SNL Palin 2012 Disaster Movie Parody
By Heather Monday Nov 23, 2009 6:00am
From Saturday Night Live Nov. 21, 2009
From Saturday Night Live Nov. 21, 2009
Every time we run a Glenn Beck post, someone trolls into the comments and asks, "Why bother with this guy? We should just ignore him! Post more videos on [insert name of preferred progressive figure here]!"
We'd like to refer them to this week's special report from the ADL on the rise of populist anti-government rage, the one that officially dubbed Beck our national "Fearmonger in Chief".
Keith Olbermann invited Arianna Huffington onto Countdown to discuss the report last night:
OLBERMANN: It would be nice to think of Glenn Beck just as a joke, as fodder for this show and the “Daily Show” and others that point out how stupid some of this stuff is. But this report, you know, suggests something else, this is—fearmonger-in-chief term is frightening.
HUFFINGTON: It is frightening. Well, I would say the fearmonger-in-chief title should still be reserved for Dick Cheney, even in retirement. But barring that, there is something that we need to really pay attention to with Glenn Beck. We cannot just dismiss him. Because the truth of the matter is that there is a good reason why we have an exemption to the free speech protection by the first amendment when we say you cannot shout fire in a crowded theater.
And he's doing that every night. He's basically using images of violence to bring together with all that he's accusing the Obama administration of, which varies from racism to communism, Nazism and everything else in between. So, all that has definitely an impact. I believe words matter, language matters and he's using it in incredibly irresponsible ways night after night.
OLBERMANN: What do you say to the argument that this country has always self corrected, that whether Father Coughlin on the radio in the ‘30s or Bo Carter (ph) who was a newscaster who presented literally stuff that was made up on the hour in CBS News in the ‘30s or the columnist Westbook Pegler or Senator Joe McCarthy? All these people a finale in which they exited the stage and suddenly. What is to say that that‘s not going to happen here?
HUFFINGTON: Well, I hope it's going to happen, but it's not going to happen without people pointing out what Glenn Beck is doing.
Indeed, since the report was issued, Beck seems to have turned up the Wingnuttery Dial all the way 11.
We put together a compendium of Beck's finest fearmongering of just the past year on Fox, inspired largely by the instances cited by the ADL -- with a few of our own favorite moments thrown in for good measure.
As Arianna says, confronting the Becks is vital to keeping our discourse healthy -- because he is polluting it daily with the toxic garbage of disinformation, paranoia, and scapegoating.
We discussed this recently in the matter of Lou Dobbs:
(h/t Heather at VideoCafe)
Rich Stockwell, senior producer at MSNBC's "Countdown", writes about his experiences at the free clinic funded by viewer contributions:
New Orleans, La. — - It happened as I watched a 50-something woman walk out, after spending several hours being attended to by volunteer doctors. "She's decided against treatment. A reasonable decision under the circumstances," the doctor tells us as she heads for the next patient. The president of the board of the National Association of Free Health Clinics tells me why: "It's stage four breast cancer, her body is filled with tumors." I don't know when that woman last saw a doctor. But I do know that if she had health insurance, the odds she would have seen a doctor long ago are much higher, and her chances for an earlier diagnosis and treatment would have been far greater.
After watching for hours as the patients moved through the clinic, it was hard to believe that I was in America.
Eighty-three percent of the patients they see are employed, they are not accepting other government help on a large scale, not "welfare queens" as some would like to have us believe. They are tax-paying, good, upstanding citizens who are trying to make it and give their kids a better life just like you and me.
Ninety percent of the patients who came through Saturday's clinic had two or more diagnoses.
Eighty-two percent had a life-threatening condition such as cardiovascular disease, diabetes, or hypertension. They are victims of a system built with corporate profits at its center, which long ago forgot the moral imperative that should drive us to show compassion to our fellow men and women.Health reform is not about Democrats or Republicans or who can score political points for the next election, it's about people. It's about fairness and justice in a system that knows none. I'd defy even the most hardened capitalist-loving-conservative to do what I did on Saturday and continue to pretend that the system in place right now is working.
Countdown chose to highlight and raise money for the Association of Free Clinics because we knew the work they do is so vitally important and we wanted to show in real terms how great the need is. We invited several politicians to attend so they could see first hand how critical the situation is. All declined. Some explained that they talk with constituents all the time and know very well of the need for reform.
