And In Case I Don't See You, Little Rock

Break-Up Sweatpants

Michael & Michael Have Issues	Wed 10:30pm / 9:30c
www.comedycentral.com
Joke of the Day Stand-Up Comedy Free Online Games

Good afternoon, good evening and good night. I know you'll be heartbroken, but with the advances in technology, really, what's the difference? Just get some great sweatpants, cry it out over the weekend, and by Monday you'll be good as new. It's been real.

Postponement: Deathblow or Fresh Air for Health Care?

GEORGE: My god, I'm getting married in December, do you know that?

JERRY: Yeah, I know.

GEORGE: Well, I don't see how I'm gonna make December. I mean, I need a little more time. I mean, look at me I'm a nervous wreck. My stomach aches. My neck is killing me. I can't turn. Look. Look.

JERRY: You're turning.

GEORGE: Nah, it's not a good turn. December. December. Don't you think we should have a little more time just to get to know each other a little.

JERRY: If you need more time, you should have more time.

GEORGE: What, you think I could postpone it?

JERRY: Sure you can. Why not?

GEORGE: That's allowed? You're allowed to postpone it?

JERRY: I don't see why not.

GEORGE: So, I could do that?

JERRY: Sure, go ahead.

GEORGE: All right! All right. I'll tell you what. How about this? Got the date; March 21st, the first day of spring.

JERRY: Spring. Of course.

GEORGE: Huh? You know? Spring. Rejuvenation. Rebirth. Everything's blooming. All that crap.

JERRY: Beautiful.

GEORGE: She's not gonna like it.

JERRY: No, she's not.

I don't think I've made it any big secret that I'm a pretty avid Seinfeld fan. I was reminded of this section from the second episode of season 7, called "The Postponement," when thinking about the news that Mike Ross and his Blue Dog cohorts successfully lobbied to punt the House vote on health care reform back about a month, after the recess.

For Ross and the Blue Dogs, it was a success. Now he gets to go back to his constituents not with a result that could be praised or damned by those voter, but with a benign open ear. For the elected official, it's always better to have something open that voters feel they can put their input into than have to discuss why something that has already happened and can't be changed happened in the first place.

But that's political. What about the issue itself? Was this the deathblow? Many people think so. Others don't.

The Wall Street Journal has released numbers saying that popularity over the President's health care plan has dropped 10 percent in the last month alone, and that a whopping 41 percent of Americans don't think the legislation is headed in the right direction.

Mike Ross says that he's going to talk to his constituents, that there's more room for changes and compromises between liberals, conservatives and everyone in between, but that this shouldn't change the overall plan to reform health care. Others think that the trend will continue, popularity of the health care legislation will continue to plummet to the point that enough votes to pass the bill would be scarce, if at all in existence.

I'm not sure this is the coup of health care reform, as opponents of such legislation would hope. There's been too much time, money and political capital spent on the matter. But will it look dramatically different by month's end? That's very likely.

With three parties going at it — Liberal Democrats, Moderate Democrats, and Republicans — there are more concessions, compromises, and sausages to be made.

UPDATE: Tim Griffin's link to this post says that I'm comparing this 'whole health care thing' to that episode. Nope. Just the postponement, not the whole issue. Just a note of clarification for the four of you who read his blog.

Democratic Infighting: Political Problem or Feature of Majority?

There was an interesting article in The Hill today, which reiterated something I've been noticing for some time already: The schism between moderate Democrats and those on the far Left, especially over the most recent issue of health care reform.

But is the recent spat within the wings of the Democratic Party a question of political ideals or of their super-majority status? I'm thinking the latter.

Looking at the political spectrum, you have the Right, the Left, and Moderates. Duh. Republicans own the Right, Democrats the Left, and the victor of each election is figuring out how lasso moderate voters toward your respective cause. A good way to do this is nominate moderate candidates.

