This blog is now located at http://mybackpagesnor.blogspot.com/.
You will be automatically redirected in 30 seconds, or you may click here.

For feed subscribers, please update your feed subscriptions to
http://mybackpagesnor.blogspot.com/feeds/posts/default.

Woke up this morning to some clouds and light, but it was a beautiful day in America. At least for now, it's almost by the people and for the people (even though some are too dense -- and racist -- to realize it).

Beep, Beep, Beep ...

We interrupt this ongoing broadcast of a blank screen with the following news flash: THE DEMOCRATIC PARTY HAS GROWN A SPINE!!!

Dems look to health vote without abortion foes

By ERICA WERNER
The Association

WASHINGTON – House leaders have concluded they cannot change a divisive abortion provision in President Barack Obama's health care bill and will try to pass the sweeping legislation without the support of ardent anti-abortion Democrats.

A break on abortion would remove a major obstacle for Democratic leaders in the final throes of a yearlong effort to change health care in the United States. But it sets up a risky strategy of trying to round up enough Democrats to overcome, not appease, a small but possibly decisive group of Democratic lawmakers in the House.

Democratic leaders are working to rally rank-and-file members around last-minute agreements on several sticking points, health insurance taxes and prescription drug coverage among them, and dozens of other complicated issues — all as Republicans stand ready to oppose the overhaul en masse.

"We will finish the job," Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev., wrote in a letter to his Republican counterpart describing the path ahead.

Said Sen. Tom Harkin, D-Iowa: "The stars are aligning for victory on comprehensive health reform. The end is in sight."

Democratic Rep. Henry Waxman of California, chairman of the Energy and Commerce Committee, said the leadership will press ahead without reworking the abortion provision, which opponents say falls short in restricting taxpayer dollars for abortion coverage. He predicted some of the anti-abortion lawmakers in the party will end up voting for the overhaul anyway.

One point on which Obama may not get his way is the White House demand for a vote by March 18, a week away. Speaking to reporters after Democrats met for a status report on the emerging health care agreements, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi called the deadline merely "an interesting date."

Before a vote, Pelosi, D-Calif., said lawmakers must first receive a cost report from the Congressional Budget Office on changes to the bill being worked out among the White House and Democratic congressional leaders. After that, it could be a week or more before the legislation goes to the floor.

House Democrats were meeting behind closed doors Thursday to hear a point-by-point briefing on the latest health care compromise from White House health reform director Nancy Ann DeParle. Pelosi asked the members whether they wanted to vote sooner rather than later. They responded with a broad shout of "Yes!" according to lawmakers coming out of the session.

It will come down to a phenomenal effort by congressional leaders and the White House to win over skittish lawmakers after a year of incendiary debate, even as Obama keeps up campaign-style appearances designed to fire up public support.

At stake is the fate of the president's call to expand health care to some 30 million people who lack insurance and to prohibit insurance company practices such as denial of coverage on the basis of pre-existing medical conditions. Almost every American would be affected by the legislation, which would change the ways many people receive and pay for health care, from the most routine checkup to the most expensive, lifesaving treatment.

White House officials and congressional Democratic leaders met Wednesday evening in Pelosi's office. Aides said they agreed on scaling back a health insurance tax that unions oppose, and on gradually closing the Medicare prescription drug coverage gap. They were not far apart on other major issues, including Medicaid financing for states that already provide above-average benefits, and on improving subsidies that would be available under the plan to help individuals and families pay their premiums.

Several Democrats expressed frustration, however, with the absence of cost estimates from the Congressional Budget Office on the latest provisions. They want to ensure the total price tag stays around $950 billion over 10 years.

Those costs would be covered through a combination of Medicare cuts and tax increases. Among the new levies, the Medicare payroll tax would be applied to the investment earnings of upper-income people, including proceeds from capital gains. Until now, the tax has solely been levied on wages.

In a bit of bookkeeping, the Congressional Budget Office on Thursday released its final cost estimates for the bill the Senate passed on Christmas Eve. That 10-year, $875 billion plan would reduce the federal deficit and cover 31 million people who'd otherwise be uninsured. The Senate bill is the foundation of the proposal that Obama wants Congress to pass in the next few weeks. But the numbers will change yet again with the new version.

Obama invited members of the Congressional Black Caucus and the Congressional Hispanic Caucus to meet him Thursday at the White House to discuss the health legislation.

House and Senate Democrats are working on a complex rescue mission for the health care legislation, which appeared on the cusp of passage late last year before Senate Republicans gained the strength to sustain a filibuster that could prevent final passage. The White House is pushing for a vote by the House before Obama leaves on a foreign trip at the end of next week.

The current plan is for the House to approve the Senate-passed bill from late last year, despite serious objections to numerous provisions. Both houses then would pass a second bill immediately, making changes in the first measure before both could take effect. The second bill would be debated under rules that bar a filibuster, meaning it could clear by majority vote in the Senate without Democrats needing the 60-vote supermajority now beyond their reach.

That strategy would leave in place the Senate language on abortion. It would allow health plans receiving federal subsidies in a new insurance marketplace to cover abortion, provided they pay for it only with money collected from policyholders. The House bill would have prohibited health plans receiving subsidies from covering abortions.

Rep. Bart Stupak, D-Mich., has been pushing for the stricter House provisions, saying that he and a dozen or so abortion opponents would vote against the health care bill if the Senate language is retained. But the leadership appears to be moving to call his bluff.

Republicans have vowed to do everything they can to thwart the plan, and for the Democrats, some policy questions remain unsettled.

