As Much As I Love This Place, Sometimes I hate It -or- "The Sky Is Falling! The Sky Is Falling!" -or- The More Things Change, The More They Stay The Same
Jeez, Louise...It's been awhile since I've heard this kind of caterwauling...In fact, the whining and sniveling about Obama not fighting hard enough (over a year ago) is what brought me here to begin with. And, yeah, it's a little like deja vu all over again.
I've never heard so much pissin' and moanin' over something that MIGHT happen. More stomach acid has been wasted over the imagined results of a bill that hasn't even been completed yet...
Did you guys really think that universal health care was going to happen this year? If you did, I want some of what you're smokin'. If you thought the public option was going to be easy to get, you are just as high. Think about it, people...We DO NOT have 60 votes in the Senate...The Bluedogs are Dems in name only. If the "gang of 16" vote with the repubs, we don't even have 50. So scream all you want, one way or another, compromises are going to have to be made, or you can just scream your way into maintaining the status quo.
There is nothing I would like better than to see EVERYONE have access to affordable health care RIGHT NOW. I'm not wedded to one single way of getting there, but I DO want to get there. However, I am realistic enough to know that it isn't going to happen overnight. The Repubs had 8 years to do something about this, and they did NOTHING. They did not make one single step in the direction of getting affordable health care for all.
So, we win the election...wouldn't really have mattered which Dem it was...Edwards, Clinton, Obama...All wanted to reform the health care system in the United States. And all would be facing the same resistance. None could make it happen on their own. I don't believe that either Edwards or Clinton would be one single step closer at this point than Obama is. In fact, I doubt that either one of them would have been even presenting ANYTHING this soon. They would be dealing with the economy, the wars. I believe it took a man like Obama to even be willing to tackle it all at once. Have mistakes been made? Possibly. Did he bite off too much at once? Possibly.
But when he made the promises he made, we were not in the middle of an economic meltdown. He could have just said, "I'm sorry. In light of the position we find oursleves in, it will be impossible to tackle health care this year. We'll try again when the economy improves and people are a little less frightened about spending all this money." But he didn't. He plunged ahead, knowing that it would be better to get the ball rolling, than to just let all these people continue to suffer, without at least trying.
So now, here we are. No one knows what is going on. We are fighting and threatening and pissing and moaning, and we don't even know what the bill looks like yet. The House dems say they won't vote for a bill that does not have a public option. A large portion of the Senate says they won't vote for a bill that does. The repubs have managed to convince a whole mess of people that that the dems want to turn this into a Socialist country. I can hardly quit laughing hearing the oldsters on medicare (and their children who would be paying their bills if they weren't) saying that they don't want the government involved in their health care....HELLO????? Death panels? How dare they scare people like that...A 90 year old woman going up to her representative with tears in her eyes, asking him not to put her out on the ice floes...they should be ashamed.
And we're fighting with each other, blasting OUR GUY at the top of our lungs...the repubs have got be getting their rocks off on this one.
I know, we have our principles. We are in the right. We won, we deserve to get our way. I know all that. But at what point do we just say, okay, the ball is rolling. We're not going to get everything we want. We maybe aren't going to get even most of what we want. But we are going to get SOMETHING, and it is going to be more than we would have gotten if we hadn't tried. Are they crumbs? Maybe. Does it just stick in your craw? I hope so. But what is the alternative? Are you just going to take your marbles and go home? Are you going to vote for someone other than Obama in 2012 to show him just how pissed off you are? Well go ahead. And then we'll have yet another 1 term president and we'll be back at the mercy of the frickin' repubs again...Gee, I'm sure looking forward to that.
This would be a different story if the Dems were united, but they aren't. What the hell good does it do for the President to rant and rave in public if he doesn't have his guys backing him?
I'm sorry, I don't care how strong a President you are, you can't FORCE the members of your own party to vote with you. Do you really think he isn't doing everything that can be done through back channels? I refuse to believe it. The Prez wants a win on this...
An amazing amount of progress has been made in a relatively short amount of time. Many, many people are working to come up with the very best plan we can get through, in spite of the fact that many, many are working towards keeping the status quo.
Yelling at and threatening Obama isn't going to get us what we want. It's our own damn party we need to be convincing. Those of you who have Blue dogs for reps, need to be twisting their arms. Those of us whose reps are in line need to be twisting their arms to twist the arms of the Blue Dogs. Because at this point, we can't even get reconcilliation. Write letters, send faxes, slap on bumper stickers, attend town halls, put out your "Yes We Can" yard signs, talk to your friends...But for God's sake don't abandon our President at a time when he needs us so badly. We can't afford to weaken him. We need him just as badly as he needs us, maybe even more. If he does not get re-elected, he will be fine. He won't make the difference he wanted to make, but he and his family will be fine. We will have yet another Republican President...will you and your family be fine?
From our vantage point it LOOKS like Obama could be doing more. But, that's the way it looked last July. And yet he stuck to his game plan and won. He was right. Why are you all so quick to assume his tactic is wrong this time? Can you just allow for the possibility that he knows what he is doing?
Let's give Obama his 8 years before we get out our pitchforks...maybe by then we won't need them.
Stilli,
I endorse your sentiment and rationale.
That said, I will state that I am extremely concerned and disappointed in the manner the allegations that he will agree to forego public option at this time has been publicized. To have those from his administration put it out there and he has yet to address it, well, suffice to say, I am not happy.
Better he should state up front that unless he gets the support and efforts of all (We, The People) who clamored for this action, well he may have to put it on backburner. Also, better he should use his big guns to go on the media and state the same, rather than them sending this message of capitulation on this issue. Of course, much more could and should also be done by the masses.
There's lots more, but I do agree with your premise and really appreciate your post.
Appreciate. Rec'd.
August 17, 2009 6:49 PM | Reply | Permalink
By DAVID ESPO, AP Special Correspondent
The White House insisted there had been no shift in position, adding the president still favors a federal option for the sale of health insurance. "The bottom line is this: Nothing has changed," said a memo containing suggested answers for administration allies to use if asked about the issue.
August 17, 2009 7:08 PM | Reply | Permalink
Thanks for this, appreciate.
(However, I would still like to hear from the President directly about this issue.)
August 17, 2009 7:13 PM | Reply | Permalink
Thanks, Sam...I'm not exactly a happy camper myself, but I just HAVE to believe he's got a game plan. When I see him speak on the subject and hear the compassion in his voice, I have no choice but to believe he wants to relieve this suffering as much as we do. I'd do it a little differently, but then again, I'd never get elected.
August 17, 2009 8:43 PM | Reply | Permalink
You beat me to it, but I'm going to post on this anyhow. And Recommended, of course.
August 17, 2009 7:04 PM | Reply | Permalink
Stilli, I hope you feel better after writing this, I know I feel better after reading it.
August 17, 2009 7:10 PM | Reply | Permalink
Well, I'm glad it made you feel better. I'm feeling just as pissy as I was before...I'll feel better when the first round of improvements is in the book and we start working on the next round...or when the repubs stop being obstructionists...any bets on which will come first?
August 17, 2009 8:49 PM | Reply | Permalink
As soon as every objection isn't painted as obstruction by democrats, we will then start to see a different republican party.
The hysterical overreaction to Mackey's op-ed is a perfect example of that trend and is why health care reform isn't already a done deal. A little strategic thinking and Obama could have passed a revolutionary bill that fixed perhaps three-quarters of the problems with a like number of American supporting the effort. He would never get the right fringe, but getting the center could have been a snap with a little creative thinking.
