From NBC's Mark Murray
Political journalist Ron Brownstein has a provocative blog post -- entitled "Dean's Blind Spot -- noting that many progressives who are railing against the Senate health-care bill can dismiss it because they actually have health insurance.

Writes Brownstein:

Maybe one reason former Vermont Gov. Howard Dean and so much of the digital Left can so casually dismiss the Senate health care reform bill is that they operate in an environment where so few people need to worry about access to insurance.

The 2004 presidential campaign that propelled Dean to national prominence was fueled predominantly by "wine track" Democratic activists-generally college-educated white liberals. (In the virtually all-white 2004 Iowa caucus, for instance, exit polls showed that two-thirds of Dean's votes came from voters with a college degree.) Those are the same folks, all evidence suggests, who provide the core support for online activist groups like MoveOn.org or Dean's Democracy for America and congregate most enthusiastically on liberal websites. (According to studies by the Pew Internet & American Life Project, college graduates are more than twice as likely as those with only a high-school degree to communicate about politics online.) Along with Dean, those digital Democratic activists are generating the loudest demands to derail the Senate bill.

Some individuals in these overlapping political networks undoubtedly face challenges with access to health care, but as a group college-educated whites are much less likely than any other segment of the population to lack health insurance.

From Chuck Todd, Mark Murray, Domenico Montanaro, and Ali Weinberg
*** Back to Copenhagen: President Obama's last trip to Copenhagen -- to help get Chicago the 2016 Olympics -- didn't end in success. Will today's stop in the Danish capital have a different outcome? (And if not, will Obama ever return there?) "We come together here in Copenhagen because climate change poses a grave and growing danger to our people," he said at the conference earlier this morning. "You would not be here unless you -- like me -- were convinced that this danger is real... Unchecked, climate change will pose unacceptable risks to our security, our economies, and our planet." Obama continued, "I believe that we can act boldly, and decisively, in the face of this common threat. And that is why I have come here today." (By the way, this is the president's SIXTH separate trip to Europe this year…)

*** Mad Libs time! Then, in remarks he also could have said about the health-care debate -- or even immigration or financial reform -- back home, Obama argued that, while imperfect, the climate accord they're working on would signal progress. A little Mad Libs fun from Obama's speech today… "We can embrace this [climate accord/health bill], take a substantial step forward, and continue to refine it and build upon its foundation. We can do that, and everyone who is in this room will be a part of an historic endeavor, one that makes life better for our children and grandchildren." More: "Or we can again choose delay, falling back into the same divisions that have stood in the way of action for years. And we will be back having the same stale arguments month after month, year after year – all while the danger of [climate change/rising health costs/Medicare insolvency] grows until it is irreversible."

*** Will we get a deal? At the moment, the New York Times writes, the prospects for any kind of agreement look shaky -- due to Chinese concerns about establishing monitoring systems to measure whether countries are complying with emission cuts. "Within an hour of Air Force One's touchdown in Copenhagen Friday morning, Mr. Obama was in a big meeting with a high-level group of leaders representing some 20 countries and organizations. But the meeting was most notable in that Chinese premier Wen Jiabao elected not to attend, instead sending Vice Foreign Minister He Yafei, a snub which left both American and European officials seething." That said, "An American negotiator, weary from a night of negotiations, expressed confidence early Friday that the talks would produce some form of an agreed declaration, even if it falls short of the ambitions of many delegates and lacks specifics on some of the toughest issues." Obama did meet one-on-one with Wen Jiabao, and the White House says their climate negotiating team has now split in two -- half negotiating multi-laterally and half negotiating SOLELY with China. Looks like the U.S. wants to get some deal with China and the two countries (along with India?) will dictate the terms of whatever comes out of Copenhagen. 

*** The survey says…: What are Americans' thoughts on climate change? In our new NBC/WSJ poll, a majority (54%) believes that climate change is either a serious problem or is occurring, and that action should be taken. But that percentage is down from the 59% who said that in 2006 and the 64% who said it in 2007. And the party split here is HUGE: 77% of Democrats believe climate change is a serious problem or is occurring and action should be taken, but just 33% of Republicans believe this. Also in the current poll, nearly three-quarters of all respondents (74%) agree with the statement that global warming is caused more by human actions, versus 20% who say it's caused more by naturally occurring forces.

*** Reid's bill clears last night's hurdle: At 1:20 am ET last night, the Senate voted 63-33 to block a GOP filibuster on the Defense Appropriations bill, with Republicans Olympia Snowe, Susan Collins, and Kay Bailey Hutchison joining all 58 Democrats and the two independents. Per NBC's Kelly O'Donnell, this rare overnight vote helped keep Democrats on schedule to meet their own Christmas deadline to vote on health-care reform. Democrats argued that the filibuster was a GOP delaying tactic to stall the health bill. As the Washington Post says, "After years of criticizing Democrats for not supporting the troops, just three Republicans supported the military funding." "Rarely has the Senate seen such a sad statement," Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid last night. "Rarely have I seen such brazen irresponsibility. And rarely have our nation's citizens received such little regard from their leaders." At 1:06 am, in fact, 92-year-old Sen. Robert Byrd (D) arrived to cast his vote, O'Donnell reports. The ailing Byrd was brought inside the chamber in a wheelchair, and his colleagues reacted by applauding. During that applause, Byrd raised his hand with a thumbs-up to signal an "aye" vote as he was heard saying, "Shame, shame."

*** Krugman backs the bill: Outside the Senate, liberals continue their back-and-forth over the bill. Today, in a response to Howard Dean and others who want to kill the Senate legislation, Paul Krugman -- joining other liberal voices on health care like Ezra Klein and Jon Cohn -- argues for its passage, despite all its flaws. "Bear in mind … the lessons of history: social insurance programs tend to start out highly imperfect and incomplete, but get better and more comprehensive as the years go by," Krugman writes. "Thus Social Security originally had huge gaps in coverage… But it was improved over time, and it's now the bedrock of retirement stability for the vast majority of Americans." On the other hand, David Brooks said he would vote against the bill, if he were a senator.

*** An appeal to the Ayatollah: As NBC's Andrea Mitchell reported on TODAY, one of the mothers of the hikers being held in Iran, has made a video appeal directly to the Ayatollah.

*** An eventful year: Despite the president's declining poll numbers, his setbacks (the missed deadlines on health care, the Olympics), and all the challenges he still faces (the economy, health care, Afghanistan, Iran), it's worth stepping back to remind ourselves how eventful President Obama's first year in office has been. It started with a legislative fight over the stimulus and is ending with a historic debate over health care. It has included some very big trips (Europe, Egypt Russia, Asia), big speeches (Cairo, the address to Congress on health care, West Point, Oslo), and more press conferences than we can count. Even his harshest critics would acknowledge that Obama has set out to do big things, to be the kind of transformative president he has said he admires. "I think Ronald Reagan changed the trajectory of America in a way that, you know, Richard Nixon did not and in a way that Bill Clinton did not," he said during the primaries.

*** But much more to accomplish: Yet unlike Reagan and even Nixon and Clinton, Obama has yet to accomplish something really big. Health care still has some high hurdles to clear before passage. The stimulus has yet to stop the monthly job losses. His Afghanistan gamble won't be known for years. And it's unclear whether his work on climate change in Copenhagen will lead to a breakthrough. Still, it's very early -- tomorrow concludes his 11th month in office -- and there's plenty of time to begin racking up major accomplishments. But this probably won't be one of them: ending the partisan fighting in Washington. "On this day, we gather because we have chosen hope over fear, unity of purpose over conflict and discord," Obama said at his inaugural. "On this day, we come to proclaim an end to the petty grievances and false promises, the recriminations and worn-out dogmas, that for far too long have strangled our politics." Bottom line: It's been a consequential first year of Obama's presidency. But it may not be for years or decades until we know for sure if this has been a successful first year.