I have news for them, these people didn't need to speak. Their actions spoke far louder than any words. Having to get a check up and diagnosis at a free clinic because they have no other option tells you all you need to know. There are no words that can accurately describe the quiet desperation on the faces of the patients. Every single one I spoke to, and every one I heard talking with doctors, expressed their gratitude for the event and wished that they were held more often.
November 13, 2009 MSNBC: Countdown with Keith Olbermann, Lawrence O'Donnell guest host
Dave N.: The famed 9/11 widow -- one of the people who helped force the creation of the 9/11 Commission and one of the leaders of the 9/11 victims' families organization -- went on with Lawrence O'Donnell last night and countered the right's favorite new fearmongering meme, namely, that holding civilian trials for the 9/11 conspirators in New York might set them free.
O'Donnell: Some of the victims' families of 9/11 have indicated that they're not pleased with this move to New York. How do you react to this?
Breitweiser: I think those families seem to be indicating a sense of anger or fear. And I think really, to be feeling those types of things, it doesn't fit my personality. I think that that's bowing to the terrorists. I think there is no better place than the Southern District of New York to be having these prosecutions heard. I think it's an open forum. And I think it speaks to the world that we are in fact a nation of laws. And frankly, I think, after eight years of the Bush administration we've got a lot of work in restoring our legitimacy to the rest of the world, that we are indeed a just nation that follows the rule of law.
Take that, Bill O'Reilly.
Dear 24 Hour Cable News Channels:
I understand your dilemma, I really do. You have 44 minutes on the hour to fill with content. And it has to be compelling stuff, so that the viewer isn't tempted to channel surf to your rivals. In the situation like the Fort Hood shootings, where news is coming scattershot and conflicting, it's even more difficult.
See? I get it.
But having said that--and I say this with love and respect--PLEASE, SHUT. THE. F#@K. UP. Don't spend time guessing on motivations when there is so little information available. Don't surmise terrorist intent when you can't possibly know. And for the love of everything holy, don't go to criminal profiler Cliff "A Hammer Sees Everything As A Nail" Van Zandt (a crime of which Keith Olbermann is also guilty) to make up utter bovine excrement.
At the time that Van Zandt was waxing rhapsodic over possible terrorist inclinations, remember, the news was that there were two or three shooters, one of whom was dead (Hasan, the single shooter, was alive and being treated at the time). That Maj. Nadil Hasan was of Jordanian, Arab, or Palestinian birth (he was born in Virginia of Palestinian immigrant parents), that he was a recent Muslim convert (he had been a practicing Muslim his whole life), that he was suffering from PTSD, or secondary PTSD from his work with returning vets in Virginia, that he was sympathetic with suicide bombers, angry at bad evaluations, upset at being deployed to Iraq, frustrated by the Army's dismissal of the harassment he got at Ft. Hood about his faith and/or desperate to get out of his upcoming deployment.
Bottom line: we didn't know enough. It was irresponsible of you to try to make suppositions when the information (including the fact that he was alive) was so sketchy.
And to focus on the one known of his name and then presuming his faith (A lot of 2nd and 3rd generation immigrants don't necessarily practice the religions of their grandparents, yet still have Middle Eastern names, and I will reiterate, in those early hours, WE DIDN'T KNOW) to then suggest jihadist and/or terrorist sympathies was to give legitimacy to all those hate-mongers like Michelle Malkin and Fox & Friends anchors Doocy and not-Doocy to once again, call into question ALL Muslims.
Don't you get it? "Terrorism" is not defined as "any violence by any Muslim anywhere at any time for any reason." If it's true that Hasan had been the victim of harassment because of his religion and that contributed to his state of mind, then those who create and foster an environment that makes it acceptable to demonize and dehumanize Muslims were right there with him, pulling the trigger. To focus on Hasan's faith as you did in those early hours was the lazy approach and avoids the deeper reasons:
Alan, Alan, Alan...you forgot to use the Keith Olbermann "How to talk to Bill O'Reilly's stalker-producer in a way that guarantees the interview doesn't get on the air" guide for dealing with this sort of situation. Bill-O decided to send his stalker-producer Griff Jenkins out to do another one of his ambush interviews to get Rep. Grayson to respond to calling Enron lobbyist turned Fed lobbyist Linda Robertson a "K Street whore", which Grayson has since apologized for.
Someone needs to send Rep. Grayson Keith's tips in case Griffy-boy decides to take some more time away from promoting the Tea Baggers and sit outside of his office all day waiting to shove a microphone in his face. Three words Mr. Grayson--Malmedy, Mackris, loofah.
