I find your lack of faith disturbing...

If he wins they will delay his seating until HCR passes. They threw out the law requiring a special election in order to seat the current unelected senator, therefore, they will have no trouble making sure that any new senator is shut out until the purpose for which they appointed the unelected senator is accomplished.

That'll be a spark...

I certainly hope so but I''m not holding my breath just yet! I have been through too many past events where the majority of the American populace caves in to 'business as usual' once it becomes inconvenient or painful to stand with the opposition--whatever the issue. To permanently change the American mind toward nonconformity would take a special intervention of God. I cannot say right now whether God will do this. It depends on whether His purpose towards this nation is one of ultimate and irreversible destruction based on the guilt of its wickedness or blessing towards His elect in the midst of all the mindless evil.

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2429626/posts

They can try to pass health care before he can be seated. The problem is that it will strike people as unfair and undemocratic—brazen really. It will create a roiling populist revolt that will far outstrip anything we've seen so far. It also will be tough to pull off. There's the issue of timing—could they cut a final deal and get an acceptable CBO score and all the rest of it before Brown arrived? Plus, there would be the heavier political headwinds created by Brown's win and the above mentioned revulsion at the process. Would Blanche Lincoln be comfortable going along with this ploy? Would every Blue Dog who voted for the bill the first time around? Seems unlikely.

There are other routes: The Democrats could make another run at Olympia Snowe. This would be the easiest solution. But would they be able to address her concerns about affordability without another drawn-out negotiation (with time continuing to work against them) and without creating other problems in the bill? Also, if Brown won, it well might stiffen her resolve.

There's always reconciliation. If they go that route, they no longer need 60 votes in the Senate. But my understanding is that they would have to send the bill back through committee. It would be a time-consuming process, making it impossible for Obama to do his “pivot” to jobs anytime soon. And a lot of the most popular features of the bill couldn't be included, meaning Democrats would have to pass just the Medicare cuts and tax increases through the House and not lose any votes (again, in an environment where a Democrat lost in Massachusetts in an election defined by health care).

In theory, they could try to get the House to pass the Senate bill in its entirety. That means the unions give up the Cadillac loophole, the liberals eat every single one of their concerns, and they don't fix their Stupak problem, which itself threatens to bring down the bill in House. A very heavy lift.

It wouldn't be impossible for Democrats still to get it done if Brown won (and the leadership would be more desperate than ever to make it happen), but the odds would be against them. That's why the stakes are so gigantic and Obama is going to Massachusetts. The fate of his signature piece of legislation—and perhaps his presidency—hangs in the balance.

The bottom line is--history has demonstrated that any significant victory by the Republican party is reversed in ultimate defeat once the media bombards the American populace with endless rage over the most minimal of budget cuts (even a 'no increase' cut in food stamps from one year to the next!). To avoid default the U.S. government must make MASSIVE budget cuts even more severe than Truman in the late 40's. IN ALL AREAS, including those most near and dear to every person reading this blog! A change in the minds of the people to tolerate this reality in the cause of freedom would require a special action of God that I can't imagine right now. If it doesn't happen (the more likely scenario), we just have to wait for God to cause the type of suffering in this country that Haiti is experiencing right now before anything changes.

Agreed Bob. I know it's coming.

He won! He won! Wow, there isn't a freakin' kennedy from taxachusetts in the senate!

I'm virtually incredulous to think that a non-leftist won a senate sear in the state of MASSACHUSETTS!?!?!?! I'm totally blown away. But then again I shouldn't be surprised - Reagan won the mass vote.

A little relief from the quick slide into totalitarianism--for at least a little while. Praise God for that!

Good read from John Birch society : http://www.jbs.org/jbs-news-feed/586...pending-spiral

From what I have been watching this weekend, the Republicans are about to stink it all up again, ALREADY. They are taking about being the party of REAL health reform. I think we all know what that means; a plan that has about 75% of the increased premium costs and government spending as that of the Democrats.

I'm not so certain about that Bob. I think maybe the rhetoric about "working together" coming from some of the senate republicans is a strategy for this election year so that the main stream media cannot brand the pubbies as the "party of NO". Still, conservatives are going to have to win in November in spite of the mccains and grahams...

My investment recommendation services today are already assuming its a reality sure to happen! The new strategy of the Democrats (which they are confident will keep them more seats in the fall) is to give Republicans the 'seat at the table' that they have been asking for. All they need is a watered down version of the same bill that Snowe, Collins, and maybe some others will vote for. A permanent bill is far more attractive than reconciliation because it enables them to put off the cost longer, so I think including a few Republicans will be the new tactic. This is why Obama was so quick to give up forcing thru the Christmas Eve bill.

If even a few Republicans support a watered down version, any new 'contract with America' will be severely weakened by contradiction and compromise. If they want to be the future party of Conservatism, a stand against ALL new health care spending must be taken now. Any bill proposing anything that costs more Federal money must be rejected.

Any movement forward on ANY healthcare reform will have the tea parties going berserk! The people simply do not want any focus on healthcare now. Those that do (radical leftists) are hellbent on preventing any compromise - shoot, they were stark raving mad at Obama because they thought the current hcr was nothing more than a gift to the insurance companies. The leftists want a public option - PERIOD - and will not be satisfied with anything BUT THAT - and you may see them join the tea parties if they don't get what they want! If the democrats are smart, they will DROP COMPLETELY any talk of healthcare reform.

I'm sorry, but ANY talk of health care reform from this point out is political suicide for the democrats. In a way I almost hope they go down that road - their confidence is hubris.

Is talk of health care reform political suicide for the REPUBLICANS? That is the real question that matters now in my view. If the GOP takes a stand that health care is not going to be their issue this year (apart from tort reform and insurance portability ONLY), they can hold on to their momentum. If they keep on with all this talk about 'if only the Democrats give us a seat at the table, a REAL health reform bill can be forthcoming' they are sure to end up as the butt end of a cruel joke. The Dems are waiting to see where the GOP is going with this before committing to their own priorities.

Once they get a bill, the regressive clan (commonly called 'leftists') can get anything they want by modifying the bill thru reconciliation. They know that. So they will initially go along with the compromise with the regressive republicans.

I think talk of health care by the ENTIRE GOP is political suicide for them - they risk being replaced by tea party candidates or facing a third party. But I think some lip service to it by a few key senators isn't going to harm them and in fact may help them with some independents.

It Still Won't Work: Mini Obamacare also a dud

In the wake of Scott Brown's as tounding win last week in Massachusetts, President Obama has been backpedaling faster than Darrelle Revis on health-care reform, telling reporters that Congress should "move quickly to coalesce around" parts of the health-care bill that both parties can agree on, "core elements" such as insurance reform.

That might be more popular politically, but it still won't work.

Take one "core element": prohibiting insurers from turning down customers with "pre-existing conditions" or charging more to customers who become sick. A bill to simply ban such practices might attract support from such GOP moderates as Maine's Olympia Snowe and Susan Collins.

But the "reform" would wind up pushing millions of people off the insurance rolls -- and New York state provides the proof.

The term "pre-existing condition" simply means people who are already sick. But if you can wait to buy insurance after you get sick, who'd ever buy insurance while they're healthy?

This is what I am concerned about. If more GOP senators rally around insurance 'reform' (i.e., the END of insurance by any historic definition) with the two key elements of the boondoggle--outlawing denial based on pre-existing conditions and expanding medicaid to make cheap coverage available to those who don't want to pay the price for private insurance--the essence of the nightmare is still with us in full.

Next up - allowing you to buy fire insurance after your home burns down and having your claim honored!

Wow, they went and did it.