*** A final note: With Christmas and New Year's approaching, we won't be publishing our morning and afternoon notes beginning on Monday; they'll return on Jan. 4. However, we'll be updating the blog and our twitter feeds regularly -- especially with the Senate still debating health care -- so be sure to check in often. Happy holidays!

Countdown to MA Special Election: 32 days
Countdown to IL primary: 46 days
Countdown to TX primary: 74 days
Countdown to Election Day 2010: 319 days

Click here to sign up for First Read emails. 
Text FIRST to 622639, to sign up for First Read alerts to your mobile phone.
Check us out on Facebook and also on Twitter.

The Washington Post: "Senate Republicans failed early Friday in their bid to filibuster a massive Pentagon bill that funds the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, an unusual move designed to delay President Obama's health-care legislation. On a 63 to 33 vote, Democrats cleared a key hurdle that should allow them to approve the must-pass military spending bill Saturday and return to the health-care debate. After years of criticizing Democrats for not supporting the troops, just three Republicans supported the military funding." 

Roll Call's headline on the Defense measure's middle-of-the-night passage: "Reid's Health Care Bill Strategy Clears First Hurdle."

The defense bill "now heads for a 7:30 a.m. Saturday vote in the Senate after Friday's 1:30 a.m. cloture vote, according to Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.)," The Hill writes. Republican Whip Jon Kyl: "Republicans didn't delay this bill until a week before Christmas." Reid: "We're here at 1 o'clock in the morning because of the Republicans."

The New York Times notes how the fate of the Senate bill seems to be in Sen. Ben Nelson's hands. "Other Democrats, liberals as well as centrists, have not yet committed to vote for the bill. And the abortion provisions are just one of numerous concerns that Mr. Nelson has expressed about it. But the biggest obstacle seems to be his demand for tighter restrictions, which are being resisted fiercely by a bloc of senators who support abortion rights."

More: "Pete Rouse, a senior White House adviser, has been assigned specifically to address Mr. Nelson's concerns. Senator Bob Casey, a freshman Democrat from Pennsylvania and a prominent opponent of abortion rights, was tapped to devise some sort of compromise language on coverage for abortions to bring Mr. Nelson on board. But Mr. Casey's initial efforts have come up short, though he said he would keep trying. 'I want to be a fountain of ideas on this topic,' he said. To help divine Mr. Nelson's thinking, a wide array of Democrats have reached out to him in recent days, including former Senators Tom Daschle of South Dakota and Bob Kerrey of Nebraska. In the calls, Mr. Nelson has not disclosed how he is leaning, but his friends say they can sense the pressure he is facing."

Right now, Nelson's a "no." "If it's not at the point where I think it needs to be with the improvements that I'm pushing -- and they've made a lot of them -- then I will not vote for cloture on the motion to end debate," Nelson said in an interview on KLIN radio in Nebraska. There's a lot of improvement on the legislation but the basic question on funding for abortion hasn't been answered yet." 

Former President Bill "Clinton -- who saw his own attempt at a health-care overhaul crash on the shoals of Congress in 1994 -- wrote an open letter saying it would be a 'colossal blunder' to let the nearly $1 trillion plan die," the New York Post notes. "'Does the bill read exactly how I would write it? No. Does it contain everything everyone wants? No,' he wrote. 'But America can't afford to let the perfect be the enemy of the good. Take it from someone who knows: These chances don't come around every day. Allowing this effort to fall short now would be a colossal blunder.'"

In must-see video, Al Franken shut down Joe Lieberman on the Senate floor yesterday. Lieberman asked for more time, Franken, presiding over the Senate, denied it. "Franken's spokeswoman, Jess McIntosh, said that the Minnesota senator wouldn't allow Lieberman to continue because time limits were being enforced by Senate leaders rushing to finish a defense spending bill and get to the health bill." (Here's NBC's Kelly O'Donnell's piece from Nightly News last night.) 

Speaking of Lieberman, MoveOn says it's raised $1 million off Lieberman, using this sock-puppet video mocking him.

By a 16-7 vote yesterday, the Senate Banking Committee voted to approve Ben Bernanke's confirmation for a second term as Fed chairman. It now moves to the full Senate. But yesterday's vote "represented a retreat from Mr. Bernanke's near-unanimous approval by the committee four years ago. Neither party's members voted as a bloc, and even some of Mr. Bernanke's supporters said they harbored reservations and might reconsider when the vote went to the Senate." 

How productive were House members this year? "Healthcare may have dominated debate in Congress this year, but House lawmakers still found time to record 991 total roll call votes over the past 12 months," The Hill writes. "That's the chamber's second-highest vote total since 1991, according to the chamber's historians. The first session of the 110th Congress currently holds first place, recording more than 1,100 votes in a single year. Interestingly enough, July was the most productive month for the 111th House. Over the course of 31 days, its members recorded 209 roll call votes."

"On the final day of a 12-day global summit, Obama said all major economies should announce decisive actions to reduce emissions, adding that many -- including the United States -- already have. But he insisted that any accord must include a mechanism to review whether nations are keeping their commitments. Without it, Obama said at the morning plenary session, any agreement would be 'empty words on a page,'" the Washington Post says. 

"A clearly frustrated President Barack Obama displayed impatience Friday with world leaders' failure to reach agreement on a new climate pact, saying America is setting an example of bold action and other nations must follow or see the world suffer catastrophic effects," the AP writes from Copenhagen. "Acknowledging that some nations feel the United States is not doing enough, Obama said it's better to embrace an imperfect accord than to reach an impasse." (Sound familiar?)

Politico adds, "A visibly angry Barack Obama threw down the gauntlet at China and other developing nations Friday, declaring that the time has come "not to talk but to act" on climate change." 

The Wall Street Journal: "[A] new draft agreement circulating on the final day of negotiations at the climate talks in Copenhagen doesn't specify any carbon emission reductions targets, people familiar with the document said. The targets are currently left blank, but could be filled in over the course of talks between world leaders Friday. The text comes as heads of state scramble to hammer out a final deal on combating global warming Friday, after two weeks often acrimonious talks characterized by deep divisions between rich and poor countries."

Per NBC's Athena Jones, Obama's Organizing for America has produced an interesting -- and personalized -- holiday video. 

After David Axelrod's "Morning Joe" phone-in yesterday, the New York Daily News says, "President Obama's right-hand man had a harsh message Thursday for disgruntled liberals who call the Senate's health care reform plan worse than nothing: You're 'insane.'" Axelrod: "To defeat a bill that will bend the curve on this inexorable rise in health care costs is insane." "Later, in an attempt to calm tempers, Axelrod told bloggers: 'I'm not professionally qualified to judge insanity and maybe I should have used a different word.'"  
 
The Boston Globe: "Despite being portrayed as responsible for myriad national ills, Wall Street bankers, oil and coal companies, and health industry executives bounced back in Congress this year with remarkable success, stalling or weakening the biggest regulatory threats on President Obama's domestic agenda.
 
