* Perhaps taking a cue from her most rogueish guest, Oprah Winfrey has decided she will no longer be shackled behind her talk show.

* The Senate takes up its version of the health care bill tomorrow morning. Harry Reid needs 60 votes just to proceed with debate, because the Republicans do not want to deal with this thing at all. If they filibuster, let us hope they forgo the phonebooks and pledge allegiance to the flag for twelve hours straight. (Eat your heart out, Todd Akin!)

* Said health care bill is 2,074 pages long. Tony Perkins and his fightin' evangelicals have released something called "The Manhattan Declaration," which manages to cover "the sanctity of life, traditional marriage and religious liberty" in just 4,700 words.

* President Obama will make a decision about Afghanistan troop levels after Thanksgiving, assuming he's not in a food coma.

Right?

The poll asked this question: "Do you think that Barack Obama legitimately won the Presidential election last year, or do you think that ACORN stole it for him?" The overall top-line is legitimately won 62%, ACORN stole it 26%.

Among Republicans, however, only 27% say Obama actually won the race, with 52% — an outright majority — saying that ACORN stole it, and 21% are undecided.

Yep, 52% of Republicans think ACORN stole the 2008 presidential election, using nothing but their patented stupidity to secure 53% of the popular vote for Obama. Another 21% of Republicans think, well, maybe. Yeah. That certainly sounds plausible, but… hmm, who can say for sure?

After all, if there's one thing we know about ACORN, it's that they're masters of getting away with illegal activity without anybody ever noticing.

Anyway, the Senate has a health care bill, it runs 2,074 pages, and that is a source of great consternation. Why is this bill so long? Look at it! Why does it have all those words and numbers? Can't they just overhaul the American health care system with a Facebook note, like normal people? What outrageous things are the Democrats trying to hide with their writing and publishing?

How about this?

To raise money for the health overhaul, Democrats are proposing a new 5% tax on elective cosmetic procedures. The tax was a surprise addition to the sweeping 2,074-page bill that Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid unveiled late Wednesday. It generates $5 billion over a decade for the plan, which is expected to cost $849 billion over a decade.

The tax would fall on the individuals who undergo the procedures. If they don't pay it when they’re billed for their surgery, then it falls to the provider who performed the procedure.

Outrage-o-meter says… 3. Maybe 4, max. Fun fact: since 2004, New Jersey has been the only state with its own cosmetic surgery tax law on the books.

Yet if you've ever gone down the shore in July, you'll notice that it's had zero impact in terms of putting bureaucracy, or even common sense, between patients and their plastic surgeons.

^{Aww, NJ, you know I love you. Next time I'm in Belmar, the pork roll-egg-and-cheese is on me.}

And don't you think they'd notice that clause in their policies before some Politico reporter did?

The Republican National Committee will no longer offer employees an insurance plan that covers abortion after POLITICO reported Thursday that the anti-abortion RNC's policy has covered the procedure since 1991.

"Money from our loyal donors should not be used for this purpose," Chairman Michael Steele said in a statement. "I don't know why this policy existed in the past, but it will not exist under my administration. Consider this issue settled."

Steele has told the committee's director of administration to opt out of coverage for elective abortion in the policy it uses from Cigna.

Yep, issue settled, unless you happen to have a uterus, a job at the RNC and an unwanted pregnancy.

Oh well! At least the GOP's loyal donors can sleep soundly again, secure in the knowledge that their dollars will not go toward standard insurance policies that cover legal health care services for people with uteri. Nope, their dollars will only go toward important things, like web design.

Just like today, according to the Twitter account of Colorado state Senator David Schultheis…

Schultheis wrote, "Don't for a second think Obama wants what is best for U.S. He is flying the U.S. plane right into the ground at full speed. Let's roll." [...]

"Let's roll" were reportedly the final words of passenger Todd Beamer before his hijacked plane crashed into a Pennsylvania field during the Sept. 11, 2001 attacks. Passengers aboard the flight tried to regain control of the plane and crashed before reaching the hijacker's intended target.