Obama already has moved to eliminate a couple of special deals in the Senate bill that turned off voters when they became public, including extra Medicaid money for Nebraska — derided by critics as the "Cornhusker kickback." Late Wednesday the White House said the president was pushing to strip out a number of deals that remain, possibly including a provision sought by Sen. Max Baucus, D-Mont., providing Medicare coverage for residents of Libby, Mont., who suffer from asbestos-related illnesses because of a now-closed mining operation.

Politico first reported the list.

Throughout my childhood, and into my alleged adult years, Jim Bunning was always the answer to this trivia question: Name the Phillies pitcher who threw a perfect game on Father's Day in 1964.
The answer: Jim Bunning.
As that became easy, the additional question was tacked on. What is he doing now? The answer was that he was a congressman from Kentucky.
Add a third question now.
Who can name the former Phillies pitcher who threw a perfect game in 1964, became a congressman from Kentucky and then became perfectly lame in 2010 by stonewalling jobs benefits with his conservative pomposity.

Are you kidding me with this, Olympic higher-ups? They're Canadians, for crying out loud. They were born drinking beer.

Personally, I found the gold medal women's hockey game one of the most refreshing events thus far (even if the wrong team won). There was real elation, and dejection, after the final horn sounded -- the kind you don't see from the NHL players on the men's side who go back to their million-dollar salaries once the medals are handed out.

Read on:

IOC to investigate Canadian women's hockey team for celebration

By Chris Chase

The International Olympic Committee will investigate the actions of Canadian women's hockey players who celebrated their gold medal victory Thursday night by swigging beer and smoking cigars on the ice in Vancouver.

A number of players, including 18-year-old superstar Marie-Philip Poulin, were drinking alcohol on the ice following the team's 2-0 defeat of the United States. (The legal drinking age in British Columbia is 19.) Players lingered for more than 70 minutes after the awards ceremony reveling in the arena, which was empty except for media and arena staff. (Click here to view a slideshow of the celebration.)

Gilbert Felli, the IOC's executive director of the Olympic Games, said that drinking in public was "not what we want to see" from athletes at an Olympic venue. The organization will investigate the actions and will speak with the international hockey federation and Canadian Olympic Committee and ask them to "act accordingly."

Steve Keough, a spokesman for the Canadian Olympic Committee, told the Associated Press, “We condone celebrations. … We don’t condone actions of irresponsibility. I think Canadians understand it’s quite an emotional moment for our team. It was not our intention to go against any IOC protocols.”

To be sure, the Canadian women's hockey team should have acted with more class and been a little more discreet with its celebration. But to do something drastic like ban the team from the Closing Ceremony or force them out of the Olympic Village would be an overreaction. In past Olympics we've seen steroids, political boycotts, cheating and judging scandals. A few puffs of a cigar hardly seems to be in the same league.

Tears of laughter or Tears of joy for this ridiculousness?

`Tea party' activists eagerly await Palin's words

By LIZ SIDOTI, Associated Press Writer Liz Sidoti, Associated Press Writer 1 hr 46 mins ago

NASHVILLE, Tenn. – These are Sarah Palin's people. Just ask them.

At the mere mention of her name, "tea party" activists light up and whip out "Saracudda" buttons — a play off her "Sara Barracuda" nickname from her high school basketball team in Alaska.

With a dash of familiarity, many say they didn't vote for Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz., in 2008 — they voted for "Sarah." Quite a few see her as the right person to carry their limited-government, low-tax, freedom-fighting mantle — if only she wanted it.

"She is the one," says Loren Nelson of Seattle. "And she's gonna do it."

Maybe.

The 2008 GOP vice presidential nominee isn't saying whether she'll run for president in 2012.

In fact, Republican observers say she's seemingly done more lately to establish herself as a political celebrity focused on publicity rather than a political candidate focused on policy.

If she does launch a White House bid, she has a natural constituency with this anti-establishment grass-roots network that's motivated by anger over the growth of government, budget-busting spending and President Barack Obama's policies.

In her latest media blitz since her "Going Rogue" book release last fall and the publicity tour that went with it, Palin was booked to give to give the keynote address Saturday night for the inaugural national "tea party" convention — a gathering of 600 activists from across the country.

Her fee is $100,000 for the appearance at the for-profit event. That sum has led to criticism from even some activists that it runs counter to the coalition's image and could preclude people from attending.

Palin struck back at critics in a column in USA Today, saying she weighed whether to participate.

"My decision came down to this: It's important to keep faith with people who put a little bit of their faith in you. Everyone attending this event is a soldier in the cause," she wrote. "I made a commitment to them to be there, and I am going to honor it."

Without elaborating, she says she won't benefit financially from speaking at the convention and any compensation from the appearance "will go right back to the cause."

"The soul of the Tea Party is the people who belong to it," Palin says. "They have the courage to stand up and speak out ... They believe in the same principles that guided my work in public service."

She called the "tea party" mentality an organic effort, a ground-up call to action. Because of that, she said, "the process may not always be pretty or perfect, but the message is loud and clear: We want a government worthy of the fine Americans that it serves."

The former Alaska governor also planned to tape an interview Saturday to air on "Fox News Sunday," the network where's been employed as a contributing analyst since January. Then it was off to Texas on Sunday to campaign for GOP Gov. Rick Perry, who is facing a bitter primary challenge from Sen. Kay Bailey Hutchison.

Next month, she will speak at a rally in Senate Democratic leader Harry Reid's hometown of Searchlight, Nev., to kick off the Tea Party Express III tour. In April, she heads to Boston for "tea party" gathering there around the one-year anniversary of the coalition that began last spring.

Yesterday, Howard Zinn ("A People's History of the United States"). Today, J.D. Salinger ("The Catcher in the Rye").

The world has lost two great voices, but their impacts live on.

Both forced ordinary people to think outside the box.

Is there any epitaph more great?