... is to get some kind of weak compromise bill through the senate, then write the desired bill in the conference committee, by picking the most progressive elements from each side. The conference committee could choose the public option language from the House bill and the abortion language from the Senate bill.

At this point, the resulting bill would have a lower cost than the original Senate bill, since the public option saves money. It would then qualify under the reconciliation rules.

The Vice President, Joe Biden, is. It is not Sen. Reid's prerogative to rule something out of order. That's the job of the VP or whoever sits in the chair. The Republicans can then challenge the ruling, and it goes to a vote.

Provided that the Dems have a good case that the relevant bill would fall within the Byrd Rule, even it it's "iffy", they can do it.

Should the Republicans object, then we can simply trot out their speeches from a couple of years ago, when they were pointing out how they could stop a filibuster.

The entire cartoon at full scale, plus the ads, will fit on the page. So Salon, please get rid of "click to enlarge" and go back to the old layout (or some modified layout that can put the whole cartoon on the page).

While there are a variety of possible definitions for gender, this doesn't change the fact that sporting competitions can choose one particular definition, make it precise, and use it to determine eligibility. Because someone doesn't pass doesn't mean that they have to stop identifying as female, it simply means that they aren't eligible.

A male athlete with an extremely high level of testosterone in his body is banned from competition as a suspected doper. Even if he's a mutant and it's natural, it's still legitimate to set a standard that all must meet.

... if the Obama people had chosen to make it. Perhaps they could have argued that the attack on the Cole was an illegal military action, and used the Geneva Conventions to argue for a military trial on that basis (but if I understand correctly, the defendants would then have to receive the very same rights and protections as a US soldier charged by a court-martial would receive).

But they didn't make such a distinction, they were quite open in saying that they choose the trial format in such a way as to assure convictions. And Obama talked about how pleased we all would be to see KSM executed: sentence first, verdict afterwards. The guy wants to be a martyr, and I'd like to see him denied this prize. There appears to be enough damning evidence out of his own mouth before he was captured (in an interview he did with al Jazeera in 2002, for example) to put him away for life, and that would be suitable punishment.

... and while I don't know anything about her qualifications, the military is desperate for warm bodies to fight their wars. Those right-wingers who think that single moms shouldn't be in the military should enlist to take their places.

... is that we are placing impossible demands on the all-volunteer army: they are required fight two large, seemingly endless wars, they get to go back again and again, and each time around their lives are destroyed a little bit more. Their relationships are destroyed so that they have no family support, and they find themselves in increasingly desperate situations.

In this case, it's a mother forced to leave a child. In other cases, it's badly scarred people who should be treated for PTSD instead pressured to go back again and again, and the only way out is to become permanently disabled physically or mentally. They can resign when their contracts are up, but if they have some special skill, they can be stop-lossed and forced to go back anyway.

The only way to save them is to de-escalate both wars. Start bringing the troops home, and start getting them the help that they need.

Without the Stupak amendment, the previous Hyde amendment would still be in effect: the Federal government would not be covering abortion. Stupak goes much further: with his amendment, no policy that is part of the insurance exchanges can cover abortion even when paid for by the purchaser. He wants to prevent people from buying insurance that covers abortion with their own money, using a "money is fungible" argument (if any plan gets any federal dollars, no abortion even if paid for by other means).

This argument, if consistently applied, would make federal funding for "faith based organizations" to provide social services unconstitutional: after all, money is fungible, they can move money from the social services bucket to the religious proselytizing bucket.

... if Rick Sanchez wound up with Dobbs' slot? The old racist's head would explode!

Stupak-like language can't be added to the Senate bill without 60 votes, which it isn't going to get, especially if we make a big enough stink (as in: no more money for Democrats, ever). Then we need to insist that the conference bill drop the Stupak language.

The Democratic Party appears to be a careerist organization that stands for very little, other than jobs for its senior members, but in our political system, wired to be a two-party system, it's the only alternative. Progressives need to take it over and drive out the hacks. The Democratic Party is indifferent to women while the Republican party is actively hostile.

Sen. Reid demonstrated that it's easy to break a hold that doesn't have sufficient support, when he did it to Sen. Feingold. All he would have had to do was move to push the bill forward anyway. This would flush the person trying to hold the bill out in the open. The obstructionist can call for lots of time-consuming roll-call votes and try to block cloture motions, but he/she would need allies to go on the record.

But Reid (and many senators) have a warped sense of courtesy toward their fellow members.