Howie Klein's got more on Grayson's comment about Linda Robertson over at the HuffPo--Alan Grayson calls a whore a whore-- Beltway whores freak out & defend Enron lobbyist working at the Fed.
Rachel Maddow weighed in on the ongoing dust-up between the White House and Fox News and the collective freak-out by Fox and the right wing over herself and Keith Olberman, among others, being invited to a meeting at the White House. She wrapped it up with this statement:
Maddow: You can be upset all you want that the president meets with people who you disagree with. But consider being fair and balanced in your criticism, at least admit that this White House has met with both sides while the Bush White House did not. You should especially admit that if you happened to have been a member of the Bush White House during that administration.
Keith joined Rachel later in the segment and talked about how hypocritical and completely disingenuous all of this pearl clutching has been by the right.
Transcript below the fold.
The wingnuts were out in force yesterday denouncing that Washington Post/ABC News poll showing strong public support for the public option.
But as Keith Olbermann pointed out last night, there was a lot more data in the poll that should really have them clutching their pearls and fainting:
OLBERMANN: When anti-government protesters targeted President Obama and other Democratic leaders on April 15, the party took a hit. When town halls raged and the Tea Bag crowd hit Washington, the party staggered further. Now, the Tea Bag guys are on the move again. But in our third story tonight, signs that the party getting hurt by the anti-government Tea Bag people is the Republican party.
This week's "Washington Post"/ABC poll found 51 percent of Americans say that in next year's Congressional vote, faced with the generic Democrat versus the generic Republican, they'll vote for the Democrat; 39 percent will vote for the Republican. Only 19 percent have at least a good amount of confidence in Congressional Republicans to make the right decisions, far lower than Democrats or the president, for that matter.
And the number of Americans calling themselves Republicans has fallen to 20 percent -- 20, the lowest since 1983. A closer look shows that number has fallen from 25 percent just since mid-August. That's not a five percent loss for Republicans. Dropping from 25 percent to 20 percent is a loss of a fifth. Meaning since the height of town hall, Palin, Beck, death panel palooza, one out of five Republicans has stopped being Republican.
Republicans stopped at 25 percent back in March too, nine days after Tea Bag nations. Republicans were down to 21 percent. Naturally, Republicans are trying again. That's right, Tea Party Express II launches this weekend, coming to 38 cities, according to its press release, 37 on their website. Oh, well.
Previous Tea Parties so successful, they now have to hold them in such venues as Wichita's Lawrence Piedmont Stadium (ph) parking lot, Fallon (ph) Nevada's old Walmart's parking lot, a high school auditorium in Tri-Cities in Washington, Bozeman, Montana's Heritage Christian School gymnasium, and in Amarillo, Texas, John Stiff Memorial Park, picnic area number four. Seriously, picnic area number four. Don't interrupt the outing in area number three, please.
A dozen cities have no venue listed at all. According to the tour's Facebook page, "192 people are planning to attend these rallies."
In its own press release, a spokesman says about its new video, the web video promoting the tour, quote, "the tone of the ad is upbeat and positive." The name of the upbeat, positive ad is, "Countdown to Judgment Day."
And here's what upbeat and positive sounds like to these people.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: If you had enough of the out-of-control spending, bailouts, higher taxes, a spiraling national debt and big-government liberalism, then we invite you to join the Tea Party Express rally nearest you. We'll send a message to the politicians. Come election day, we're going to hand you a pink slip and take our country back.
Of course, it was simpler for Sean Hannity to just be in denial, since the poll made a liar out of him the day before when he tried to claim all the polls showed the public hated the public option. So he went on his show last night and said this:
Hannity: The business of this White House is division. And the White House's war against Fox News Channel is the latest evidence that it will throw its principles by the wayside to ensure that everybody falls in line with their agenda. And with the exception of Fox News, the other networks, they're receiving gold stars on their White House report cards.
And the latest case in point is the Washington Post/ABC News poll that shows that 57 percent of Americans support a government health-care takeover, and only 40 percent oppose it.
Now, a closer look at that poll explains why. Now, get this: They polled 13 percent more Democrats than Republicans! That explains a few things!
