• Menu
  • Skip to primary navigation
  • Skip to main content
  • Skip to primary sidebar

Before Header

  • About Us
  • Lexicon
  • Contact Us
  • Our Store
  • ↑
  • ↓
  • ←
  • →

Balloon Juice

Come for the politics, stay for the snark.

This fight is for everything.

Let’s not be the monsters we hate.

The arc of history bends toward the same old fuckery.

Incompetence, fear, or corruption? why not all three?

The GOP couldn’t organize an orgy in a whorehouse with a fist full of 50s.

If you’re pissed about Biden’s speech, he was talking about you.

Everybody saw this coming.

A thin legal pretext to veneer over their personal religious and political desires

Whoever he was, that guy was nuts.

A sufficient plurality of insane, greedy people can tank any democratic system ever devised, apparently.

“Everybody’s entitled to be an idiot.”

The words do not have to be perfect.

Make the republican party small enough to drown in a bathtub.

When your entire life is steeped in white supremacy, equality feels like discrimination.

Something needs to be done about our bogus SCOTUS.

Seems like a complicated subject, have you tried yelling at it?

Bark louder, little dog.

Our job is not to persuade republicans but to defeat them.

I really should read my own blog.

Red lights blinking on democracy’s dashboard

The next time the wall street journal editorial board speaks the truth will be the first.

Republicans are radicals, not conservatives.

This really is a full service blog.

I’d like to think you all would remain faithful to me if i ever tried to have some of you killed.

Mobile Menu

  • Winnable House Races
  • Donate with Venmo, Zelle & PayPal
  • Site Feedback
  • War in Ukraine
  • Submit Photos to On the Road
  • Politics
  • On The Road
  • Open Threads
  • Topics
  • Balloon Juice 2023 Pet Calendar (coming soon)
  • COVID-19 Coronavirus
  • Authors
  • About Us
  • Contact Us
  • Lexicon
  • Our Store
  • Politics
  • Open Threads
  • War in Ukraine
  • Garden Chats
  • On The Road
  • 2021-22 Fundraising!
You are here: Home / Politics / Domestic Politics / Tune in, turn on, opt out

Tune in, turn on, opt out

by DougJ|  October 26, 20099:49 pm| 170 Comments

This post is in: Domestic Politics, Politics

FacebookTweetEmail

TPM has a great interview with Chuck Schumer about the discussion between Harry Reid and the White House on the opt out public option versus the triggered public option. It certainly sounds like the White House doesn’t trust Reid to count votes. And I don’t either.

Throughout the HRC HCR process, whenever I’ve read anything Chuck Schumer said about it, it’s made me wish that the Lord of Flatbush was running the Senate instead of Harry Reid. The guy may be a whore for AIPAC, financial companies, and probably all kinds of other scumbags, but he’s tough, he knows how to win elections, and I bet he’d know how to get what he wanted through the Senate.

FacebookTweetEmail
Previous Post: « This House is Not Rocking
Next Post: Off to the Rodeo »

Reader Interactions

170Comments

  1. 1.

    Xecky Gilchrist

    October 26, 2009 at 9:53 pm

    As a red-stater, I’m not too happy with opt-out. Though by now it’s better than I was expecting from the Senate.

  2. 2.

    General Winfield Stuck

    October 26, 2009 at 9:57 pm

    It certainly sounds like White House doesn’t trust Reid to count votes. And I don’t either.

    Only a fool would. But sooner or later, whether now or in conference, dems individually in the Senate are going to have to muster 60 votes to do this by regular order, if a PO is included. Might as well find that out sooner rather than later and then decide on whether to do it by the messy Recon. process.

    And though I am no longer a Harry Reid supporter, he was once a tough hombre as assistant leader and is thought of as the best vote counter in the Senate, and rulesmith. When he wants to be. His style as leader has been mushy at best in whipping votes, but he does know how.

  3. 3.

    cleek

    October 26, 2009 at 9:57 pm

    statewide ‘opt-out’ is truly a stupid idea. for that matter so were individual mandates.

    Democrats are useless.

  4. 4.

    mvr

    October 26, 2009 at 9:58 pm

    @Xecky Gilchrist:

    Once it the PO is in both Senate and House bills then the end game becomes where they meet in between and will the opt out be in or out. If Snowe wants influence she kind of has to vote for this version of the Senate bill, at least if otherwise the Ds will do it by themselves. And then at the next stage the pressure is still on her. (Of course this presupposes that Reid can in fact count the votes. Shumer obviously thinks that in this case he can.)

    So while I live in a red state somewhat likely to opt out, I think at this point the opt-out being in is good news.

  5. 5.

    John Cole

    October 26, 2009 at 9:59 pm

    All things considered, the Redskins are worse than Harry Reid. I think a challenge to the Redskins name by Native Americans might be successful based on the premise that native Americans deserve better than to be smeared with the stench of Snyder’s team.

  6. 6.

    beltane

    October 26, 2009 at 10:01 pm

    Schumer is a nasty SOB. His campaign against Al D’Amato was a thing of beauty. He would be a very effective majority leader.

  7. 7.

    Xecky Gilchrist

    October 26, 2009 at 10:02 pm

    @mvr: I’m inclined to agree with you. I will say that I prefer the opt-out thing to triggers.

    Welp, we’ll see what happens, I suppose.

  8. 8.

    DougL (frmrly: Conservatively Liberal)

    October 26, 2009 at 10:03 pm

    I trust Reid. I trust that he will find some way to fuck things up royally. He should get some company to create a line of lawn furniture with his name on it.

    Reid Lawn Chairs: They neatly fold up at the slightest pressure.

  9. 9.

    AhabTRuler

    October 26, 2009 at 10:04 pm

    @John Cole: Thanks for remiding me why I’m not watching the game!

  10. 10.

    WereBear

    October 26, 2009 at 10:04 pm

    So they got to have it for a year, and then states can opt-out?

    That has a fiendish symmetry to it. You know what the opt-out rate is… heck, it was banned as a way of compiling email lists.

    What are the chances of people letting it get taken away?

  11. 11.

    Ash Can

    October 26, 2009 at 10:05 pm

    As a red-stater, I’m not too happy with opt-out.

    Nobody expects you to be. Sadly, that’s the point. You and all of your fellow red-staters got the job dumped in your laps to beat the shit out of your reps until they either opt in or find another job.

    Ironically enough, if the opt-out does become the law of the land, you and your neighbors will hold ultimate responsibility for crippling the Republican Party beyond recognition. Not necessarily a bad thing in and of itself, the way Republicans are acting these days. But it’s undeniably unfortunate for the red-staters who need the services their so-called representatives are denying them.

  12. 12.

    kommrade reproductive vigor

    October 26, 2009 at 10:05 pm

    Throughout the HRC process

    HCR.

    The HCR process would get the wingnuts screaming an entirely different set of squawking points.

  13. 13.

    anonevent

    October 26, 2009 at 10:07 pm

    Being from Texas, I’m not entirely happy with it from the standpoint of Goodhair or Kay opting out if given the chance. But I do think that the Republicans need to be forced to have to stand behind their rhetoric on something more concrete than “I’m for torturing people I don’t know in order to prevent that ticking bomb from going off.”

  14. 14.

    ellaesther

    October 26, 2009 at 10:07 pm

    I’m sorry, even at this late date, when y’all write HRC, I have to go through thinking “Hillary Rodham Clinton? What does he mean “Throughout the Hillary Rodham Clinton pro – oh. I am a moron.”

