The Public Option Has A Bad Day, Michael Moore Interview, More Polanski, Father Arrested In Japan, Job Scam, And Did You Hear CNN Has An iPhone App?!!

Hi everyone. Anderson Cooper is doing the new standing thing again. It's a nice change of pace, but I hope this isn't part of the solution to fix the ratings. Anyway, we're kicking off things with a recap of health care reform's no good, very bad day. The Senate Finance Committee quashed not one, but two amendments to add the public option to the health care reform bill.

Lest there be any confusion, the Democrats--the people we voted into office to fix health care--are the ones who just shot us in the foot (and that's not covered!). I don't think it can be said enough, but screw Max Baucus. And when I say "screw," I mean something else, but I'm trying to keep this place classy.

According to Candy Crowley, it's not over for the public option, except that it kinda is. She seems to think we'll be getting some sort of public option-lite. Until the proverbial fat lady sings, I'm not giving up hope. Jason Linkins over at Huffington Post isn't as optimistic, but he has a good write up of what happened today, and just why it's so infuriating. For my fellow public option supporters, if your senator is on the finance committee and voted no, tell them they suck! But, you know, politely.

Joining us for discussion of all this, is Michael Moore. Woo! Obviously I'm a bit biased here, but it's always nice to see a real progressive get teevee time. Michael is fired up and ready to go! He's planning on kicking ass and taking names, though actually probably not in that order. Time to challenge some of these spineless Democrats. Normally I'm not really much of a reactionary, but things have gotten ridiculous. If certain Democrats aren't going to deliver on the public option, vote them out.

Anderson seems to be perplexed by this, asking Michael if he'd really campaign for Republicans. Erm, there are these things called primaries that I think we'll start with, thank you very much. Ned Lamont ring a bell? Bueller? Sure, that didn't work out in the end, but it made Lieberman spend his money and gave him quite a scare. Michael stresses that at least two-thirds of Americans support the public option, so exactly who is Congress working for? He calls the public option, "absolutely make or break."

Then there's talk of a single payer system,which is what Michael really wants (as do I). He says that "any intelligent, or even half-intelligent, nation has either a single-payer or a national health care plan." Okay Michael, simmer down there. Needlessly inflammatory statements like that turn people off. But then he makes the very good point that despite all the calls to compromise on the public option, Obama already compromised on health care reform right off the bat by taking single payer off the table. In my opinion, a dumb move.

"Nothing is going to change. Trust me on this one thing," says Michael, referring to a bill without a public option. And I do trust him. Because as he points out, he's been right about basically everything he's been saying over the years. A lot of progressives have. Yet they are consistently marginalized and I am so friggin sick of it. Perhaps the only thing worse than living through a train wreck, is to warn that one's coming and have no one listen to you. A bill without a public option is a massive tax payer funded gift to the insurance companies. It's that simple.

Anderson wants to know why all the public option supporters aren't out at town halls making their voices heard like the opponents. Michael says he's going to do his part to organize people, but notes that probably most Americans thought that after voting in a Democratic president and a super Democratically-controlled Congress, we were kinda, you know, set. Apparently, democracy also requires batshit insane yelling.

Next, the whole vote count thing is brought up. Some senators (coughBaucuscough) are claiming they couldn't vote for today's amendments because they don't have enough votes, which Jason Linkins pointed out in the above-linked piece, is just about the most ridiculous thing ever. Michael thinks this is stupid as well, and puts on his faux "whiny Democrat" voice that I must admit is in of itself a little annoying. But I'm totally down with what he's saying. As Michael notes, this isn't how the Republicans would play this thing. They'd just do it.

"What is wrong with our side of the aisle? Where is the spine? Where is the courage?" he asks. Amen! Why is it presumed we need 60 votes? We don't. We need 51. Democrats like Baucus are really going to join Republicans and vote against cloture? Fine. Call their bluff. Make them do it. As Michael says, let the Republicans have their filibuster. We do not need 60 votes on the bill. If the Democratic caucus can come up with 51 votes for a bill with a public option there is absolutely no reason to surrender.