"The success is fueled in part by a $1 billion combined lobbying blitz through the first 10 months of the year, as the industries fought off the changes that many thought were coming with Obama's election. A year after the worst economic crisis in 75 years, a crackdown on lending abuses and risky trading practices has barely received a hearing in the Senate. The Senate has temporarily shelved legislation in tended to combat global warming. And while Obama's cornerstone health care proposal still has momentum, the insurance industry scored a major victory this week when Democratic leaders scuttled a government insurance option."

The Hill on the National Republican Senatorial Committee's recent "allegations of primary favoritism" after fundraising for "establishment-favored candidates" Carly Fiorina (CA), Trey Grayson (KY) and Kelly Ayotte (NH): "If these outsider candidates think the NRSC is bluffing, why don't they call the committee on it and seek its help? The answer: because they're perfectly happy to be on the outside looking in… It's clear that the NRSC seeks out some candidates and is more proactive in helping them. But at some point, campaigns begin to embrace and use their outsider status to their advantage -- especially in the current environment. At this point, they have more to gain by staying the outsiders. 

ARKANSAS: "Sen. Blanche Lincoln (D-Ark.) got a boost in her reelection effort on Thursday morning by way of a fundraising e-mail from former President Bill Clinton," The Hill writes. Clinton: "I am going to tell you what I told Sen. Lincoln this week: She's going to win this thing. Make no mistake, this will be a tough fight. But I know Sen. Lincoln well and I know she is up to it. That's why I'm standing with her, and I'm asking you to do the same."  
 
NEW HAMPSHIRE: Democratic candidate Paul Hodes took on Connecticut Sen. Joe Lieberman (I) "in a scathing fundraising email," the New Hampshire Union-Leader reports. "Asking for "$5 or more" for his campaign committee, the Democratic U.S. Senate candidate and two-term House member tells supporters, "We don't need any more Joe Liebermans to slow us down. His antics will only delay reform and keep insurance companies in charge of our health care." 

NEW YORK: The New York Post's Gershman on Gov. Paterson and 2010: "For the better part of the year, New York's political world has operated under the assumption that Gov. Paterson had buried himself in a bottomless grave and that Attorney General Cuomo is a shoo-in for the job. But while Cuomo still holds a commanding lead in the polls, the odds against Paterson aren't quite as impossible as they once seemed -- because the key question isn't whether Paterson has a realistic shot at beating Cuomo in a Democratic primary. (He doesn't.) It's whether he can deter Cuomo from running. And that's where Paterson's simple strategy is paying off." 

PENNSYLVANIA: Rep. Joe Sestak (D), a challenger for Sen. Arlen Specter's seat, is criticizing Specter for not pushing hard enough for a public option in the Senate health care reform bill, The Hill writes.  
 
UTAH: The LA Times looks at the primary challenge to Sen. Bob Bennett, despite a solid Republican voting record and scandal-free three-term tenure. Bennett's conservative primary challengers, including Cherilyn Eagar, are "boosted by the conservative Club for Growth [and] cite Bennett's extended time in Washington and criticize his willingness to work with Democrats on issues such as healthcare reform and the Wall Street rescue approved amid last year's financial crisis," the Times writes. The Times adds that Bennett, who did not run a single campaign spot in 2004, has already spent more than $500,000 in this race, "exceeding what some entire Utah congressional races cost." 

From NBC's Ali Weinberg
While President Obama's and congressional Democrats' declining poll numbers will most definitely impact next year's midterm elections, they probably won't predict what will happen in the 2012 presidential election, a group of leading pollsters and analysts agreed today.
 
A day after the latest NBC/WSJ poll was released -- showing Obama's job approval rating at 47% -- the survey's Republican pollster Bill McInturff joined Democratic pollster Fred Yang in a discussion about the 2010 electoral landscape. The forum, moderated by National Journal's Amy Walter and Charlie Cook, was filled with predictions dire and optimistic, as well as a few pop culture references.
 
When asked by Cook to sum up Democrats' 2010 outlook, McInturff cited the words of the political philosopher Mr. T in Rocky III. "Prediction: pain." McInturff also compared the current political atmosphere to that of Oct. 1994, when congressional Republicans rode a wave of anti-incumbency sentiment to overturn 40 years of minority status. 
 
Yang agreed that 2010 will usher a shift against the party in power, as happened fifteen years ago. But he contended that the Republican brand is weaker now than in '94, when Newt Gingrich's "Contract With America" offered frustrated voters a tangible alternative to a liberal agenda. "That anger could turn against the Republican Party," Yang said, with conservative Tea Party-backed candidates like Florida's Marco Rubio and Kentucky's Rand Paul challenging Republican incumbents who are viewed as Washington D.C. insiders.
"In 1994, Democrats were the 'suit,'" Yang said, citing slang from the HBO series "Entourage," in which one character is seen as the establishment figure, intent on ruining everyone else's fun. "Now, the 'suit' could be all of us," he said.
 
When asked whether Tea Party candidates would end up fragmenting the GOP, McInturff responded by touting the dominance of the two-party system. "All other movements are absorbed by one [party] or the other," he said, citing Ross Perot's presidential bid as an example of GOP gains due to an influx of third-party voters. McInturff added that the GOP "ought to be smart enough" to incorporate Tea Party candidates. He cautioned, however, that intra-party disputes should be resolved during the primaries, as an independent Tea Party candidate in the general election would be "a disaster."
 
Despite his overall optimism for 2010, McInturff also warned that Republican midterm gains would not necessarily augur success in the 2012 presidential race. "There's a sharp segmentation between the temporal and long-term numbers," he said, explaining that while Democrats may be seen as focusing too much on health care reform -- to the detriment of the economy -- presently, they "might get credit in three years for what they're doing now." He added, however, "that leaves a lot of people behind in 2010."

From NBC's Domenico Montanaro
Despite a noxious political environment and recent retirements of members in competitive districts, the man tasked with trying to stave off a terrible midterm election for House Democrats says his party will hold onto a majority.

Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee Chairman Chris Van Hollen (D-MD) called predictions of a Republican House takeover nothing more than "hyperbole."

"That hyperbole is just that," Van Hollen said, particularly of predictions made by his Republican counterpart Pete Sessions (R-TX) and House Minority Whip Eric Cantor (R-VA).

But after two cycles of big gains for Democrats, signs -- 11 months from next year's election -- are pointing to that majority looking a lot narrower than once thought.

"We've been saying from Day One at the DCCC that this is going to be a challenging year," Van Hollen told reporters gathered at the Democratic National Committee's headquarters. He added, "We told members to prepare for a very challenging year," to "fasten their seat belts and get ready from the start."

Republicans would need 40 seats to regain the majority in the House, a tall task. Consider that in the past two cycles -- in which Democrats made big gains -- not once did they gain that many.

The last time that many seats were taken over by either party was in 1994 when, after 40 years of Democratic rule, Republicans won an astounding 52 seats in Bill Clinton's first midterm election. Historically, since World War II, the party out of power has picked up an average of 26 seats in a newly elected president's first midterm.

But one reason for Democrats' 1994 bloodletting: retirements. Democrats have had far fewer retirements thus far this time around. But with four Democratic members from competitive districts in the past month calling it quits, talk has begun in Washington that Democrats could be facing a similar fate.

That's not going to happen, says Van Hollen.

"While there may be additional Democratic retirements," he said, "we do not expect a large surge" like in 1994. He added, "This is not going to be 1994 all over again."

