I'm sure many of you are watching the season premiere of "Lost." I've never seen it, and I'm not sure I'll start, but if you really think I should, let me know in comments. Here's a cheat sheet.

The Denver auditions of "American Idol" are on first, and for sure, I'll be watching them.

The Oscar nominations came out today. Will the increased number of "best picture" films make a difference?

Whatever you are doing tonight, this is an open thread, all topics welcome.

Could Lady Gaga's dress be any more strange? That's her arriving on the red carpet for tonight's 2010 Grammy Awards. (Photo by Herman Flores.)

There will be the big three (yet again): Beyonce, Taylor Swift and Lady Gaga, all of whom will perform. And a Michael Jackson tribute -- a 3-D broadcast of his orchestral ballad "Earth Song". His kids will be there.[More...]

Why is ABC so heavily promoting its segment tonight with Andrew Young, author of the sleaze book on John Edwards? I have gotten an e-mail from ABC every few hours today. Their website is filled with news and details of his appearance. So is GMA, they've been hyping it all week. I wouldn't watch Young, a self-promoting scam artist, if they paid me.

Young is not an unbiased journalist. He has a past filled with transgressions, from tax liens to misdemeanor convictions. He's out to make money. He's trying to bury Edwards. I hope no one buys his book.

As for the sex tape he's trying to peddle, the court put a kabosh on that for the time being, granting Rielle Hunter's motion for a temporary restraining order preventing him from disseminating it. A hearing will be held Feb. 8. [More...]

For the most part, I thought President Obama's State of the Union address was excellent. The TL kid and I decided we'll give the President an A and the speech an A-. (Update: CBS poll: 83% of Americans approve the proposals in the speech)

The reasons the speech isn't getting an A: His reference to:

• Allowing (only)those who "play by the rules" to contribute
• "Those who obey the law should be protected by the law." Everyone should be protected.
• No commitment to closing Guantanamo and repatriating those who haven't been charged
• No commitment to criminal justice reform
• Vague on intentions for social security

Obama gets an "A" because of the leadership he displayed, his passion in delivering the speech and the confidence he inspired in us. We think our Government is in good hands.

How would you score the speech and the President?

The wait is over. Apple held its news conference today and unveiled its much anticpated Tablet, called the iPad. And, contrary to speculation it would cost $1,000., the price will be between $499 and $699. They will be available in a few months. Here's more: [More...]

Ezra Klein calls tonight's SOTU from President Obama "the most important [speech]" of his Presidency. Perhaps so. But since the Village Dems and bloggers have declared Obama irrelevant and impotent, does tonight's speech matter to anyone but Obama? Kevin Drum writes:

[I]s President Obama going to rally the nation behind the cause of ambitious, wide-ranging healthcare reform in tonight's State of the Union address? It sure doesn't sound like it. [. . .] If Obama isn't willing to step up and take ownership of passing the current plan, what chance is there that Congress is willing to get out on a limb and take the risk itself? Not much, I'm afraid. I sure hope Obama and his advisors screw up their courage on this and do the right thing before the end of the day.

Perhaps. But it is hard to square the calls for Obama to "step up" with the earlier Village argument that Obama was a slave to the whims of the Senate.

Speaking for me only

I like Jon Walker of FDL, but this post is bizarre.

Walker criticizes increasing taxes on the wealthy in order to modify the excise tax. Wha? That's neither smart nor progressive.

What's up with that?

Speaking for me only

Media Matters:

Back in 2004, the United Church of Christ (UCC) attempted to run the following advertisement during CBS' broadcast of the Super Bowl:

The attempt was thwarted however when CBS rejected the ad – apparently because of the network's policy of "prohibiting advocacy ads, even ones that carry an 'implicit' endorsement for a side in a public debate." Now, six years later, CBS is set to air an ad by the anti-choice, anti-gay, far right-wing Focus on the Family during this month’s Super Bowl broadcast.

This is a blatant double standard. CBS should run both ads. Update - CNS said today, under its new guidelines, it would air the UCC ad.

Speaking for me only

Matt Yglesias:

The clearest path forward for health reform is for House Democrats to (a) pass the Senate bill, and (b) pass a “sidecar” of amendments that deal with reconciliation-eligible topics, allowing House leaders to improve the bill by modifying the “cadillac” tax and replacing the Senate’s state-based exchanges with a nationwide exchange. But Carrie Budoff Brown reports that not every Senator likes this idea:

Sen. Ben Nelson (D-Neb.) said Monday that he would oppose any health care reform bill with a national insurance exchange, which he described as a dealbreaker. [. . .] If Senate Democrats still had 60 votes, this would matter a lot.

[. . .] The real point, however, is that Nelson’s views are irrelevant. The exchange set-up will either be determined by reconciliation or else nothing will be done. Either way, he doesn’t matter.

(Emphasis supplied.) They are beginning to get it. They have the best of both worlds from their perspective - a locked in Senate vote that can be amended with the agreement of only 50 Senators. Gawd forbid they get ambitious about it.

Speaking for me only

The new season of "Damages" begins tonight on FX (10 pm ET). It's a fictionalized version of the Bernard Madoff case (without using their names of course.) The New York Times explains and gives it a big thumbs up, especially for Lily Tomlin who plays the financier's wife.

Rose Byrne is now a D.A. but she and Patty continue their complex and bizarre relationship.

From Sports Left -- J-E-T-S, JETS ! JETS! JETS! To listen to New York sports radio talk this week, you would think the AFC Championship Game, the Jets travel to Indianapolis to face the Colts, is a toss up. In fact, in Vegas, the Colts are 8.5 point favorites over the Jets. What explains this seeming disconnect? The Week 16 Colts-Jets game is the main reason (the Jets' wins at the Bengals and at the Chargers also has optimism for the Jets bubbling.) In that game, Colt coach Jim Caldwell rested his starters in the second half of a 15-10 game. The game went to the Jets and the Colts undefeated season went down the drain (I defended Caldwell's move at the time.)

So what about the game? It's intriguing. But ultimately a mismatch. The Colts demonstrated against the Ravens that they can handle pressure defense, that their defense can stop the run and manhandle inexperienced QBs. It may take until the 3rd quarter but I expect the Colts to get a 2 score lead and after that, the Jets will have to play catchup. If you have confidence in Mark Sanchez to get it done, then betting the Jets to make it close might make sense. I do not believe Sanchez can do it at this point in his career, on the road. I like the Colts (-8.5). I also like the Under (40).

By now it should be apparent to anyone that without a contemporaneous fix of the Senate health bill, the Stand Alone Senate bill is dead. No matter how many times Village Dems and bloggers chant "pass the bill," the math is inescapable - there simply is no possible way to get 218 votes in the House to pass the Senate bill WITHOUT a companion fix via reconciliation.

That may be "monstrous" or "politically stupid" or anything else anyone wants to call it, but it is the political reality. With that reality staring people in the face, the continued strategy of "punching the hippies" employed by Village Dems and bloggers is irresponsible, from THEIR perspective. It is nothing more than a juvenile temper tantrum now. Want them to "pass the bill?" Then push the Senate to agree to a companion fix via reconciliation. Anything else is nothing more than a de facto "Kill the Bill" movement.

Speaking for me only