Too bad he left it up to the democratic Congress to be creative. The best they could come up with was Medicare-for-All that didn't have a chance of passing, let alone working as written. Approaching a debate with an underlying scheme of grudging compromise rather than true collaborative thinking is the surest path toward the most fierce resistance.
Not sure why Obama forgot everything he wrote in Audacity of Hope, but I suspect it is because of the democratic base's reaction to each encounter with their politics opposites. He is unable to function in the way he would have preferred because both parties are still being pitted against each other by our own natures and the subtle (and not so subtle) manipulations of special interest groups.
August 18, 2009 8:25 AM | Reply | Permalink
"As soon as every objection isn't painted as obstruction by democrats, we will then start to see a different republican party."
Bullfeathers!!!
August 18, 2009 6:02 PM | Reply | Permalink
Did you have something relevant to add or are you simply here to confirm my point?
August 19, 2009 8:01 AM | Reply | Permalink
What Stilli said...
August 17, 2009 7:12 PM | Reply | Permalink
Hi Stilli.
Ah, a little steam. Everything's okay.
HE IS MY PRESIDENT. HE WAS MY CHOICE. FIRST TIME EVER.
I aint goin nowhere
But I love my Stilli.
August 17, 2009 7:26 PM | Reply | Permalink
And I love my Arthur...glad to see you aren't threatening to jump ship!
August 17, 2009 10:04 PM | Reply | Permalink
I think it is a bad symptom of our times that so many believe electing a President is All It Takes. Phooey. We Americans are spoiled rotten; we do gripe and moan, and yet every Prez woth his salt says, "Make me do what you require." We have forgotten Congress, and Campaign Finance Reform, and pressing for education and civic involvement. Generation X was invisible except for shopping demographics. Gen Y? Who the hell knows? Maybe Obama inspired them to vote, but where the hell are they Now??? It's their world to inherit; maybe they don't give a damn. But we are the ones who should have driving the issues en masse. A leader is fine, he/she can inspire. But if our folks can't even get in the street at half the numbers most Eurpopean nations do, what the hell? Are they all home watching "24" or what? "Dancing With the Stars?" (Please tell me it's a joke about Tom DeLay being on there soon...instead of IN JAIL!
I feel a bit deflated, but then I am older. I have read and consulted the Tao te Ching for many decades; my favorite hexagrams, though frustrating, include: Waiting Is.
Remember that: the yin contains a kernel of the yang; the yang contains a kernal of the yin. It's never as black or white as we believe it is.
If you believe in the Tao at all, this is the reality we have all helped to create.
Sorta sucks, doesn't it?
August 17, 2009 7:45 PM | Reply | Permalink
Well, America's defense - we elected a democratic president AND a democratic house AND a democratic senate. It's not like we didn't give lame-ass McHopesalot something to work with.
August 17, 2009 8:33 PM | Reply | Permalink
And we STILL can't get it done...WTH?
August 17, 2009 8:37 PM | Reply | Permalink
Because there are too many democrats in the democratic party. You want to get something done, even if it is the wrong thing, you have to bring in a republican. That's why moderates such as yourself need to come back.
August 18, 2009 8:03 AM | Reply | Permalink
Partisanship is okay when directed at Democrats, eh?
August 18, 2009 12:34 PM | Reply | Permalink
I didn't see a statement that would indicate that was my position. I take on partisan assholery no matter which party it comes from.
August 18, 2009 12:52 PM | Reply | Permalink
oooohh...new word. I like it!
August 18, 2009 12:56 PM | Reply | Permalink
I bet Jon Stewart would have already used it if he could get away with it.
August 18, 2009 1:00 PM | Reply | Permalink
As the poster pointed out, we don't really have a Democratic Senate. You need 60 votes to get anything controversial passed now (this sucks but it seems to be reality). Our 60 includes Joe Lieberman, Arlen Specter, Ben Nelson, and at least several a dozen others who are unreliable.
The political reality is that, because of the radicalization of the Republican party, most of what used to be the center-right, "moderate" wing of that party has migrated to the Democrats. This phenomenon isn't going to change. The "blue dog" contingent will get larger unless the Dems split into two parties. We'd better get used to it.
But to say "they have the 60 votes so why can't they just give us everthing" is keeping the blinders on.
August 18, 2009 12:39 PM | Reply | Permalink
Tom DeLay being on there soon...instead of IN JAIL!
Isn't that emblematic of where the Right is on democratic government? Delay makes a mockery of the laws of the land, himself a law maker, and now we have to watch his grinning pie hole dancing on national TV. It's a deplorable state of affairs how we allow people to flaunt themselves when they should be ashamed.
August 18, 2009 3:04 AM | Reply | Permalink
I think also we have recent memory. When Bush was in the White House, his party snapped in line behind him. In in the few cases of push back, they pushed out the obstructionist in their own party (ex. Trent Lott as Majority Leader). So to a certain extent I think Dems are expecting something similar. Probably wrongly so, but there is a little of "Hey, why can't we do that?" See Jon Stewart's segment last night we he reminded us that Bush sold America a war that we did not what and did not need, but he did successfully sell it to the majority of Congress and America.
That said, I think the Dems are a must more diverse group and more consensus driven. I do not think would be receptive to top down leadership. Additionally, from Dreams of My Father, I get the strong impression that is not President Obama's leadership style.
August 18, 2009 9:47 AM | Reply | Permalink
Regarding:
Most people have jobs and families and other crises to occupy them.This is why seniors have so much political power: they have all the free time. :-)
August 18, 2009 12:51 PM | Reply | Permalink
Co-sign.
With six months completed, were in the first inning of what is at least an eight inning game, or most likely in a 16 inning game.
The GOP can huff and puff, but we ain't going nowhere, and we're not gonna give up any time soon.
If it takes 50 years, I'll still be pulling for the same things -- a clean environment, good health care, good schools, multilateralism .... And that is the main reason our opponents will lose.
August 17, 2009 7:51 PM | Reply | Permalink
This is why we ALL will lose. You seem to truly believe that the average republican doesn't want a clean environment, good health care, good schools and multilateralism as well.
You also seem to have missed that our school are worse than ever before, the environment has been tanking since the 1970s despite a republican signing the Clean Air Act and a democratic majority in Congress for decades. Health care has been equally dismissed. I seem to remember a vote for the Iraq War that was a bipartisan punt for unilaterism.
The reason this country will continue to lose is the more ideological in both parties will continue to tear into their own moderates as "appeasers" and treat every single person in the opposite party as the enemy. We fire rhetorical shards across a cultural divide with all those nasty "centrists" stuck between both camps.
That is the only reason we continue to fail as a people and is exactly what this blog tried to address, though I think there was still a little too much Us versus Them to be completely helpful at setting the stage of reconciliation of all our competing priorities.
August 18, 2009 8:11 AM | Reply | Permalink
This is sort of a tangent from the OP, but what do you mean when you say our schools are worse than ever? In what way?
August 18, 2009 9:13 AM | Reply | Permalink
Our schools are worse in every way currently measurable when compared against a baseline of other industrialized nations.
Same with the environment and medical care and housing and poverty and all the rest of the democratic hit parade that never seem to get solved despite decades of effort to achieve common sense goals that should be widely supported but they aren't.
The blame always gets leveled at "Them" for getting in the way. "They" can't seem to get it no matter how much "We" lecture. I am as amazed as the democrats are that they seem unable to actually deliver on some rather obvious solutions to our current problems, but hardly surprised because of the average liberal's inability to consider alternative solutions to get to the same end goals. If it wasn't their idea to begin with, very few seem interested in anything else that anyone else has to offer.
