As I wrote at TPM about Bayh, he is basicaly saying we must preemptively destroy Obama's and the Democrats' agenda via Bayh's "tyranny of the 60" lest it possibly be sidetracked at some point by excessive partisanship

By Bayh's reasoning, if we don't let Lucy hold the football for Charlie Brown, then she will take the football, and go home.

Gosh, what a dilemma. . .

The problem I have, though, is why are this website and TPM etc wasting time on Evan Bayh's views? The whole point of using majority vote in the Senate is to bypass a marginal pivotal conservative Dem like him, so OF COURSE he opposes doing that. As Nate Silver said, Bayh opposes a procedure that would render him irrelevant. But somehow the rest of us keep giving Bayh airtime and analysis time? Why? The people who should be questioned about using reconciliation are the White House and the Senate leadership, the ones who can make it happen and benefit from it.

Steve this is a nice try to deflect from Obama's insistence on "bipartisanship".

Whatever argument against Bayh one uses can also be equally applied to Obama.

Moreover, since Bayh is *not* the president, one could also say that Obama CREATED the situation whereby Bayh is empowered.

Around the world and also inside America, most people thinks of "democracy" as being majority rules. Obama says otherwise with his consistence harping on "bipartisanship".

If Bayh is guilty, then Obama even more so.

Is it too much to ask for a Democratic official getting up to the mic to talk about the American people rather than their hurt feelings that Obama didn't hold their hand or Joe Lieberman was mean to them. Do they get it - it's not about them.

Did you mention that he is an asshole?

Unfortunately, Bayh is from Indiana, where standards are, well ...

"Senator Quayle"

All clear?

The problem I have, though, is why are this website and TPM etc wasting time on Evan Bayh's views?

To expose the moral rot of the Senator from Wellpoint, obviously.

Someone at TPM, I believe, pointed out that the real problem with reconciliation from Bayh's point of view is that it makes his concern trolling irrelevant, and therefore curtails his ability to extract concessions that will enrich his corporate masters and, by extension, himself.

Then don't call it "reconciliation." Call it what it is, "majority rule." In a democracy, there's nothing that's absolutely more moral than "majority rule" -- and even Bayh ought to be able to comprehend that.

After Holy Joe, I think Buy-Bayh is the worst.

The intellectual dishonesty of his remarks are appalling. Can't Bayh just admit he opposes HCR?
What is being spouted by this fraud is not an argument against reconciliation; it is lies to hide the fact tat Bayh has no interest in the welfare of the people he purportedly represents.

As I, unfortunately, am currently residing in Indianapolis; let me provide some clarifications for Steve.

Evan Bayh is NOT a 'Center-Right' democrat. He is an evil, corporately owned asshole whose primary purpose in being (and staying) a senator is to increase his family's wealth.

Evan Bayh's wife, Susan, is on the board of directors of 8 or 9 corporations. She receives about $1M a year in compensation for such. Her most lucrative directorship is with Wellpoint. Wellpoint owns Anthem and a number of Blue Cross corporations. They are the largest health insurance provider in the United States, based upon enrollees. Wellpoint pays her more than $1/3M a year. Most of her other directorships are for biotechs & pharmaceuticals.

Prior to Evan becoming the governor of Indiana, Susan was a mid-level corporate attorney. When he became governor, she was appointed to be the lead corporate attorney for Eli Lilly (pharmaceutical based in Indianapolis), with a salary way beyond anything she had previously. Prior to Evan running for election as a senator, Susan had zero directorships on her resume. Since then, it has become her well paid profession.

Evan Bayh will have 75 reasons to defeat any health care reform that does not add to the profitability of Wellpoint, the other corporations Susan is paid by, and the wealth of his family. If he runs out of those, he will make up more.

Evan Bayh is a self serving ass.
Evan Bayh has always been a self aggrandizing ass.
Evan Bayh will always be an asshole.

Look up Corporatist Jackass in an encyclopedia, see photo of Evan Bayh.

When are the Dems going to realize that they could get Jesus Christ himself elected and the Republicans would do whatever they could to take him down? The Republicans' idea of bipartisanship is to punch a Democrat in the face. Apparently the Democrats' idea of bipartisanship is to say thank you when they get punched in the face.

Even Bayh is a POS & is an embarrassment to his father.