    Every.single.fucking.time.

  15. 15.

    Max

    October 26, 2009 at 10:08 pm

    @ Doug J:

    HRC = Hillary Rodham Clinton or Human Rights Campaign

    I think you are looking for HCR = Health Care Reform.

    Not that any of that is important, we all know what is meant.

  16. 16.

    DougJ

    October 26, 2009 at 10:09 pm

    Thanks for the correction on HCR, people.

  17. 17.

    ellaesther

    October 26, 2009 at 10:11 pm

    @Max: So I wasn’t wrong! Just even more of a moron than I thought. Because I think I must be seeing “HRC” even when they write “HCR.”

    Sigh.

  18. 18.

    Robin G.

    October 26, 2009 at 10:11 pm

    I think the opt-out will damn well near guarantee that in 4 years’ time, 90% of the governor’s seats will be blue.

    There are downsides, but this is better than a trigger option, which was nothing more than a punt.

  19. 19.

    Lev

    October 26, 2009 at 10:16 pm

    I agree fully with this post. I think that Schumer’s best advantage as Leader, though, would be the 1/4 of the Senate that literally owe their jobs to him. He personally got fifteen Democrats elected to the Senate in two years. And he’s tough.

    This is a sentiment I keep seeing on left-leaning blogs, by the way. Liberals know that Schumer has some problems (Wall St., etc.), but they recognize leadership ability when they see it. I keep having this fantasy that after healthcare, Reid will step down as Majority Leader to focus on getting reelected in Nevada, and Schumer will take it from there. The rest of the Democratic agenda would have a much better chance.

  20. 20.

    Cain

    October 26, 2009 at 10:16 pm

    @mvr:

    So while I live in a red state somewhat likely to opt out, I think at this point the opt-out being in is good news.

    Think of it this way, it is likely the people who most need a public option are going to be in the south. We’re probably saving money since the high density of people who need health insurance are probably in those states. If a state opts out will they be forced to have health insurance?

    cain

  21. 21.

    DougL (frmrly: Conservatively Liberal)

    October 26, 2009 at 10:17 pm

    OT:
    HT to GoS:

    Why do Republicans propose legislation that removes freedom and name it in a way that sounds like they are protecting it?

    On Thursday, Sen. John McCain (R-AZ) became the Republican Party’s lead man on technology issues (and probably made Glenn Beck a happy man) by introducing the “Internet Freedom Act.” The legislation would prohibit the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) from making sure that Internet service providers don’t create a pay-for-play system where they could selectively block or slow content and applications. McCain called these net neutrality rules a “government takeover of the Internet.

    You can wrap a turd in all of the pretty paper and bows you want, even spray perfume on it, but it is still a turd and McCain just dropped a big one.

  22. 22.

    ds

    October 26, 2009 at 10:18 pm

    “I think the opt-out will damn well near guarantee that in 4 years’ time, 90% of the governor’s seats will be blue.”

    More likely Republican governors will loudly and violently condemn socialized medicine and the evils of a public option but then quietly let it go through, and then at election time brag about all they did to bring down health costs.

  23. 23.

    SiubhanDuinne

    October 26, 2009 at 10:19 pm

    Yeah, I live in a red state surrounded by even redder states. I am not happy about the state opt-out option.

    But I would sure love to see me some Chuck Schumerish majority leader action. He’d be ruthless, and very effective. Note I didn’t say “likeable.”

  24. 24.

    Lev

    October 26, 2009 at 10:20 pm

    @Robin G.: They need to require it to be an act of the state legislature, signed by the governor. I don’t know if Arnold would opt out of the public option in my state (I suspect not), but I don’t want him to have that ability.

  25. 25.

    Max

    October 26, 2009 at 10:21 pm

    @ellaesther: Nope, you are right on time.

    As an aside, I have noticed that on some democratic, but boy-do-we-hate-Obama-because-Hillary-should-be-president sites, (Talk Left, Open Left, My DD, America Blog, Taylor Marsh, etc.) the bloggers and commenters are really wrapping themselves in knots to still blame Obama for not supporting the public option, even though the Senate bill will include one. To say nothing of what passes in the House and thru Conference.

    I really think that a lot of those on the aforementioned sites would prefer HCR to fail so they can say “I told you Obama would be a failure”.

  26. 26.

    kommrade reproductive vigor

    October 26, 2009 at 10:22 pm

    I’m in a Violet Beauregard-blue state that already does a lot to the HIPs in line, so saying “Don’t worry, be happy,” seems kind of obnoxious. But, this:

    Being from Texas, I’m not entirely happy with it from the standpoint of Goodhair or Kay opting out if given the chance. But I do think that the Republicans need to be forced to have to stand behind their rhetoric on something more concrete than “I’m for torturing people I don’t know in order to prevent that ticking bomb from going off.”

    Also.

  27. 27.

    Lev

    October 26, 2009 at 10:23 pm

    @DougL (frmrly: Conservatively Liberal): You had me at “McCain…became the Republican Party’s lead man on technology”. Why would they do that? The guy doesn’t even know how to use a computer!

  28. 28.

    evie

    October 26, 2009 at 10:23 pm

    The Lord of Flatbush? Are you seriously wishing a fictional character was the Majority Leader of the Senate?

  29. 29.

    ds

    October 26, 2009 at 10:27 pm

    “Think of it this way, it is likely the people who most need a public option are going to be in the south. We’re probably saving money since the high density of people who need health insurance are probably in those states. If a state opts out will they be forced to have health insurance?”

    That’s something I hadn’t thought about. Southern states tend to be fatter and have higher rates of chronic diseases like diabetes. Which would mean that if they opt out of the public option, it would make the pool of people in the public option healthier.

    But I think the bill that’s going through has a risk adjustment mechanism, so plans will be taxed if they have a low risk pool of subscribers and subsidized if they have a riskier pool.

    So at least in theory the opt out won’t make the public option any cheaper.

  30. 30.

    Just Some Fuckhead

    October 26, 2009 at 10:27 pm

    I bet he’d know how to get what he wanted through the Senate.

    .. or at least what AIPAC wanted.

  31. 31.

    cleek

    October 26, 2009 at 10:28 pm

    I keep having this fantasy that after healthcare, Reid will step down as Majority Leader to focus on getting reelected in Nevada, and Schumer will take it from there.

    never.

    majority leader is elected. and who, besides authority worshiping “conservatives” would elect a leader who would make them toe the line ? not the Senate Dems, that’s for sure.

  32. 32.

    DougJ

    October 26, 2009 at 10:28 pm

    The Lord of Flatbush?

    Chuck Schumer is from Flatbush. I thought it was a catchy nickname.

  33. 33.

    WereBear

    October 26, 2009 at 10:29 pm

    @evie: Yes.

    Are you seriously wishing a fictional character was the Majority Leader of the Senate?

    I nominate Paul Bunyan.

  34. 34.

    SIA aka ScreamingInAtlanta

    October 26, 2009 at 10:30 pm

    @General Winfield Stuck: Maybe he’s desperate enough about reelection to get tough with the holdouts?

  35. 35.

    ellaesther

    October 26, 2009 at 10:31 pm

    @Max: It astonishes me how many people out there would rather be proved right, than see positive change. Truly, I continue to find this astonishing. (And you’ll note that the fact that HRC in fact works so doggedly for the candidate who bested her in the contest matters not a whit to a bunch of the folks who happen to be on our putative side of the political fence).

