A lot of people are noting that Orwell was a socialist and Gingrich doesn’t know what he’s talking about [in his CPAC address], but I’m much more appalled that Gingrich thinks a dystopic piece of fiction was “proof” that “that centralized planning inherently leads to dictatorship” and an argument against health-care reform. That’s like me saying “The Shawshank Redemption” is proof that prison walls are too weak and we should invest serious money into reinforcing them against extremely small rock picks.

And now something adorable to take my mind off the fact that Barack Obama has just restarted America’s nuclear weapons development program.

What part of this is so hard for you to understand (emphasis added)?

the new strategy commits the United States to developing no new nuclear weapons, including the nuclear bunker-busters advocated by the Bush administration.

There will indeed be proposed budgetary increases in funding for basic high energy research via NSF and, yes, also through the various government labs tasked with development and upkeep of the nuclear arsenal, as well as through other funding mechanisms. All of this is aimed at understanding the ongoing implications of long-term storage of existing warheads (which were never designed with shelf-life in mind), and is a very different thing than “restarting” nuclear weapons development. That long-term storage part being the thing we’ve already done with weapons we already have. Bush policy was to simply replace all these weapons with something entirely new and/or also updating and using the existing physics packages of existing weapons to sidestep laws, treaties, and/or funding limitations that are and were preventing the development of new weapons.

Let’s review: Obama’s administration is, on the basis of this review, moving to radically and unilaterally (and finally) reduce the number of extant nuclear weapons the United States has in inventory, reduce or remove tactical weapons from Europe and other locales, and the Obama administration is, in fact, stopping new nuclear weapon design and development started under Bush. Other than those minor quibbles, though, you’re right on with your concerns.

Comprehensive health care reform will not work through reconciliation. But if the House passes the Senate bill, and wants certain things improved on, like affordability, the Medicaid provisions, how much of Medicaid expenses are paid for by the Federal government, that is something that could be done through reconciliation.
A sidecar would be a good candidate for reconciliation depending on what’s in it,
The only thing that works here is the House has to pass the Senate bill, then the House can initiate a reconciliation measure that would deal with a limited number of issues that score for budget purposes.

Kent Conrad (~D, ND) and (clearly) a friend to Lemkin

The Democrat has spent (at least) two full days “scrambling” over what to do about this. Here’s an idea: make him talk. Relentlessly. 36, 72, 176 hours: whatever it takes until he collapses. Then hold the fucking vote by asking for unanimous consent to do so. Dare Republicans to let it “marinate.” Dare them. This is how you earn respect.

All the while, you scream on microphones outside the Senate chambers about how this is all 100% indicative of the Party of No.

Is this so hard to understand? Apparently it is.