Moving on to some discussion with David Gergen and Candy Crowley. The Gerg is "mystified" by Michael's emphasis on the public option. I am mystified by how much the Gerg seems to not get it. He concedes that there is approximately 65 percent support among the public for the option, but then just as quickly dismisses the number, noting that you don't find that state by state. I guess we're supposed to assume that senators like Baucus who are in more conservative states are just doing right by their constituents. Yes, that must be it. I'm sure it has nothing to do with the millions he gets from health and insurance interests that are against reform.

More bizarrely, about a couple minutes later, the Gerg notes all the ways that this is now a weak bill. Uh huh. Once again, you can't mandate that people buy insurance and then not put into place anything (public option) to keep those insurance companies honest. Lots of new customers with nothing to keep down costs? I'm thinking those companies are currently saying, "yes, please." There must be a public option.

Transitioning now to talk about Roman Polanski with Jeffrey Toobin and Jeff Berg, Polanski's agent. I think this is just going to be one of those stories I skip. At least they didn't put it up top again.

So hey, did you hear that there's a new CNN iPhone application? No? Well, then you must not watch CNN, read anything on CNN's website, or follow anyone with any connection to CNN on Twitter. Yeah, me thinks there was a "promote me!" memo sent out today, because boy have they ever! And now it's Anderson's turn. So tell us, Anderson, how much is it? "Less than 2 bucks, $1.99. I mean, you can't afford not to get it. Am I right?" he says. Such a steal! Do you think that was painful for him? Eh, what's a little corporate whoring every now and then. Am I right?

We then move on to the case of Christopher Savoie, an American who had two children with a Japanese native. The couple divorced and the agreement was that Noriko (the ex-wife) could take the kids to Japan for the summer, but would otherwise live close to Christopher in the states. Things were going according to plan, until one day Noriko took the kids back to Japan. Christopher subsequently alerted police, a warrant was put out, and he was given full custody. He expected to get his kids back, but that's not how it works in Japan.

In fact, when Christopher traveled to the country himself to get his children, he was the one who ended up being arrested. Now he sits in jail, while his ex-wife has his kids. Way uncool. For discussion, we're joined by Jeremy Morley, Christopher's attorney, and his current wife, Amy Savoie. This case is pretty outrageous. I had no idea this was how Japan operates.

On now to a Drew Griffin investigative piece, but I missed some of it, so I think I'm just going to take a pass.

The "shot" tonight is a naked New Yorker with a fanny pack buying a taco from a food stand. There is so much wrong with that sentence I don't know where to begin. First of all, ew, unsanitary! And second, a fanny pack? Nakedness, fine. But a fanny pack? That's just tacky. Anyway, Anderson and Erica Hill share my revulsion and for a second there, I thought we were going to get a bastard version of "Really?!! With Seth and Amy." I think they could totally pull that off. I'd watch it.

Once again, 360 did the whole thing where they drop a good segment into the second hour. Tonight it was an interview with the mothers of those hikers being held in Iran. I'm still comfuzzled as to why they're doing the programming like this. Given the current cable news landscape, I would assume 360 is trying to build a base of loyal viewers. Yes, CNN gets mad ratings when events happen, but Michael Jackson can't always die. Cable news has changed significantly even since 360 has been on the air.

So...given that the segments they are dumping seem to be subjects that loyal viewers would actually be drawn to, and given that (I'm assuming) appointment viewers are more likely to tune in for the live first hour broadcast, I don't get their reasoning at all. Because hey, I'm a big fan, but even I'm not going to watch almost two hours of the same thing every night. The only reason I caught the segment tonight is because Colbert had a commercial. But, anyway, I guess they have their reasons.

The show was an improvement from last night.