Last week, Blake "Look at these shoes. These are some awesome shoes. You don't like these shoes? Consider yourself judged; These shoes don't like you or your shoes, because these shoes are awesome" Rutherford had a good back and forth with Cory Allen Cox of the Arkansas Project. I tend to agree more with Rutherford's assessment of the woes of the Arkansas Republican party in that rather than a lack of communication through grassroots, it's a problem of roster.

In that argument, Rutherford aptly described that Democrats, at least at the state level, have done a better job at fielding moderate, winning candidates to fill positions at the state level, a la the blueprint Republican Newt Gingrich and his Congressional take over in 1994. I would contend that since the Republicans have controlled the House, Senate, White House and very nearly the Supreme Court, moderation on the part of Democrats aided their ascent.

That and a historically unpopular President. That'll do ya.

There's a lot of noise, mainly from those that have never voted Democratically in their life, that this is a sign that President Obama and his policies aren't flying in Middle America, and that he and his policies should just shut up and quit being so stupid and shut up. Moderate Democrats like Mike Ross are throwing the broom into the spokes of Obama's health care plan.

But I think its less a matter of policy and more a matter of the diversity of that, the majority party. Not diversity in that they've got numerous demographics in their fold, either. They've just got the base plus moderates. When Republicans win again, they'll be the diverse ones.

I dunno. Just a thought. Wakka wakka.

Because This Zach Is Funnier Than I

I've got nothing for the blog today. Did this one for the Bureau, but had little for the UFW. Plus Zach Galifianakis is hilarious.

Trying to Contemplate the Birther Issue Without Laughing

Conspiracy Theorists, I guess, make the world go 'round.

I remember them growing up. I had an uncle who swore the moon landing never happened. He also thought that actors and thespians were doing nothing but "glorified lying." The kid next door had a dad who thought that "we aren't getting the whole story" about JFK, Area 51, or where magnets come from.

But they were always marked with other overt eccentricities that pretty much fit the statements they had made. Now comes this laughable bit of forehead-slappery called "The Birther Issue," proponents of which contend that our President Barack Obama was not born in America and therefore is an invalid candidate to be President.

Smiling politely as people ramble incoherently about this ridiculous accusation is now not enough it seems. Lou Dobbs is giving it some legs, and today on Politico they discuss the headaches this conspiracy theory is giving elected officials of the GOP who want to maintain the semblance of rationality and credibility among everyone else but would like to avoid marginalizing these very vocal insane people voters.

If you can't feel the restraint in my writing, please understand it now.

It is ludicrous to suggest that the President is not an American citizen and can't be president. The Hawaiian government has gone on the record — unequivocally, irrefutably, and unambiguously on the record — to say that he was born in Hawaii, which I'm pretty sure is an American state. But they don't look American! bellows a Birther from his trailer bathroom, door conveniently left open for just such an occasion. Upon further research, Hawaii became the 50th state on August 21, 1959. It's a state in America, like Arkansas, Texas, Delaware, Vermont, California...even Idaho! Being born there makes someone a citizen, and therefore able to be President. If there's more digging that needs to be done, then by all means, dig away with all of the powers granted by the FOIA, but I don't guess that the flights from Delaware to Hawaii are going to be in any higher demand.

Fie!, cries another Birther after swallowing his Copenhagen in shock and dismay that I would suggest that the documents in Hawaii are in fact the real documents, not lookalikes swapped out by them danged ole Democrats. He done switched em up! he proclaims, grinning like Encyclopedia Brown after cracking a case.

Yes, those Democrats and their crafty ways. Having a man born in Kenya, trained in the dark arts of community development, being unleashed in to Ivy League law schools and on to Chicago, the Senate, and the Presidency, all over the course of 40 years. It's almost too easy.

Uh. Sure. Maybe. That's a blanket statement that can be applied to a whole lot of things, but until evidence is produced it's just noise, not to mention so crazy that it doesn't warrant rebuttal. My problem with such statements, other than the fact that they're hopeless thrashings of people who really can't stand that a guy with a middle name like 'Hussein' is president, is this: If there were any indication that there might be a speck of truth, a hint of validity, an iota of credibility to this potentially-derailing claim, don't you think that a political party with the vested interest in that derailment — the GOP — would have done something to do just that, and derail this charismatic, confident, and composed man who made a bee line to the Oval Office?

