True! (If she were honest, she'd officially be a Democrat, too.)

* * *

“Pragmatic means can be done”

The “status quo” lie has always been a lie. Even the Republicans currently opposing “reform” aren't opposed to real reform, just being dysfunctional; in addition, they are being sidelined and can't expect their proposals for (real) reform to be taken seriously.

Meanwhile, the impatient, exasperated libbie-Dems are ready to roll. About Steele's recent remark:

“Well, I’m the cow on the tracks, and you’re going to have to stop that train to get this cow off the tracks and move forward.”

The far-left talk radio crowd has had a great morning with this remark.

* No, we don't have to stop the train.

* Run his ass over!

* You've got a union engineer at the controls of the locomotive! Don't expect the train to stop.

* We'll celebrate the passage of health care legislation with hamburger!

Et cetera.

Whatever Olympia Snowe may be, she is no lightweight. She is the most effective and influential moderate Democrat in the Senate. A fete she has managed to accomplish while remaining a Republican.

What that means is: anyone who objects to the public option is going to Hell because they have chosen money over easing their fellow men's suffering..

On the other hand, some would say supporting theft would send you to hell. Want to help your fellow man? VOLUNTARILY give YOUR OWN money to charity like St. Jude's. I think God would smile more on that than stealing from others.

think the use of the word, “pragmatic” really means “status quo”,

Pragmatic means can be done, the pipe dreamers on the far-left don't have enough Democratic Party support to get what they are seeking, time they woke up and smelled the coffee.

You forgot to promise me my free perpetual motion machine, Sil.

The Dems are continuing to rely on substitution of Feeling Good for understanding the basics. If or when that fails, there's always the resort to convincing the easily convinced that Somebody Else or Society will pay for this, magically.

(In this case, actually, Medicare providers as well as beneficiaries are going to be robbed — this effort is so sloppy that blatant, raw cannibalism is being sought, with the dirty work being delayed until after the 2010 elections, ideally until after 2012 and re-election of Obama or election of another Dem President. It's so crude as well as sloppy I'm amazed that the Dems believe everyone is so stupid as to either fail to notice the obvious, or tolerate it. Note that with Medicare, Team Obama is engaging in typical low-IQ vote buying and probably a diversionary tactic: Even though the cost of living is stagnant and no Social Security cost of living increase is merited, Team Obama wants to provide a small increase. This is not only cheap vote-buying of those whose votes are so cheaply and easily bought, but very likely related to the current health care effort and continued plans as of now to loot Medicare to “pay” for the new, larger health care “reform” initiative. The most sordid encore will be if this vote-buying increase and diversion of the easily-diverted will be done in the name of facing increases in health care costs!)

On the far-lefty talk radio so far this morning, the word is more realistic, among the impatient, even exasperated liberals, notably among the “progressives”: They're adamant that pleasing Snowe not be any kind of serious objective, sought at the risk of losing far too much in the name of compromise or negotiation even before real negotiating has yet to happen. (The Senate pre-final-legislation dickering is only the warm-up to the real fireworks, the House final-legislation crafting and then the main event, the House-Senate conference, with “progressives” insistent that their lib Dems, especially in the House, not throw away anything, seek as much as they can get, and especially not over-value and defer to Snowe.)

And please try to be accurate in your insults. I am not a prick; I am an asshole.

Let me see if I can point out your logical fallacy without resorting to school yard tactics.

Facts.

At least 48 states have addressed or still face shortfalls in their budgets for fiscal year 2010 totaling $168 billion or 24 percent of state budgets.

There couldn't be a low tax red state among those 48 right?

Oops.. TX? WY? UT? CO? LA? Freaking liberal utopias those! But wait? AL? Not Alabama!!!

Links always help

Now, I wonder what could be causing these shortfalls nationwide in even the redest states?

Hmmmm… What on earth could it be? I'm sure one of you with an education higher than my 6th grade level could clue me in.

You know Austin. When I was a kid my Grandpappy used to set me on his knee and say Davebo. Whatever happens, don't be a prick.

It's too bad you didn't spend enough time with yours.

And there is no doubt that that every health care reform option being considered both raises taxes and requires additional deficit spending from the US Treasury (AKA our tax dollars).

I cannot make this explanation into a picture book for you due to the limitations of DISQUS, but maybe you can get a friend to help explain the tricky parts to you.

Snowe has been acknowledging her possible acceptance of a conditional trigger for about a month and half now. It gives Reid his win (as conditional won't be costed) and Obama his. Snowe gets rewarded. That's the way the game will play out.

What does your source E.J. McMahon attribute that to? Certainly not health care. It's not even one of their categories.

The Source Austin left out

Those are the key words. It does NOT pay for itself, unless by pay for itself you mean it forces massive tax increases (which in turn LOWER, not raise, net revenues. Ask NY Personal income tax receipts were down 10.7 percent, or $410 million. This included a 17.3 percent decrease in quarterly estimated payments—which come largely from the same high-income taxpayers who were hit this year with a 31 percent state personal income tax increase.), and/or massive deficit spending (estamtes range from a LOW of $800B+ to close to $3T).

This is the Liberal's idea of 'pays for itself' – taking other people's money and using at they, in their infinite wisdom, see fit.

No, I mean REALLY think about it…

Why? The only reason, the one and only reason anyone would object to it is that it cuts into their cash flow in some way via the investment process in MedMob or actually being in the business. What that means is: anyone who objects to the public option is going to Hell because they have chosen money over easing their fellow men's suffering..

You can twist and turn and make up any rebuttal you want to that but it won't change a single iota of the ramifications of the Truth of it.

Thanks Senator! See ya in the funny pages.