The debate rages on as to whose fault it is that we find ourselves in the situation that Joe Lieberman can decide to cut whatever he likes out of the health-care reform bill and tongue kiss Dana Bash while doing it. Was the Obama administration so naive that they didn't think they needed to cut a deal with Lieberman on health care as soon as he won the election? Joe actually supported John McCain to the bitter end and bloggers made the argument that Joe should go from the beginning of his term, but the leadership decided to keep him on board.

Yes, the health-care fight was never going to be easy so why didn't David Axelrod secure Joe's vote on health-care before it got off the ground? It boggles the mind. We all know what prima donnas conservative Democrats are in the Senate. It's quite clear that Lieberman is only interested in punishing liberals and not helping Americans. They knew who he was. He wasn't f*&king hiding. He was stumping for McCain!

Howie Klein, Digby and I all thought that the Senate was ultimately going to call the shots at the end. I always figured the House would pass a fairly progressive bill, but it was the ConservaDems in the House of Lords who would be the problem. So that's why Blue America targeted Blanche Lincoln. She was the only senator up for re-election and had to face the voters in 2010.

Matt Yglesias makes a good case as to why this mess isn't really Obama's fault, but I don't agree with all of it.

I think there’s something perverse in the very strong desire I see among liberals to make problems in congress be about anything other than congress. It’s just not in the power of Barack Obama to make the senate anything other than what it is. To pass a bill, you need sixty votes. To get sixty votes you need Ben Nelson or Olympia Snowe to back your bill. Neither Nelson nor Snowe is especially liberal, and the President doesn’t have a great deal of leverage over either of them. You can try to change the rules, or you can accept that you’re at the mercy of Nelson and Snowe and maybe a few other moderate members.

And it’s crucial to remember that these people—each and every member of congress—is an adult human being, capable of making up his or her own mind, responsible for his or her own decisions, and possessed of moral agency. These are men and women who have amassed a great deal of power, and who ultimately need to decide on a daily basis what it is they want to do with that power. If they choose to use it for bad ends, then blame them for that, not Obama or his team’s alleged lack of familiarity with the United States Senate.

I really like Matt's writing. First, I never thought Tom Daschle was the guy for the job because he whipped the Dems to vote for the war in 2002, but maybe I'm wrong there. Obama is still the president and he won a mandate with health-care reform on the table. I think part of the problem is their inexperience in real-world governance and especially in handling a piece of legislation this massive and this momentous.

I believe that President Obama does want to pass good health-care reform, but you can't use the same tactics that were used for running a general election campaign and apply them to legislation. Not with the Senate vacant of any decent Republican human beings. The president is a wonderful speaker and a great communicator, but there was no way he could swoop in at the end and save the day like he was able to do in the general election. Policy does not work like that as we've just seen.

Digby writes:

I'm not sure how that will all work out in the end. But I'm fairly confident that the deficit scolds are getting ready to launch a full scale offensive on government spending, so "improving the bill" in any financial way is probably not going to be on the agenda any time soon, certainly not with a looming election and tanking poll numbers. And with the president's approval rating suffering not simply due to health care reform, but because of unemployment and economic torpor, what we get in this health care reform bill had better be enough to last us for quite a while.

Since the media loves Lieberman and everything he stands for, no matter what bill is passed he'll suddenly be the face of it and the Villagers will rejoice.

And Duncan adds:

I feel like those more supportive of this bill are attacking anti-mandate strawmen. The reason for thinking that without a public option or similar mandates are going to be a disaster is that without competition or sufficient affordability (due to not quite generous enough subsidies), you're forcing people to buy shitty insurance that they can't afford. Mandates aren't bad in and of themselves, but they're bad if they aren't part of a comprehensive plan which is... good!

Cohn:

Now, the reforms moving through Congress won't produce a system as comprehensive as what the Netherlands or Switzerland has. But that's not because of the individual mandate, which actually makes a lot of sense. (Read here if you want chapter and verse on that.) That's because the subsidies and regulation in these bills aren't as generous and strong as they could be.

In other words, you're forcing people to buy shitty insurance that they can't afford. Why would anyone possibly object to that?

You can view this video right here by getting the latest version of Flash Player!

DOWNLOADS: (389)

PLAYS: (1175)

Dana Bash interviewed the most hated man in America on The Situation Room and he had the balls to call what we have now a "progressive" health-care bill.