If there were any truth to the matter, people who are paid to find the deepest dirt in the world for big, big bucks would have been happy to deliver these goods and then never have to work a day in their life again. It'd be that important.

Sadly, such reason will never reach the brains of people who really think that Barack Obama shouldn't be President right now. He should. He was vetted. He was elected. He's in. But the last ditch effort of sore losers who have uncomfortable undertones that reek of good-ole-fashioned racism is really getting, quite frankly, embarrassing. As more and more people line up into this fold, it's going to not only damage the already-punch drunk GOP, but I fear politics in general. I don't think the public forum can sustain such an aberration and dearth of common sense.

And there's the objectivity of it all. I'm not decrying Republicans or hoisting Democrats — These people are just bad for business all around. Unless you can show me a detailed research proposal that can state otherwise, please drop this.

Michael Jackson's death may be ruled a manslaughter or maybe even a homicide. Have fun with that one.

Proof that Obama's Numbers Are Too Low

Fox's "So You Think You Can Dance" beat out Obama's primetime health care show case last night.

Seeing amateurs dance was more appealing to the masses than hearing the President talk about how the country might or might not provide health insurance for them.

Maybe next time Obama could moonwalk or something. That one lady on American Idol made a career by showing up in a bikini.

From the Dept. of Bad Angles: The Arkansas Business Cover

It's Funny Because It's True

Well here's just a dandy item forwarded to me from a dear friend in Dallas.

It seems that some of the creative folk at Vanity Fair have taken to Sarah Palin's lackluster resignation speech, giving it an honest edit.

The result is bloodshed. Literary bloodshed.

In Palin's defense for my Republican friends...well, there's no excuse really. "Shoulda done betta." If speaking is a supposed strong suit of hers, it certainly wasn't shown in her speech, which was described by most as "odd" and "off-putting."

Easy on the pounce though, my Democratic friends. In a recent Public Strategies poll shown off by Politico, skepticism of Democrats is on the rise. For as much of a dullard as it seems a great deal of people find Sarah Palin, who has even worse numbers? Oh, dang it, Nancy Pelosi, that Speaker of the House.

Those numbers reveal that Democrats — Obama included — are losing some of their cushy numbers. GOP rejoicing? Not so much. Republican numbers are even more putrid.

So if people are losing trust in Democrats, and have already lost trust in Republicans, who does that leave?

It's an interesting question for a later date, I'm afraid. I think there's some more dust that needs to be settled, but when it does, a great many of these patterns and trends could be thrown to the wind. It might sort of be like when a long-time incumbent resigns his or her post: it'll be up for grabs and highly contested. With the bad way the country is in these days, it might be so bad that both political parties are found culpable. Crazier stuff has happened.

Just a stray thought on my end I guess. Politics is weird in general.

What Do All of These Ricky Randoms Mean For Lincoln?

(Ed. Note — After a week sabbatical and then a case of the violently-ill Mondays, the UFW is back for its regular installments. I know you were missing me. I missed you, too.)

Monday morning, I noticed a blog post by Jason "Too Much Time" Tolbert that a retired Army colonel, Conrad Reynolds, was throwing his name into the hat in the ever-shifting, always awkward roster of those Republicans vying for a shot to beat Blanche Lincoln, the Democratic incumbent, in the U.S. Senate.

Tom Cox, the Tea-Bagger. Curtis Coleman, ex-Huckster/Safe Foods mogul. Fred Ramey, a businessman who runs a business. A Chicagoan with Arkansan roots named Chris Bequette is being rumored. Conrad Reynolds. Moneyman French Hill was also rumored, but he seems to be warming up to a Congressional run against Vic Snyder. Kim Hendren, oy vey. Gilbert Baker seems to have quietly bowed out, while Tim Griffin seems to have been playing opossum the whole time.

