Things are tough all over...unless, of course you're one of the elites.

Not one of those liberal elites Fox News is always grumbling about. But the true elites. You know, the ones who get bonuses bigger than the ones they received last year despite being bailed out by the Feds. Or who post record profits despite a soft economy and record gas prices. Or who complain that they can't possibly compete with a federal public option, despite having a literal cartel and a near monopoly. Those who tell you that the problems in this country can be blamed on labor unions, illegal immigrants, lazy people who won't try harder to get off unemployment rolls, or gay people who want to have their partnerships legally recognized.

What do those elites have in common?

Greed. Simple, all-American greed.

In the last thirty years, greed has over taken our society and economy, grabbing our politicians, our media and too many people for whom the benefits don't trickle down into their Chicago School of Economics/Friedmanesque/free market-worshipping grasp. We have gone from Gordon Gecko's "Greed is good" to the GOP's implicit mantra "Greed is patriotic" and that force to get the most for ourselves, the hell with everyone else has driven this country to the brink of a second great depression and all but killed our middle class.

Jonathan Tasini has chronicled the reasons and people responsible for the looting of America in his new book, The Audacity of Greed. The corporate executives who bust unions and lay off workers while jet-setting in their multi-million lifestyles; the politicians too beholden to corporate interests to regulate industries to protect Americans to the media that reinforces and celebrates the robbing of average Americans as something to which one should aspire.

From Jonathan's official bio:

Jonathan Tasini is executive director of the Labor Research Association. The longtime president of the National Writers Union, he was the lead plaintiff in Tasini vs. The New York Times, the landmark electronic rights case that took on the corporate media's assault on the rights of freelance authors. In 2006 he ran against Hillary Clinton for the Democratic nomination for the US Senate in New York. He has written about labor and economics for a variety of publications including The New York Times Magazine, The Washington Post, Los Angeles Times, and The Wall Street Journal, and has appeared on CNBC and Fox News. He is currently challenging Kirsten Gillibrand for the 2010 Democratic nomination for US Senate from New York.

Howie Klein has an autographed copy of The Audacity of Greed that we will be giving out to the C&Ler whom Jonathan has determined asked the best question.

So with that, please join me in welcoming Jonathan Tasini to C&L.

Nancy Pelosi stays strong on the public option.

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi told reporters at a Thursday briefing that she was glad to see the Senate making progress on its version of health care reform but she emphasized that the House plan would look markedly different - by including a public option.

"I fully support the public option. The public option will be in the bill that passes the House," Pelosi (D-Calif.) said purposefully.

By including a public health insurance option in the House version, Pelosi will set up a confrontation between the House and the Senate when they meet in conference committee to hash out the differences between the two bills.

We have a long way to go, but the blogosphere is keeping up the pressure on the public option and it's helping.
And Cilizza has some new polling numbers on health care, but Digby is puzzled by his framing.

Chris Cilizza writes that the numbers on health care haven't actually changed much over the past two months in spite of the August hoohah. And then he sagely notes:

The Gallup numbers provide a worthwhile reminder that even while Washington is consumed with the daily back and forth over health care, the public at large is less invested in the tit for tat inside the Beltway. And, they also suggest that for all the doom and gloom talk regarding how Americans view Obama's health care plan, there may well be room for the White House to pull out a victory on the legislation.

A signing ceremony in the Rose Garden -- and the resultant favorable media coverage -- could well be the last (only?) time some Americans pay close attention to the health care debate and give the president a chance to snatch victory from the jaws of defeat.

Well isn't that good news. But I'm a bit puzzled. Cilizza himself writes in the same piece that polls show that a majority support Obama on health care reform --- and always have. Why in the hell should there need to be "room" to "pull out a victory?" And what "jaws of defeat" is he pulling victory from?

This is typical beltway narrative building. Despite the fact that the teabaggers have done everything in their power to change public opinion, it hasn't worked. Despite the fact that the Republicans have vowed to do everything in their power to kill health reform, it hasn't worked. Despite all the "doom and gloom" talk in the media, people still support the bill and every vote in the congress that has been taken thus far has advanced the bill. But apparently all of this shows Republican strength and it's the Democrats who will be snatching victory from the jaws of defeat if they manage to pass the bill. Same as it ever was.

The teabggers have shown a dark side in America that was being hidden by the right and America is turned off to it. They have lost the debate, but they still have their Beck.