What state that opts out is going to want to pay for states that opt in? There is no way that Oklahoma is going to be OK with their tax dollars paying for Massachusetts' health care.

They don't want the public option in any form because it's "government run health care" or "socialized medicine". It doesn't matter what polls you cite or information on reducing costs - It's not in the cards. Without overwhelming evidence to the contrary (like many polls showing a substantial majority when the question is phrased in different ways - not just one with the 60% we keep hearing about) there is nothing that is going to change their minds. In fact, even with such evidence it's not going to matter.

This idea, along with the trigger, is DOA. Tomorrow you'll hear all about how this is just a wolf in sheep's clothing or any variation of the same phrase.

There are two possibilities right now - it goes in, or it doesn't. I don't think there is the window of opportunity to get it passed right now. The problem is, 10 years from now when the health care system is still hosed up - do we say "we told you so"? or accept the GOP version? Because democrats sure aren't going to have anything to run on.

As someone posted in Open Salon, I agree with the thought he should decline the honor and say something to the effect of "I am humbled but I want to live up to the idea of this award". Not to mention the right wingers will have a field day with this and it just fits into their meme that he's a messiah and such. Clearly not something he needs right now.

But then I think about this issue with "he hasn't done anything yet" to warrant this award, but what about others? True he hasn't done much yet, but is that what the peace prize is? Al Gore gave a few speeches on global warming and shared the prize. Should he have not won either?

I think the idea here with the Nobel prize is to put a stamp on the ideas and direction that people are taking in the world for peace. It's a clear political statement of course but I'm not so sure it requires a resume of accomplishments to earn. The panel thought global warming was important and awarded people who brought that cause out to the forefront and were to fight more for it. Obama, at least internationally, has done everything I expected him to on this front and his stance on nuclear weapons is something I am hugely supportive of. This is a good award to represent the issues the world should be paying attention to and Barack Obama is the best person to do that today.

...not use the same tactics shown here.

Saying the GOP is siding with the terrorists sounds as stupid as it did when the GOP did it. I thought Democrats were the educated people in the country.

No need to play this game. Thanks for calling it out Alex, now if you'd just be a bit more consistent.

"This just reemphasizes how this president has moved the United States from a foreign policy of strong national defense to one based on multinational cooperation. That is the kind of change that the Nobel committee believes in."

Yeah...no shit. Maybe you should figure out why.

I'm not sure why you needed to post this opinion or what you were hoping by doing it but it reflects poorly on your character Heather.

What gives with posting this crap? Is the news day *that* slow?

What if the kid was dead? Still OK?

Your "coverage" of this is beyond pathetic. A new low I'm afraid.

Why have their been 4 stories on Salon's frontpage about this?

Joan, you and your staff are the biggest hypocrites.

We'd still get the same result as we did in November. Cheney will soon be another person on the sidelines that will be increasingly marginalized. The clamoring right we see day to day will find out just as quickly as Democrats did in 2004 that they are not changing people's minds with Tea Parties and honoring people like Dick Cheney.

I think when the heat comes down, they'll realize that standing in the way of health reform isn't something that will bode well for them in the future.

However, if the Democrats go through reconciliation....I will be incredibly pissed off. That would be the start to the end of everything for the next 6 years. It's one thing to call out the GOP for using such a tactic, but it's another to do the exact same thing. In fact, I'm going to write my senators right now on this very point. I encourage everyone to do so as well.

I've been consistently annoyed at the amount of subsidies we give out and the politics that is behind it. You've definitely summed it up really well. What to do about it? Well, that is another story.

I want to see a knock down drag out fight over this....but, I don't think the democrats are up to the task. They are worried that if they actually fight for something, it will hurt their reelection chances. So they'll shirk back into a corner and pass it with Reconciliation (no, it doesn't take balls to do that).

By the way, where the fuck is Obama? He needs to get his shit together and at least *appear* like he's doing something to fight for this.

I'd like to see the page totals, names, and who was in power for every bill since Reagan that was over 300 pages. That'd be a nifty list to have right now heh.

By the way, those bills are filled with so much freaking white space, that it's probably 100 pages of text total. I'm not sure what the big deal is except people buy this garbage.

Quick search turned up this.

http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/archives/individual/2009_08/019629.php