With the slight exception of a state Senator or two — one of which only made the kind of national headlines that candidates don't want — none of these names are household ones. I'm sure they've got fund raising ability, and I'm sure that in their relative communities, they're pretty popular fellows. But the moniker 'Ricky Random' can be applied to most if not all of them.

Maybe it makes sense for a populist state like Arkansas to have a host of willing contenders ready to throw their names, reputations and families into the ring. A litany of everymen, lining up like a group of modern-day Cincinnatus-es, it's almost compelling.

Emphasis on almost. Compelling doesn't bring home the bacon. My point man on the power of money, David Kinky Kinkade, had a good piece today on the Arkansas Project about how much real dollars some of these candidates are going to have to raise to compete with Lincoln. Like Kinkade, I'll punt on some of the chances these suitors have. Sure, they've got a shot, they're running after all, buuuuuut...

What does this mean for Lincoln exactly? A few points, if I may:

People say she's vulnerable: This isn't news. Polls have been out for a few months now, revealing tepid numbers for anyone, let alone a two-term incumbent. Lincoln has been in the dastardly pickle to pick sides on issues ranging from card check, to health care, and soon, I'd wager, energy, between her more-conservative state and her more-liberal party. This perceived vulnerability allows people who would regularly not consider running to think, hey, maybe I've got a shot.

The field says she isn't vulnerable: What this should also show is that perhaps she isn't so vulnerable after all. You'd think that, if she were after all, so weak and unable to mount a good enough campaign to make up for those meager numbers, that someone of note — like a Mike Huckabee, for instance, or someone in that same vein — would swoop in to take advantage. Elections naturally favor incumbents. Lincoln is a shrewd politician, who wisely straddles the fence on many issues, much to the chagrin of her opponents. She's obviously got not only plenty of people, but plenty of well-off people who aren't afraid to scrawl out a check, again, referencing Kinkade's mention of her $11 million pace she has already set.

More to come: It's still very early in this race, despite what the 24-hour hungry news cycle would let you think. Think about it a couple of months ago. You had Tim Griffin and Gilbert Baker making the most noise. Then Kim Hendren loudly barged into the discussion. Then he loudly pushed the eject button out of the discussion. Names are floating in and out of the conversation in the vacuum of actual news on the subject. There will be more names, some less credible than the roster assembled, others more so.

Like this Tom Cotton guy Sanders opined about. He's not a household name by any means, but he seems to have some pretty big time credentials. Harvard Law grad leading soldiers into battle? Brains and brawn! He's just one of the names I've heard in the ether, and frankly, one that I think, if he is as well-connected as many are claiming he is, has a decent shot in a runoff.

That's pretty much it. Is this the common Arkansan rising up against Lincoln? I doubt it; many Arkansans don't care enough to vote, let alone run. But it should mean that, despite the Ricky Randoms assembled thus far, we should be in for a barn-burner in 2010. Or not! See what I did there?

PoLOLitical Stuff: Punching, Time Travel and Nerds

Kicking Back

If you haven't noticed, I've been taking a few days away from the blog. Not only have the Bureau duties become a tad busier, but I'm taking a bit of a sabbatical from the UFW to recharge the cognitive juices. Despite the lackluster, shoddy, unedited, and what my good friend John Brummett would call "nothing but self-promulgating" of these posts, it takes awhile to come up with this stuff.

If something comes up that's really noteworthy, or divine inspiration strikes (both unlikely), I'll put something up. Otherwise, I'll toss up some PoLOLitical Stuff on Friday and we'll call it a week.

In the news business, I think this would be called an 'advisory.' I don't know. I'm merely a Youngblood and know not of such things.

PoLOLitical Stuff: Peeks, How to Dress, and the Future

Rough PR Move, Guys

As I was creeping by on I-430, making my hasty yet sluggish trek to the office yesterday, I noticed this sign staring me in the face.