  36. 36.

    gwangung

    October 26, 2009 at 10:31 pm

    This is all encouraging, but we shouldn’t let up (at least, we shouldn’t if we live in swing areas; guess if Schumer’s your senator, you’re in good shape). It’s a marathon, not a dash, you have to do the whole 100 yds, yadda yadda yadda.

  37. 37.

    kay

    October 26, 2009 at 10:32 pm

    @Max:

    Except for Hillary Clinton, who said graciously (and truthfully) months ago that Obama has gotten further than she did. Months ago. True then, and truer now.

    Hillary Clinton is far more practical and hard-headed than her sappy admirers.

    She’ll be thrilled if we succeed at this, because, um, she actually wants Democrats to reform health care.

  38. 38.

    Xecky Gilchrist

    October 26, 2009 at 10:34 pm

    @WereBear: I nominate Hannibal Lecter. Intelligent, classy, and nobody would ever dare to fuck with him.

  39. 39.

    geg6

    October 26, 2009 at 10:37 pm

    I have to wonder if Harry Reid finally decided he needed SOMETHING to a) tout in a tough election where his poll numbers are making the shitter look golden or b) to be remembered for something other than being a spineless piece of wimpiness, perhaps one of the weakest Dem Senate leaders ever. Makes a pretty good ending to the story of Hapless Harry for the history books. And Reid is a seriously good vote counter when his weak old heart is into it.

  40. 40.

    cleek

    October 26, 2009 at 10:37 pm

    I really think that a lot of those on the aforementioned sites would prefer HCR to fail so they can say “I told you Obama would be a failure”.

    beware the ego of a PUMA scorned.

  41. 41.

    WereBear

    October 26, 2009 at 10:38 pm

    I do think the Secretary of State would haz a happy over reforming health care.

  42. 42.

    General Winfield Stuck

    October 26, 2009 at 10:39 pm

    @SIA aka ScreamingInAtlanta:

    Maybe he’s desperate enough about reelection to get tough with the holdouts?

    Yep. He’s has nothing to gain by not giving his best effort and everything to lose. The wingnuts in Nevada aren’t going to give him a break for scuttling HCR, they will just add incompetent to their 30 second attack ads. And the dems obviously aren’t going to be impressed by failure.

  43. 43.

    gbear

    October 26, 2009 at 10:41 pm

    I need to ask the age-old question:

    If Reid doesn’t have 60 votes, why not force the republicans to actually go thru with an anti-healthcare fillibuster? Let them dig a hole so deep they’ll never see daylight again. Permanent asshole status.

    Why isn’t this an option?

  44. 44.

    kommrade reproductive vigor

    October 26, 2009 at 10:43 pm

    @Lev: McCain is aware of all internet traditions.

  45. 45.

    Max

    October 26, 2009 at 10:44 pm

    @kay: I agree. I was never a fan of HRC, but I respect her and like what she’s doing as SOS.

    It’s interesting (and probably why I check into those sites) the Obama stories they like to focus on. Just last week, the Vets bill was signed and the Matthew Shepherd Hate Crimes passed the Senate and it went completely unmentioned.

    It would seem it didn’t fit their narrative.

  46. 46.

    geg6

    October 26, 2009 at 10:46 pm

    [email protected]: I agree with you. But ain’t gonna happen. Both Reid and Obama seem to have a pathological fear of a filibuster. I, personally think it will work about as spectacularly as shutting the government down did when that genius Gingrich got insulted by his airplane seating arrangement. Perhaps even more so given the tenor of the times.

  47. 47.

    Max

    October 26, 2009 at 10:46 pm

    Great post at the GOS, a list of pundits who declared the public option dead.

    Wankers.

    http://www.dailykos.com/story/2009/10/26/797441/-List-of-Pundits-who-Declared-the-P.O.-Dead-%28more-added%29

  48. 48.

    gwangung

    October 26, 2009 at 10:47 pm

    Just last week, the Vets bill was signed and the Matthew Shepherd Hate Crimes passed the Senate and it went completely unmentioned.

    Hm. Funny how that happened.

    Focusssing on the horse race and the daily news cycle tends to obscure things.

    So what has Obama done, hm?

  49. 49.

    kay

    October 26, 2009 at 10:49 pm

    @WereBear:

    I like to compare Hillary Clinton’s career post-Bill Clinton’s Presidency to the post-Bill Clinton career of Newt Gingrich.

    He’s…. what now, a pundit? Interesting how things play out.

  50. 50.

    soonergrunt

    October 26, 2009 at 10:50 pm

    @gbear: It is an option. It’s a great one for motivating people like you and me to go to the poles, but the concern, right or wrong, is that losing this vote to a Republican filibuster would possibly cost them the Senate.

    I don’t agree with them, but the blue-dogs have the priority of getting elected so that they can do–well, something that presumably isn’t offensive to anyone back home.

  51. 51.

    Brian J

    October 26, 2009 at 10:56 pm

    As a red-stater, I’m not too happy with opt-out. Though by now it’s better than I was expecting from the Senate.

    I don’t know about your particular situation, and it could be a lot worse than I imagine, but realistically, if we got the regulations they are talking about, subsidies up to 400 percent of the poverty line, and a public option with opt-out qualifications, I’d say that’s a decisive victory. (More on cost controls would be nice, but I’m willing to believe it’s more important to get the expectation in place and then worry about them.) Yes, it’d suck for someone who lives in a state that’s overrun with nutty legislators if these guys decided to opt out, but at the same time, you’d still be much further down the path than you’d otherwise be. If the public option is a success, and the states that don’t have it continue to have problems, the pressure is only going to increase to fix it. And that’s assuming it does little as a pressure in neighboring states to reduce costs, when in fact there’s speculation it could very well do that.

  52. 52.

    WereBear

    October 26, 2009 at 10:56 pm

    @kay:

    Heck of a good point. And I’ll stack up our ex-prezzes against theirs, anytime.

  53. 53.

    cleek

    October 26, 2009 at 10:57 pm

    If Reid doesn’t have 60 votes, why not force the republicans to actually go thru with an anti-healthcare fillibuster?

    if Reid doesn’t have 60 votes, then there’s at least one non-Republican holding things up. it’s not a GOP filibuster at that point.

  54. 54.

    kay

    October 26, 2009 at 10:59 pm

    @Max:

    Kennedy’s death got me thinking. I believe I now admire plodding along and doing what you can get done more than bold and brilliant flame-outs.

    Kennedy and HRC share(d) that quality. Live to fight another day, and all that.

    Ten years fighting to raise the minimum wage. Ten years. That’s how long it took.

  55. 55.

    Brian J

    October 26, 2009 at 11:01 pm

    Schumer is a nasty SOB. His campaign against Al D’Amato was a thing of beauty. He would be a very effective majority leader.

    He spoke at my sister’s high school graduation (and maybe mine, too; I don’t remember). I wanted to talk to him after, but he left before I could. He probably had a bunch of others to get to–you know, local schmoozing and all that. Plus, I believe he had a few hulking guys with sunglasses escorting him, so that might have made it difficult.

  56. 56.