Of course, if Sean Hannity worked for a real news organization, he would likely know -- or have somebody around to explain to him before committing idiocies like this -- that polls use what they call "sampling" to get accurate results. In this case, they sampled more Democrats than Republicans for a very simple reason: The latest party-identification polling shows a 13-percent difference between Americans who call themselves Democrats and those who (shudderingly) admit to being Republican.
But then, Hannity doesn't work for a real news organization. So of course this kind of propagandistic crap is what we get polluting our teevees. Which, anymore, is the only thing the shrinking ranks of the rabid right have going for them still.
The wingnuts do get themselves all worked up, don't they?
The fringey-right are upset at the news that Keith Olbermann and Rachel Maddow attended an off-the-record briefing at the White House:
A day after key White House officials declared the Fox News Channel wasn't a news organization, President Obama met with MSNBC personalities Keith Olbermann and Rachel Maddow.
Talk about your delicious hypocrisy.
Fittingly, the news was broken by FNC's Bret Baier during Tuesday's "Special Report" (video embedded below the fold with transcript, relevant section at 1:45, h/t Hot Air via NBer Thomas Stewart):
BRET BAIER, HOST: And finally, during this morning's off-camera White House briefing with reporters, ABC's Jake Tapper asked Press Secretary Robert Gibbs about the ongoing White House attacks on FOX News Channel.
After being asked about the charge that FOX isn't a real news organization, Gibbs answered, quote "We render opinion based on some of their coverage and the fairness of that coverage."
Tapper: "That's a sweeping declaration that they're not a news organization. How are they different from say, ABC, MSNBC, Univision?"
Gibbs: "You and I should watch around 9:00 tonight or 5:00 this afternoon."
Tapper: "I'm not talking about the opinion programs or issues you have with certain reports. I'm talking about saying that thousands of individuals who work for a media organization do not work for a news organization. Why is that appropriate for the White House to say?"
Gibbs: "That is our opinion."
Well, the White House's strong opinions about our opinion shows - - Glenn Beck runs at 5:00 p.m. and Sean Hannity at 9:00 p.m. -- apparently do not extend to similar shows on other networks.
A White House official confirms to us that the audience for Monday's off the record briefing with President Obama included MSNBC personalities Keith Olbermann and Rachel Maddow.
Hmmm. So the White House thinks Fox isn't a news organization because it has a perspective, and specifically points fingers at Beck and Hannity.
What does the Adminstration think Olbermann and Maddow have?
I guess it's not a problem for a new organization and its members to have a perspective so long as it's one the White House shares.
They seem to miss the big difference between people like Olbermann and Maddow: They attempt to gather and present facts on their shows. Sometimes they slip up, but it's not usually intentional. Get it?
And they're suffering from memory loss again:
The guest list included Sean Hannity, Neal Boortz, Michael Medved, Laura Ingraham, and Mike Gallagher. (Rush Limbaugh was unable to attend.) Friday’s off-the-record talk, set for 30 minutes, ended up lasting 90 minutes, where Bush told his guests that the war on terror has to be about right versus wrong, “because if it’s about Christianity versus Islam, we’ll lose.” He also showed them the pistol Saddam Hussein had when he was captured.
Continuing his Anita Dunn jihad -- in fact, he devoted nearly his entire hour yesterday to attacking Dunn speciously -- Glenn Beck featured a segment with an anonymous "Concerned Parent" who actually attended the high-school commencement ceremony at which Dunn delivered her now-notorious "Mao" remarks. To protect his identity from the evil White House thugs who no doubt would brutalize the poor fellow, they altered his voice and showed him only in silhouette.
But John Aravosis noted a particular family resemblance between this silhouette and a familiar profile at Fox News"
Well, today America's favorite sociopath had a super duper double secret "anonymous" parent on to complain about a graduation speech that Ms. Dunn gave a while back. The thing is, when you look at the alleged parent, who was speaking from FOX's Washington, DC bureau, he sure looks an awful lot like FOX's own Chris Wallace. Check out the screen capture above from the TV. I posted a normal photo of Wallace to the left, and one in which I scrunched his head to the right (since the anonymous parent looks like they scrunched the video of his head, to further disguise him). Is it just me, or are those trademark ears and helmet-head hair just a little too similar to Chris Wallace's?

That's always fun speculation. But then Richard Wolffe of Newsweek went on Countdown with Keith Olbermann last night and pointed out that there was more than just a resemblance:
Wolffe: Look at how this video has just popped up about Anita Dunn and her graduation ceremony of her own son. You know, this video, which was not available for public record, happened to pop up on the Glenn Beck show. And it's the same school where Chris Wallace spoke the year before because his kids also went there.
