VIDEO- Rachel Maddow eviscerates Orrin Hatch: It is a L-I-E.

By GottaLaff

Republicans shouldn't even try to lie any more. Ever. Rachel will call you out loudly and clearly:

Visit msnbc.com for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy

Hyp. O. Crites.

Eviscerated.

"Hatch just wants to sink it, whether it's unconstitutional or not"

By GottaLaff

Here's another L.A. Times letter to the editor that I found interesting, this time on the health care mandate:

Hatch and Utah Atty. Gen. Mark Shurtleff write: "The mandate that individuals obtain health insurance . . . would be the first time in American history that Congress has required all Americans to purchase a particular good or service."

That's incorrect. We are already forced by the federal (and state) government to buy goods or services we might not desire. The feds require me to buy Social Security insurance; the state requires me to buy disability insurance.

The feds can coerce states into action when the general public welfare is served. The federal government can withhold educational funding to states that don't implement the No Child Left Behind Act. In the 1970s, it threatened to withhold highway funds to states that didn't implement the 55 mph speed limit.

Amar makes sense: The healthcare bill is constitutional.

But that really doesn't matter. Hatch just wants to sink it, whether it's unconstitutional or not.

He sure got that last part right.

Video- Happy Hanukkah from Orrin Hatch

Eight Days of Hanukkah from Tablet Magazine on Vimeo.

Oh my, I couldn't resist. Via Ben.

Separation of Church and... Health Care

By GottaLaff

Paddy's earlier Tuesday Linkage post mentioned this briefly, but when I opened my L.A. Times this morning, I opened my eyes, too... wider and wider.

Abortion is one of the favorite health care reform sticking points that the punditiots opine about daily, but we haven't heard a peep about equating prayer with clinical medical treatment:

Backed by some of the most powerful members of the Senate, a little-noticed provision in the healthcare overhaul bill would require insurers to consider covering Christian Science prayer treatments as medical expenses.

The provision was inserted by Sen. Orrin G. Hatch (R-Utah) with the support of Democratic Sens. John F. Kerry and the late Edward M. Kennedy, both of Massachusetts, home to the headquarters of the Church of Christ, Scientist.

The measure would put Christian Science prayer treatments -- which substitute for or supplement medical treatments -- on the same footing as clinical medicine. While not mentioning the church by name, it would prohibit discrimination against "religious and spiritual healthcare."

I understand the premise, but that creaking sound you hear is the door opening... too widely.

It would have a minor effect on the overall cost of the bill -- Christian Science is a small church, and the prayer treatments can cost as little as $20 a day. But it has nevertheless stirred an intense controversy over the constitutional separation of church and state, and the possibility that other churches might seek reimbursements for so-called spiritual healing.

It would be part of the policies offered in the "exchange" we've been hearing about. The so-called marketplace could now include prayer.

But critics say the measure could have a broader effect, conferring new status and medical legitimacy on practices that lie outside the realm of science. [...]

[T]he opportunity to receive payment for spiritual care could encourage other groups to seek similar status.

Nancy Pelosi agreed that this would be unconstitutional and took it out of the House bill.

Erwin Chemerinsky, dean of the UC Irvine School of Law, said the provision raised serious questions about government support of religion.

There would be no mandate for spiritual care, but Dr. Norman Fost, a pediatrician and medical ethicist at the University of Wisconsin, said:

"They want a special exception for people who use unproved treatments, and they also want to get paid for it," he said. "They want people who use prayer to have it just automatically accepted as a legitimate therapy."

Why would religious consultation be acceptable when end-of-life counseling wouldn't? Church panels v. death panels. One is faith-based, one is option-based. So, if I have blind faith in options, would that pass muster enough to slip into final legislation, too?

During the day, Davis may see multiple patients and pray for them at different moments. He charges them $20 to $40 for the day, saying, "I think that it would be considered modest by any standard."

So as long as it doesn't cost an arm and a leg, separation of church and health care doesn't apply? Is that all it takes? Bargain basement prices and you get a thumbs up! It's the Wal-Mart of health care reform.

I'm not at all religious, but I pray this gets a little more attention. If we're trying to cut costs, and if every dollar counts, and it's not clinical medicine, then how is this justified?

Your thoughts?

VIDEO- Orrin Hatch slips: Americans might like health care reform, vote for (gasp!) Democrats

By GottaLaff

Oh noes! Americans might like the very health care reforms (public option or not) that could, you know, benefit them and keep them alive! Enough to want to vote for the party that supports it! And we can't have that now, can we?

