Secretary Kathleen Sebelius before the House Energy and Commerce Committee. (J. Scott Applewhite/Associated Press) Secretary Kathleen Sebelius before the House Energy and Commerce Committee. (J. Scott Applewhite/Associated Press)

Happy Halloween, PostScripteers! We have for you today a 5,000-commented winner from Dana Milbank, which picks up the Wizard of Oz rhetoric employed in yesterday’s Congressional hearings with Kathleen Sebelius. Luckily enough, that enables us to imagine the assorted players in costume. The House questioners set up Health and Human Services Secretary Sebelius as Dorothy Gale, which, Milbank argues, casts the questioners themselves as winged monkeys opposing her. Or maybe the trees who get mad when she eats their fruit. Or maybe the poppies. It’s all political allegory anyway, though PostScript didn’t know that L. Frank Baum wrote editorials in favor of genocide. Thanks, Wikipedia!

Anyhoo, Milbank writes that Sebelius tricked the Republicans by taking responsibility for the big ol’ tornado wreckage, when they had planned to badger her about blaming others. It was a graveyard smash.


Take a moment to imagine the meeting where someone actually suggested that they all use Wizard of Oz comments. Think about it. Getting ready for this hearing they actually coordinated their comments around the Wizard of Oz! How embarrassing.

Precisely. And they didn’t even have the commitment to dress up! No candy.

Even without coordinating their outfits around The Wizard of Oz, mcafla says, the questioners looked pretty silly:

Republicans did the administration a favor getting Sebelius out there promoting the ACA and countering Republican disinformation. She was so much more professional and believable than the hyperbolic, ignoramuses attacking her.

Especially since it gave Sebelius the opportunity to improve her past performances, says DocAwesome:

A nice turnaround from her Daily Show interview.

AnnsThought, though, says SURRENDER, SEBELIUS:

Sebelius is part of the administration that stopped issuing the regulations in July 2012 for political reasons, thus delaying the instruction to the programmers. She’s guilty as sin.

Hegelian_”CRISIS” saw a completely different hearing, one with problem solvers:

Wow! Instead of turning the hearing into a circus of name-calling and grandstanding (as liberals would have done), the GOP actually asked hard but reasonable questions. Dana (unwittingly of course) highlights the difference between liberal haters and GOP problem solvers.

Lee1865 proposes even more hearings:

I want my opportunity to grill the Republican Party over their arrogance, incompetence, and willful malfeasance. I want to know what they’re going to do about the damage they did – now verified – by the shutdown.

And IndieOne thinks a few more hearings might actually change his or her mind:

I never liked the ACA. I am a proponent of single payer, or a public option at the very least. I was extremely disappointed with what we got instead. But there is one thing I dislike even more, by orders of magnitude, and that is the Republican response to it. I am so sick of their years long, obsessive hissy fit that I may start supporting the ACA just to spite them.

Wow. These hearings might have real-world effects! In case that’s not ghoulish enough, PostScript really, really wants to reiterate that beloved children’s author L. Frank Baum only 120 years ago advocated genocide in a newspaper, and that appears to have had very little effect on his book sales or how we remember him today. Boo!