    Xecky Gilchrist

    October 26, 2009 at 11:06 pm

    @Brian J: My own situation isn’t bad – I’m employed at a place with decent benefits and all; I’m more worried about the down-and-out folks here. Plus we’re all in danger of being one of the down-and-outers, you never know what’s around the corner. Knock wood.

    I live in Utah. We had a reasonable Republican governor not so long ago, but his replacement is a jerk and our legislature is a nightmare. I’m pretty sure we’ll opt out.

  57. 57.

    DougL (frmrly: Conservatively Liberal)

    October 26, 2009 at 11:08 pm

    @Lev: “The guy doesn’t even know how to use a computer!”

    What do you mean? Walnuts is the virile tech-savvy nerd of the Senate. Not only is he aware of all internet traditions, he has them tattooed on his scr0tum, with the alphabetical index on his taint. He is walking information technology!

    This also allows him to pull information right out of his ass.

  58. 58.

    dfd

    October 26, 2009 at 11:10 pm

    @DougL (frmrly: Conservatively Liberal): That was one mental image I could have gone a lifetime without.

  59. 59.

    gwangung

    October 26, 2009 at 11:11 pm

    @kay: Yeah. There are a LOT of things to be said for slow and methodical. Because if you have history on your side, you have economic and social forces that will help you keep the gains you win, and put you in position for further wins down the road. It’s a long term, riskier strategy (because who knows if you live that long or get re-elected), but your strategy is to be a relentless, tenacious bastard, instead of going for the flashy, splashy big win, that might get reversed.

    Lots of good things to be said for that.

  60. 60.

    DougL (frmrly: Conservatively Liberal)

    October 26, 2009 at 11:13 pm

    @dfd:

    Glad to have been of assistance! ;)

  61. 61.

    Will

    October 26, 2009 at 11:15 pm

    Chuck Schumer came out of nowhere to take down Al D’Amato. Nuff said.

  62. 62.

    Svensker

    October 26, 2009 at 11:16 pm

    @gbear:

    If Reid doesn’t have 60 votes, why not force the republicans to actually go thru with an anti-healthcare fillibuster? Let them dig a hole so deep they’ll never see daylight again. Permanent asshole status.
    Why isn’t this an option?

    I know, right? How come?

    And, also, Mark Sanchez ate a hot dog DURING a game! Can you believe it?

  63. 63.

    Will

    October 26, 2009 at 11:22 pm

    @Max:

    that was awesome–thanks

  64. 64.

    burnspbesq

    October 26, 2009 at 11:24 pm

    @DougL (frmrly: Conservatively Liberal):

    You can wrap a turd in all of the pretty paper and bows you want, even spray perfume on it, but it is still a turd and McCain just dropped is a big one.

    Fixed.

  65. 65.

    PeakVT

    October 26, 2009 at 11:27 pm

    McCain called these net neutrality rules a “government takeover of the Internet.

    Good FSM, that is stupid. And I can personally testify that it is stupid because I worked in the same government-funded server room where UUNet was founded.

  66. 66.

    Cheryl from Maryland

    October 26, 2009 at 11:31 pm

    I hate Daniel Snyder and Vinnie Cerruto. They suck. The name sucks, the team sucks, all Redskin football is now is suckitude.

  67. 67.

    tomvox1

    October 26, 2009 at 11:36 pm

    @Max:

    While you’re perusing the “wrong president” crowd, don’t forget to stroll on over to FDL for the real dope on how the trigger-happy Prez has always wanted to douche the public option:
    http://fdlaction.firedoglake.com/2009/10/26/the-history-of-the-conspiracy-to-link-obama-to-triggers/
    Your head just my pop off at how he’s just like GWB or Reagan or Bernie Madoff or something. Who knew?

  68. 68.

    Free At Last

    October 26, 2009 at 11:37 pm

    @Brian J: Schumer speaks at CCNY graduation every year – uninvited!

  69. 69.

    Calming Influence

    October 26, 2009 at 11:39 pm

    @beltane:
    I voted in that one. Green and Ferraro took the heat early on when Schumer had roughly zero name recognition, then Schumer came at D’Amato like Sony Liston with a baseball bat.

    It was a beautiful thing.

  70. 70.

    TenguPhule

    October 26, 2009 at 11:39 pm

    If Reid doesn’t have 60 votes, why not force the republicans to actually go thru with an anti-healthcare fillibuster?

    Harry Chickenfucker Reid never met a Republican secret hold he didn’t like or a Democrat hold he didn’t shit on.

  71. 71.

    Calming Influence

    October 26, 2009 at 11:41 pm

    Sorry, Sonny…

  72. 72.

    TenguPhule

    October 26, 2009 at 11:41 pm

    Both Reid and Obama seem to have a pathological fear of a filibuster.

    No, it’s just that Harry goatballer Reid believes there are two kinds of rules in the Senate.

    One for Republicans to do whatever the fuck they want.

    And one for Democrats that mandates Republicans be part of it.

  73. 73.

    jeffreyw

    October 26, 2009 at 11:42 pm

    Whoa, what have I missed, watched a string of dvr’d stuff, mad men, dexter, doll house, lawn order. Mad men was great again, dexter not bad, doll house is really rockin with tofer gettin all moral and shit. lawn order sucked.

  74. 74.

    Geeno

    October 26, 2009 at 11:48 pm

    @DougL (frmrly: Conservatively Liberal):
    I LOL’d to the point of gagging

  75. 75.

    Max

    October 26, 2009 at 11:48 pm

    @tomvox1: Sweet baby jesus. Yep, that’s them.

  76. 76.

    Ron

    October 26, 2009 at 11:49 pm

    I just have to wonder what kind of bribes and/or threats are being made right now to Ben Nelson and Blanche Lincoln to prevent them from joining a GOP filibuster. I’d like to believe Reid wouldn’t put this out there without having the votes but both of them have remained awfully coy about what they will do.

  77. 77.

    jeffreyw

    October 26, 2009 at 11:51 pm

    And where’s asiangrrlMN? I have pr0n for her.

  78. 78.

    patrick

    October 26, 2009 at 11:53 pm

    When Harry Reid is showing more political nerve than the president, it is time for the president to take a long look it the mirror.

  79. 79.

    Geeno

    October 26, 2009 at 11:54 pm

    @jeffreyw:
    No, you want pr0n of her… leave the rest of us out of it.

  80. 80.

    burnspbesq

    October 26, 2009 at 11:54 pm

    @Ron:

    I just have to wonder what kind of bribes and/or threats are being made right now to Ben Nelson and Blanche Lincoln to prevent them from joining a GOP filibuster.

    Whatever it takes. This is too important to too many people for a just and righteous loss to be an acceptable outcome.

  81. 81.

    Max

    October 26, 2009 at 11:57 pm

    @patrick: Explain your comment please.

    Do you think that today’s announce from Reid was contrary to the tons of meetings and phone calls that Obama and his senior level people have had with members of congress?

    Am I to understand that you think that Obama told Reid not to go forward with the public option and Reid said “screw you”?

    I’m not being entirely snarky, I really am curious.

  82. 82.

    Fern

    October 26, 2009 at 11:58 pm

    @tomvox1:

    I used to read there daily. No more. They are letting the best be the enemy of the good.

  83. 83.

    Max

    October 27, 2009 at 12:03 am

    @ Patrick – I need to add to my question to you….

    Organizing for America did a huge push for the public option. Multi-city tour, phone call and letter writing round-up, rallies, etc.