Seems counter-intuitive if the goal is a more sustainable America, but what do I know? I am just a progressive republican. Something that hasn't existed for a century. I apply a little too much logic and objectivity to a given situation to be a truly effective partisan.
August 18, 2009 9:29 AM | Reply | Permalink
PS: I meant the "average" politically active liberal. Same applies to the conservative side of the house, unfortunately. Both fringes fighting each other as well as fighting their own moderates has led us to where we are today.
August 18, 2009 9:31 AM | Reply | Permalink
Horseshit.
Democrats regained control of Congress in 2006. Prior to that, Republicans held the Congress since 1994. And prior to 1992, Reagan and Bush held the White House.
Bipartisanship is fine if it's bilateral.
It's good that you mentioned the Clean Air Act, because Nixon's regime was the last time there was any bipartisanship from the GOP. Oh wait. Nixon had an enemy's list and tried to subvert the Constitution to win the '72 election. Strike this paragraph.
August 18, 2009 12:46 PM | Reply | Permalink
Re:
Most of them don't. Oh, sure, they say they do. But ask them to pay another $20/year for it, and they say: "Oh hell no! You're not making ME pay for it! MY environment right here is clean enough, MY school is good enough, get those losers across town who live in the bad air and polluted water and in the bad school district to cough up the dough!" And they're right, because we all know the bad air and polluted water never mix with the good stuff, and the kids who join gangs never drive into the good (white) neighborhoods....(ahem)
August 18, 2009 12:56 PM | Reply | Permalink
Whoops, misplaced reply ... ah well.
August 18, 2009 12:57 PM | Reply | Permalink
This has been coming since the end of World War II with various and sundries steps toward empire prior to that. We are at the end of our imperial ambitions, not the beginning. Just as both parties had a part to play in our success, both played a role in our failures and both will be required to fix things once and for all.
Or toast marshmallows together while it burns. Who has the fiddle?
I find it odd that you absolve Clinton of his responsibility for changing things with a republican Congress while at the same absolving the democratic Congress for not changing things during republican administrations. The double-standards inherent to partisan politics is killing us.
I think I have been pretty consistent on that point.
August 18, 2009 12:57 PM | Reply | Permalink
PS: Nixon was admittedly the most authentically conservative republican in the last fifty years when his meds were working.
That he created the modern neocon movement with his paranoid schizophrenia is sadly ironic. He strikes me as the republican Jimmy Carter, but for markedly different reasons.
Neither lived up to their potential to redefine their parties for the better.
August 18, 2009 1:03 PM | Reply | Permalink
Nixon was admittedly the most authentically conservative republican in the last fifty years when his meds were working.
Bwaha-ha-ha-ha-ha-ha! Nixon a Conservative! Bwaha-ha-ha-ha-ha-ha!
Hello?!? Wage and price controls? Conservative?
Nixon had precisely two conservative traits: He campaigned against abortion and he was a crook.
August 30, 2009 10:02 PM | Reply | Permalink
Your grasp on history is as thin and weak as your grasp on politics. Why not go troll someone else for a change?
August 31, 2009 6:33 AM | Reply | Permalink
I'll tell you what, Jason. I'm going to hop on down to your level this once and give you some of that ad hominem you crave so badly and pass out so generously.
Almost every post you inflict on us is lame. You constantly accuse other people of the sins you most consistently commit. Your concept of debate is nothing but, as Monty Python once put it, "nothing but simple contradiction." I rather doubt that you would recognize a fact if it was sawing its way through your mandible with a horse shoe.
Just for once, why don't you do something stupid but interesting instead of just stupid. Explain, for example, why wage and price controls ARE in favor among you and your fellow Conservatives, or deny that Nixon instituted wage and price controls, or claim that he was forced into wage and price controls by an atomic oyster. Anything but just this tiresome, insulting, angry, idiotic "did not, did so, nuh-huh, yuh-huh" style of yours. You're just wasting electrons that could be used to, let's say, brighten that dim bulb that inhabits your skull.
August 31, 2009 7:18 PM | Reply | Permalink
You are condescending and pedantic. As I said, go troll someone else.
September 1, 2009 6:33 AM | Reply | Permalink
And if I don't take my "trolling" somewhere else, Jason? Will you resort to debate, or simply continue to whine and put up unjustified opinion? "Mommy, make Tankard stop making me look stupid!"
September 1, 2009 8:24 PM | Reply | Permalink
More commentary that is illustrative of why the democratic party is already starting to lose this debate. Too many democrats.
September 2, 2009 6:46 AM | Reply | Permalink
Who you calling a Democrat? Don't you ever get anything right?
What a dolt.
September 2, 2009 7:09 PM | Reply | Permalink
Whatever.
September 2, 2009 7:12 PM | Reply | Permalink
Your most intelligent comment in many months.
September 3, 2009 7:32 PM | Reply | Permalink
Ditto.
September 4, 2009 9:21 AM | Reply | Permalink
Stilli, I do agree with much of what you've said here. (And I love they way you've said it.)
I realize he's not going to get all he promised--I didn't expect it even as he was promising--but I'm disappointed that he's not showing the kind of backbone he needs right now in order to lead. He can back down without looking like he's backing down if he has to. (Johnson did it masterfully. So did(gag)Reagan.)
He needs to go down kicking and screaming whenever he loses even the smallest battles. He needs to let the Repubs and the Blue Dogs know that he's NOT HAPPY when he's forced to compromise. And he needs to let US know that he did all he could. Then maybe I would have more confidence in him.
But you've made some excellent points and I'm going to ponder them again. Thanks.
August 17, 2009 7:54 PM | Reply | Permalink
Thanks, Ramona...that's all I ask, just that we consider the possibility that his chess game beats our checkers...
August 17, 2009 8:03 PM | Reply | Permalink
Yez, if you pardon the expression and know I do LOVE Bwak, there is an old Russian saying that "It is better to die like a man then live like a chicken." {I guess, it's all right to live like a chicken if you actually ARE a chicken.}
August 18, 2009 3:07 AM | Reply | Permalink
Hey Stilli,
Doesn't this kind of happen a lot because... well... because Obama doesn't quite do what we want him to do on a number of major issues?
I think we all had this conversation about circular firing squads back when Obama didn't go with the TPM majority on domestic surveillance and the FISA lawsuits.
These are all major disagreements about important issues. It's not like people around here are jumping all over Obama over every little thing. It's fair to say that whatever problems Obama might have with the base are the result of Obama's choices.
August 17, 2009 8:41 PM | Reply | Permalink
To be effective as a democratic president, Obama decided not to sacrifice his goals to the emotional whims of a "base" who is impossible to please no matter what the subject. Few successful reformist politicians catered to the base of either party since "base" is just another way of saying vocal fringe minority.
August 18, 2009 8:14 AM | Reply | Permalink
I had to check to make sure I didn't write this.
Democrats emote and whine and over-overreact to whatever the MSM is overreacting to and then get amnesia about having done so when it turns out whatever we were overreacting to was bullshit. We rail against the vapidity of the MSM but believe with all our hearts that everything they say is accurate and complete when whatever they say aligns with our paranoia or our simpering upsetitude that our Amazing Magic President hasn't forced Ben Nelson to heel to Using Only the Power of His Mind. (Or Rahm Emmanuel's colorful vocabulary. Whichever.)
Meanwhile, Republicans coordinate in the shadows, orchestrate on the web and show up at townhalls carrying assault rifles.
August 17, 2009 8:43 PM | Reply | Permalink
"I had to check to make sure I didn't write this."
