Joe Lieberman - In the Mafia, they call it being a "Stand-Up" Guy.

[Vinnie From Indy]

The health care debate has been a con game all along. The players in this political theater worked out months ago how it would go down. Joe Lieberman's playing the part of the evil, bad guy single-handedly driving a stake in the heart of meaningful reform. I have no doubt that his role is to provide cover for the Democrats in the Senate and in the Obama Admin. It is highly likely that they and Joe agreed LONG ago to run this con for the insurance industry. In this case, we the American public are the marks, hayseeds and rubes getting fleeced in the long con.

It makes perfect sense actually. Joe has no constituency to care about. This is his last term in the Senate. He is the perfect heavy in this scenario. All of them can plunge the knife in the back of meaningful reform and only Joe's fingerprints will be found on the blade. In the Mafia, they call it being a stand-up guy.

[LiberalFighter]

1. Need to tie Evan and Susan Bayh in this scam.

[KittyWampus]

2. that is as idiotic a scenario as it was when it was posted the other day. Sure, Democrats

want to lose on the issue again. It'll do wonders for them.

It's so stupid.

[Vinnie From Indy]

3. Well, ok!

Please explain why Dems in the Senate do not simply pass a meaningful health care bill without Joe?

The best cons are always the ones where the mark doesn't know they have been fleeced. I think that there are two scenarios that will play out here. One, the Joe Lieberman gambit actually does strip the last vestige of credible reform from the bill and it passes. Two, Joe backs down or the bill is taken to reconciliation and the compromise bill passes. Either way, the Democrats that wanted to kill meaningful reform for the insurance industry get everything they need. They will declare victory and campaign as fierce warriors in the health care battle and they have placated their corporate overlords desire to have no reform dressed up as real reform.

The only losers here will be the American public.

[The_Commonist]

4. Kitty hasn't been paying attention.

She probably still thinks there are two distinct political parties in this country...

[el_bryanto]

6. How does Reid break a filibuster, should the Repukes decide to start one?

Which, let's face it, they almost certainly will.

Bryant

[HughMoran]

7. Please explain how they pass a bill without his vote for cloture

Seriously, your smugness aside, prove one word of your insane theory.

[rucky]

8. You are correct & here's why:

Mandate is not negotiable.
Cost controls are not being addressed.

They got us & nobody but the "fringe" is making a peep about it.

Dems will try to tout their hollow victory in 2010 (More people insured! Nobody denied! Deficit neutral!), but the average voter won't see positive change, and will likely feel another stretch in their pocketbooks. Nobody but the teabaggers will be voting in 2010, and frankly I don't care.

[HughMoran]

5. Insanity

You've lost it.

:crazy:

Prove one word of your ridiculous supposition.