Hey, man! Hey's a "Bayh-Partisan!"

Get it?

they could get Jesus Christ himself elected

Not fit for office. Can't write op-eds, no employment history, bit of a bigot. If he can really do the loaves-and-fish trick, give him an entry-level job at FEMA.

Bayh says he sees a real prospect for bipartisanship on those issues, but that Republicans will walk away if Democrats play hardball on health care.

Evan Bayh is the poster child for Battered Democrat Syndrome.

ah, Evan Bayh. Who here evokes the eternal question: "Cynical, or stupid? Cynical or stupid?"

Of course, the other question is, why is ANYONE listening to anything Evan Bayh is saying? Now or ever? He's a useless, quisling tool. Who cares what the fuck he thinks about anything.

...not to mention, what SadOldVet said.

Couldn't help the attaboy, that was a *great* post, Vet.

Evan Bayh sleeps with an insurance company director. Joe Lieberman sleeps with an insurance company lobbyist. Why isn't any senator so deeply compromised not required to recuse himself?

I know, I know. If every seriously conflicted senator had to recuse himself there would be nobody to vote.

Why do they always refer to Bayh and his ilk as "moderate Democrats"? Why not "Scum bag spineless reactionary Democrats"?

This is so hopelessly misguided, it's hard to know where to start. I'd remind Bayh, for example, that reconciliation has been used plenty of times in recent years...

Benen: You shouldn't be using a word like "misguided."

It sounds like you're giving Bayh way too much credit.

From his perspective, it's not "misguided" at all. Rather, it's very "guided" indeed -- by a desire to bamboozle his Democratic constituents into thinking that he's just being nice and reasonable, and his Republican constituents that he's not threat to their Reaganite agenda, and to David Broder than he won't rock the boat.

Bayh knows full well what he's doing. What's miguided is the view that Democrats could count on his support in doings something as fundamental to the progressive agenda as universalizing health care.

He can come meet me here in Texas... I got laid-off last Friday from a small advertising agency.

("I'm gonna have to let you go, and oh uh, your insurance will be good until the end of the month. Thanks for all the years.")

The Health Plan that has been insuring me for the last 8 1/2 years, will no longer do so because of slightly elevated blood sugar. Thanks Bayh. Tell all your cronies thanks too.

Is Bayh some kind of horse's ass ? Is he really an idiot, or is there something going on I can't see ? He's worried that republicans might be discouraged from acting in a more bipartisan way ?

Pacato: You're wrong --> the Democrat's idea of bipartisanship is to punch themselves in their own faces because they're fretting over the damage to the Republicans’ fists !

How do you poison a dry well?

You guys can crap on Bayh all want.

All this information was and is public when it was announced in various media outlets that OBAMA was going to name Bayh his Veep.

Now, obviously, Bayh wasn't selected but it appears he was on the short list.

So, again, whatever you want to throw at Bayh you need to throw at the PRESIDENT.

"... But somehow the rest of us keep giving Bayh airtime and analysis time? Why? The people who should be questioned about using reconciliation are the White House and the Senate leadership, the ones who can make it happen and benefit from it."
Posted by: Theda Skocpol on January 28, 2010 at 1:59 PM

But I like having him expose himself for what he truly is. It might help get him un-elected for his hypocrisy, pretending concern for the people rather than his corporate interests. Yes, hold him up to the light whenever possible...worked wonders on Lieberman.

I don't think your obvious solution is obvious at all. I think a more obvious solution is that the senate redoes their version of HCR through reconciliation so it is a little closer to the house bill, and THEN the house votes on it. Requiring the house to approve the senate's bill first is just a sleazy way of guaranteeing that we are stuck without any change from the senate bill. It's clear that the senate has absolutely no intention of giving at all, unless they are forced to, and the house has already proved it is willing to compromise, so I think it should be up to the senate, right now, to make the first move.

Evan Bayh, whose quavering-voiced interview on NPR regarding the Iraq war in 2005 is a high point in Democratic party spinelessness (refraining to criticize a war gone disastrously wrong because it might upset the Republican administration), is really the standard-bearer for todays Democratic party. Bayh, Conrad, Nelson, et. al. are the reason why the Republican House leadership sat at the SOTU and giggled at Obama's speech. Because Obama shares their general approach to policy development in Congress if not their rhetoric.