That made me laugh...On my very 1st post here I got accused of cutting and pasting stuff that you and Jason had been saying, when I didn't even know who either one of you were and had never read anything either of you had written! I guess great minds think alike! LOL!
August 17, 2009 8:56 PM | Reply | Permalink
:O)
August 18, 2009 8:16 AM | Reply | Permalink
Stilli, I think most folks who come to the Cafe are torn by these opposing emotions.
I think for me the realization of what was happening during the election cycle was breathtaking. And then, the reality - we elected someone of substance with a vision for a better country, a better society. We actually have a president who inspires people! If that's possible, then anything is possible. Right?
Well, no, not actually. And I know that. I've lived in the village, inside the beltway. It's a different reality. Nothing is what it seems. But the trough on my bipolarcoaster was the realization that "they" simply bought out the public option and stuck it on a shelf somewhere. "Not this time kids. Nice try."
Sleepin' Jeezus called it the "corporate whorehouse that is Washington". (close anyway)
So the drop from the high of the election to the low that big bidness owns it all anyway, well that was just a hell of a jolt. It's disorienting. I know Obama is our guy. I believe that the world and our country will be better places because of his presidency. But just once, I wish he'd grab one of these numbnuts and take him to a back room and bury a fist about 4" into his stomach. Then ask him how he feels about health care reform for America. Just once.
I loved Mom's cooking. But it pissed me off anytime she served brussel sprouts or beets. I hated them both and she knew it. But I loved Mom's cooking.
August 17, 2009 9:02 PM | Reply | Permalink
I have many times on these boards referred to Capitol Hill as a whorehouse...and nothing has happened to change that assessment. The vast majority of our representatives are whores...some do it for the money, some for the power, some for the sex, some for a combination, but most of them are for sale. But then, that is an insult to the profession...(the whores, that is.)
August 17, 2009 9:53 PM | Reply | Permalink
We are the only pimps in history who let their whore smack them around and shack up with whomever they want, whenever they want. I am pretty sure that isn't how the Pimp-Whore relationship is supposed to function.
August 18, 2009 8:19 AM | Reply | Permalink
But just once, I wish he'd grab one of these numbnuts and take him to a back room and bury a fist about 4" into his stomach. Then ask him how he feels about health care reform for America. Just once.
I am SO with you on this.
Wish I could recommend comments, just for this sentence.
August 18, 2009 2:56 PM | Reply | Permalink
I think you better listen to Rachel.
August 17, 2009 9:08 PM | Reply | Permalink
I've got it DVR'd but can't get to it for awhile...am I gunna be pissed?
August 17, 2009 9:24 PM | Reply | Permalink
I don't know but she's got some guy on their claiming this bill is going to be so bad it will be the Democrat's Iraq. He's got some piece in Rolling Stone coming up.
August 17, 2009 9:36 PM | Reply | Permalink
Just listened. Terrifying. What IS this country coming to? Assault rifles on shoulder straps in plain view, in a crowd, at a rally, near the president.
Anarchy bought and paid for, served up as entertainment, promoted by the NRA and buffered by the Second Amendment, which clearly did NOT give individuals the right to bear arms.
"Well-regulated militias" gave states the right to protect against a rogue government, if need be.
Now we have this because those fuzzies in Washington are afraid to go against the NRA Big Guns.
We're in trouble.
August 17, 2009 9:31 PM | Reply | Permalink
Sorry, didn't mean to go off onto something else. That gun stuff scares me. But so does no health care. It's a crazy world.
August 17, 2009 10:34 PM | Reply | Permalink
Primary Obama:
President Obama:
1. Backroom deal with PhRMA and Hospitals and the White House won't even disclose the terms of the agreement.
2. "Negotiations" for the President's preferred bill are being done by 6 Senators - 3 Republicans, 3 Republican-lite. Not done publicly. No transparency.
I'm sorry Stilli, but Obama asked us to hold him and the Congress accountable on healthcare reform. Not when it's too late, not after a crappy bill is passed, but in the moment when he starts betraying the principles he ran on and his promises to the American people. He doesn't have 8 years - he only has four. If he wants a second term, he better find his principles quickly. That's not the change I voted for and I know I am not alone.
August 17, 2009 10:41 PM | Reply | Permalink
Please quit lying to us with this bullshit:
"That's not the change I voted for and I know I am not alone."
You didn't vote for "change". you didn't vote for Obama. You've been an Obama-basher from day one.
In this case, we have a funny little document called the constitution that states that the Senate actually makes the laws, not the president.
Quit concern trolling.
August 17, 2009 10:58 PM | Reply | Permalink
Um, you're either naive or trolling yourself.
The President has a lot of political power and some Presidents have known how to use it. The Constitution gives him the right to veto and that gives him a lot of leverage even if Congress decides to override his veto. His control of major portions of the Democratic Party gives him a lot of political carrots and sticks which can be translated into legislative accomplishment. If all he is willing to say to Republicans who are knifing the U.S. in the back is that he wants the world to be bipartisan, we can keep looking for that pony. A better response is this is a good idea and unless you can show me otherwise I'm going to come into your district and campaign against you.
And, yeah, when such absurd portrayals of the President as an innocent bystander are offered, I'm entirely willing to teach my grandmother to suck eggs.
August 17, 2009 11:46 PM | Reply | Permalink
I understand that, Dij...but I don't like threatening the President, I don't like doin' stuff the Repubs get off on, and I don't think we have another option in the primaries in 2012, and if we vote for anyone other than a Dem in the general, we may as well just vote for the republican...
Given that, it just doesn't make any sense to weaken our guy...Hold him accountable? Sure...write to him everyday. Just don't weaken him to the point where Palin et all take over. It's just too frickin' scary.
August 17, 2009 11:03 PM | Reply | Permalink
Well then Stilli, he needs to do his job which is to LEAD. He is weakening himself by caving to the Republicans continuously. If Palin takes over that's his responsibility for doing a poor job. How badly does someone have to fail for Palin to be viable? The thought is frightening. If he wants to retain power, then do the things he was elected to do. Egads, GWB did not have a filibuster proof majority and he was able to cram his conservative policies down Congress. You mean to tell me Obama is incapable of passing his moderate proposals? That is poor leadership. I can deal with failure after a tough fight, but this rolling over and capitulation just disgusts me.
August 17, 2009 11:13 PM | Reply | Permalink
"Egads, GWB did not have a filibuster proof majority and he was able to cram his conservative policies down Congress."
That's because dems are pussies...what can I say? Republicans stick together, we eat our young...
I'm just as disgusted as you are. Nothing would make me happier than to see him stand up and tell the repubs to pound sand where the sun don't shine...I'm just not willing to cut my nose off to spite my face.
August 17, 2009 11:24 PM | Reply | Permalink
You have principles those in power have
princi(PALS)
Obama and McCain, the candidates of the Capitalists.
Capitalism was about to be brought to ruin. It needed a needed a pressure relief valve.
The anger of the American people was about to boil over. The FEDERAL RESERVE; the tool of moneyed interests, was in deep trouble.
McCain shilling for them, telling the people the Fundamentals were sound; but circumstances boiled to the surface, quicker than the Capitalist's thought, McCain’s mistiming, discredited him from the competition.
The Capitalists second choice, Obama had to be the pressure relief valve; or the Banker class were about to get the pitchforks.
Obama to the rescue, bringing in Tim Geithner to help direct the lifeboats on the Titantic financial ship that was sinking, rich folks first, you in third class pray.
Lifeboats for the banks of the Federal Reserve and its members, even if it meant the peasant class lost everything. Capitalism would be saved. Save wealth and privilege.