In addition to the lower number of retirements so far, Van Hollen cited Democrats' successes in special elections in Upstate New York this year, the conservative Tea Party movement, which threatens to move Republican primaries even further to the right, and that he anticipates the economic outlook will get better.

If the economy gets better, Democrats will get the deserved credit for that, Van Hollen said. On the other hand, "Republicans have been totally AWOL," he said.

Van Hollen also credits: (1) Democrats being better prepared ("In '94, they were caught totally off guard."); (2) The DCCC's "Front-Line Program," in which they identify early particularly vulnerable incumbents; (3) Staying on offense (It's a "smaller playing field" because of the last two cycles," Van Hollen said, but Democrats are "competing vigorously" unlike in 1994); and (4) The Republican brand is "terrible."

To back up that latter point, Van Hollen cited the NBC/WSJ poll out yesterday showing the Tea Party movement being viewed more positively than Republicans.

That's true, but the Tea Party movement was also viewed more positively than Democrats. In response to that point, and the challenge that Democrats, the party in power, face due to the overall anti-Washington sentiment that is bubbling, Van Hollen said, "As we turn the corner [on the economy], the question will be who's on your side. When we get to the point of positive job creation, that'll be a big psychological boost to the American people."

And Republicans haven't helped in that effort, Van Hollen said. "The facts are," he said, "they walked off the field."

The reason for the dissatisfaction now, he said, "We haven't turned the corner yet."

Another potential problem for Democrats next year is the liberal base's disaffection and complacency, particularly among new and young voters who helped elect Barack Obama.

"Obviously, off-year elections pose certain challenges, especially among young voters," Van Hollen said. "We need to make it clear what's at stake in this election."

NOTES: Asked about Howard Dean's comments about the health care legislation moving through the Senate, Van Hollen said, "This is a long way from over. We don't have a final product yet. … Howard Dean has a very important voice in this debate. He's helped move the process forward. The Senate will complete its work and the House and Senate will work together for a final product."

From NBC's Kelly O'Donnell
Senior aides to Nebraska Sen. Ben Nelson (D) say that he is not prepared to be the 60th vote needed to pass the Reid health-care reform bill. Nelson said today that a proposed compromise he's studied does not yet ensure that a long-standing federal standard barring public funding of abortion would be maintained in the Senate health care bill.

Without further improvements, Nelson says, "the compromise is not sufficient."

However, Nelson did praise provisions in an abortion compromise that aides say adds new teen pregnancy initiatives and tax credits for adoption as "valuable improvements that will make a positive difference and promote life."

Nelson reiterated that he will not be able to support a cloture motion needing 60 votes to end debate on the underlying Senate bill if certain language in the bill remains.

From NBC's Mark Murray
Breaking News, per Reuters: By a 16-7 vote, the Senate Banking Committee approved Ben Bernanke's confirmation to serve another term as Fed chairman.

It now moves to the full Senate. 

From NBC's Ken Strickland
Senate Democratic Leaders have laid out an ambitious timetable for passing the health-care bill on Christmas Eve. But if they're successful with their strategy, the vote that matters most and sets the stage for final passage would happen on Monday.

To be successful, the plan assumes Majority Leader Harry Reid will have three key elements before the weekend: 1) a cost estimate from the Congressional Budget Office, 2) a completely written and publicly available bill, and 3) assurance from all 60 members of his Democratic caucus that they will vote for the bill. As of this writing, none of those things has materialized.

The timeline also would require that Democratic strategists have accounted for every possible grenade that Republicans to throw in their path. Some Republicans have made it clear they're hell-bent on slowing down the process and/or killing the bill. But if Republicans relent of some of their delaying tactics, the timetable could speed up by a day or two.

With that as the backdrop, here's a look at Reid's game plan:

-- On Wednesday, the Senate temporarily moved off the health-care bill to deal with a bill funding Defense Department operations and programs (a.k.a., Defense Appropriations). Considering all the procedural hoops Republicans will likely make Democrats jump through, the final vote on the Defense bill will be Saturday. Yes, the Senate will be in on the weekend, both days.

-- On Saturday, Majority Leader Reid will start the process of bringing the health-care bill to final passage with a series of votes. As a testament to his desire to get the bill finished before Christmas, some of the votes are likely to happen after midnight or before breakfast.

The bill is in three distinct parts, all of which must be passed separately. Each part will need two votes. The first vote -- called cloture -- is to break the filibuster, and it requires 60 votes. The second vote is for passage, requiring a simple majority. Because of Senate rules, there will likely have to be 30 hours between those two votes

-- Part #1, the "Managers' Amendment": This is the part of the bill that includes all the last-minute fixes, most importantly stripping the public option and probably including suitable abortion language -- assuming Democrats can reach an agreement on the issue. Once this part of the bill is passed, requiring 60 votes, it's effectively done. Reid will have to pass to other parts of the bill, but that's really more about formality and process.

The cloture vote would be sometime Monday. THIS VOTE MATTERS THE MOST in this process. If Reid gets 60 for this -- which contains the most controversial parts of the entire bill for Democrats -- it's assumed he'll get 60 for everything else. Passage of the managers' amendment would be Tuesday.

(But here's one little wrinkle: Republicans have threatened/promised to make the Senate clerk read the entire managers' amendment aloud. But a Democratic source knee-deep in strategy feels they can have the amendment read within 8-10 hours, and still stay on Christmas Eve timetable. But if they're wrong and it takes a lot longer, it could push the entire schedule off by a day and push the vote until after Christmas.
 
-- Part #2, the "Substitute Amendment": This is the essentially the bill that was created when Reid merged the Senate Finance and Health committee bills. It included the public option/opt out provision, but the managers amendment -- mentioned above -- stripped it out. This part has all the other major parts of the health care bill: the exchanges, the subsidies, insurance reforms, etc. Again, if the above "managers' amendment" gets the 60 votes it, this should get 60 votes too. (Are you still awake?) The cloture vote would take place on Tuesday, and passage would be on Wednesday.

-- Part #3, "the Underlying Bill": This is the bill that everything else sits on, but it's really just an empty shell (consider this the pizza dough; the substitute and managers' amendments are the toppings). Most people don't realize the underlying bill is not even a health-care bill. It's actually called "Service Members Home Ownership Tax Act." The cloture vote would be on Wednesday, and Senate passage would be on Thursday -- Christmas Eve.

So this is the plan as Democratic leaders hope it will play out, leaving some wiggle room for error. Too much error could push the vote until after Christmas.

From Chuck Todd, Mark Murray, Domenico Montanaro, and Ali Weinberg
*** 332 Days Later: For much of his first year in office, President Obama has largely resembled the protagonist in a futuristic zombie movie -- think "I am Legend" or "28 Days Later" or "28 Months Later" -- in which he's the only character that doesn't seem to have the virus that's infected everyone else. In those movies, the protagonist inevitably gets the virus, too. And that's precisely what has happened to Obama, according to our new NBC/WSJ poll: He has caught the anti-Washington, angry-at-everything virus, and it has dramatically changed the plot of our political movie. In the poll, Obama's approval has dropped below 50% (to 47%); his party faces its first net-negative fav/unfav since Sept. 2007; and one-third think he has the right goals and priorities to fix the economy. In fact, when the Afghanistan results are Obama's best numbers (55% support the troop surge, up eight points since October), you know this is a bad poll for the White House.

