Needlenose

Like some others, my initial reaction to the 5-4 decision upholding the Affordable Care Act on Thursday was about the slender thread by which even a semblance of American democracy now hangs — the radical-right dissenters (now including former “centrist” Anthony Kennedy) made clear that they would act based solely on politics to overturn the entire law, and probably would have sought to invalidate Barack Obama’s election in 2008 and maybe a Super Bowl result or two if they could have found a decent excuse.  Even if Chief Justice John Roberts blinked this time at the prospect of announcing a de facto judicial coup, as Kevin Drum and others have noted, we can’t expect to be so lucky in the future.

That bleak note aside, I was intrigued by the political assertiveness some observers saw in President Obama’s post-decision statement from the White House, a humanely grounded defense of the ACA that Firedoglake’s David Dayen headlined “Obama Creates Teachable Moment” and Esquire’s Charles Pierce described as “The Progressive President Speaks Out“, saying:

The popular opinion among the pundits is that the president should now walk softly on this issue, or that the issue will fade as the campaign rolls on. I think that would be as big a mistake as his pulling back in the face of the manufactured outrage of 2010 was. The president should talk about this every day.

————————————-

I expect Obama will continue to make the healthcare bill an issue on the campaign trail — because, contrary to Jon Walker, I think further debate on this plays out well for him.  On the one hand, he can promote awareness of the bill’s benefits, which are more tangible now (or at least closer to becoming real) than they were in 2010.  On the other, as he did yesterday morning, Obama can position himself as a determined fighter for ordinary people even when the political tides are against him.  (Even if it seems implausible to progressives who’ve seen him abandon that fight too often, it’s probably a better tactic than talking about the economy, right?)

But more than anything else, I’m struck by what might have inspired this populist pugnacity in the president… was it because he shared the common perception that the law would be struck down?  Did he face the possibility that he’d have to justify to the public why he’d spent so much time and energy on the ACA, not to mention find a rallying cry after being legislatively emasculated by the Supreme Court?  Was it, once again, an example of Obama discovering that progressivism is his best political option, only after exhausting every other alternative?

If so, I hope the lesson sticks a bit better this time, and that he spends the rest of 2012 — and his second term, if he gets one — acting like he lost at the Supreme Court on Thursday.

(Cross-posted at Firedoglake.)

There they go again, the Greedy Old Pigs fighting for the right to protect their Sugar Daddies with back room deals.  Reid should accept their conditions, then secretly tape the proceedings and release the results via a leak during the election cycle.  Can you imagine what juicy nuggets these evil dimwits would let slip?  Could keep the Dems from losing some seats.

Thanks to Matt Yglesias yesterday for making the argument that my modest donations to John Edwards’ presidential campaign weren’t a total loss:

Repeatedly throughout his campaign, Edwards served as a useful progressive foil. He was never really up there with Clinton and Obama, but he was always close enough that they couldn’t simply ignore the possibility that his efforts to appeal to the base would work. So when Edwards unveiled his four point plan for achieving universal coverage—a plan based on exactly the pillars of ObamaCare—it made a huge difference and swiftly became the benchmark by which Clinton and Obama were judged. . . .

. . . The see-saw of the political expectations game is such that by the Spring of 2010 many people had convinced themselves that this approach to health care was a disappointing sellout. But back in the Spring of 2007, it was considered radical—a left-wing idea by the standards of a Democratic presidential primary. . . .

. . . Three years ago, few thought it was politically realistic. Tomorrow, it will be signed into law. But the whole thing easily could have never been taken up if not for the pressure Edwards put on others to shift in his direction.

(Images via Witty Comics.)

Swearing, yelling and flipping off reporters, Hillbilly Senator Jim Bunning carries on a one-man battle against extending unemployment benefits.  Seriously Senator?  I tell you what, if you feel so strongly about it, let’s just exclude benefits to Kentucky!  Come on Reid, don’t cut off his mic, cut off his Federal dollars spigot!

Meanwhile fellow Hillbilly Senator Lamar Alexander suffers either from an excess of hypocrisy or senility as he decries using the reconciliation process to pass legislation that the party of the minority plans to filibuster.

Why the hell are my tax dollars going to fund the folks in the states these idiots represent?

*Update*  This just keeps getting worse!  Democrat-in-Exile sent me this tip: Redneck Asshole Senator Inhofe is trying to intimidate climate scientists with McCarthyite witch-hunts.