In order to control the steam created by the heat of discontent, Obama was the apparent peoples choice.
Imagine Watts, and the civil disobedience that would have ensued had the people thought the election was stolen again.
Obama, the pressure relief valve worked, the discontent is becoming a slow simmer.
I was for Obama, before I was against him. His actions have dispelled his charm.
A side note, can anyone tell me if the bite of a water moccasin is deadlier than a rattlesnake?
August 18, 2009 12:55 AM | Reply | Permalink
I think it is unrealistic to take a response from a debate that was obviously naive and hold the man to it.
That quote was never part of his platform and a savvy political observer such as yourself would understand that this first round wasn't going to be perfect and would involve at least a small amount of misdirection, not to mention being incremental in nature as all sustainable changes in this country have been.
I am sure Hillary understand why this initial effort has gone the way it has and is probably pretty happy with what is emerging from Congress.
August 18, 2009 8:46 AM | Reply | Permalink
JEM, that was from his stump speech. That was part of his platform. He was saying the reason Hillary failed because the lobbyists were working in secret and his administration would be different. So... he gets elected, goes to the White House and works with lobbyists in secret. I don't get it. Obama wanted Hillary off focusing on foreign affairs so she wouldn't interfere with his domestic agenda. And she'd be appalled at the status of health care reform where we don't even get a public option.
August 18, 2009 10:10 AM | Reply | Permalink
I don't recall this being a part of most of his speeches on health care, but I do know it was never a part of the platform presented on his website. That is tangential to my point in either case as that never seemed a realistic goal and wasn't something I was expecting to see.
The reason I have come around to the average Hillary supporter's way of thinking was their pragmatism and how it provided a mirror to what I perceive as a reluctance on my part to admit the efficacy of the trait in their candidate. Holding any politician accountable for naive remarks that got applause and thus stayed on the stump seems the opposite of that pragmatism to me.
I think President Hillary Clinton would have made similar compromises to be where President Obama is currently in the effort. I also think she would have had a multi-year strategy that allowed for early compromises that may have seemed big to the base but were actually immaterial to the long-term game plan.
I see President Obama as being much more like your candidate than Senator Obama was.
August 18, 2009 10:18 AM | Reply | Permalink
Jason, you've got me and most Hillary voters misdiagnosed. I supported Hillary because she didn't take the half-assed "pragmatic" approach to economic & social policy like Obama did even though it made those positions harder to defend in the primary. No exceptions, no excuses health care for all. I am an idealist in those areas, not a pragmatist. I can accept compromise meaning a strong public option. I will not accept less.
August 18, 2009 10:45 AM | Reply | Permalink
I just want to say I think you guys (dijamo and jason) are having an interesting dialogue. jason has come a long way in his thinking about Hillary, and replaying all of this is good food for thought. Thanks to you both. ;-)
August 18, 2009 10:57 AM | Reply | Permalink
Excellent point, Blow...
I think a lot of us have changed our opinion about Hillary. I'm even open to taking another look at her in 2016...never, ever thought I'd hear myself say that.
August 18, 2009 11:31 AM | Reply | Permalink
More than just Hillary, gasket, and it is really the interactions I had with you all that was to blame.
I find it ironic and hilarious that many people who were allies during the primaries and general are now the ones I can barely communicate with while everyone I used to knock heads with makes an inordinate amount of sense on many issues.
Politics makes for strange bedfellows indeed, if done right.
August 18, 2009 11:32 AM | Reply | Permalink
I've always liked you, jason, which I've said before and mean(t) sincerely. You have driven me crazy sometimes, but I'm sure I've done the same to you—we're kind of like family that way. I think when we are both calm, we actually share many similar ideas and ideals. Since you first arrived, I have been impressed by your efforts to discipline yourself to contribute to a higher level of dialogue: You deserve kudos for that, and your transformation is inspiring (I mean, you walked through the door with guns a-blazin', and now you make me think twice). As you're finding out, not everyone can do that.
Anyway, cheers!
August 18, 2009 1:31 PM | Reply | Permalink
Ditto, mon frere.
August 18, 2009 1:58 PM | Reply | Permalink
Jeez, guys...get a room! (LOL! just kidding!!!) It's nice to see everyone getting along so well!
August 18, 2009 2:00 PM | Reply | Permalink
Only so far as each individual issue goes.
August 18, 2009 2:12 PM | Reply | Permalink
If that is the case, I suspect you would have been very disappointed with how Hillary performed in those areas as well because she would have been presented with many of the same Hobson's Choices that Obama has had to face.
I still think you are a pragmatist in partisan clothing on this one though. :O)
August 18, 2009 11:27 AM | Reply | Permalink
Great blog. I've been thinking about going away from TPM for awhile because it's getting to the point where there's nothing but bad news. Concern, concern concern, someone said something that could possibly mean healthcare is doomed, Obama's choice of words may imply healthcare is doomed and he's a fraud, Dick Armey said this, Sarah Palin said that, Michele Bachmann is on page one again. Seems creating nervousness and worry are TPM's currency. I wish they'd throw us a bone once in awhile.
August 17, 2009 11:19 PM | Reply | Permalink
I've tried to stay away, but I can't...it's in my blood. I make it a day or two, sometimes a whole week if I have a particularly hectic schedule, but I can't just leave. It keeps pulling me back. Then I get all riled up, do a post, and it's like I snorted cocaine...Y'all are just stuck with me.
August 17, 2009 11:30 PM | Reply | Permalink
That's actually not true, stilli. Remember when John McCain suspended his campaign to rush back to the Senate to save the economy? The meltdown was well underway globally while Obama was making health care reform promises.
That same month, Obama said this to the New England Journal of Medicine and the Harvard School of Public Health:
That seemed pretty clear to me and others at the time.
Yet he also made this cryptic statement:
So did he say two different things or just one and we misinterpreted it?
August 18, 2009 1:13 AM | Reply | Permalink
Ya got me, Blow...all I know is he's having a hard time delivering what he promised thanks to the gutless wonders in the whorehouse on Capitol Hill, and now we either abandon him and give the repubs a huge leg up, while at the same time shooting ourselves in the feet, or we find a way to stick with him and help him push this through, and forgive him if he fails. I choose to help and forgive, if necessary.
As far as the timing of the meltdown...he'd already committed to health care reform, and since the whole situation was in such flux with no way of knowing at the time how devastating the economic situation would be, I can give him a bye on not backing out of the commitment at the time...
August 18, 2009 1:55 AM | Reply | Permalink
I'll be honest with you Stilli I underestimated the degree of ethical and moral corruption in the congress and particularly the senate. Ever since Obama took office it has grown increasingly apparent how corrupt senate republicans and blue dog democrats are. I wasn't blind to this but to see how bad it really is, to realize what the inevitable consequence of this corruption has to be, scares the shit out of me.
It cannot be more obvious how harmful this is to the country and honestly I view the actions of these people as treason. They knowingly are stealing the wealth of this country for personal gain and for the gain of persons in and out of this country who are global wealth holders. This is more horrible than I could have possibly imagined and is sure to be very harmful to the country. It is also particulary scary to have senators not condemn the obvious threatening conduct of persons openly carrying firearms to the town meetings. This is a first in modern U.S. history and unmistakably is intended to convey a threat. It is definitely a departure from past social conduct and underscores the ethical decay that is being practiced in the senate.
August 18, 2009 2:02 AM | Reply | Permalink
We are certainly living in frightening times...I fear for our President, and I fear for us all.