*** When everyone else looks worse: But just like in one of those zombie flicks, the environment -- and everyone else, for that matter -- looks even worse than the protagonist. In the poll, 55% think the country is on the wrong track; 61% believe the country is in a state of decline; and a whopping 81% believe the past year in Congress has been marked by division and a lack of willingness to compromise. (Compare that with the 52% who thought, immediately after Obama's presidential victory, that unity would prevail in 2009.) What's more, Sarah Palin's fav/unfav is 32%-40%, up a tick since her book tour. And the Republican Party's fav/unfav is 28%-43%. Indeed, the anti-Washington sentiment is so strong that the conservative, libertarian-leaning Tea Party movement has a net-positive fav/unfav, 41%-23%. Populism is alive and well, folks. And it's up for grabs. Washington-establishment types watch out: 2010 could be the year of the outsider and turn into the THIRD-STRAIGHT change election cycle, an unprecedented level of political volatility in this country.

*** The new enthusiasm gap: Looking ahead to next year's midterms, Democrats enjoy only a two-point advantage on the generic ballot, 43%-41%, which is their smallest edge on this question since 2004. In addition, unlike was the case during the 2008 election season, Democrats are now the ones facing an enthusiasm gap. According to the poll, 56% of Republicans said they were "very interested" in next year's midterms, compared with 46% of Democrats who said that (rounding explains why it is EXACTLY 100%, btw). Moreover, when you look at the generic-ballot score among high-interest voters, Republicans have an eight-point advantage, 47%-39%. "This survey underscores what I consider a dramatic and unmistakable change in the political landscape," said NBC/WSJ co-pollster Peter Hart (D). "For Democrats, the red flags are flying at full mast." Indeed, if Republicans end up taking back control of Congress -- and that still remains a BIG IF -- this survey would have marked the turning point and be the first poll to truly show the Democrats could actually drive off the cliff.

*** Obama and his left flank: Speaking of the enthusiasm gap, our poll suggests the health-care fight and the Afghanistan escalation have taken a toll on Obama with his base. Back in our February poll, 88% of Democrats approved of his job. Now that number is 79%. While it's still considerable support, that slight drop is the difference between being above -- or at -- 50%, and being below it.

*** A final thought on the poll: If you don't believe the Tea Party fav/unfav, check out these numbers: 36% of respondents said they would be MORE likely to vote for a congressional candidate supporting Obama's issue positions more than 90% of the time, versus 45% who said they'd be LESS likely to vote for the candidate. By comparison, 32% said they'd be more likely to vote for a candidate who has supported GOP leaders over 90% of the time, versus 42% who said they'd be less likely to vote for that person. And only 20% said that they'd more likely to vote for a candidate backing Nancy Pelosi 90% of the time, versus 52% who said they'd be less likely to vote for him. What does this tell us (other than we're going to see Republicans using Pelosi in their ads and mail)? That no one is happy with either party right now… Anyone else surprised we haven't seen more candidates attempt to run on a third-party of indie line?

*** Nelson isn't the only guy left to watch: Turning to health care, Sen. Bernie Sanders (I/D-Socialist) said in an interview with FOX Business News that he's not ready to vote for the Senate bill. But do note the wiggle room here: "As of this point, I'm not voting for the bill... I'm going to do my best to make this bill a better bill, a bill that I can vote for, but I've indicated both to the White House and the Democratic leadership that my vote is not secure at this point. And here is the reason. When the public option was withdrawn, because of Lieberman's action, what I worry about is how do you control escalating health care costs?" (Hat tip: Taegan Goddard.) Also, SEIU President Andy Stern sent a message to his members saying that while the legislation does positive things, Obama must fight for more reform. "President Obama must remember his own words from the campaign. His call of 'Yes We Can' was not just to us, not just to the millions of people who voted for him, but to himself." What say you, AFL-CIO? The White House has to hope all of this is posturing right now. If not, this thing could be in BIG trouble...

*** White House vs. Howard Dean: The White House is clearly worried about the liberal chattering class possibly killing health care. White House adviser David Axelrod called into "Morning Joe" to pick apart Howard Dean's Washington Post op-ed on health care. He got quite animated about it -- just as Dean has -- which brings us to the entire relationship between the White House and Howard Dean. Why is it such a mess? How has it deteriorated like this? Does it go back to the Dean-Rahm feud from '06 and '08? Is it distrust of Dean by the Obama campaign in '08? Many progressive opinion elites are wondering this morning why the White House has an easier time attacking Howard Dean than Joe Lieberman.  Speaking of Lieberman, ex-Dem Sen. Bob Kerrey pens an op-ed defending his former colleague.

*** Today's sked: After holding meetings at the White House, Obama takes off for the climate-change conference in Copenhagen at around 7:00 pm ET… Vice President Biden will be in Georgia (the state, not the country), where he'll make a stimulus announcement with GOP Gov. Sonny Perdue (!!!)… And beginning at 9:30 am ET, the Senate Banking Committee meets to vote on "Man of the Year" Ben Bernanke's confirmation to serve another term as Fed chairman. 

Countdown to MA Special Election: 33 days
Countdown to IL primary: 47 days
Countdown to TX primary: 75 days
Countdown to Election Day 2010: 320 days

Click here to sign up for First Read emails.
Text FIRST to 622639, to sign up for First Read alerts to your mobile phone.
Check us out on Facebook and also on Twitter.

Sen. Bernie Sanders (I) ain't on board -- yet. "I'm struggling with this," he said on Fox News, per PoliticalWire. "As of this point, I'm not voting for the bill... I'm going to do my best to make this bill a better bill, a bill that I can vote for, but I've indicated both to the White House and the Democratic leadership that my vote is not secure at this point. And here is the reason. When the public option was withdrawn, because of Lieberman's action, what I worry about is how do you control escalating health care costs? ... I am doing my best right now to make this a better bill for the American people."

Asked on MSNBC's "Morning Joe" if she could you support the current legislation, now that it does not have a public option, Sen. Olympia Snowe (R) responded, "It's a good question." She said she still has "concerns" with the legislation, including how much small businesses can expect in the bill and how much an average American would pay in premiums. "We still do not have answers," Snowe said.

"Liberal groups and labor unions have pulled back from calls to kill the Senate healthcare bill," The Hill writes, adding: "House Democrats and liberal interest groups are hoping to win a few concessions in conference, which is expected to wrap up in time for Obama to tout the completed bill during his first State of the Union address in January."

"Still, Democrats said they were determined to use all the tools at their disposal to ensure passage next week, despite the fact that Sen. Ben Nelson (D-Neb.) has yet to privately assure Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) that he will provide the 60th vote needed to break a GOP-led filibuster of the package," Roll Call writes. " 'I think we can get this done in time for each of us to go home for Christmas,' Majority Whip Dick Durbin (D-Ill.) told reporters."

"Democrats in the House Wednesday muscled through a year-end plan to create jobs, mixing about $50 billion for public works projects with another almost $50 billion for cash-strapped state and local governments," the New York Daily News writes. "Not a single Republican voted for the plan, which passed on a 217-212 vote after House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., worked the floor for an hour. The measure now goes to the Senate, which won't consider the measure until next year and which generally has a smaller appetite for such deficit-financed economic stimulus measures."

"It was the second suspenseful vote of what House members hope was their last workday in 2009," The Hill notes. "Democratic leaders also had to lobby members from conservative districts to pass a $300 billion increase in the debt limit." (They also passed the debt ceiling increased 218-214.