    Correct me if I’m wrong, but isn’t OFA the group that was Obama For America and don’t they still serve at the pleasure of the president and take direction from the White House?

  84. 84.

    jeffreyw

    October 27, 2009 at 12:03 am

    @Geeno: Hah! No dumplins for you!

  85. 85.

    patrick

    October 27, 2009 at 12:04 am

    @Max
    “As Schumer explains it, the disagreement between the White House and Senate wasn’t substantive so much as it was tactical: The White House had its doubts that Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid could really get 60 votes for a public option with an opt out for states.”

    1. I think anything less than what Reid is going for is a significant policy loss.
    2. My reading of Schumer was that Obama was willing to settle for less to get Snowe in the fold.
    3. I don’t think Reid knows for sure what Nelson and Landrieu will do when the pressure is on, but is willing to press for their vote and take a chance on a political loss for significant policy gain.
    4. Yes, Reid is showing more balls than Obama. Just my opinion.

  86. 86.

    TenguPhule

    October 27, 2009 at 12:07 am

    When Harry Reid is showing more political nerve than the president, it is time for the president to take a long look it the mirror.

    Fortunately for all concerned, that has yet to happen.

  87. 87.

    Jon H

    October 27, 2009 at 12:10 am

    I don’t understand why they insisted on picking Reid instead of somebody in a fucking safe seat.

  88. 88.

    General Winfield Stuck

    October 27, 2009 at 12:14 am

    . Yes, Reid is showing more balls than Obama.

    Yea, That must be it.

    sigh

  89. 89.

    MNPundit

    October 27, 2009 at 12:15 am

    I welcome you to Minnesota. Pawlenty is declaring he will opt-out, but as long as the legislature has a role it is simply not going to happen. DFL near-supermajorities will not allow it.

  90. 90.

    Jean

    October 27, 2009 at 12:15 am

    @Fern: I too used to read FDL daily and never go there anymore.

    Virginia is so depressing right now (with 2 or possibly 3 right wingers on the horizon) that I am hoping for one big national win on healthcare.

  91. 91.

    Brick Oven Bill

    October 27, 2009 at 12:17 am

    Schumer does not play well West of the Hudson DougJ. Let us again consider Plato’s four understandings. These came about after Socrates rambled on for a long time:

    First, there is certainty;

    Second, mathematics gives us the power of perception;

    Third, though the physical applications of mathematics may change, the thoughts themselves are eternal and are in another realm of existence;

    And fourth, mathematics is thought and, therefore, it is eternal and can be known by all;

    Let us, 5000 years after the Leap, consider the Truth of Schumer’s intent.

    One. It is good to reserve resources for the ones actively participating in the economy, namely those between 15 and 65 years of age, if years are the metric.

    Two. In an efficient society, those over 65 would be ended, based on the metric of years.

    Three. This is what Hilter would have wanted, and why we should encourage, rather than tax, smoking.

    Four. Stupid people really should not be pushing for this as, once we assign value to age, soon after, we will surely assign value to intelligence and productivity.

    Five. Currently, black people with an SAT score of 1000 have parents with an income of $200,000+. A white person with an SAT score has parents averaging $40,000.

    This data is from a group calling themselves Blacks in Higher Education. Make your own judgment about the wisdom of publishing that data.

  92. 92.

    gwangung

    October 27, 2009 at 12:17 am

    @patrick: This supposes this is a one-and-done event, with a short term horizon.

    I’m not so sure this is the correct way to look at it. It is certainly not the only way to look at it.

  93. 93.

    MNPundit

    October 27, 2009 at 12:18 am

    @patrick: Nelson seems to be trying to grab credit for this, so it seems he is unlikely to oppose it. He can always claim “It was MY committee bill that was the foundation!”

    Landrieu is the difficult one but if Bayh is out of the picture (and most of the counts I’ve seen say he is) Landrieu is going to stand alone.

    The issue here is that the progressives did this. Not Obama. This is because Obama realized that with the public option as currently articulated by Reid, he has a chance to get to 60 but with Snowe’s non-trigger, forget about 61. He wouldn’t even get to 58. So probability.

    The progressives forced his hand.

  94. 94.

    Mark S.

    October 27, 2009 at 12:20 am

    @patrick:

    I don’t think Reid knows for sure what Nelson and Landrieu will do when the pressure is on, but is willing to press for their vote and take a chance on a political loss for significant policy gain.

    I’m not a huge fan of Reid, but I don’t think he’s that stupid. He wouldn’t go to the floor with this unless he was pretty damn sure he has 60 votes. Schumer seems to be saying the same thing in the TPM article DougJ linked.

    I also liked this comment Schumer made: “I think that, to many many people in the caucus…the trigger was never very attractive. I think it was Jay Rockefeller that said whenever you have the trigger, it never goes into effect.” That is why I never liked the trigger and thought it would be worthless.

  95. 95.

    r€nato

    October 27, 2009 at 12:21 am

    I live in a reddish-purple state, and while I am not excited by the idea of the morons in our GOP-controlled Legislature opting out, I also think that there would be a tremendous backlash against a successful opt-out, and it might be just what the doctor ordered to get more and better Democrats in charge.

    That plus the fact that our state is broke and getting broker. State parks are close to a total shutdown.

    This is a big win folks. Be happy. We’re going to get a public option and the Republicans are going to convince themselves that running against it will be their ticket to power.

    Once again, they’ll be fooling themselves.

  96. 96.

    DougL (frmrly: Conservatively Liberal)

    October 27, 2009 at 12:22 am

    @patrick:

    IMO, people who think the president should be out in front (seen as leading) on this issue are not thinking about the fact that if he did then HE would be the focus of everything. By denying the press/repugs this ‘weapon’ he was able to keep the focus on the legislative branch, you know, the people who are supposed to come up with something for the president to sign. He has made it clear as he can that he is for a public option but he is not going to let the legislature and press use him as a distraction.

    Obama can loudly call for whatever he wants and become the story everyone focuses on or he can quietly work in the background to try and make things happen at the legislative level.

  97. 97.

    JenJen

    October 27, 2009 at 12:23 am

    That was a great read. So is (my!) Senator Sherrod Brown’s retelling of what was going on behind the scenes with Reid, in this interview with Ezra Klein:

    An interview with Sherrod Brown: Reid listened to his Senators

  98. 98.

    r€nato

    October 27, 2009 at 12:24 am

    …I’m curious… if a state opts out of the public option… the citizens of that state still have to pay whatever new taxes come with it, yes?

    And whatever Medicare cuts there are, will be borne by all providers whether or not the state in question opts out, yes?

    I mean, if the voters are already paying for public option, their politicians would be idiots to opt out, right?

  99. 99.

    General Winfield Stuck

    October 27, 2009 at 12:25 am

    I like Jane Hamsher, but she stuck her foot in her mouth bigtime, and not the first time, with buying into the blather over Obama’s alleged selling out for Snowe’s vote.

    And now she’s listed all the other knucklehead pearl clutchers and wankers as her defense for being a hysteric.

    I think Obama certainly has been hoping to get some bi-partisan support, which is understandable, but I seriously doubt he’d consider a single gooper vote as passing for bi-partisan. Further that the WH just wanted to get something passed out of the Senate and deal with adding a PO in conference and take it from there. Just my opinion.

  100. 100.