Was that coincidence, or is Fox determined to take this to another level? That's not about news, it's about personal attacks. Look, they may enjoy it for all sorts of commercial reasons. But it goes way beyond the commercial aspect here. There is an unholy jihad going on.
Someone needs to ask Chris Wallace if he is Beck's "Concerned Parent." Just, you know, to clear things up.
This one had me chuckling. After all of the air time Liz Cheney has been given on Morning Joe and some of the other MSNBC daytime programs, her new group, the ironically named "Keep America Safe" is running an ad saying that Chris Matthews, Ed Schultz and Keith Olbermann are afraid to debate her.
From The Plum Line-New Ad From Liz Cheney’s Group Bashes Olbermann, Matthews As “Afraid” To Debate Her:
The implication being, of course, that the MSNBC gang is running scared from Ms. Cheney. If memory serves, though, Ms. Cheney has repeatedly been granted a platform on … MSNBC, again and again and again, to defend her pop’s legacy and champion policies that don’t even exist anymore.
Looking forward to the lily-livered liberal network crew’s response to this one. Maybe they’ll invite her on again a bunch more times to discuss her contempt for them.
And from Benen:
Earlier this year, Liz Cheney spent so much time on the cable news networks, I think she had her mail forwarded to the green rooms on N. Capitol. At one point, the "liberal media" had the former State Department official on 22 times in 24 days. Not only were many of these appearances on MSNBC, but when people like me started complaining about the news networks turning Cheney into a right-wing celebrity, Liz Cheney's biggest defender was ... MSNBC.
And now Cheney wants to turn the network into a punching bag?
Also, I couldn't help but notice that Liz Cheney's ad targets Olbermann, Matthews, and Schultz, but seems to have left out one high-profile MSNBC host: Rachel Maddow. Indeed, Rachel has invited Liz Cheney onto her show many, many times, and yet, Cheney has declined every opportunity.
To borrow a phrase, why doesn't Liz Cheney want to talk substance? Why doesn't she want to debate the issues?
I would be surprised if Cheney hasn't been invited to appear on all of those shows, although I'm not sure why any of them would want to give the likes of her some air time so she can spend the segment interrupting and talking over them. She doesn't debate anyone. She filibusters and talks over anyone she's on the air with so she can get her talking points out without actually answering any questions. If they put her in a debate box off the set with a mute button they might get a word in edgewise.
I wonder if her cohort Bloody Bill Kristol wants some face time during prime time on MSNBC as well? I'd absolutely love to see him come on Rachel or Keith's shows.
From The Washington Independent:
At a briefing for conservative bloggers at the Heritage Foundation today, Rep. Michelle Bachmann (R-Minn.) dismissed MSNBC as a network neither she nor “most of the American people” paid attention to.
“Quite honestly I don’t even know anything about MSNBC,” said Bachmann. “It’s not a network that I watch, and most of the American people agree with that assessment. They aren’t watching it either. And that’s why Fox’s ratings — I mean, it’s like, CNN, CNBC, MSNBC combined. I think Fox even exceeded one of the major networks last week. They’re on the ascendency.”
Bachmann praised conservative bloggers for getting out the truth past the filters of the old media. “I didn’t fear my own editorial boards in Minneapolis-St. Paul when I lived there,” she said. “I’m certainly not going to fear the likes of Keith Olbermann.”
I went on Countdown last night to chat with Lawrence O'Donnell -- who was filling in for Keith Olbermann -- about Bill Clinton's remarks the other day about the never-ending bloodlust of the "vast right-wing conspiracy".
O'Donnell was critical of Clinton for suggesting that the power of the conspiracy was less today than what he faced -- and regarding that aspect of Clinton's remarks, I agree with him. The reality, as I explained in the segment, is that the spread and reach of the really virulent wingnuttery that plagued Clinton -- the black-helicopter conspiracy theories like Mena, or the Vince Foster suicide, or the Clinton Body Count -- was largely relegated, until later in his tenure, to the fringes of the militia movement.
Obama, by contrast, is not even through his first year as president and he's already being plagued by Birthers and Tenthers and Teabaggers and Death Panels (along with, of course, the obligatory "He's Going To Grab Our Guns" conspiracies).