Nancy Pelosi says she's now done being Legislator In Chief. She now moves to being Campaigner In Chief as 2010 rolls around. "As I told the members this morning," she said, "I'm in campaign mode… I don't know if you've noticed, but I'm in campaign mode." On 2010, she said, per The Hill: "I think we will have a Democratic majority. I don't think there's any risk to that." But she acknowledged that the party would probably lose seats next November. "It's been a swing of about 110 seats," she said, referring to the 2006 and 2008 election results. "That is really challenging to sustain. But that's our goal, to sustain our majority. And we'll have a strong majority."

Oh, the games they play... "Republicans accused Senate Parliamentarian Alan Frumin of being biased toward Democrats on Wednesday after he made a procedural ruling that allowed Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) to short-circuit GOP efforts to derail his health care overhaul legislation," Roll Call reports. "Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) accused Democrats of 'somehow [convincing] the Parliamentarian to break with the long-standing precedent and practice of the Senate in the reading of the bill,' saying it proved Democrats will resort to any means necessary to pass the bill."

... come down. Here's our take on the latest NBC/WSJ poll: "For much of his first year in office, President Barack Obama has largely defied political gravity in the midst of skyrocketing unemployment, an ambitious legislative agenda and wars in Iraq and Afghanistan… But now nearing the end of his first year in office, the economy, the wars and the legislative skirmishes finally have taken a toll on the president and his party."

Here's the Journal's take: "Less than a year after Inauguration Day, support for the Democratic Party continues to slump, amid a difficult economy and a wave of public discontent… The findings underscored how dramatically the political landscape has changed during the Obama administration's first year. In January, despite the recession and financial crisis, voters expressed optimism about the future, the new president enjoyed soaring approval ratings, and congressional leaders promised to swiftly pass his ambitious agenda."

Meanwhile, a new AP/GFK poll "shows the president's popularity holding steady, with 56 percent of those polled approving of the way he's taking care of the country's business. His marks for handling the 8-year-old war in Afghanistan have jumped by double digits, with more than half now approving, since he capped a three-month strategy review by announcing a big troop increase."

The gossip site TMZ got its hands on a photo of Sarah Palin wearing a McCain hat with the logo blacked out. But NBC's Andrea Mitchell reports that someone close to Sarah Palin says she loves John McCain and had no idea that an attempt to preserve her -- and her kids' -- privacy while on vacation in Hawaii would lead to an incorrect conclusion by TMZ. Palin told her friend that she blacked out McCain's name with a magic marker on a leftover campaign sun visor in the hopes that the paparazzi would not recognize her -- so she could be left alone. TMZ interpreted the "blackout" as meaning Palin had had a falling out with McCain. That was an incorrect interpretation, the friend says. Says Palin, according to her pal, "I love John McCain. So much for incognito." 
 
But seriously, wouldn't you just buy/wear another hat?
 
Minnesota Gov. Tim Pawlenty paid a visit to major primary state New Hampshire yesterday, telling the New Hampshire Union Leader there that "he will not endorse or have his PAC contribute to the campaigns of any candidates for the U.S. Senate or House who are competing in "open, transparent" primary campaigns," the Union-Leader reports (h/t The Hill).

The Hill lists vulnerable lawmakers on both sides of the aisle whose electoral fates may in part already be decided by their support for the highly unpopular $700 billion bank bailout plan: Sens. Bob Bennett (R-UT), Harry Reid (D-NV), Chris Dodd (D-CT) and Blanche Lincoln (D-AK) are among those incumbents that The Hill predicts "should expect a heavy dose of bailout-based criticism." And "the issue is more likely to affect Republican incumbents seeking other jobs, including governor and the Senate," like Republican Sen. Kay Bailey Hutchison (TX) and Reps. Roy Blunt (MO), Mark Kirk (IL) and Mike Castle (D). 
 
CONNECTICUT: Republican Linda McMahon's campaign is touting Obama's message that will run soon as evidence that "WWE is broadly recognized as a company that for years has made tremendous contributions to the community, to the state of Connecticut and to men and women in uniform," the Hartford Courant writes. McMahon's husband Vince is the founder and she was CEO. But the "White House is saying not so fast. Obama did not tape a greeting to be aired exclusively on the wrestling program, a White House spokeswoman said Wednesday night. Instead, the president taped a general greeting that was made available to multiple outlets who wanted to air it." 
 
ILLINOIS: In a debate among the four Democratic candidates for President Barack Obama's old Senate seat, "Cheryle Jackson and Jacob Meister spent much of the 70 minute debate looking on as [Alexi] Giannoulias, the state's first-term treasurer, and [David] Hoffman, Chicago's former inspector general, sniped over their records and how they would stand up to special interests if they were elected." Giannoulias labeled Hoffman a hypocrite for funding his campaign through personal investments in institutions that received help from the federal bailout, while Hoffman retaliated by saying that Giannoulias' experience mostly involves helping run a now-unsuccessful family bank. 
 
MASSACHUSETTS: "On paper, the special U.S. Senate election next month should be another walkover for the Democrats," the Boston Globe writes. "Yet the race for the seat of the late Edward M. Kennedy will play out not on paper, but in a noxious political environment, providing a rare glint of hope for the state's undermanned Republicans." 
 
NEW HAMPSHIRE: U.S. Senate candidate Kelly Ayotte (R) was feted in Washington last night at a fundraiser sponsored by AT&T's political action committee and a lobbyist from CTIA, a wireless telecommunications industry lobbying firm, the New Hampshire Union Leader says. 
 
NEVADA: Danny Tarkanian, one of the Republican challengers to Harry Reid for the Majority Leader's seat, has raised more money in Fresno -- the city where his father coached the college basketball team -- than any other city besides his hometown of Las Vegas, the Miami Herald reports.

From NBC's Mark Murray
Here's our take on the latest NBC/WSJ poll:

WASHINGTON - For much of his first year in office, President Barack Obama has largely defied political gravity in the midst of skyrocketing unemployment, an ambitious legislative agenda and wars in Iraq and Afghanistan.

His approval rating remained above 50 percent, a plurality viewed his party positively, and even the number believing the country was on the right track — despite the bad news — temporarily spiked during his first few months on the job.

But now nearing the end of his first year in office, the economy, the wars and the legislative skirmishes finally have taken a toll on the president and his party, according to the latest NBC News/Wall Street Journal poll.

For the first time, Obama's overall job approval rating has fallen below 50 percent (to 47 percent). In addition, for the first time since Sept. 2007, a plurality (45 percent) sees the Democratic Party in a negative light. And the percentage believing the country is on the wrong track (55 percent) is at its highest level in the Obama presidency.

"This survey underscores what I consider a dramatic and unmistakable change in the political landscape," said Democratic pollster Peter D. Hart, who conducted the survey with GOP pollster Bill McInturff. "For Democrats, the red flags are flying at full mast."

"The sagging economy is beginning to drag him down," McInturff added. "This is increasingly becoming President Obama's economy."

Click here for the full story.

From NBC's Ali Weinberg
The liberal blogosphere reacts accordingly to the moving parts on health care reform today, leveling critiques on DNC Chairman Howard Dean's "kill the bill" comments yesterday and the Senate's back-and-forth on the floor, as Republicans try to delay action by reading an amendment -- in its 767-page entirety -- before its sponsor, Bernie Sanders, pulls the amendment. Also, a few comments on Fed Chairman Ben Bernanke's being dubbed Time Magazine "Person of the Year." 