I drove through hell and back on the way from my home in Saline County to my high school in Little Rock during the I-30 construction that changed it from two lanes to three. I've seen people flung off interstates because of congestion and traffic due to construction. Needless to say, my usual jolly temperament (sure, I'm jolly) is slammed to the curb as my road rage increases tenfold.

I'm sure that goes for a lot of people. Traffic jams no es bueno. So you can imagine why it might be a bit of a PR snafu for the construction going on to advertise it as such a wonderful, brilliant, beautiful thing as people pass by, white-knuckled and weaving endless tapestries of profanities.

After the construction is done, and the roads are safer and perhaps more pleasant, then you could do it. I don't know, I'm not a big PR guy. We could probably bug Blake Rutherford or Emily Reeves, but I'm sure they're busy publicly relating to someone much more important than I.

Michael Jackson Splitting Democrats? Sounds Like the Summer Doldrums To Me

First, let me say I am a pretty big Michael Jackson fan. I think he meant a lot to the African-American community, meant a lot to many other communities, and hey, I can moonwalk.

So I'm not not too beside myself about the MJ coverage. There's an argument such a presentation was in demand. Let it be. I was surprised however to see the beltway political Web site Politico launch into a bevy of articles about the death of the pop icon. Two stuck out, one because it was interesting, the other because it was a stretch.

First, Al Sharpton said that it was Michael Jackson that made it possible for a man like Barack Obama to be elected President.

This isn't the aforementioned stretch I was referring to earlier. I think, in, of course the broadest sense of the terms, that Michael Jackson may have helped ease some of the previous tensions that in times past would have kept some white voters from voting for Obama. He certainly wasn't the only reason, and I doubt he was even a big reason. Maybe just in the societal subconscious. I'm just saying. Okay, it's a stretch, I admit it. Happy?

Plus, I don't think Al Sharpton saying something as ridiculous as that should have surprised anyone.

But a Politico article that shamefully used the pun "moonwalking" to connote delicately toeing around a divisive issue was brought to my attention last night. Since the new administration took office in January, there has been a theme over the past few months regarding a possible schism between the far and middle left. It happens to every majority. Some want to keep it going in the other direction (In the early decade, it was the Far Right and to much success on their part, now it's the Far Left, with less-than-expected success) others fight to keep it more moderate.

Politico asserted that since Rep. Sheila Jackson-Lee, D-Texas, was announcing that she was planning a resolution to honor MJ and his humanitarian efforts, and the leftward Congressional Black Caucus being in support of such a bill, could further the divide in House Democrats.

I think this is a wild, crazy idea, personally. There are resolutions submitted every single day on the House floor for things more crazy than Michael Jackson and his humanitarian bent. And no matter how bust Congress is right now (which they are) a twenty minute break to talk a little bit about the actual tangible good MJ did might be a good breather.

Plus, if there are such stark cultural differences between the pro-Michael and anti-Michael camps within the Democratic Party, I think those differences would have already made themselves apparent by this point.

I think what this is is a good opportunity for the media to get a quick respite from what are called the summer doldrums. You know, the slow news times where nothing seems to happen and that seem to go on without end and are endless and go on without end? Making something out of nothing, I guess.

By the way, the blog post is an example of summer doldrums respite.

Overexposure vs. Playing Your Hand

President Barack Obama is the most popular guy in school the world. He's got charm, smarm, snazz, tact, and smooth rhetoric that makes Morgan Freeman sound like a heavy-breathing, awkward teenager on the line with his Jr. high sweetheart.

He's good looking. I'm comfortable enough with myself (and my listening abilities) to say that. He's in shape. He hoops so regularly that ESPN ran an Outside the Lines article talking about how basketball is the new golf course, as for where the business in Washington is handled.

He has a compelling narrative. He has an 'it' factor that makes even conservative columnists like the New York Times' David Brooks acknowledge that he is the epitome of dignity in an ever dignity-less world, and that his greatest achievement as President might be the reawakening of a new age where dignity is treasured.