And it's true, moreover, the Clinton is right that the country has changed demographically since he was president, which means they do not possess the actual political power they held during much of his tenure. But they've made up for the lack of power with a much deeper reach into the mainstream. I dunno about you, but it sure looks to me like the Teabaggers are the new Patriots -- and there's a hell of a lot more of them.
Perhaps more to the point, they've already demonstrated -- by at least temporarily derailing the debate over health-care reform with wingnutty distractions like the "death panels" and the gun-brandishing nutcases showing up at health-care town hall forums -- that they continue to have an outsize influence on the national discourse. Especially because of Fox News and the rest of the mainstream media's willingness to be bullied by them -- led, as always, by the wise media poobahs of the Beltway Village.
That is -- and you can file this under the L'esprit de l'escalier Dept., since I meant to say it in this segment -- what they lack in power they've more than made up for by continuing to pull the media reins and shape the national discourse. They're able to move the media needles still -- which is, of course, the problem. The Village gives movement conservatives far more respect than they deserve, especially at this juncture, with the movement fully in the hands of nutty populist demagogues.
Glenn Beck is as popular as he is because everyone in the "mainstream" is too busy running fawning puff pieces to point out his actual extremism. No one has the guts to explain that these people are driving the Republicans over a cliff into political oblivion.
In The Eliminationists, I do talk a lot about how vicious the campaign against Clinton got to be -- and how many bridges and alliances were built between the far right and mainstream conservatives during those years as a result, particularly in the way right-wing talkers started picking up and transmitting memes from the far right.
Finally, I should add that, while I disagree with Clinton on this point, I generally agreed with the overall thrust of his recent comments, particularly his warning that the "conspiracy" (as it were) remains a potent force, capable of undermining Obama's presidency in unexpected ways. One can't help but suspect that Obama has been naive on this front -- how many times does he have to reach out to Republicans and come back with a chewed-up hand to get it? -- and I suspect Clinton intended to point out the cold reality. To which I can only add: Hear! Hear!
Last night on Countdown, Eugene Robinson and Keith Olbermann agreed on the risks for Obama: If he doesn't come up with a viable public option, he will very likely face a challenger in the Democratic primary.
Olbermann: But what about the risk of passing some sort of interim measure here and we hear Congressman [Raul] Grijalva, who's the head of the Progressive Caucus having released a statement last night about grave concerns about these contacts supposedly from the administration to health care reform advocacy organizations they are going to cease supporting the public option. What good does it profit a man to win a bill and lose the base of his party?
Robinson: In the medium term and in the long run it doesn't strike me as a great idea. I mean look, you could say okay, this is the best bill we can get. Is the liberal Progressive Caucus going to thwart what is possible in search of the perfect? And so you could put them in that position and you could maybe wrestle them into going along with what they consider a bad bill, but there's a lot else on the table. He's, our involvement in Afghanistan is deepening, we're talking about Iraq, we're talking about Guantanamo. We're talking about a lot of issues on which the Progressive Caucus is going to have a lot to say and I don't think you want them to be in a foul mood.
Olbermann: No, no, no because he's compromised on everything so far and as self defeating as it might be, the Progressive Caucus and progressives would abandon him if necessary if this were to be the policy of this administration into 2012. If it's necessary to find somebody else to run against him, I think they'd do it no matter how destructive that might seem at face value.
Robinson: Well, I think that is possible. We are a more polarized nation right now and I think searching for a mythical center, a mythical compromise between doing something and doing nothing, ah... there's nothing in the middle there, you know. Either you're going to do something or you're not and I think you've got to choose.
Olbermann: The middle has been nothing all this time. This is just a different variant of it.
Meanwhile, the House Dems' Progressive Caucus has fired a return shot across the bow. Last night they delivered a letter to the White House: Not only will they not support a House bill, they will not vote for the final bill without it and asked for a meeting with the president:
We continue to support the robust public option that was reported out of the Committees on Ways and Means and Education and Labor and will not vote for a weakened bill on the House Floor or returning from a Conference with the Senate.
Any bill that does not provide, at a minimum, a public option built on the Medicare provider system and with reimbursement based on Medicare rates-not negotiated rates-is unacceptable.(...)
A health reform bill without a robust public option will not achieve the health reform this country so desperately needs. We cannot vote for anything less.
To date, only six members have signed. If they get to 40, we have a very different ballgame.
Keith Olbermann blasts Glenn Beck for his tin-foil hat wearing rant about Rockefeller Center and MSNBC and their "communist, fascist, progressive building".