August 18, 2009 2:36 AM | Reply | Permalink
Stilli, your fears are not unfounded but my intent in stating this in the way I have is to draw attention to it so we are fully aware of the direction and possible consequences. It is crucial to acknowledge this and possibly invigorate the general populace into becoming involved by contacting their representatives and demanding a change in their corrupt conduct. The people of this nation need to become far more aware and involved than they are at present. I believe that is the sole chance we have to get this country back on a civil track. It is necessary to condemn the in your face dishonest representations of the facts surrounding so many of the issues we face. It is simply unacceptable to have our elected officials knowingly lie in the way that has become so common, with the certain outcome of very serious harm to the nation. That has got to stop and it can only happen through public awareness.
August 18, 2009 2:53 AM | Reply | Permalink
Just wait until the Supremes meet in Sept. First up is a case that Big Chief John Roberts is going to use to open the corporate spigot full tilt. "More contributions for all my friends."
Until we figure out a way to get the corporate money completely out of the equation this level of corruption will continue and worsen. It's all about the Benjamins.
For those who are interested, here's a group working for publically financed elections:
http://youstreet.org/
August 18, 2009 7:35 AM | Reply | Permalink
You're right TJ. The biggest piece of this is about money. There is no way for money to be driving the bus of democracy. There is an awful lot of legal precedent that supports this stupidity and honestly, that is going to be very hard to overcome. As you correctly point out, Roberts will be more inclined to drive the bus right over the cliff than not. With his background he should never have been confirmed. There is just no way he'll ever decide in favor of the people and nation before monied interests.
August 18, 2009 8:07 AM | Reply | Permalink
A well-thought out rant. Yez, we will have to support Obama, but sometimes, being on his side involves getting in his grill. I want him to know that if there is no public option, I will be pissed and there are plenty of folks here who will not be happy as well. I don't think he realizes how many people there are who want a public option. The whole Singel Payer crowd would accept a public option if single payer in unreachable. But to NOT have at least a public option is unacceptable.
August 18, 2009 3:16 AM | Reply | Permalink
May I have framed photo of you?
Exactly true, all you've said.
August 18, 2009 12:56 PM | Reply | Permalink
Rec'd, Stilli, because you are as usual such a valuable voice of reason when the kids eat a bit too much sugar in their cereal and start climbing the walls.
But I'm not quite ready to get off my wall, here. This last move - going soft on the public option - was the last straw for me. His awful judicial policy, heinous financial policy, and weak-kneed economic policy, all those things I could forgive if he was saving his political capital for an almighty fight on health care reform. And he has chosen not to fight, not to lead, and to settle for whatever bill Baucus and Grassley deign to hand him. He wants a perceived success, independently of any actual success in improving health care outcomes.
I'm not being a purity freak on this bill. Just answer me this: how is this bill better than nothing? If you can convince me, I'll gladly join you in supporting the president. But here's why now I don't think it is better than nothing. The public option is not non-essential. It's a small part of the overall bill - maybe a few dozen pages. But it's the hinge that makes the whole package move in the right direction. It's the ONLY serious way to keep premiums from spiraling out of control. The co-ops are not a slightly worse alternative. They are a joke. The rest of the bill is the result of decades of research on health care markets. The co-ops are an idea Conrad and his staff literally dreamt up one afternoon to make his opposition seem 'reasonable' in the media. And it worked. Does anyone seriously think they will keep insurance costs down? No. It's just a fig-leaf for industry shills. Show me one research paper showing how co-ops gain the market power to negotiate seriously with service-providers and drug makers, and I'll concede ... Everything.
So what happens if the public option is scrapped and the rest stays? Insurers retain total pricing power, and subsidies for the poor combined with an insurance mandate and anti-discrimination regulation all just combine to drive premiums through the roof. I repeat, insurers can charge what they want for a product that people will HAVE TO buy. It's the industry's wet dream scenario. So what do we do? Maybe eliminate the mandate? Then we have a free-rider problem. So eliminate the anti-discrimination regulation concerning pre-existing conditions? Okay. Now what is left: subsidies for the poor, an expansion of Medicaid. Fine, THAT would be an improvement, however slight. THAT is a bill I could applaud. But it is not health care reform. It is incremental expansion of government programs. But THAT is not what is on the table. The rough outlines of the Senate bill to which Obama is expressing no opposition whatsoever is a straight corporate give-away.
By saying the public option is NOT IMPORTANT he is betraying the essence of health care reform. And I'm not one of the road-to-single-payer crowd. I'm not a radical lefty. I, like you, have travelled the rough road from small-c conservatism to progressivism because the supposed representatives of the former have sold their souls to the corporate overlords. Only the progressives seemed to still conceive of market-mechanisms as a means to achieve social welfare, not an end in itself.
I will not blindly 'have faith' in the president's reassurance that this is a good bill. I look at the bill, and it is bad. By all means expand Medicaid, by all means find a way to help those with pre-existing conditions (eg. let them enroll in one or another government program). But the way this bill is constructed, it does more to strengthen a corporate sector that is adamantly opposed to eventual reform that cuts into their bottom line. Passing it will have the same effect as the bank-bailout. The promised reform of the banking sector is now dead for the foreseeable future. Dead. Why? Because the bank-lobby is that much stronger thanks to the way the bailout was structured. Passing this HCR bill does the same for the private HC sector. The 'pass a bill, any bill' crowd is simply wrong that a 'victory' now opens the door to better reforms down the road. It's the opposite. It closes all those doors.
People keep saying, 'it will lead to such outrageous profits for HC providers and insurers and drug-makers that eventually people will revolt'. But we're already paying double that of other countries for services and drugs. When do we revolt - at triple, quadruple? The more profits we cede to these leeches, the bigger and more formidable they become, and the harder they become to fight. So with this bill, we hand them their 2-300 billion ransom, the price for expanded coverage, or so we say. Do we really think that we can turn around and fight these people next year, or the year after? What is a one billion dollar ad campaign to these people? What is the several tens of millions to them, that they use in subverting the think-tank industry that writes the research underpinning legislation. What is the several tens of million they use to create the incestuous revolving door for Hill staffers and industry shills? It is nothing to them. What is the reaction of other corporate sectors? They oppose reform, because they see how easy it is to bend washington to their will and they don't want to stop the health care sector's fleecing of the tax-payer. They want their piece of our skin. That is the lesson they learn from all this.
So for now I'll keep climbing my wall. Obama has sold out. It breaks my heart. But it doesn't blind me to the facts.
August 18, 2009 8:00 AM | Reply | Permalink
Pelosi has already agreed with you. Without a public option, nothing will reach the House floor for a vote.
August 18, 2009 8:02 AM | Reply | Permalink
Double rec this comment.
August 18, 2009 8:39 AM | Reply | Permalink
Good points, all, Pugsley, but it's not a done deal yet...I'm merely suggesting that we wait and see what the bill looks like before we get all up in arms. The House and Senate are miles apart right now. There's just no way at the moment, to know if it is worse than nothing. If it is, I'll support not passing it. If there are some things that make it a good stepping stone, I'll feel like it is better than standing still.
I don't know what his strategy is here. I didn't back last year. I'm thinking (okay, more like hoping) it is a repeat of slowly, deliberately, working a plan, like it was last time. If I'm wrong I'll be just as pissed as you are. I'm just trying at this point to 1) give him the benefit of the doubt, and 2) not embolden the repubs any further by making it seem as if he has lost the confidence of his base.
I hate all this crap. Just give us a frickin' bill that covers everyone...Why is that so damn hard?