Roman Polanski Arrested, Iran Testing Missiles, Chicago Student Killed, Inside The Earth Liberation Front, And Modern Slavery

Hi everyone. We begin tonight with Anderson Cooper standing in front of the big screen to intro the night's segments. Ooh fancy! Although, he might have done this last week too. As I said in my prior post, I'm not much of a noticer. Remember when he used to do the standing "pose" with his foot up on step? Good times.

Anyhoo, the introing put me through a roller-coaster of emotions. At first I was annoyed because I thought we were starting with the Roman Polanski story. Then when I realized he was previewing, I got relieved. And...then he really did start with the Polanski story. Le sigh. I'm not going to deny the story merits coverage, but top story? C'mon.

In an Erica Hill piece, we learn that the director was arrested in Switzerland over the weekend in connection with a warrant over three decades old. I think most of us know the basic details of this case. In 1977 Polanski drugged and raped a 13-year-old girl, then fled to Paris right before his sentencing. France refused to extradite and he continued his directorial career. To this day, the man has his defenders, along with those who feel he got away with a crime.

For discussion (yeah, you knew it was coming), our panel is being rocked by Lisa Bloom, Jeffrey Toobin, and criminal defense attorney Joel Brodsky. Honestly, I don't care much about this. The panel gets all arguey, Anderson loses control, I zone out, and then I tune out. It's been a while since I've had to reach for my remote during the show.

Moving on to the subject of Iran, the country must not have been listening when Obama told them they were "on notice" because they just went and test-fired themselves some missiles. To talk about this, we're joined by Paul Begala and Rich Galen. Political strategists. To talk about Iran. Because that makes sense in a way that totally doesn't. I guess it really is just all a game. Apparently we've already made up our mind about Iran.

For a post that gives some good reasons as to why we don't have to freak out about this whole bomb thing, check out Michael Hastings' latest at True/Slant. From there you can find a good post from Glenn Greenwald that compares the current dialog to that of prior to the Iraq invasion, as well as level-headed analysis from Scott Ritter, the former inspector who was totally right about Iraq. Now an interview with him would have been a good segment.

Anyway, there's not much of note here, them not being experts in foreign policy and all. But I will point out that Anderson again hits on the fact that though Obama seems to be fairly popular worldwide, that popularity hasn't translated into much (example: NATO troops for Afghanistan). I think this is a good point, but he sets it up with a false premise: "For all the reaching out, is this president perceived as being weak?" I'm not sure how you immediately leap from not yet successful to being weak.

As Paul points out, the last guy's macho cowboy policy didn't really get us anywhere either. In fact, it actually made up less safe. Rich is happy that Obama has not taken the military option off the table in regard to Iran. It's funny, when the last crew said stuff like that it used to scare the crap out of me. Obama? Not so much. That's because, in my opinion, Cheney really did want war with Iran, no doubt still does. Obama can leave the war-button on the table to play the psych-out game all he wants. It's nice to know that at the end of the day, we have a president that doesn't really want to press it.

Transitioning now to the horrific beating death of 16-year-old Darrion Albert, a Chicago honor student. In a Joe Johns piece, we learn that Darrion was a good kid who was trying to help a friend and became an innocent victim in a street fight. He was beaten to death by other teens with wooden boards, a crime captured on video. Four individuals have since been charged. This kind of violence among teens is not new to Chicago--last year alone the city lost 37 school kids. 360 has been covering the crisis since 2007.

For more, we're joined by Ronald Holt, father of Blair Holt, a slain student 360 profiled two years ago, and USC Trojans football head coach Pete Carroll, who founded A Better L.A., an organization that works to combat teen violence. Both men seem to attribute this violence problem to teens' family life. Pete discusses structure and the lack thereof. He works to make connections with community leaders, no matter how dangerous, in order to show them that there is another way to live. Sounds like he's doing good work.

Anderson notes all the kids in the video just standing around watching. Honestly, that's not really a new thing or specific to Chicago, is it? I remember when I was in high school we had some pretty big brawls--sometimes daily--and 95 percent of the kids would rush to gawk. Hell, a couple of years ago there was a brawl at a local mall that got so out of hand that they had to call in SWAT. I applaud the work of the guests, as well as 360 shining a light on this, but I don't know, I'm not sure this is a story I see improving.