    Max

    October 27, 2009 at 12:25 am

    Obama can loudly call for whatever he wants and become the story everyone focuses on or he can quietly work in the background to try and make things happen at the legislative level.

    This exactly.

  101. 101.

    gwangung

    October 27, 2009 at 12:25 am

    The progressives forced his hand.

    This….is vastly amusing.

    Y’all don’t think a community organizer, steeped in bottom up collective action, who got himself elected President of the United States doesn’t realize this?

    Heh. Heh heh. Heh heh heh heh heh.

    I’m going to be chuckling about this for the rest of the week.

  102. 102.

    General Winfield Stuck

    October 27, 2009 at 12:31 am

    @gwangung:

    The progressives forced his hand.

    It’s a win/win always with this conclusion. Scream and holler about Obama fail without any real evidence, and when he doesn’t fail, claim it’s because of the screaming and hollering.

    And if by chance he does fail, then it’s “see we told ya so”

  103. 103.

    General Winfield Stuck

    October 27, 2009 at 12:33 am

    And that quote is not from gwandung, sorry. My kingdom for edit function.

  104. 104.

    r€nato

    October 27, 2009 at 12:34 am

    @General Winfield Stuck:

    I pretty much can’t stand Hamsher… precisely because she’s so prone to fly off the handle. Chick needs anger management classes.

  105. 105.

    patrick

    October 27, 2009 at 12:34 am

    @gwangung

    Well, I am not sure what I said supposes this is a one-and-done event. I think Reid may be considering going for the stronger bill first, and if it doesn’t work water it down later. However, once the Repubs realize that the Dems couldn’t get something thru, they (actually her — Snowe) will be even tougher to deal with. So, I think that Reid would pay a price for not getting this through, and is taking something of a chance.
    As for whether read can really count votes or not, Rahm seems to think not and Schumer seems to think he can. We will see.
    And MNPundit — yeah, I had forgotten that about Nelson, but there was still another Senator on the fence whose name I cannot of right now.

  106. 106.

    cleek

    October 27, 2009 at 12:37 am

    Hamsher = Lieberman blackface pic. that’s all i need to know about her.

  107. 107.

    Neurovore

    October 27, 2009 at 12:39 am

    I did not have time to read through all of the commentary here, so forgive me if this question has already been asked…

    Does anybody know what the prevailing sentiment is regarding people who already have health insurance through their employer? If they have shitty insurance, will they be able to choose the public health plan instead if they are in an “opt in” state?

  108. 108.

    Max

    October 27, 2009 at 12:40 am

    @patrick: Or perhaps, Obama can see what the Nevada polls are saying and that the meme is that Harry Reid is perceived as weak and this is an opportunity to boost Harry’s street cred.

    I believe that Obama is a different kind of politician in that he truly doesn’t care about taking credit, but instead wants to make good policy.

    For example, we’ve killed how many high value AQ/Taliban targets and he has taken credit for what percentage?

    Remember the Somali pirates? GWB would still be running self-congratulatory ads on that one.

    But then again, according to the usual suspects, I am an “O-bot”

  109. 109.

    Max

    October 27, 2009 at 12:42 am

    @Max:

    Sorry, one last thing and I don’t know if its true, but I read somewhere that the Canadian system started as an opt-out program.

    Does anyone know if that is true?

  110. 110.

    Mr Furious

    October 27, 2009 at 12:44 am

    @Brick Oven Bill:

    Five. Currently, black people with an SAT score of 1000 have parents with an income of $200,000+. A white person with an SAT score has parents averaging $40,000…. This data is from a group calling themselves Blacks in Higher Education. Make your own judgment about the wisdom of publishing that data.

    Here’s my judgment of your needing to wedge a completely unrelated race issue into a thread on vote-counting health care reform…

    You’re a fucking asshole.

  111. 111.

    Batocchio

    October 27, 2009 at 12:45 am

    I really want another LBJ working the Senate, but I think Schumer would be a big step up. He’s somewhat corrupt, and a son of a bitch, but he’d be (more of) our son of a bitch! I kept hearing the Reid took on the mob – but he hasn’t done that in the Senate to date, and that’s pretty much how the Dems need to treat the Republicans.

  112. 112.

    Mr Furious

    October 27, 2009 at 12:47 am

    @Neurovore: My understanding is no. But I’d be happy to be proven wrong, since my insurance is fucking awful AND expensive.

  113. 113.

    General Winfield Stuck

    October 27, 2009 at 12:47 am

    gwan(d)ung

    should be gwangung

  114. 114.

    r€nato

    October 27, 2009 at 12:47 am

    @cleek: pretty much.

  115. 115.

    gwangung

    October 27, 2009 at 12:48 am

    @patrick: Yeah, I definitely think you’re approaching the entire issue as a one-shot, never to be repeated kind of event.

    Which is true—but I think the one-shot event is that the political process has decided the current system of health care is not working and we need to change. THAT was the key decision that had to be made–the biggest decision that had to come down to point. Everything else after that is definitely negotiable and is susceptible to a gradualist approach.

    A lot of the stuff people are worried over are not things that are one shot–they can brought up again, and they are something that can be implemented. We’re talking the long term here, and extending far beyond the next election cycle. That’s a viewpoint that’s been absent from politics for quite some time, and it’s something people should be catching themselves on. Policy extends beyond the daily news cycle an d the next election–so we, as voters, and as activists, should plan on those kind of time frames.

  116. 116.

    patrick

    October 27, 2009 at 12:51 am

    @“Max”

    If he is that good and Schumer is in on it, my hat is off to him.

  117. 117.

    gwangung

    October 27, 2009 at 12:53 am

    @General Winfield Stuck: Gwangung. God of warriors, writers and prostitutes. And don’t you forget it.

  118. 118.

    shoutingattherain

    October 27, 2009 at 12:55 am

    @Max:

    For example, we’ve killed how many high value AQ/Taliban targets and he has taken credit for what percentage?

    Actually to the exact numbers, it’s all very hushhush:

    http://cryptome.org/0001/predator-war.htm

  119. 119.

    Brick Oven Bill

    October 27, 2009 at 12:55 am

    Christ, moderation.

    Equalizing resources has everything to do with equalizing outcomes Mr. Furious. One cannot deny the outcome discrepancies of the various arriving demographics. Arriving Asians make more money than established Europeans.

    Social_ism equals racism.

  120. 120.

    General Winfield Stuck

    October 27, 2009 at 12:58 am

    @gwangung:

    LOL.

  121. 121.

    Max

    October 27, 2009 at 12:59 am

    @shoutingattherain: My point exactly.

    Bush / Cheney would not only put out a press release on everything, on slow days, they would just make shit up.

  122. 122.

    TenguPhule

    October 27, 2009 at 1:00 am

    One cannot deny the outcome discrepancies of the various arriving demographics.

    One can’t deny that BOB wastes many words to say “I hate n*ggers.”

  123. 123.

    Brick Oven Bill

    October 27, 2009 at 1:03 am

    I value Talent and Virtue TheguPhule. These are time honored traits.

  124. 124.

    TenguPhule

    October 27, 2009 at 1:04 am

    I value Talent and Virtue

    And yet possess neither.

    Truly Zen.

  125. 125.

    Brick Oven Bill

    October 27, 2009 at 1:07 am

    Tell that to your mom.

  126. 126.

    Will

    October 27, 2009 at 1:09 am

    @General Winfield Stuck:

    I couldn’t agree more. She has become so damn invested in the idea of Obama selling out the public option, when he goes ahead and DOESN’T, she just calls it bullshit. What the hell?