Politico reported that he is marketable, filed away under the biggest 'duh' ever category. Yesterday, I talked about how he, like Sarah Palin, has such a stellar character profile that it outshines hitherto considered to be blemishes on his resume, namely, a lack of a long one. Many in Obama's early corner told the now-President but then junior Senator only two years into office that he ought to wait a term or two to insure that his election would be a lock.

It was never anything but a lock, save for a few brief moments about six weeks before the election, but those tumbled as did the economy.

I could keep going on and on, but it would be redundant and would border on flirtatious. He's popular and he knows it.

But then that wily codger John Multimedia Brummett went and got me thinking about overexposure. In his renowned phone-it-in arrows column, he gave Obama a downward arrow for overexposure. "He’s overexposed and shouldn’t do any more health care specials on ABC unless he can produce better answers than he offered the other night...It is to say he should stay off television if all he can do is regurgitate banal talking points," said Brummett.

While I'm sure the two sorted it out that Sunday evening, with Obama being a fan of Brummett's and Brummett being a fan of his, this struck a chord with me; I had been having a meal with an avid, blindly and staunchly conservative, and she said the exact same thing. I had chalked it up to bias. But I think it's a strategy.

It's a balancing act for the President. Obama can be seen on television, the internet, and every medium in between (yes, Blake, TwiTTeR!!!) every day. Politico 44 stalks reports his every move. Barry (yeah, I feel like I'm on a first name basis with the guy) is like the picture of a loved one you keep on the dashboard of your car: Maybe not your primary focus, but always in sight, smiling at you.

But there's personable and then there's overanxious. Last week, Politico ran an article about the Politics of Personal Perfection, referring of course to how Obama seemingly being just so perfect in every way may actually be a detriment, as people might prefer a "real" or "flawed" person just like them. So President Obama is trying to be unflappable to his political opponents, yet would do well to seem more flawed, to connect with the common man.

Personally, I think the 'Everyman' narrative is a little worn out. Nobody craves the 'Everyman' or 'Everywoman' when they watch TV or a movie. They look for perfection. They look for Cameron Diaz. They look for Brad Pitt. They look for Obama. While worn, I think it still holds water.

Obama can see his assets as well as anyone. He sees that his weaknesses are also overshadowed by his strengths. His strength now becomes a pseudo-weakness. As his policy ratings continue to decline, his personal popularity might become more than just the luster on the ride, it could end up being the motor.

I think he'll do it, step out of the spotlight a bit and give his persona a breather. That'd be the smart move, and he's proven he's got a vast repertoire of smart moves. But that isn't to say that he'll be offstage, either. Again, it's Obama's hand to play.

Let the Mindless Palin Speculation Begin!

So Sarah Palin made some headlines this week, abdicating the throne of Alaska to pursue...something other than running Alaska.

While it's all well and good that she's making actual headlines, rather than wedging herself awkwardly into the conversation by talking about how creepy that Dave Letterman guy is (slaps forehead), what she has now started is an endless carousel of annoying speculation.

The news ran between segments about Michael Jackson and that Jonas Brother who got engaged, if that tells you anything about the magnitude of the speculating.

There are a few schools of thought on the subject. One is that she's bailing due to up-and-coming lawsuits that would derail her political viability, another is that she'll use all that time she was wasting trying to run Alaska and devote it to a tour of the lower 48 on her way to the White House, and another thinks that she'll ride the gravy train with biscuit-capped wheels all the way to the bank, getting out of elected office and speaking for money.

The three are not incompatible, which leads to a wide array of various combinations (seven!), and fuels speculation further.

I yield to the imitable Mark McKinnon, who prepped her for her admittedly low-bar and successful Vice-Presidential debate with Joe "HEY!" Biden. He says that she exceeded his expectations in the debate, always knows how to keep things interesting, and he concludes that she has still more up her sleeve.

