According to this news story,  the Texas Supreme Court (sans Alberto Gonzales), found that Tom Delay's trial can go forward.  The applicable texas statute prevents corporations from making donations to individual candidates.  Citizens U puts a big damper on that indictment.

I am staying the hell away from downtown on April 19th.  Do you think it's just an oversight that, uh, it's illegal to carry guns in DC without a DC permit and the website fails to mention that?  Nah, it couldn't be.  'Cause otherwise, you know, there might be violence.

I've read all the breathless commentary on kos and elsewhere, and I have to confess the following reactions.  

• The bill is better than nothing, for sure.  It addresses some really, really bad things that insurance companies do, and that should have been outlawed a long time ago.  That it passed is a miracle.  There are, however, parts that are enormously complex and that will be lobbied, gamed and otherwise distorted as it moves through the regulatory process.
• That it passed is an encouraging sign for this country.  The merits of such legislation, when you boiled down to it, were such that on substance there was no reasonable position against it.  Period.  Look at the quality of the opposition's arguments.  Fake memos.  Racial epithets.  Socialism.  Communism.  Dictatorship.  Gays.  Abortion.  These aren't policy arguments, they are slogans divorced from any measure of objective reality.  The bill (a) saves money; and (b) covers more people.  
• That it was watered down so much is discouraging.  Although an improvement, there were a lot of provisions that made eminent sense which did not make it into the bill, including a public option and bulk negotiation over prescription drugs.  The interests that opposed this are not going away, and they came pretty close to winning.  The media is no help.  If you think we're out of the woods, look at Howard Kurtz's column defending press coverage of the legislation, and its focus on teabaggers and race-horse process.  (No link on principle).  

So yeah, I'm glad it passed.  Whew.  It shows that as a country, the sane beat the insane by a score of 219-212.  That's a win, but not a rout.  

Because at least once a day, they produce something better than any newspaper--(e.g., greenwald, digby, john cole, josh).
Occasionally, they produce something truly excellent.  This is one such piece.

So the Supreme Court turned down the torture appeal.  This is bad news, but IMO it would be a bad thing indeed if the case went up.  What it suggests (absent some procedural wrinkle) is that the outcome is uncertain.  Four votes can be expected against the DC circuit; four votes can be predicted to affirm.  Kennedy was the hair-splitter in past cases.  If this case mattered that much to you, would you want him to be the hair-splitter?
A Supreme Court decision affirming what the government did would be far worse than a DC Circuit opinion that could be reversed later.  And I suspect there will be other cases, somehow.

Carville and Greenberg focus-grouped a bunch of conservative republicans, and they determined that race did not motivate them.  These voters are, admittedly, conscious of being called racists, and say that if they disagree with Obama's policies, they fear being tagged with that label or are at least aware that they will be.  It's also clear that no amount of fact is going to penetrate their bubble.  These folks are hard-core.
At the risk of being accused of discounting evidence in front of my nose, I don't buy the absence of a substantial racial angle.  At all.  And, (shocker!) none of the voters admitted to harboring prejudices--just like that justice of the peace in Louisiana.  I simply don't trust the reliability of their research on something like this.  It's not as if the report surveyed their attitudes on other aspects of life or programs, and asked -why- they held particular positions.  It's been my experience that most people that harbor prejudices will simply deny having them, and then ask the black guy next to them how long they've been a janitor.  Most people who are really not will admit to thinking about race, and not being really sure whether certain beliefs are "right" or "wrong," but at least actively endeavor to figure that question out.  Given this focus group's makeup, it's just not convincing.  If Michelle Obama can't travel to SC because of security, something is seriously out of whack.
And I have to wonder about the angles of the authors.  Cui bono?  (I honestly don't know the answer to that).  *The above is rank speculation and should be regarded as such.  Comments welcomed.

