I've been hard on congressional Republicans recently for pandering to voters' ignorance by offering politically appealing but irresponsible slogans instead of a credible conservative vision of how to meet America's challenges, even those they harp on Obama for failing to address, such as our rising budget deficits. So, it is only fair that I praise Rep. Paul Ryan (R-Wisc) for coming forward with a proposal that could actually reduce long term deficits.

Ryan would to do so by essentially eliminating Medicare (and privatizing Social Security). Everyone under 55 today, would not get covered by the U.S. government. Instead they would get vouchers with which to buy health insurance upon turning 65. You can quickly surmise what this would lead to: insurers, with a customer base that is high-risk, would either charge rates well above what the vouchers provide, and/or offer only bare bones service for the cost of a voucher. The result: seniors who are uninsured or under-insured. Ultimately, seniors would die as a result, as younger Americans who lack insurance do now.

This is a conservative vision of government, and you cannot expect Democrats to embrace it. But if the Republicans ran on such a proposal and won control of Congress and the White House they could claim a legitimate mandate to enact it. 

Alas, Republicans are all but certain not to run any such program.

Maybe it's time to stop some of the name-calling over counterterrorism policy and start checking the facts. As the debate over Obama administration counterterrorism policies has heated up in the wake of the failed Christmas Day underpants airplane bombing, prominent Republicans, ranging from leading senators to a former press secretary for George W. Bush, have attacked the current administration for claiming that hundreds of terrorist suspects had been successfully prosecuted through the civilian court system during Bush's presidency. But it turns out that the Obama administration's claims do appear to be well documented—assuming that an official budget request sent to Congress by Bush's last attorney general was truthful itself.

For the full story, visit Declassfied.

John Murtha was Nancy Pelosi's friend and mentor, and his backing her for leader over Steny Hoyer, a longtime insider player in the Democratic caucus, gave her the street creds she needed to win as the first woman to hold that high a position in what was an old boys' club. A gruff former combat Marine officer, Murtha provided political cover for Pelosi and other left-wing Democrats in their opposition to the Iraq war. After having initially supported the war, Murtha became an outspoken opponent, calling for immediate withdrawal of U.S. forces in 2005. As a once reliable Bush administration ally, his defection signaled the growing disaffection with Bush's war policies. Murtha's long history of pro-military votes and close alliance with the military helped rebuff Republican charges that Pelosi and other anti-war Democrats were endangering national security.

Pennsylvania Democrat John Murtha died this afternoon at a hospital in Virginia, following complications related to gall bladder surgery he underwent in January. Murtha, 77, had served in the House for 36 years. The first Vietnam veteran elected to Congress and chair of the Defense Appropriations Subcommittee, Murtha wielded enormous power over defense related issues and boldly sought earmarks that benefited his district.

For more on Murtha, his life, achievements and brushes with scandal, The Washington Post has a comprehensive obit.

That is not an article from The Onion; it’s actual, real news.

The Pew Research Center has some new, interesting numbers up on public opinion and health-care reform. The general takeaway is that, while the same numbers of Americans support  reform, they’re increasingly pessimistic about its odds of passing. It’s notable that, despite all the roadblocks in the legislative process, the same number of Americans generally stand behind it.

Michael Isikoff reports on the Declassified blog:

White House counterterrorism adviser John Brennan played an unusual role Sunday when he swiped at congressional Republicans for bashing the administration's handling of the Christmas Day bombing suspect.

Normally, it is the White House political aides such as David Axelrod and Press Secretary Robert Gibbs, both seasoned veterans of the 2008 Obama campaign, who take the offensive against the president's GOP critics on the Sunday talk shows.

But this week, it was Brennan─a professional U.S. intelligence official who now serves on the president's national-security staff─who played the attack-dog role. While national-security aides─like Richard Clarke after 9/11─have been used in the past to rebut political attacks by providing "background" briefings, and Brennan himself did the Sunday talk-show circuit immediately after the Christmas Day bombing─it is extremely rare for a White House aide in his position to so directly target the president's critics, much less members of Congress by name, according to several former White House staffers and congressional staffers.

Read the entire post here.

Since "underpants bomber" Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab's failed Christmas Day bombing plot, his prosecution has become a political football, with the Obama administration opting to try him in civil courts and Republicans pushing for him to be turned over to the military. NEWSWEEK's Mark Hosenball reports that Obama and officials including Attorney General Eric Holder considered that path, but opted to stick with civil courts:

The subject of whether Abdulmutallab should be transferred to military custody came up at a meeting the president held in the White House Situation Room in early January, shortly before the Justice Department announced it would proceed against him in the civilian-court system, according to little-noticed statements made by one or more "senior administration officials" who gave a background briefing to White House reporters on Feb. 2.

But according to [an] official, "nobody advocated for that position. People were comfortable throughout this process that it was going in the right direction and that given what we can do in a military commission, what we can do in the criminal justice system, there was full unanimity on the part of the seniors that this was the right way to go."

Read the full story on the Declassified blog.

The revolution may not be televised, but it has been photographed by your humble man on the ground. Photos from the trenches at tea-party HQ.

The only press conference open to all media at the Tea Party Convention just wrapped, and the newsiest component from it was the announced effort to incorporate the tea party into what organizer Mark Skoda said would be called the Ensuring Liberty Political Action Committee. Except not. It wouldn't be part of the tea party, per se. It would be a separate corporation (and we would normally call it a PAC, but Skoda repeatedly used the word "corporation," so we'll go with it).

Skoda said that such a corporatization didn't take anything away from the tea-party movement, which has experienced most of its success at the grassroots level. In fact, it would be completely unrelated except that it would appeal to the values of the same conservative thinkers who have formed the tea party proper. The money will be managed by Skoda, who at the moment is the only member of the board of directors. Who else will be leading this group, someone asked? "I don't—I'm not going to announce that yet," said Skoda.