I'll tell you one thing. I don't know how they do it, but the repubs are sure a helluva good minority party. They may want to just stay out of power. They accomplish more of their goals when WE are in charge. Then they get to blame us. Go figure.
August 18, 2009 9:31 AM | Reply | Permalink
Actually Stilli, the rough outlines of the package are pretty settled. The public option is the only serious element still up for grabs. The rest is tweaking subsidy levels, degree of Medicaid expansion, revenue sources, the look of the minimum benefits package. To be honest I'm not sure about the outlines of the insurance exchange. But the thing there is, the big insurers' share price reacts hugely only with moves in the political debate on the public option. I.e. they are dead scared of the pressure on their profits it creates. That tells me these exchanges won't work well without it (i.e. the insurers can maintain a healthy profit margin).
What enrages me the most is the spreading skepticism about the importance of the public option. The WH is as far as I can tell spreading it as fast as they can among even progressive pundits. Klein and Yglesias have eaten it whole. So it seems to me that the administration is pretty much trying to undermine this bill. At least its good bits. I don't buy all the 'cunning plan' crap. I'm so spitting mad at Obama, I had to rewrite this reply a couple of times in a more civilized manner.
August 18, 2009 11:06 AM | Reply | Permalink
I really do understand your anger. I still have high hopes that the public option will survive, especially with the progressives in the house sticking their elbows out. I just can't let myself spend months in pissed off mode, so I'll wait until I need to go there.
August 18, 2009 12:08 PM | Reply | Permalink
Stilli, with all due respect and great admiration for you, this is exactly where you and your post are wrong.
The shape of health care reform is being determined NOW. You cannot rely on the hope that what is cut from the bills now will be restored in conference. Moreover, without a public outcry FOR the public option, Congress has not incentive to include it. Ever.
Democracy takes sustained effort. Riding to the rescue at the last minute only works for Batman and the Lone Ranger.
August 18, 2009 1:10 PM | Reply | Permalink
You know I respect you, too, Ripper, especially because I know you are living this nightmare. Our difference comes only in style, I believe. I think we should yell, and yell loudly. "This is what we want!" My problem is with the threats to bail on the party and on the President. I believe they are counter-productive and only embolden the repubs. If they are just bluffs they make us look foolish. If we follow through, we are, in essence, voting for the repubs...either way, we lose.
August 18, 2009 1:18 PM | Reply | Permalink
Obey, you've done your homework. I am in complete agreement with you and Gregor. This isn't a fight over health care; thanks to the president and Congress, it's become a corporate-led massacre, and we are those bodies on the battlefield.
August 18, 2009 1:04 PM | Reply | Permalink
Glad you agree, Ripper. The chances the public option makes it to conference committee I guess are now nil. Thank you Mr. President: he's just given Baucus political cover for leaving it out. People can't see that?
But it's now no longer about Obama any more. It really depends now on who the Senate leadership elect to negotiate with the House. If Reid puts in a couple of other centrists alongside Baucus, we're screwed. They just won't put themselves in the position of having to vote on a public option.
August 18, 2009 1:32 PM | Reply | Permalink
What have you heard that is making you say that, Pugsley?I thought with the progressives sticking their elbows out, and the White House saying strongly that the public option was very much alive was making it look better, not worse...Have I missed something (again?)
August 18, 2009 1:45 PM | Reply | Permalink
Which bit? I don't have any hard evidence. But I worked in journalism long enough to get a sense of the Kabuki theatre and the talking points driving coverage. That, and I still have journo friends in Washington who I trust. But don't take my word for anything. There are seasoned political observers around here who seem to disagree. Though, to me, it's bloody obvious what is going on. We'll see...
August 18, 2009 2:14 PM | Reply | Permalink
good for you Obey, well said, from the heart.
From atop whatever wall you climbed. (Speaking of which, the view is often clearer from higher up.)
August 18, 2009 3:29 PM | Reply | Permalink
I admire your enthusiasm, Stilli, and not too long ago I would have agreed with you. I don't have a horse in this race because I have medicare and he hasn't fiddled with it too much, so far anyway. What disturbs me is exactly what Obey described above. If he had gone in all guns firing for health care I could have forgiven him a lot. But he didn't. He has shown no real leadership on any of his initiatives and that deeply disappoints me
As for Obama's pulling out a win in the presidential campaign - I have serious doubts that he would have won if mccain had selected Meg the ebay woman, for instance, or even dan quayle as his running mate. I don't think it was Obama's strategy that won him the presidency, and I don't think his preferred MO will serve him well during his presidency given the unloyal opposition, including the blue dogs. It will be another center right administration like Clinton's (or worse) where policy tilts dizzily to the right.
August 18, 2009 8:37 AM | Reply | Permalink
Great blog, Stilli. Not sure I agree that the republicans are really the problem here as ideological considerations seem to be driving the conversation on both sides with moderates being shouted down by the fringes on both sides.
I have tried to offer my ideas on the current reform plans and how they represent a huge win for the democratic party, with or without a public option, but I am constantly being misquoted and made to represent "the right" that I am hardly surprised that nothing is getting done but for that which can be carved out of the middle despite the fringes.
This shit should sell itself yet the democratic party is hard-pressed to drive a fifty-percent-plus-one margin with the public. It should be at 75% by now given the wide support for reform efforts at the grassroots of both parties. You identified the problem head on - cognitive dissonance between what is possible over a number of years and what the "base" expects in both parties.
How the hell are we supposed to get anything done in Congress when people who mostly agree can't even find a way to discuss the issue let alone craft effective reform legislation?
August 18, 2009 9:19 AM | Reply | Permalink
I know, Jason. It seems so simple, but the fact is there are are 16 repubs in dem clothing...looks good on paper, but the reality is we don't have the majority it looks like we have.
I am heartened this morning that the progressives in the House are sticking their elbows out. No public option, no bill, seems like a good thing on the face of it.
I just keep thinking that the lobbyists are getting their money's worth this time... THEY are running the country, and Goldman Sachs is running them...but that's a whole 'nuther post.
August 18, 2009 9:46 AM | Reply | Permalink
I think you may have missed my point. It isn't about democrats or republicans at this point. It isn't about Blue Dogs or Red Dogs or Purple Dogs.
I am damn glad the "repubs in dem's clothing" joined with some moderate republicans in republican clothing to craft a bill that has a chance at actually fixing the system we have instead of replacing it with a system that would have never worked. But for the "centrists" in both parties, we would have never crafted a bill that could hope to have bipartisan support.
For this sort of reform effort, bipartisan support isn't just a luxury, it is a necessity. I am not talking about bipartisan in the Congress either. I am talking about the silent majority grassroots of both parties - including our seldom mentioned fourth wall of lurkers - who are trying to make sense of losing everything they have to do something they can scarcely understand. No matter the lies or the lying liars who tell them, any legislation coming out Congress as our first effort was going to be very moderate.
Americans like their changes in small, measured does for the most part. All of the big ones - civil rights, suffrage, labor rights, the New Deal, environmental regulations, etc. - came out of a series of bills passed over a number of years as earlier reforms changed public opinion.
That is why all those things are unassailable now. The leaders of those efforts didn't allow fringe elements to dictate the pace of the required change. They were strategic in long-term planning and tactical in execution. Most of them would have been pleased as punch to get even a tenth of what Obama has gotten on this one so far. The "public" option is actually the least important part of the reforms that are sure to make it into the final bill.
Anything that is missing can be handled as part of a different discussion. I think the public option would be best addressed as a part of Medicare reform. A phrase, by the way, that shouldn't be so maligned by the left. The notion of reform is widely supported by both parties but only if it means the continued viability of the program. A case could be easily made the extending it to healthier Americans is the ONLY way to save it.