BASH: But you talked about the fact that on this particular issue, a Medicare buy-in, you have changed your position and you've said it's because things have changed. The deficits are high and Medicare is in more trouble -- the system.

LIEBERMAN: Yes.

BASH: But give me a little straight talk like your friend John McCain gives. Is it also that you philosophically have moved to the right a little bit?

LIEBERMAN: No, I don't think so. I mean, actually, this is a very progressive bill. The parts that I didn't like are taken out, I'm prepared to support. I've always believed that government has to be there when nobody else will be there to help people. But in this country we don't believe the government should take over everything. And for me, that's what's been on the line here. What kind of future are we going to have? And of course all of this goes to the debt -- the national debt and taxes. If government takes over everything -- the public option is something the public will pay for. And that means higher taxes. That's why I did that.

Didn't you know that John McCain won the election and put Lieberman in charge of health care reform?

There was nothing in this bill that could be considered a government takeover of health care in America, but don't ask a Villager to make Lieberman be honest about it. He has his bullshit fallback position and they just eat up his words and move on. Opening up Medicare to people at age fifty-five would have only helped Americans.

You know that if a health-care bill does pass, Joe Lieberman will take full credit for it. He'll be out there saying that it shows how incredible our system of government is. The media -- who love Lieberman and consider him a real independent soul who was forced out of the Dem party because of the dirty hippies -- will praise Joe's leadership on getting a bill passed.

Since the media believe liberals should always lose, they will relish the opportunity to promote Lieberman all over the TV because they know how much it will piss us off. Anybody who gives that lowlife props should be vilified early and often.

The Evolution of Dad trailer, a film by Dana H Glazer

My book chat this week with Andrea Batista Schlesinger really had me thinking about how to raise my kids to honor their curiosity and love to learn and try new things. And I have to admit that most of those characteristics in me were learned from my dad. My mom was my source of comfort and my role model in nurturing, but my dad was the one who told me to crack heads and take names and never be afraid to ask questions and more importantly, to keep asking them until I was satisfied. I learned from a child development book that your relationship with your mother affects how you feel about yourself; your relationship with your father affects how you relate to others. And now I see it with my own kids, and how they look to cues from their daddy and how their eyes light up when they make him laugh or he praises some little bit of something they've worked out. So I want to wish my dad and my hubby a very happy Father's Day and thank them for their roles in raising inquisitive kids. And happy Father's Day to all you daddies out there as well. It is frequently a thankless job, but possibly the best and most important role a man can have.

This Sunday's shows are simply more of the same. I almost suspect the bookers of these shows to be reading C&L and choosing guests that guarantee a good number of snarky posts. How else can you explain Presidential runner-up John McCain on Face the Nation, Fred Thompson on Meet the Press, Lindsay Graham on This Week and Pete Hoekstra on Fox News Sunday? Seriously, with all the problems we're facing in the world, these guys are the best ones to opine? Maybe it's because all the adults who can actually have real ideas to deal with these problems are too busy working.

ABC's "This Week" - Sens. Chris Dodd, D-Conn., and Lindsey Graham, R-S.C.; former Labor Secretary Robert Reich.

CBS' "Face the Nation" - Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz.

NBC's "Meet the Press" - Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu; former Sens. Sam Nunn, D-Ga., and Fred Thompson, R-Tenn.

NBC's "The Chris Matthews Show" - Panel: Gloria Borger, Bob Woodward, Joe Klein, Tina Brown. Topics: How will this year's health care reform debate be different from 1993? What will be the lasting impact of this past week's protests in Iran? Meter Questions: Will Republicans unite as a bloc to oppose any health care reform bill? YES: 9 NO: 3; Will President Obama's policies be a riper target than his personality for Republican critics? YES: 12 No: 0.

CNN's "State of the Union" - Sens. Dianne Feinstein, D-Calif., Charles Grassley, R-Iowa, Bob Casey, D-Penn, and Richard Lugar, R-Ind; Zbigniew Brzezinski.

CNN's "Reliable Sources" - Diane Sawyer, Bill Keller.

CNN's "Fareed Zakaria GPS" - An in-depth look at the crisis in Iran. What do we know about the man with the REAL power in Iran - the Ayatollah Khamenei? Plus, how technology has altered the power of the people.

"Fox News Sunday" - Sens. Evan Bayh, D-Ind., and McCain; Reps. Pete Hoekstra, R-Mich., and Paul Ryan, R-Wis.; Karim Sadjadpour, an Iran expert at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace.

So what's catching your eye this morning?