him and asked, “so do you think Caroline Kennedy will be a good senator for NY?”

MSNBC did pause from demonizing Bush and promoting Caroline Kennedy to say the park department doesn’t make crowd estimates anymore because of controversies about them.

The only good commentator on MSNBC was the historian Doris Kearns-Goodwin, who always is a reservoir of presidential information and comparisons between Lincoln and Obama.

I switched to CNN a bit after that to get a better view on a regular TV, but also it seemed CNN at least tried to be balanced in describing what was going on.

doug

–Amy Poehler

While there is no guarantee Obama will appoint her, it seems he is trying to take a page from Lincoln’s book where he created a cabinet of his rivals to ensure greater unity in the long run. The book “Team of Rivals: The Political Genius of Abraham Lincoln” by Doris Kearns Goodwin is a fascinating and good read by the way. It appears that Obama is a fan of the idea as well.

From Clinton’s perspective, she apparently feels stymied by the seniority system in the senate. Apparently at her age and relative position she has little chance, as junior senator from New York, of ever achieving control of a major committee or becoming majority leader. And she was also apparently rebuffed by Kennedy when she asked him to create a sub-committee to deal with new health care legislation that she could run. That is, after all, her trademark issue.

Also, as somebody else pointed out, while as Secretary of State you still have to attend boring meetings all the time, at least they are with heads of state in glamorous places like resorts in Dubai and Geneva instead of with transit officials at a Holiday Inn in Albany.

Even her critics don’t doubt that she would throw herself into it and do a good job if appointed. She is the type who likes to keep busy and actually accomplish things, so that’s probably why she would not be satisfied with a just senate sinecure.

doug