  127. 127.

    JenJen

    October 27, 2009 at 1:15 am

    @General Winfield Stuck: Thank you, thank you, and thank you.

  128. 128.

    Mr Furious

    October 27, 2009 at 1:17 am

    @TenguPhule: Don’t forget Asians.

  129. 129.

    Mr Furious

    October 27, 2009 at 1:19 am

    @Brick Oven Bill:

    One cannot deny the outcome discrepancies of the various arriving demographics.

    You certainly seem capable of denying the discrepancies between a post on votes and health care and using it as a forum for your race-based garbage.

  130. 130.

    Mr Furious

    October 27, 2009 at 1:19 am

    @Brick Oven Bill:

    One cannot deny the outcome discrepancies of the various arriving demographics.

    You certainly seem capable of denying the discrepancies between a post on votes and health care and using it as a forum for your race-based garbage.

  131. 131.

    Mr Furious

    October 27, 2009 at 1:20 am

    wtf?

  132. 132.

    Will

    October 27, 2009 at 1:23 am

    @Mr Furious:

    This is just a performance.

  133. 133.

    Colette

    October 27, 2009 at 1:23 am

    BoB’s pie sure sounds good. Mmmm, pie.

  134. 134.

    arguingwithsignposts

    October 27, 2009 at 1:31 am

    Just finished watching “Ghandi” on Netflix. Damn, what we couldn’t do with a Ghandi to lead the U.S. I’m not saying Obama isn’t better than the alternative, but … damn, that was a leader.

  135. 135.

    Steeplejack

    October 27, 2009 at 2:00 am

    @arguingwithsignposts:

    C’mon, Gandhi was a pussy. That would be the reaction of 60-70 percent of the population.

    Look at how lightly regarded Martin Luther King is even now, and he’s the closest thing we’ve had to a Gandhi in the last 50 years.

  136. 136.

    Steeplejack

    October 27, 2009 at 2:02 am

    @Steeplejack:

    Oops, moderation. The p-word?

    Let me see if I can clean it up:

    @arguingwithsignposts:
    __
    C’mon, Gandhi was a p***y. That would be the reaction of 60-70 percent of the population.
    __
    Look at how lightly regarded Martin Luther King is even now, and he’s the closest thing we’ve had to a Gandhi in the last 50 years.

    Better?

  137. 137.

    freelancer (itouch)

    October 27, 2009 at 2:08 am

    @arguingwithsignposts:
    no doubt.

    While I applaud schumer for his bulldog nature on this issue alone, I can’t help but not forget that young Charles is a principle free, opportunistic publicity whore. If wishes were ponies, I would like Al Franken as majority leader. Him or feingold. Other than that, capital F, FUCK the senate.

  138. 138.

    Martin

    October 27, 2009 at 2:10 am

    The progressives forced his hand.

    Actually, I personally forced his hand through my letter writing campaign and calls.

    Prove me wrong.

  139. 139.

    Martin

    October 27, 2009 at 2:14 am

    Want to know why journalists today suck? Here’s why.

  140. 140.

    Cain

    October 27, 2009 at 2:32 am

    @Brick Oven Bill:
    Did you vote for Bitsy? how come you never pick any philosophers like in this century? Socrates is so.. like old, dude. You know… like in B.C. or something like that right? So to change the topic, your boss has like two desks right? Which one does he keep the liquor in?

    cain

  141. 141.

    arguingwithsignposts

    October 27, 2009 at 2:33 am

    @Steeplejack:

    I was also thinking of MLK when I wrote that. But imagine if we had one? We’d be rockin’, I think. Imagine if the U.S. went all pacifist on everyone’s ass. Of course, that doesn’t serve the corporate interests, so they’ll all be assassinated somehow.

  142. 142.

    Cain

    October 27, 2009 at 2:43 am

    @arguingwithsignposts:

    Just finished watching “Ghandi” on Netflix. Damn, what we couldn’t do with a Ghandi to lead the U.S. I’m not saying Obama isn’t better than the alternative, but … damn, that was a leader.

    The correct spelling is “Gandhi”. Thanks.

    cain

  143. 143.

    Cain

    October 27, 2009 at 2:46 am

    @Steeplejack:

    C’mon, Gandhi was a pussy. That would be the reaction of 60-70 percent of the population.

    Meh. I wouldn’t say he was a pussy. He certainly one uncompromising son of a bitch that’s for sure. You would have beat the shit out of him and he’d still resist you till you cut his throat. That isn’t a pussy in my book. That he can inspire others to do the same is something. If you consider how fast a mob can get started in that part of the world, it’s amazing he could organize a country like that.

    cain

  144. 144.

    arguingwithsignposts

    October 27, 2009 at 2:46 am

    @Cain:

    noted. sorry for the misspelling. Gandhi rocks.

  145. 145.

    Cain

    October 27, 2009 at 2:47 am

    @arguingwithsignposts:

    noted. sorry for the misspelling. Gandhi rocks.

    No worries, it’s a common mispelling as it sounds like Ghandi. :-)

    cain

  146. 146.

    TenguPhule

    October 27, 2009 at 2:48 am

    NSFW: Sora no otoshimono ep 4: The Return.

    This has been tonight’s invasion of BJ’s Japanese Overlords.

  147. 147.

    Steeplejack

    October 27, 2009 at 2:52 am

    @arguingwithsignposts:

    But imagine if we had one? We’d be rockin’, I think.

    Dude, we had one. And we were rocking for a while. (The civil rights movement cannot be underestimated.) And, yeah, he did get assassinated somehow.

  148. 148.

    2th&nayle

    October 27, 2009 at 3:22 am

    It wasn’t by mistake the MLK studied Gandhi’s non-violent approach to bringing about social and political change.

  149. 149.

    nikita

    October 27, 2009 at 3:30 am

    @DougJ,

    “…let it flow now mama…”

    Nice thread title. Loved that song.

  150. 150.

    Ailuridae

    October 27, 2009 at 3:37 am

    I think the “opt out” was the best outcome within political possibility once they started from the framing they did. Single payer, which should have been the left’s starting point was off the table and totally irrelevant non-solutions from the Republicans (malpractice reform, competition across state lines) were treated as a viable “right pole”. So, from where the Dems (the White House and the Senate Dems) started they didn’t give up much and actually “won” the negotiation. Its imperfect but, much as Social Security was imperfect on first passage and improved so can this health care reform. The answers to why they won the negotiation are not through guile or tactics but largely structural.

    1. They were correct. American health care delivery desperately needed reform, the Republicans made no attempts to find a solution palatable to their base (again, structural as no system of tax cuts and deregulation addresses the issue) so the right-center solution the Democrats proposed carried the day.
    2. Public sentiment about health care was on their side.
    3. Whereas traditional media destroyed previous attempts to reform health care, the structural changes in media prevented it this time. Almost everything that Hiatt, Samuelson, Connelly et al attempted at the WaPo was decimated by Ezra Klein’s even-handed fact based analysis.

    As for the hand wringing about the opt out clause and red states, how many states turned down the stimulus funds again? And in those states where the primadonna 2012 Republican Presidentials hopefuls held the governor’s seat what was the reaction from the Republican led legislatures?