Had a single democratic moderate thought to position the public option in that way, we wouldn't even be having this discussion because he would have signed a bill ahead of the summer recess.
August 18, 2009 10:11 AM | Reply | Permalink
Jason, what has me concerned here (just can't get away from that word!) is that the repubs are doing all this watering down, then still won't vote for it, just like they did with the stimulus...Then they sit back and say, well, gee, you got your bill and it isn't working...Well, DUH...It isn't working because you sabotaged it from the get go!
If they mess with it, then actually VOTE for it, at least they will have SOME ownership.
This is one of those parts of politics that REALLY gets me down. It would be nice if everyone would bargain in good faith and do what is RIGHT for a change. How ANYONE could think that the current system is RIGHT is beyond me, as is the notion that it is okay to make these obscene profits on the backs of real people's pain and suffering. This is an issue where "Party" shouldn't matter.
August 18, 2009 10:48 AM | Reply | Permalink
I have the exact opposite expectation. Based on what I know of the current proposals, that without the public option shoved down conservative throats enough moderate republican voters will expect their representatives to support reform.
That is the key here. Gaining the support of the silent majority as a way of forcing moderate republicans to vote yes. Even if it is only a handful that is a victory because even the most modest of these reforms is going to make a huge difference and be widely supported.
If he can turn the moderates into supporters of Medicare as the public option it is a slam dunk. He seems to be playing this game to the grassroots rather than the gilded cages and is smart enough to chart a course over his entire administration without carrying overly much about the caterwauling from the left fringe.
The democratic party should thank themselves every day for electing this dude instead of Hillary Clinton. That way they get Hillary's pragamatism without sending even moderate conservatives into a tailspin of anger and recrimination. I am actually much more optimistic based on his caution and measured leadership on this particular issue.
I wish he had been as startegic with the stimulus debate. Everyone has a learning curve I suppose, especially for the hardest job on the planet.
August 18, 2009 11:23 AM | Reply | Permalink
You've been at this politics thing longer than I have, Jason. I hope you are right.
August 18, 2009 11:36 AM | Reply | Permalink
I doubt that. It has only been since 2004 that I even started to pay attention. It wasn't until my arrival here last April that I started to become aware. I am just blessed to be a very quick learner. :O)
August 18, 2009 11:37 AM | Reply | Permalink
I, mostly, agree, Stilli. Much of the emotional hand-wringing on the left feels quite similar to the election, when we felt that Obama was misplaying his hand against McCain campaign attacks. However, I think that some form of public-option is essential for reducing the cost of health insurance.
What frustrates so many on the left, who want single-payer, is that the public-option was presented to them by Obama as a politically necessary compromise. Democrats control both houses of Congress and the White House, and yet, immediately sacrificed single-payer on the alter of bipartisan compromise, and now, look like they may sacrifice THAT compromise.
While none of us yet knows what the final bill will contain, I would not support it without it featuring either a public-option or some strong profit regulation of the health insurance industry. Why? Because nothing else will significantly lower the rate of increase in industry costs.
The worst outcome would be a law requiring universal participation, but no hard cost controlling provisions. The health insurance industry would just love to have us all legally forced to buy their product with no concomitant curb on their pricing. Heck, what 'for profit' business wouldn't?
August 18, 2009 10:02 AM | Reply | Permalink
Boy, you hit the nail on the head! Progressives remind me of a Richard Jefferson engagement. They wait until the night of the wedding and panic about how it's just not gonna work out like they thought it would.
August 18, 2009 10:05 AM | Reply | Permalink
Stilli:
(Bowing down on bended knees before you):
"I'M NOT WOOOR-THY!!! I'M NOT WOOOR-THY!!!"
Thank you for climbing out on that proverbial limb and saying what needed to be said.
Couldn't'a said it better meownself.
August 18, 2009 10:47 AM | Reply | Permalink
WOW! I think I'll print this comment and frame it! Talk about unworthy...thanks, Deanie! Coming from someone I respect SO much, this is high praise.
August 18, 2009 10:55 AM | Reply | Permalink
If we aren't vocal and don't complain we won't get what we want. The vocal minority from the right wing is having excessive influence here and dominating the media. Obama needs to understand that his base expects a public option to be the compromise not the bargaining chip.
If it's all part of his master plan then perhaps this is designed to wake up the left to start clamoring for what we want so we don't get drowned out by the naysayers.
August 18, 2009 10:54 AM | Reply | Permalink
But we don't have to use threats and hand-wringing to get our point across. He said "make me do it" well, tell him..."Here's the deal sir...We elected you to get us a public option in health care and that's what we expect. So do what you need to do. Twist some arms, break some knee caps if you need to (okay so maybe not that) but get this done. It's what we voted for and we will settle for no less."
All this talk about voting for a 3rd party candidate just makes us look stupid. IMHO. The repubs are not stupid...they know that voting for a 3rd party candidate is just as good as a vote for them. They've got to be licking their chops in anticipation...
August 18, 2009 11:12 AM | Reply | Permalink
Stilli, one of the best comments so far.
August 18, 2009 12:29 PM | Reply | Permalink
Thanks, loosey...
August 18, 2009 12:48 PM | Reply | Permalink
Short message here, Stilli. I can understand your frustration. But you've only recently migrated from one "side" to "another" - and for many of us it's not just the Obama administration, it's years and years - sometimes even decades of frustration that's pent up here. Personally, I think it's the pent-up frustration that's driving the dissatisfaction of many on the left.
Peace be with you, my dear.
August 18, 2009 12:02 PM | Reply | Permalink
I so understand that...But it's a little like getting mad at a child today for some little thing, but piled on top of yesterday's transgressions, it seems larger than it is. We're supposed to be grown ups here, and we need to keep things in perspective.
Sometimes the thing that "feels good" (in this case spitting vinegar) does more damage in the long run than a measured response.
The more the repubs (and pseudo repubs) see us in disarray, the more it fuels their determination. I just hate giving them that satisfaction.
But, true, I haven't been feeling this way for long, so it's easy for me to say...
Thanks for stopping by, Thera...appreciate the input.
August 18, 2009 12:19 PM | Reply | Permalink
I'm trying to stay out of the fray. But clearly the Dems are now at each other's throats - and that's playing right into the hands of the right.
You're right that it should not make a difference how many decades I've been on the left (it's about 5 now on my end). But indeed it does. Goes back to Viet Nam and so many other things. Very discouraging to see the country, socially & economically, going backwards, becoming more like the Wild West with potential shoot-outs just around the corner.
Very, very sad is how I feel, Stilli. I fear for the fate of the Republic. For me, it's way larger than health care. And not looking good. Just trying to maintain my calm nonetheless.
Just don't forget that the right is busy stirring up the lefties... that's to their advantage (getting all riled up plays into their hands). So the infighting gets us nowhere - and for that reason, I think you're a good moderating influence. Wish you could moderate the gun-toting folk who no longer believe in majority rule, however...
Peace, my dear. (I don't have the solutions. But I am a peacenik...)
August 18, 2009 12:35 PM | Reply | Permalink
"But clearly the Dems are now at each other's throats - and that's playing right into the hands of the right."
It so is, Thera...that's the part that bugs me the most. I wish we could somehow keep our discussions with other more civil so they can't get off on the bickering.
August 18, 2009 12:41 PM | Reply | Permalink
So true. You sure have gotten a great discussion going here, Stilli! Kudos on that!
August 18, 2009 4:09 PM |