Moving on now to a Drew Griffin piece, which introduces us to Jake Ferguson, a former member of the Earth Liberation Front (ELF). You probably don't think of hardcore radicals when you think of environmentalists, but that's exactly what the ELF was. Known as "the family," the group committed massive acts of vandalism costing millions in damages. They torched everything from lots of SUVs to Vail Ski Mountain. Eventually the FBI caught onto Ferguson and gave him the choice of going to jail or flipping on the ELF. Yeah, he flipped. Talk about giving environmentalists a bad name. The Animal Liberation Front (ALF) too.

In tonight's "360 Bulletin" we learn from Erica Hill that Sarah Palin has chosen the name of her memoir. I can barely contain my excitement. The only reason I'm noting this is because before the break, Anderson gave us three choices and told us to guess: "Going Rogue"; "I'm a Maverick, Too"; or "Only Dead Fish Go with the Flow." Now, probably most news junkies already knew it was that first one, but "Only Dead Fish Go with the Flow" completely cracks me up. Fond memories of her last batshit insane speech. Anyway, I was just imagining all the 360 kids having a boatload of fun coming up with possible guesses. Producer Jill came up with the fish thing. Well done.

Up next, it's the first ever "Beat 360"/"Shot" combo! And here I've barely yet to recover from learning the name of Palin's book! "Yes, we are making history tonight," Anderson deadpans. So anyway, "Beat 360" used this picture, and then the "shot" was the video version, which I actually could not find--though admittedly didn't look very hard. Pigs flying jokes are made; hilarity is had.

After we've grown fond of the leaping porkers, Anderson wraps it up with, "And all the pigs were 'eadden' by the large crowd." Erica is shocked (SHOCKED!) he would say such a thing, but I dunno; when he says it like that, it doesn't sound quite so horrible. It's like when he says "Sadden"--the dark prince suddenly sounds, quite frankly, adorable. Oh Anderson, I kid because I love.

Stop right there, people. We're not done yet. Because 360 has decided to pull one of their magic tricks where they drop a perfectly good segment in the second hour and don't tell anybody. Anderson interviewed Julia Ormond and writer Ben Skinner about modern day slavery. It's estimated that 27 million people worldwide are victims, which is pretty astounding. They also talked about corporate responsibility--a topic I'd love to see covered more.

Anyway, this was a good discussion and it's kinda mind boggling to me that they would treat a subject that affects 27 million people almost as an afterthought. Don't get me wrong, major props for the attention, but this wasn't good enough for the first (live) hour? This wasn't good enough for any mention whatsoever, besides one tweet from a producer? Maybe I missed some blog posts. It's just odd how they treat some of their coverage. We never did get the Roxana Saberi interview. And based on blog posts, I know that some of their New Orleans coverage never made it to air. Yet they'll use airtime for segments full of speculation. Honestly, I don't get it.

The show was just meh tonight. I think my commentary pretty much speaks for itself.

More Discussion Of The Tea Party Protests, Interview With Barney Frank, Annie Le Case Update, Border Funding Bungle, And An Overly Honest Doctor

Hi everybody. Anderson Cooper is coming at us from Los Angeles tonight. I know this because he actually tweeted (gasp!), but he did not elaborate. So your guess is as good as mine. Choose your own rumor! Kidding. Okay, so you know how Jimmy Carter got everyone worked up into a lather when he said racism was behind the tea party movement? Well, the news cycle is just about at that point where things quiet down. So you know what we need? Something to ratchet it back up. Enter Nancy Pelosi.

Today she got a little teary when she noted that all this anti-Obama rhetoric is very reminiscent of what she saw in San Francisco in the late 70's, which is a reference to the assassinations of Harvey Milk and George Moscone. I think we all know what happens next in this play. Occupying the role of the Republican who is angry she would even say such a thing, is Minority Leader John Boehner. So that was fun. And the news cycle has red meat for at least one more day.