Commenting on Sanders' decision to withdraw his bill rather than allow Sen. Coburn to continue reading it in its entirety, Washington Monthly's Steve Benen writes that Sanders is "[d]emonstrating, once again, who the bigger man is... He called the GOP tactics an "outrage," which seems like the appropriate description." 

Balloon Juice's John Cole diverges with former Dean, who yesterday urged Senate Democrats to "kill" their health care bill as it stands, noting the political difficulty of starting from scratch: "How many months did it take for a bill to get out of Baucus's committee alone. How many months did it take for a bill to get out of Baucus's committee alone. On top of that, we would be treated to another six-eight months of teabaggers throwing things at congressmen, wildly inflated claims on Sarah Palin's Facebook page and the op-ed pages of the Washington Post... And then, you have to filter in that all of this would be happening in an election year, and with the notoriously timid Democrats, you have to be sniffing glue to think that the bill is going to be easier pass and more progressive."  
 
Like several other liberal bloggers, Washington Monthly's Benen links to a piece from Mother Jones' Kevin Drum, in which Drum says Dean is "living in a dreamland." Benen suggests that Dean's own plans to reform health care in 2004 were even weaker than those he is now criticizing: "Let's not forget that the existing Senate Democratic plan -- with no public option and no Medicare buy-in -- is already far more ambitious and much more progressive than what Howard Dean was proposing just five years ago," Benen writes. "Dean's 2004 health reform plan... features no competition for private insurers, fewer consumer protections, and would cover fewer of the uninsured. This is not to disparage Dean, who has done as much personally to advance the cause of health care reform as anyone in the country, but rather to highlight just how far we've come in a short period of time. In 2004, Dean, considered a liberal firebrand, offered a health care plan that even he would dismiss as weak and tepid today. If Republicans presented Dean's 2004 plan today, Democrats would laugh them out of the room."

Salon.com's Glenn Greenwald reiterates a point he made in August: that, in his opinion, the White House is choosing not to pressure centrist: "The White House seems perfectly content with what the centrists and Blue Dogs have done thus far; the only anger they have shown, as usual, is towards progressives who are demanding robust reform." He brings this post up again, relating it to Gibbs' criticism of Dean in today's briefing: Why did Gibbs never publicly criticize people like Blanche Lincoln, Ben Nelson, Joe Lieberman and the like if they were supposedly obstructing and impeding the White House's agenda on health care reform? Having a Democratic White House publicly criticize a Democratic Senator can be a much more effective pressure tactic than doing so against a former Governor who no longer holds office." 

Balloon Juice's DougJ also comments on TIME's choice of Ben Bernanke as Person of the Year: "I have nothing special against Bernanke. I think he probably deserves credit for averting financial catastrophe. But this is a pretty strong signal that elite media still worships the architects of our awesome financial system. Some things never change."

Think Progress' Yglesias also views the Bernanke pick as poignant social commentary. He writes that in spring 2009, "[Bernanke] basically unfurls a "Mission Accomplished" banner, says ten percent unemployment is okay by him, and if congress wants to do anything fiscally it should look at cutting Social Security benefits. That's not nothing. That's not the worst record of any 21st Century public official (I dunno…Robert Mugabe?) or even of any major 21st Century central banker (Jean-Claude Trichet) or any Bush administration appointee (Don Rumsfeld) or anything. But it's really not all that great. And it demonstrates a very specific class skew -- extraordinary intervention into the market place just long enough to fix the situation from the point of view of asset-owners while leaving wage-earners holding the bag. But the owners and managers and editors of Time Magazine and the companies that advertise in it probably don't care so much about that. In a lot of respects it strikes me as the most fitting possible choice, an eloquent statement about where America is in 2009."

From NBC's Kelly Paice
The race is on to get health care passed before Christmas, but will Democrats pull it off? Conservative bloggers today are not counting on it, especially with the Republicans' attempt to slow down passage by reading a 767-page amendment on the Senate floor today; and, some say even if Dems do push a health care bill through, Republicans will retaliate.

Weekly Standard's William Kristol hits at the Dems' push for health care reform: "The Senate Democrats' legislation is a Medicare-cutting, tax-hiking, no-real-reform, 2,000-page monstrosity opposed by the majority of the American people. The only winners would be Big Government, Big Pharma, and Big Insurance." And Kristol offers some plausible GOP responses if the opposing camp's bill passes: "Republicans should say: No, No, a thousand times No. And if the legislation passes, the GOP should immediately begin trying to repeal key parts of it. ... And of course they [Republicans] should promise to relieve the American people of the prospect of living under the Democrats' health bureaucracy regime by promising repeal of the whole thing in 2011."

And RedState writes today, "Senator Tom Coburn (R-OK) objected to the the unanimous consent request that the 'reading of the amendment be dispensed with' when Senator Bernie Sanders' (admitted Socialist - VT) single-payer amendment (SA#2837), totaling 767 pages, was called up. According to one calculation, this could take 38 hours to read. It is notable that there are two co-sponsors: Sherrod Brown and Roland Burris. Now, THIS is how you fight the kind of assault on freedom this healthcare monstrocity represents. Leave no tool unused -- force the Democrats to face up to an American people who overwhelmingly do NOT want this bill."

In his column, conservative commentator Hugh Hewitt weighs in on "Obamacare," as well: "Not surprisingly, the reason for optimism among opponents of Obamacare is the country's decisive rejection of the bill. Every poll shows strong majorities against it..." And Hewitt's take on how Democrats are handling their effort to achieve reform: "Rather than stage a tactical retreat and begin a genuine attempt at bipartisan agreement on the basis of common ground on health care reform -- of which there is a lot -- the president, Harry Reid and Nancy Pelosi are attempting the mother-of-all-jam-downs...."

With all this, Hewitt suggests more liberal-leaning Democrats are not happy either, much to the doings of their party leadership: "Then there's the left wing that now sees their dream of the public option in ruins, and the consolation prize of an expansion of Medicare also on the junk heap. Howard Dean is calling for the scrapping of the bill in favor of a kamikaze charge at the reconciliation process. The abortion debate is still very much rankling the House radicals who lost that round as well. If anything is going to get through the Congress soon, it will not resemble the left's idea of health care reform. Some will mouth the words 'half a loaf' but their leaders will have failed them." Hewitt's reaction in a nutshell: "Democrats should go home and enjoy Christmas instead of playing Grinch to the seniors of America by passing this attack on Medicare. But they won't, because the president wants his 'legacy law,' even if it is built on the betrayal of every Medicare beneficiary as well as future generations burdened by the massive deficits built into Obamacare."

On RedState, Dan Perrin's prediction for health care reform: "My guess is that the progressives will post more than one NO vote from within the Democratic Senate caucus, and ObamaCare will die."

And a final note, today TIME magazine named their "Person of the Year" -- Fed Chairman Ben Bernanke. BUT GOP12 points out one who tops TIME's 2009 "People Who Matter" category -- the one and only Sarah Palin: "America's favorite Rorschach political figure is still going rogue, whether quitting her job as governor -- who needs a bully pulpit when there's Facebook? -- or spending her hour on Oprah dissing the 19-year-old father of her grandson. Will she run in 2012? Does it matter? In a Republican Party looking to be energized, Palin is the one drawing the crowds (even if they have to pay for a photo with her). She's their moose-huntin', 'you betcha'–spouting, partisan jabbing sweetheart."

From NBC's Luke Russert
On the House floor today Majority Leader Steny Hoyer (D-MD) did something fairly uncommon for a politician in a leadership position, he admitted that he and his party were wrong in the past.