But what do we actually know about Palin, and could that shed light on her future intentions? I don't think we know enough about her, honestly. There's not enough on the record, politically, to gauge her actions in that arena.

That plays to her advantage. While I think it'd be akin to comparing apples to oranges F-16 Tomcat jet planes, she, like President Obama, has enough of what I'd call a "blind appeal" that makes her, to many people, simply wonderful, despite lacking hitherto considered invaluable intangibles, in their cases, experience.

In other words, those who cultishly cling to Palin, as Obama, don't cling because of their brief political stints as governor and senator respectively; They've got something else altogether. Call it snazz, I guess. Now, from there, you can go off on a number of different tangents and directions spouting the obvious differences between Obama and Palin. I'm not comparing them any further or to any other extent.

She's very folksy, which appeals to some and doesn't to others. She's relatively inexperienced, which matters to some and doesn't to others. But across the board, the consensus is that she keeps things interesting and is therefore someone to keep an eye on.

Whatever breaks up this Michael Jackson mania is a-okay with me, anyway.

Caption Contest! PoLOLitical Stuff

It's an early weekend, and therefore, is an early caption contest. In light of a recent dearth of comments, I've decided to kick it up a notch, and add some photos that already have comments on the photos themselves.

By all means, feel free to add more comments, captions, suggestions, or threats on my personal well-being. All are appreciated.

And yes, this is a clear cut example of my phoning it in today. Enjoy, and have a merry Independence Day, and take part in America's favorite pastime — recklessly and dangerously blowing up stuff that is highly flammable.

Short Notice: On the Radio This Aft Around Five

I know it's short notice but I'll be on the old timey radio talking machine today with David J. Sanders; columnist, sharp-dresser, and Father of Many Children.

Not exactly sure what the soup de jour will be, but I bet we'll talk about this Marcus Vaden, Conway's Prosecuting Attorney, character he opined about today, and probably the goings on in Washington, like health care in the Senate (vague!), and Cap-and-Trade in the House (done!).

Should make for a good time anyway. Mother always said I have a face for radio. Listen here, and retweet me for questions, topics, or whatever.

Lincoln's a Cool Customer on Health Care

Sen. Blanche Lincoln and I have done our fair share of conversating over the past few months. From card check to energy reform and in between, the Senator has always been good to call me back for an interview, and we've had many.

The headliner as of late, as you already well know, is what are we going to do about health care. Lincoln sits on the ever-powerful Senate finance committee that will be responsible for footing the bill, a bill that many are estimating is mighty steep, at over $1 trillion.

That's no chump change for anyone.

Lincoln has stated that she has no definitive stance on the issue, only the vague, tepid response that she is for "whatever it is that works," fulfilling all of the goals for all of the problems that there are or may be in the health care arena. That's a rather tall order.

So you can understand how ambitious it must be for her to say that she expects a health care bill next week, as everyone returns from the July 4th recess. To go from having no preference whatsoever, as she stated to me several times is her position, on a specific position — be it a public option, co-op, or any other option — to having some meat on the table will surely be something.

Actually, what it shows is that beneath the tame surface, there is a frenzy of activity in the legislative waters on health care. But with all of her weight being shifted equally, we have no idea how she'll land.

My guess — again, guess, mind you — is that we'll be presented with something remarkably similar if not identical to the public option proposed by President Obama, only reworded to fix the well-publicized collective aversion to the socialist-sounding moniker of "public option." I think Obama, a former Senator, will be able to make sure his goal is taken care of with a small, 100-person room full of his former colleagues, which as of yesterday, also happens to be a supermajority.

Cap-and-trade, a divisive bill that split the Democratic party down a rural fence, passed in the House, in no small part due to Obama's backing. It will die in the Senate, but the message is still clear.

Like Arkansas Gov. Mike Beebe during the past legislative session, I think President Obama could be riding his popularity to the bank, nearly sweeping all of his legislative agenda points, any one of which would have been remarkable, but all of them? That's big time.