A Candy Crowley piece breaks it all down. We know the drill: Socialists! Nazis! Racists! Oh my! The president doesn't want anything to do with it, and no one is actually talking about health care. This is where we are now. I don't understand why people have to get so defensive when race is brought up. I haven't heard anyone say that everyone who opposes the president is a racist. If you think you have legitimate gripes, well fine, we're not talking about you. Though one does wonder about people who claim not to be racist, yet get overly defensive when the subject is brought up.

Next up, Barney Frank is here for the "360 Interview" (there's a graphic and everything!). He starts off by talking about the assassinations Pelosi alluded to and notes he wouldn't have made the comparison. All I can think is that I really should rent "Milk" sometime. Then Frank gives us a little history lesson in partisan politics, laying most of the blame for our current situation on Newt Gingrich's doorstep. Apparently the Newster felt that the only way the Republicans could ever win was to demonize the opposition. Says a lot about their policies, doesn't it? And here we are.

Frank goes on to talk about the faith that has been lost in our country's institutions, such as the financial sector and the news media. People get their information from partisan sources now. When you can't even agree on basic facts, what can you agree on? "You guys are more in the middle, but you're in the minority in being sort of in the middle," says Frank, referring to CNN. Anderson is all over this one. "Tell me about it," he says. Aw, the Silver Fox needs a cyber high five, y'all. (Though in my opinion, CNN's problems are just as much their own doing, as they are due to competing against partisan networks.)

For our requisite panel tonight, we once again play a rousing game of "which of these people don't really seem to belong?" Barney Frank sticks around and we're joined by David Gergen, Republican Congressman Mike Rogers, and Deepak Chopra. We're back to the racism deal and we begin with Rogers, but he pretty much says what you'd assume he'd say. The Gerg reiterates his point from last night that the racism is only on the fringes. Then he starts talking about Lincoln and the negative way he was portrayed, ending with, "And it's important to remember what happened to Lincoln in April of 1865." Um, wow. There's no follow up here, which is a shame because I think the Gerg just implied something pretty big. Maybe I'm misreading.

It's Deepak's turn now and he goes from talking about the moving goal posts of reform, to the fear people feel, to how end of life care extends suffering, to all the money spent on unnecessary tests, to how there are more health care lobbyists in Washington than Congresscritters. Wow, that was quite a trip we just took. I mean, all good points and all, but quiet the mouthful. Anderson then flips the subject to Frank's totally awesome instructional video on how you deal with a crazy person.

Following the clip, Frank explains that the woman who asked the question was a LaRouche. If you're not familiar, consider yourself lucky. "I ran against one who said that Queen Elizabeth was a drug dealer. My response was that I didn't think she dressed nearly well enough to be a drug dealer," he says. I love it that the Gerg and Anderson are the ones who get a kick out of this the most. Frank then makes probably the most important point about this whole thing thus far, which I'm not sure a lot of people are getting: "There is a reluctance on the part of mainstream politicians to repudiate the angriest and least rational and least logical and unfairest people in their own wing."

This is the problem with the debate in a nutshell. As I've noted numerous times, there are legitimate reasons for people to be wary about reform, but the debate is being driven by the crazies. Why? As Frank says, "The conservatives were very happy to let them go out and attack Democrats." Both sides have their fringes, but at this point the difference seems to be that the Democrats keep their fringe on the fringe, while the Republicans are allowing theirs to represent mainstream conservatives. Example: the Daily Kos is viewed as a far left blog by many, but Truthers and 2004 election conspiracists are not welcome there. Whereas Glenn Beck, who literally tells his followers Obama is creating his own army, is seen as a leader.

