[..]Yet another excellent web site for you to look at some great content material on it[..]…

That's the video from Newsom's appearance on Morning Joe. You failed to mention at least a couple of things. First of all, the conversation took place almost entirely within the context of the public option, and secondly, Newsom spent a lot of his time talking about how SF has been able to implement its own version of the public option without raising taxes, and trying to make the point that it can be done on a national scale without raising taxes.

Now, Newsom did allow himself to be painted in a corner toward the end there when he said that he's not for raising taxes in order to fund healthcare reform rather than healthcare reform with the public option. He answered Scar's question without qualifying it, and he also didn't call Scar on talking about a 5.1% tax increase to help pay for “healthcare reform” (a 5.1% tax on who? the wealthy, or the middle class?) and saying “Nancy's talked about it…the President's talked about it”. I don't know about Pelosi, but I haven't heard the President talk about a middle-class tax increase to pay for reform, and Scar gave the impression that he was talking about a tax increase on the middle class. But, what it really comes down to is the fact that Newsom's position is basically the same as the President's.

I couldn't find anything on Ed Schultz saying “how are we going to afford this”, but I did run across a few mentions of him interviewing Amy Klobuchar this past Saturday. I wouldn't be surprised if he asked her that question after she said something about the country not being able to afford the PO, and I wouldn't be surprised to find out that he asked that question as a challenge to her.I noticed that you failed to provide any context for that question, just as you failed to provide context for Newsom's statement.

In any case, here's Schultz taking about the public option…yesterday. Doesn't sound as if he's backed off on it to me:

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/21134540/vp/3284800…

That's the video from Newsom's appearance on Morning Joe. You failed to mention at least a couple of things. First of all, the conversation took place almost entirely within the context of the public option, and secondly, Newsom spent a lot of his time talking about how SF has been able to implement its own version of the public option without raising taxes, and trying to make the point that it can be done on a national scale without raising taxes.

Now, Newsom did allow himself to be painted in a corner toward the end there when he said that he's not for raising taxes in order to fund healthcare reform rather than healthcare reform with the public option. He answered Scar's question without qualifying it, and he also didn't call Scar on talking about a 5.1% tax increase to help pay for “healthcare reform” (a 5.1% tax on who? the wealthy, or the middle class?) and saying “Nancy's talked about it…the President's talked about it”. I don't know about Pelosi, but I haven't heard the President talk about a middle-class tax increase to pay for reform, and Scar gave the impression that he was talking about a tax increase on the middle class. But, what it really comes down to is the fact that Newsom's position is basically the same as the President's.

I couldn't find anything on Ed Schultz saying “how are we going to afford this”, but I did run across a few mentions of him interviewing Amy Klobuchar this past Saturday. I wouldn't be surprised if he asked her that question after she said something about the country not being able to afford the PO, and I wouldn't be surprised to find out that he asked that question as a challenge to her.I noticed that you failed to provide any context for that question, just as you failed to provide context for Newsom's statement.

At his lowest point he went through the motions of going to rehab He showed up to some emergency situation drunk with the 19 year old in tow. I think it was after the guy got mulled by the tiger at the zoo. This was around the same time he admitted the affair so he was able to lump that into the rehab as well.

But as much as the locals forgive him for anything, I don't think his reputation is gonna play well on the national stage

That said Gavin is not innocent. There are many girls in the Marina and multiple waitresses at the same bar (Matrix) that could tell you stories of hooking up with him.

I did a quick google search and found a few pics of Kim/Dan together:

http://www.patrickmcmullan.com/site/search.aspx…

Wrong is wrong. Sorry, folks . . .

I keep tellin' folk . . . y'all need to get off Kanye's d____. He might be a talented musician, but he ain't no warrior or activist like Malcolm or Martin or Coretta or Sojourner as folk have tried to carry him throughout the duration of his 15 minutes of fame. I said this when Kanye said what he said about Bush during the Katrina fiasco, and I say it again now: Kanye. Is. ONLY. ONLY. About. Kanye. He likes to throw temper tantrums and fits and wants everybody to pay him attention like the diva/quasi-female he wants to be. Y'all betta recognize . . .

You're dishonest.

gavin messed around with the wife of the man who backed him when nobody knew his ass or gave a shit.

The lady who plays Jane is great. I could do a little without the whole Grayson bit though. I can never get past the fact that Grayson is obviously an intelligent guy, but “Deb” was a total ditz. One of my dating pet peeves, ya gotta be at least of average intelligence to carry on a convo with me. I have a friend who I love to death, but that girl is so ditzy it's not even funny. I'm thinking she has gotta be some type if “idiot savant” cause I don't know who she made it through college (I think she has a photographic memory). Anyway, she was dating this guy who was in medical school, and was a pretty smart guy. We went to dinner once, and I tell ya I don't know what going on with her and him, but I just couldn't fathom what the hell they talked about (maybe they didn't talk much though…)