We've all seen the video of Justice Samuel Alito shaking his head mouthing "Not True" when President Obama said:

Last week, the Supreme Court reversed a century of law to open the floodgates for special interests – including foreign corporations – to spend without limit in our elections. Well I don’t think American elections should be bankrolled by America’s most powerful interests, or worse, by foreign entities. They should be decided by the American people, and I urge Democrats and Republicans to pass a bill that helps correct some of these problems.

So who's telling the truth and who's lying?

John McCain knows a thing or two about campaign finance. Here's what he said on Face The Nation:

by Jon Soltz, VoteVets

Among the tragic news in Haiti, and the expected dissection of the Senate race in Massachusetts this week, there's another story going on that likely will not get as much coverage, but is still extremely important.  Dozens of Iraq and Afghanistan veterans from VoteVets.org are flying into Washington, DC to join with the Campaign to Close Guantanamo in lobbying Congress to close the prison at Guantanamo Bay.

These veterans will deliver a letter to a number of Congressmen and Senators, co-signed by about 2000 veterans, calling for Congress to follow President Obama's lead, and move to shut down the facility that has become a blight on America's reputation.

How did the Massachusetts Senate race end up so close?

1. The Right Wing Noise Machine. 365 days a year, 24 hours a day, 60 minutes an hour, the Right Wing Noise Machine attacks Democrats and liberals. Their leaders are FOX and Rush Limbaugh, but there is an army behind them. To them, everything Democrats do is wrong and evil. And if the facts don't agree with their paranoia, then facts be damned. They never issue corrections or apologies, they just smear. It's who they are, it's what they do, and Democrats let them do it.

2. The Corporate Media amplifier. The "FOX Effect" extends far beyond FOX studios. Right-wing Republican Joe Scarborough gets 3 hours every morning on "liberal" MSNBC to echo FOX smears. The "gang of 4" in the White House Press Corps - Jake Tapper (ABC), Chip Reid (CBS), Chuck Todd (NBC), and Ed Henry (CNN) - throws every FOX smear directly into the face of Robert Gibbs. Just ask Van Jones.

If Martha Coakley ekes out a victory in the Massachusetts Senate race, it will be a miracle. Coakley's campaign has been inept, while Scott Brown has the Teabaggers and FOX News pulling out all the stops.

As of Monday morning, the polling average at Pollster.com gave Brown a 52%-43% lead - what pundits would call "insurmountable."

If Massachusetts Goes Republican, All Hell Breaks Loose With Healthcare!
By Brent Budowsky - 01/13/10 07:44 PM ET

Having worked for the House Democratic leadership and senior Democratic senators, being a serious vote-counter with an occasional dose of Niccolo Machiavelli, I ask: What happens if the Republicans win the Senate in Massachusetts, and might it have the ironic result of reviving the public option and other progressive policies? Here is a scenario I advise senior Democrats to consider, if the Republicans win the Massachusetts Senate race:

1. Obviously, Democrats don't have the 60 votes.

2. The president's first inclination will be to persuade Sen. Olympia Snowe (R-Maine). But I do not believe this can be achieved, which would require moving the Senate bill that she opposed even further to the right and toward the special interests, without losing more liberal members than the market can bear.

Will LieberCare give Ted Kennedy's Senate seat to Republican Scott Brown?

A Suffolk University Poll released late Thursday night gives Brown a 50%-46% lead over Martha Coakley. Nate Silver connected the polling dots and now calls it a toss-up.

Coakley hasn't run a brilliant campaign. But Scott Brown's main claim to fame is as a centerfold, and Massachusetts is a Blue state. So why does Brown have a real chance?

Because the same poll shows MA voters oppose LieberCare by 51%-36%. Many LieberCare opponents are conservative Republicans who would vote for Scott Brown anyway. But some are progressive Democrats and independents who want Medicare for All, or at least a public option. Steven is one:

I am in Massachusetts and actually the reason I'm not going to vote Democrat (not voting republican either) is because the current healthcare bill is far too conservative. It does not have a strong public option, Coakley says she will vote for it in the Senate, I therefore will not cast my vote for her.

Chris van Hollen, who chairs the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee (DCCC), went on FOX News Sunday with Chris Wallace to raise the white flag of surrender to LieberCare.

If you haven't already joined the donor strike against the DCCC, DSCC, and DNC, this would be an excellent moment to "thank" van Hollen for surrendering.

First, van Hollen promised to "give up the public option" in return for unspecified "mechanisms" to "keep down premiums" - when we all know the only such "mechanism" outside the realm of utter self-delusion is competition from a public option.

WALLACE: Is the public option dead?

January is a crucial month for the progressive movement. We spent most of 2009 fighting for single-payer Medicare for All or, as a compromise, a robust public option. But Joe Lieberman and Ben Nelson blocked both, and now demand our surrender. Will we surrender to LieberCare?

I believe we can fight, but with one caveat: for once, the broad progressive movement must work a bit harder to unite. Democratic leaders will meet this Monday to negotiate a final deal. We can only win this quick fight if we're all working together every day.

Today the Democratic Senate passed Liebercare and raced to the airport to get home, hoping progressives would go into a customary holiday stupor and simply forget their sellouts to Big Insurance and Big Pharma. 

Forget, hell! Now the real battle begins in the Conference Committee negotiations between the Senate and the House. This is a winnable battle, as long as progressives are willing to take on Joe Lieberman and Ben Nelson, two of the most unpopular politicians in America.

I don't remember electing Joe Lieberman President, do you?

Lieberman and Ben Nelson made fools of every real Democrat in Congress when they used the mere threat of a filibuster to get Democrats to kill the Medicare Buy-In, the Public Option, and other crucial parts of healthcare reform.

Why are Democrats simply surrendering to mere threats when the vast majority of Americans support a Medicare Buy-In (64%-30%) or a Public Option (56%-38%)?

Democratic leaders have a another choice when they adopt their conference report: they can include the Medicare Buy-In, Public Option, and other progressive essentials and dare Joe Lieberman and Ben Nelson to conduct a real filibuster.

Tell your Representatives:
http://www.democrats.com/make-them-talk