Okay, so this brings us to Rogers, who admonishes Frank for not calling out Code Pink during the Bush years. Except uh, according to Frank he totally did (even threatened to have police remove them), and boy is he not happy about this accusation. Rogers also talks about how the protesters are just average people who are scared. Well, of course they're scared; you let people keep telling them that Obama wants to kill grandma. The evilness of government sticking their nose in health care is also brought up. "You mean the same people that couldn't get water to Katrina...," says Rogers. Oh no, he didn't. A Republican is using Katrina as a political football? WTF? When Obama makes some horse guy head of FEMA, then you can talk. Until then, zip it. That's enough of that.

Transitioning now to me changing the channel and then forgetting I've changed the channel. You ever do that? Anyway, when I remember what show I'm watching and flip back to 360, Tom Foreman is there live to talk about the arrest of Raymond Clark in the murder of Yale student Annie Le. We're then joined by Lisa Bloom and stalking expert Rhonda Saunders for speculation. Seriously, Rhonda even flat out admits that's what they're doing: "And right now I think everything is pure speculation. We really don't know." Yep. So the point of this segment is...? Next time I hear Anderson talk about how much he likes facts, I'm going all Joe Wilson on his ass. (With love, of course.)

On now to some actual reporting...from Drew Griffin. Yay? Yes people, I have issues with this reporter. Search my archives if you want some background. Essentially this piece is about two border crossings to nowhere. Nowhere, I guess, being Canada. Love you Canada! Anyhoo! Up in Montana they have a couple of these crossings that see very little traffic, but are getting themselves a $15 million upgrade. Sweet! How little traffic are we talking? Like under 20 vehicles per day. This is illustrated to us by having Drew sit in the middle of the road. See how he can sit there and there are no cars? Clearly no one would have understood this situation without that demonstration.

Drew tells us that once the Democrats took over Congress, the two senators in Montana--Baucus and Tester--became mighty powerful. So, of course, the implication is that this is a big old porky gift to the state of Montana. And hey, that's probably the truth. It certainly looks like it. Unfortunately, I have absolutely no trust in Drew's reporting, so there's that. After Drew's piece, he tells us North Dakota's Byron Dorgan sent Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano a note about the situation and now things are on pause. Hopefully the upgrade gets kaboshed if things are really as bad as they seem.

Next up, we have a Gary Tuchman piece that continues the series on medical malpractice. We meet cardiologist Lester Dyke, a surgeon who likes to speak his mind and is unafraid of becoming unpopular among his peers. That last part is a good thing because his opinion is not going down well with the medical community. See, while most doctors point their fingers at trial lawyers when it comes to the problem of high medical costs, Dr. Dyke has his finger trained on his own colleagues. He claims doctors are putting money-making above patient care. Whoa. Now that's guts. As you might imagine, his referrals? Yeah, not so good these days.

For the other side, we also hear from gastroenterologist Carlos Cardenas, who denies that Dr. Dyke has been blacklisted for his comments. These men practice in McAllen, a very poor county in Texas, yet home of the second highest health care costs in the nation. Says Dr. Dyke: "The doctors are able to profit not just from being physicians like we have traditionally, but by ordering tests on equipment that they own or X-rays on equipment that they own, or sending patients to facilities that they own or have a financial interest in." Now that sounds like something that needs a big investigation.

But Dr. Cardenas says he thinks the county does extra testing--or utilization, as he calls it--because the patients are sicker. It's an interesting debate. This has been a good series. I wish they were doing their whole "dig deeper" thing on this stuff instead of giving us panels filled with speculation.

For the "shot" tonight, Susan Boyle is baaaack. Meh. I'm over her. The show was okay. They're starting to become too panel-focused again, but at least Anderson is doing actual interviews now. Also, in case I forget to pimp tomorrow, Jack Gray will be live-blogging the Emmys this Sunday. All the cool kids will be there! If you're not familiar with Jack Gray, grab some chicken fingers, wrap yourself in a Snuggie, and click on his name in my links. That'll do it.

Update: I'm getting lots of hits on Gary's story. Here's the video for those interested.