Let that little detail slip out there, didja, Orrin?

(relevant segment at approx. 19:50ish, 20:00)

Big Government-Run Socialized Medicine will kill ya, I tells ya, kill ya! Especially that radical program called Medicare! Oh, wait...

Video- Sen. Orrin Hatch Complains About Opt-out Public Option

Orrin sounds like a hysterical old lady.

Hatch: Public option not likely to pass in the Senate

By GottaLaff

Wishful thinking, Orrin?

Just two days after sharing his fond memories of longtime friend and Senate colleague Ted Kennedy, Republican Orrin Hatch said Sunday that one of the main provisions of a Democratic plan for health care reform – a public policy initiative that Kennedy had referred to as the “cause of my life” – stood little chance of passing in the Senate.

Way to show your support for your "longtime friend". Attaboy.

“Is there any chance – despite the passing of your friend – is there any chance that a bill with a public option is going to pass the United States Senate?,” CNN Chief National Correspondent John King asked Hatch Sunday on State of the Union.

“I really don’t think so,” Hatch bluntly replied.

Now get this. Sitting down?

“Our senior citizens are scared to death,” Hatch said.

Why, whatever could have caused that?

Video- Sen. Orrin Hatch: 100% of Americans That Have Health Insurance are Happy With it

Oh yeah, especially the ones who's premiums are going up and benefits down. via FDL.

2 key Republican senators to oppose Sotomayor for high court

At least Cornyn admits his decision is political, wonder what in the world could make Hatch say no. But hey, keep this and the Gates shit up and not even tanned people will vote Republican again. (except maybe Boehner)

WASHINGTON (CNN) – Two key Republicans on the Senate Judiciary Committee announced their opposition to Supreme Court nominee Sonia Sotomayor on Friday, a further sign the party's conservative base is uniting against President Barack Obama's first high court pick.

Sen. Orrin Hatch of Utah — the former chairman of the committee — and Sen. John Cornyn of Texas — head of the party's Senate campaign committee — announced on the Senate floor their intention to vote against the 55-year-old federal appeals court judge.

Hatch's decision came as somewhat of a surprise. The veteran Republican has voted for every high court nominee in his 32-year Senate career — including President Bill Clinton's two liberal choices, Justices Ruth Bader Ginsburg and Stephen Breyer.

Hatch had praised Sotomayor's "credentials and experience" and the fact she would be the first Hispanic justice. But despite the nominee's compelling life story, Hatch said that controversial off-the-bench comments by Sotomayor troubled him.

Cartoon of the Day

Click to enlarge, via.

Senator Orrin Hatch: Supreme Court Nominee By End of Week

By GottaLaff

If Orrin's on to something, than this isn't just fast, it's downright zippy:

After talking to President Obama on the phone today, Sen. Orrin Hatch (R-UT) says he "believes the White House will move swiftly on its Supreme Court nominee, perhaps making an announcement by the end of this week," Politico reports.

Said Hatch: "I'd be surprised if it went beyond this week... I would think by the end of this week or over the weekend, he'll nominate somebody. I'm sure they've discussed this internally, back and forth for months now."

Senator Orrin Hatch to back Holder

By GottaLaff

Holder just got a big leg up:

The former Republican chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee will support Eric Holder's nomination for attorney general, giving him a major boost toward confirmation.

Sen. Orrin Hatch (Utah), who chaired the panel for a decade beginning in 1995, told The Hill that he will support Holder.

Mitch McChinless will have his work cut out for him now. I'd say, "chin up", but that would be counterproductive.

His decision could undermine GOP efforts to stall or block the confirmation. Senate Republican Leader Mitch McConnell (Ky.) said Friday that Holder would be the only Cabinet nominee to face a tough confirmation fight.

Hatch said that Republicans should try to strike a cooperative tone with President-elect Obama during the first days of his administration.“I start with the premise that the president deserves the benefit of the doubt. I don’t think politics should be played with the attorney general,” he said.

“I like Barack Obama and want to help him if I can.”

Well shut my mouth and call me Miss Snark! This sounds a little like... unity.

Democrats now hold a 10-9 advantage on the committee. That margin will likely grow to their favor once Senate leaders set new committee ratios.

That was a very good sentence, that last one. I'm Laffy, and I approve that message.