The moment occurred during the debate regarding the House passing a bill allowing for an increase in the Federal debt ceiling. First, Minority Leader John Boehner (R-OH) went to the floor and passionately spoke out against the increase in government spending over the past fiscal year.
 
"But after this year for you to criticize us for fiscal responsibility and to lecture us about fiscal responsibility after spending a trillion dollars that was supposed to be about jobs, what have we done?" Boehner said. "We have created more unemployment, we have not put anybody back to work and we are asking our kids and grandkids to pay back a trillion dollars in interest for a bill that is not doing anything other than increasing spending."
 
Boehner concluded by saying, "Who are we kidding? We aren't kidding anybody. I think it's time to put the brakes on spending and the way to start is to say no to increasing the debt limit."
 
After this, Hoyer walked to the floor and addressed his colleagues, he started off by giving a history lesson regarding the first TARP bill and the reasons for why an increase in the debt ceiling were needed, but he then spoke of how, in the past, votes on debt ceilings have been extremely partisan.
 
Hoyer harkened back to when the GOP was in power he himself voted against an increase to the debt ceiling by saying, "I want to plead guilty, because I've demagogued this issue as well."
 
Hoyer continued, "My suspicion is we'll find ourselves in the same place today. You all are not responsible for running the government or the passing of policy. We are. I understand that…[but] if America and its duly elected representatives say to the rest of the world, we will not pay our bills that will be of consequence. It is not about pointing fingers, it is about taking responsibility."
 
Hoyer then asked his Democratic colleagues to show restraint in criticism of Republicans.

"Therefore on my side of the aisle I ask us to do it, don't point fingers their side if we don't do it, because we didn't do it," Hoyer said. "We need to stop that, we need to stop that whoever is in charge, because Americans expect better of us."

From NBC's Mark Murray
Here's the final tease of our NBC/WSJ poll that comes out later tonight: After the news of his multiple extramarital affairs, only 15 percent view golfer Tiger Woods positively. By comparison, 42 percent view him negatively.

The last time the poll measured Woods -- back in 1997 -- he had a 76-2 percent (!!!) positive/negative rating.

But the new poll also finds that, by a 33-16 percent margin, Americans say they would be rooting for Woods in his next tournament.

Forty-eight percent say they don't care either way.

From NBC's Mark Murray and Domenico Montanaro
Just how angry is the public with the country's two leading political parties? Angry enough that the conservative, libertarian-leaning Tea Party movement is more popular than either the Democratic or the Republican parties, according to the latest NBC News/Wall Street Journal poll.

The Republican Party maintains its net-negative favorable/unfavorable rating in the poll, with 28 percent viewing it positively and 43 percent seeing it in a negative light.

For the first time in more than two years, the Democratic Party also now holds a net-negative fav/unfav, at 35-45 percent.

By comparison, the NBC/WSJ poll shows the Tea Party movement with a net-positive 41-23 percent score.

Yet looking inside those numbers, more than three-quarters (76 percent) of those who say FOX News is where they get their news see the Tea Party movement positively, versus just 4 percent who see it negatively. 

That's a stark contrast to how viewers of the competing cable networks CNN and MSNBC see the movement. More of those viewers have a negative opinion of it (36 percent) than a positive one (24 percent).

Those who get their news mostly from broadcast TV (either NBC, CBS or ABC) are split -- 28 percent view it positively, versus 27 percent who view it negatively.

The entire NBC/Journal poll comes out at 6:30 pm ET.

From NBC's Kelly O'Donnell
The reading of the amendment has stopped because Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-VT) withdrew the amendment that was being read on the Senate floor.

Sanders had wanted an up-or-down vote on single-payer health insurance, and he will not get that by withdrawing his amendment but he is able to restart the process.

Sanders was animated while speaking on the floor.

From NBC's Mark Murray
Over the past few days, much of the political psycho-analysis has focused on Joe Lieberman, wondering if his drubbing in the 2004 presidential primaries and his defeat in the 2006 Senate primary helped shape his opposition to the public option and, later, the Medicare buy-in.

Here's something else to think about: In retrospect, was Barack Obama's conspicuous snub of Howard Dean a big mistake, given the former DNC chairman's opposition to the Senate health-care bill moving through Congress?

Remember that when Tim Kaine was tapped to be the new DNC chairman, Dean wasn't at the Obama-Kaine press conference announcing the move. Instead, he was in American Samoa, but his allies maintained he would have canceled that trip had he been given a heads up about the press conference.

What's more, Dean never got a plum position in the Obama administration. Possibly adding insult to injury, few DNC aides who worked for Dean initially got top jobs in the Obama administration.

It all raised this question in Washington: Why did Obama opponents like Hillary Clinton, John McCain, and Joe Lieberman receive better treatment from Team Obama than Dean received?

And it now raises this question: Had Dean been treated better would he -- like other Senate progressives right now -- be urging liberals to accept the half a loaf on health care.

One former DNC aide who worked for Dean insists that his opposition to Senate bill has nothing to do with being snubbed. He truly believes in the importance of a public option.

But the aide argues that it was a mistake for the White House not to make Dean part of its team. "If I'm the Obama administration, I want Howard Dean on my side... Howard Dean is a team player. But if he's not on the team, he's free to say whatever he wants."

From NBC's Luke Russert
While the Senate seems to be moving at a snail's pace, the House is moving with breakneck speed.

Just now, the Continuing Resolution, known around here as a CR, the bill that approves the funding to keep the U.S. Government operational, passed via voice vote. In the House, voice votes are permitted to occur but almost every time a member requests a roll call vote.

So what is arguably the most important thing the House does, approve the funding for the government, passed via voice vote.

Usually the minority party offers some point of contention regarding the CR, this shows how much Republicans are ready to leave Washington and get back to their home districts.

*** UPDATE *** A GOP aide e-mailed First Read to emphasize that Republicans are more than willing to stay in Washington and work on the issues facing the country. Today the GOP Leadership held a morning press conference addressing Republican solutions for energy independence and healthcare reform. In the afternoon, Rep. Eric Cantor touted the party's ideas to stimulate the economy and claimed that the Democratic legislative accomplishments of 2009, including healthcare reform and climate change legislation, amounted to a "job killing agenda."

Rep. Mike Pence asserted that Democrats were more than happy to leave Washington while not completing work on pressing issues: "What we see is Democrats in Washington D.C. are gettin while the gettin's good. Getting out of town by refusing to make the hard choices necessary to protect our country with a meaningful extension of the Patriot Act or to make the hard choices to put our fiscal house in order without expanding the national debt on even a short-term basis by hundreds of billions of dollars."

From NBC's Mark Murray
As the Senate sprints to pass a health-care bill by Christmas, the latest NBC News/Wall Street Journal poll finds that those believing President Obama's health-reform plan is a good idea has sunk to its lowest level.

Just 32 percent say it's a good idea, versus 47 percent who say it's a bad idea.

In addition, for the first time in the survey, a plurality prefers the status quo to reform. By a 44-41 percent margin, respondents say it would be better to keep the current system than to pass Obama's health plan.

By comparison, in September's and October's NBC/Journal polls, the American public preferred changing the system to the status quo, 45 to 39 percent.

The poll was conducted Dec. 11-14, and has a margin of error of plus-minus 3.1 percentage points.

The full survey will be released tonight at 6:30 pm ET on NBC Nightly News and MSNBC.com.