The real question is not, "How can the Democrats pull out the Massachusetts Senate seat to preserve the supermajority?", but rather, "Why are the Republicans completely unwilling to negotiate a health care bill that is good for the country?"

That the health system in this country is broken can not be argued. By any number of measures -- infant mortality, numbers without access, cost to the individual and society as a whole, outcomes for patients -- the system is in danger of collapsing of its own weight. As a result, even more people will go without coverage and be sicker and cost more to treat. If nothing is done, healthcare costs will rise by about a third again to $3.1 trillion by 2012, or more than one fifth of U.S. GDP.

So, I ask, why is the GOP willing -- nay, eager -- to see this bill, or any health care bill, go down to defeat? Can it be that they are so enamored of power and control that the good of the country has no merit? Is no one among them willing to put the good of the nation before their desire to "see Obama fail?" How can it be good for a nation for a significant minority wish ill on their president solely for the perceived benefit to their party?

Pictures

1. 

Fin de siècle

I think I am almost speechless after I saw the video message on the website of The New Yankee Workshop. After all, I am never totally speechless. I am almost too sad to comment about it right now. More to follow ...

Random References ...

So, Bravo is rerunning "The West Wing" two hours a day, and though I should be doing useful stuff such as raking leaves or contemplating quadratic equations, I find myself draw to watching the shadow plays of Aaron Sorkin, Dee Dee Myers and Pat Caddell.

Go ahead and look those up if you need to; I can wait.

But see, here is the the thing. They are running the beginning of the second season and the assassination attempt story line. Jed Bartlett is in the hospital; the security council is meeting in the situation room and "the press" is going crazy. Nancy McNally is running down the threats faced by the country and she notes "there are several cell leaders that have disappeared, including Bin Laden."

Remember, this episode aired in October of 2000, which means it was written probably about eight months earlier during the height of the presidential campaign.

Granted, Aaron Sorkin is more plugged in than your average TV writer, but shouldn't our government have had better insight into the world than a guy who has to figure out how to fit four acts of drama around commercials for adult diapers?

Hey, its almost a decade later and we have lots of other things to talk about in the coming months, but I am just saying. If we want to know where we are, we have to know where we've been. I am just saying ...