So it seems some feewings at the White House got hurt, and they're "shocked" that the insurance industry would do such a thing.  
Let me explain.  No.  There is too much.  Let me sum up.
In order for this to be a "surprise" of other than the "gee I didn't know you were going to do this -today-" variety, you would have to have believed that the tea party/freedom works movement protesting "death panels" and the like all spontaneously erupted out of genuine citizen concern and understanding.  Betsy McAughey [sic?] is out telling lies because she feels morally compelled to do so.  And the thing is, IT WORKED.  The scaremongering, lies, and non-stop media focus on complete BS caused all kinds of problems, including (a) dropping BO's approval rating and (b) causing all kinds of legislative delays.  
If you were them, having witnessed what you just got away with, why wouldn't you go to the same playbook again?  AHIP just witnessed how effective the "ooga-booga" strategy can be. All they need is a couple of weeks and, compared to the "death panel" approach, the critiques are far more difficult to explain (tho' Klein does a decent job at the WaPo).  (No links to that rag any longer) and can be dismissed as "social scientists disagree" or some other such nonsense.     
In short, scaremongering worked.  It's no surprise they're back at it.  And, once again, the Post treated that release as A1 news.  Too bad they discontinued their pay-for-access regime, right?

The funny guy knows his stuff.
Note the style: minimal speechmaking, found the premise of the employers' argument, and attacked it ruthlessly with short, pointed questions.  And wouldn't let him waffle, or run out the clock.  The whole thing was decidedly un-senatorial.  (Taking the witness to task over a probable typo is a bit much, and I'll bet whoever drafted that testimony caught hell back at the office.  Nonetheless, the way the premise was dismantled was beautiful).

Franken for SCOTUS?

So the PO goes down because of a bunch of insurance company lackeys from, by and large, rural states.  There ain't that many voters in these states.  I really, really, hope that we see a primary.  
It's not over, though. The PO is in the House bill, and there still is such a thing as a floor amendment.  The most important thing now is that these senators find out that their vote has consequences.

Remember that story about how the swim club in Philly kicked out a group of minority kids that had rented the place and then said "racist?" "Who, us?"  
Yes, you.Cost of excluding one kid: $50K (paid to the state).  
It's a shame that the lunacy of Glenn Beck et al so dominates our national discourse, because since the shrub left office it seems like these kinds of stories are becoming more frequent, if underreported.

It's been, I think, one of the great unchallenged truths of the conservative mythos that St. Ronald and his Star Wars plan bankrupted the Soviets.  Well, it turns out that that wasn't true at all, really,  Reagan's role was considerably less than his hagiographers would have us believe. Nobody could have predicted this, of course.

Like, late night I'm on a first class flight
The only brother in sight the flight attendent catch fright
I sit down in my seat, 2C
She approach officially talkin about, "Excuse me"
Her lips curl up into a tight space
Cause she don't believe that I'm in the right place
-Mos Def

Does anyone really think that Wilson (R-Crackerville) would have talked that way to a white president? Really?  Really?  Which one?
Over at Digby's place, there is a post suggesting that this is OK because in England, they do this all the time.  This ain't England.  As I recall, as a country, we made that point as clear as we possibly could have.  If the president talks to congress every week and takes their questions, then perhaps we would have that tradition.  We don't.  
There is nothing left of the Republican party but white trash.  And yes, I think Wilson ought to be called a racist.  And a liar.
Here ends todays rant.

Mental health break.  
The joys of youtube.  

Bloomberg has sued the Fed to disclose documents describing how the TARP money (and that infused into various affiliated programs) was actually used by the banks that signed up for it.  A federal district court has done what Congress could not do: order the Fed to turn this information over under the FOIA.  The banks, it turns out, have taken the position that the release of accurate information will cause the spread of rumors that will undermine the capitalist system.  Because, you know, in the system right now, BoA is a magic pony that exists due to its superb financial management (of unlimited taxpayer largesse.)

There is a jaw-dropping article in Time in which the CEO of Goldman (this year's comp: 68.5 million) expresses his consternation that people hate Goldman Sachs despite the fact that they're making sh---loads of money.  I just don't understand these people.
(I was going to write about TK.  Ironically, it feels like the country lost someone who understands how folks like Goldman play the game (and, indeed, could have easily played on that side), but yet decided to use those talents and privileges for those who did not have them because, as he figured out, the game is if not rigged, very difficult to play.)