Now, you'd think Sen. Schultheis's apology muscle would be getting a serious workout today. You would be wrong…

Schultheis, who sent the tweet Tuesday, said he was angry about President's fiscal policies, but didn't mean to compare him to the Sept. 11 hijackers. [...]

"'Let's roll.' It's a comment people use all the time. 'Let's get going. Let's move on. Let's make major changes,'" Schultheis said. "I can see it now. But, you're busy doing jillions of things during the day. You sometimes don't analyze every single word."

Well, sure. That's true enough. Thanks for pointing that out, Schultheis, you fucking Bin Laden of Twitter.

(What? What'd I say? Guys, look, the to-do list is out of control.)

Gettin' censured…

The Republican Party of Charleston, South Carolina has voted to censure Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-SC) for working with Sen. John Kerry (D-MA) on cap-and-trade emissions legislation.

Sure, but why stop there? Bipartisan cooperation on climate change using facts and science is just the tip of the iceberg (Lindsey Graham). Here's a sampling of the other accusations the GOP (which, in our ongoing metaphor, would be the Titanic) has levied…

U.S. Senator Lindsey Graham has shown a condescending attitude toward his constituents by calling them "bigots" when they oppose his stance on amnesty for illegal aliens;

U.S. Senator Lindsey Graham has stated on many occasions that his primary concern is to "be relevant";

U.S. Senator Lindsey Graham – in the name of bipartisanship – continues to weaken the Republican brand and tarnish the ideals of freedom, rule of law, and fiscal conservatism.

It's hard to tell from the formal language of the censure resolution, but I'm pretty sure that "being relevant" part is what's most upsetting for the South Carolina GOP.

Relevance does seem to be the opposite of everything they stand for these days.

It's that time of year again…

Republican senators Jim DeMint, Tom Coburn, Kay Bailey Hutchison and Sam Brownback offered such a measure on Tuesday, saying it would be good to get fresh blood on Capitol Hill.

"Americans know real change in Washington will never happen until we end the era of permanent politicians," DeMint said.

Absolutely, and that's why Jim DeMint has been so supportive of the fresh-faced, inexperienced newbie from Chicago who ran for president last year after serving less than a full term in the Senate… oh, that's right, no he hasn't. Well, what does it matter? Sen. DeMint's first term expires in 2011, and I'm sure he'll do the honorable thing by refusing to run again.

Just to set a good example for others.

All she has to do now is secure the Republican nomination, and here's where the story gets symbolic…

Fiorina, considered to be a moderate Republican with little history on social issues, will face off against conservative California Assemblyman Chuck DeVore for the GOP nomination.

The Fiorina-DeVore matchup has all the makings of another Republican battle between the conservative wing of the party and national leaders seeking for the most electable candidate. [...] A string of conservative bloggers have already lined up behind DeVore, and South Carolina Sen. Jim DeMint said Tuesday he was backing the assemblyman.

So which will it be, California Republicans? The ineffective lady whose printers never work or the DeMint-ed DeVore? Only time will tell, but either way, it'll have nothing to do with the shallowness of the GOP's leadership pool and everything to do with Barack Obama's first year in office.

So if you or someone you know has died (at any speed) because of a lack of health insurance, you may visit Alan Grayson's new Names of the Dead website, type in that info, click submit and then check out the links to Rep. Grayson's speeches on YouTube, to assuage your grief.

Oh boy. This should go over like a lead balloon with a nonexistent child in it…

The National Republican Congressional Committee slammed Grayson Wednesday over the new site.

"What is wrong with this man?" NRCC spokesman Andy Sere said in a statement e-mailed to CNN. "Alan Grayson's morbid exploitation of 'the dead' for personal political gain may be the most shameless stunt he's pulled yet."

The NRCC has a point, of course. Nothing is more shameless than exploiting the dead* for personal political gains, and I'm sure Republicans will fume real hard about this while they festoon their suits with yellow ribbons and instruct their handlers to pose them next to more dead soldiers' moms.

^{* Notice that Andy Sere typed 'the dead' in skeptic's quotes. How do we have any way of knowing these people really are dead? They could be asleep, or faking, in an effort to advance the Democratic agenda.}