    Medicaid which was more opt in than opt out (and a much more problematic program than the PO*) was universally adopted within 17 years (regressive AZ being the last to do so in 1982) and was offered to a huge portion of Americans immediately (around 78%) as the most populous states got in early. In short, there is go to be very, very broad adoption of the public option and very few states will opt out and those that do will likely not do so for long.

    * The PO will be an “us” program rather than a “them” program and will be wildly popular a la Medicare and Social Security (and contrasted to welfare, Medicaid, food stamps etc which Reagan effectively demonized).

  151. 151.

    freelancer (itouch)

    October 27, 2009 at 3:42 am

    @Steeplejack:

    I completely understand where you’re coming from with respect to JFK. I’m 27 years old and yet, the man is one of my greatest political heroes. The I have a dream speech and the civil rights act happened after the momentum of Camelot.

    We’ve grown since then and the people who have filled the void for the progressive, central voice of a free democratic America have disappointed, meagerly yet proudly represented by individuals like Rachel maddow and Andrew Bachevich. Even given admirable voices as these, we have no Gandhi. Obama is the closest thing and he’s a centrist.

    I want a radical on my side, screaming for social justice, that one day, my grandson might drive me down a street bearing his or her name. Or have the day off, or a an impromptu family photo in front of their monument.

    I want a progressive hero to unabashedly tell my kids about. There were black women that wept last November because they never thought that in their lifetime they’d see someone like Obama as president. I want that. Obama’s my guy, but I want someone outside the strings of the political infrastructure to speak for me. I want the impossible irresistible figure.

    In short, I want a pony on mount rushmore. Who can deliver?

  152. 152.

    hamletta

    October 27, 2009 at 3:46 am

    What if? What if we had LBJ and Gandhi and MLK around?

    So fucking what? We don’t. [Insert Rumsfeld paraphrase here]

    We’re going to get something halfway decent, which is what Medicare was in its infancy. It won’t help the poor bastards who are hanging on by a thread right now, but it’ll help a lot of people in the future, and that’s important.

    Also important is that it’ll save our country from bankrupting itself, which is what would happen if we kept doing what we’ve been doing. I’ll stop there.

  153. 153.

    hamletta

    October 27, 2009 at 3:49 am

    In short, I want a pony on mount rushmore. Who can deliver?

    Saddle up, emo boy.

  154. 154.

    2th&nayle

    October 27, 2009 at 4:10 am

    @freelancer (itouch): Gotta go along with hamletta on this one Lance. I agree with you that this country needs a real firebrand to lead the charge for the social and economic change. Sounds like you’ve got the fever for the job. It’s “Boots in Saddles” time, Buck! What you say you want won’t come about be itself! Sic ’em!

  155. 155.

    ironranger

    October 27, 2009 at 6:25 am

    I don’t know why I turn on Morning Joe. Scarborough makes me want to throw stuff at the tv. I think that he is itching to run for office again.

  156. 156.

    DougL (frmrly: Conservatively Liberal)

    October 27, 2009 at 7:38 am

    I don’t know why I turn on Morning Joe Choad. Scarborough makes me want to throw stuff at the tv up. I think that he is itching to run for find a dead intern in his office again.

    Fix’t.

  157. 157.

    Leelee for Obama

    October 27, 2009 at 7:47 am

    If the opt-out provision must allow the PO to be tried for a reasonable time, perhaps 2 or 3 years, and then only be exercised by referendum, I think it would be big-D Democracy at it’s finest and would lead to the PO being the norm. Red-staters can be ideologues, it’s true, but they also don’t want to pay more than they have to to have what they want, and need. Just my 2 cents. If Floriduh were to opt out, I would be likely to move, as would others, I’m sure, and the state is already shedding residents for the first time in decades. The pols will figure that out, post-haste.

  158. 158.

    ironranger

    October 27, 2009 at 7:52 am

    @DougL (frmrly: Conservatively Liberal):
    Heh.

  159. 159.

    DougL (frmrly: Conservatively Liberal)

    October 27, 2009 at 8:00 am

    @ironranger:

    Heh indeedy. :)

  160. 160.

    Cerberus

    October 27, 2009 at 9:07 am

    On progressives forcing hands, their insistence on reform that actually in some way reforms things did indeed force certain outcomes to be necessary and did indeed help keep focus on certain outcomes in the face of a hostile press drunk on the toxin of bipartisanship.

    This is indeed true.

    Also true, however, is that Obama is grateful for that, seeing as, as he has often stated, he was strongly in favor of the public option and health care reform that works.

    The progressive wing should continue to grow in strength as I imagine Obama will be grateful to get better bills passed as they will invariably be closer to his desires rather than what he will settle for.

    And also fellow progressives and liberals, the main problem is the senate conservadems and the remaining republicans and not in that order. The president is trying to make the president once again a figurehead in charge of the executive branch rather than god-king emperor. It may feel easier to blame one man than face the inherent fucked-uppedness of our modern Senate structure, but that’s what the big problem is and that problem will exist no matter what we say to Obama. Sure, pressure him as you do the others, but we can’t change what is broken without coming to recognize that important fact.

  161. 161.

    tomvox1

    October 27, 2009 at 9:10 am

    @General Winfield Stuck:

    I like Jane Hamsher, but she stuck her foot in her mouth bigtime, and not the first time, with buying into the blather over Obama’s alleged selling out for Snowe’s vote.

    And now she’s listed all the other knucklehead pearl clutchers and wankers as her defense for being a hysteric.

    It is all about Hamsher’s E G O, IMO. She wants to “own” Obama’s success and she doesn’t. That and the fact that nothing is ever pure enough for her. She’s not so different from the extremists on the Right who would rather have a purity test than win elections & govern. Governing in a democracy is compromise & that drives idealists like Hamsher nuts. She should try to get a seat on her local community board sometime and see how that goes…

  162. 162.

    Violet

    October 27, 2009 at 9:16 am

    Red state resident here…hate what the opt out option is going to do to residents of my state (and others) assuming the Govs really do opt out. But politically I think it’s the best solution for now. And it has the bonus of making the idiot red state leaders take a stand. That’ll bring lots of popcorn-worthy moments, no doubt. And if it scr3ws over the people of various red states in the short term, it’ll hopefully hasten the demise of the idiot conservatives.

  163. 163.

    Kirk Spencer

    October 27, 2009 at 9:22 am

    I’ve been trying to reserve judgment till I see the bill. There are too many short-hand phrases that mean, well, too many things.

    Opt-out, for example. Is it going to be anticipatory or reactionary – that is, will the states be able to opt out before or after the bill takes effect? Will it be governor, legislature, public referendum, or some combination that is required to reject it?

    For that matter, which public option? Everyone, or only about half those who don’t have any? If you’re on a plan can you jump (yes, no, sometimes)? When does it start – 2010 or 2014 or something between?

    All of these have been in some of the bills discussed.

    Now I know even this isn’t going to be the final bill. At some point the House bill is going to meet it, and the final that comes out of the joint conference will be a mashup of the two. But at this point I’ve no certainty of what the bounds might be. I might be dreading something, or I might know that even the worst possible (because they can’t add new stuff) is acceptable.

    I want to see what the Senate has wrought before I get excited.

  164. 164.

    parksideq

    October 27, 2009 at 10:10 am

    There were black women that wept last November because they never thought that in their lifetime they’d see someone like Obama as president.

    Hell, I’m a black man, and I cried last November, for the exact same reason. And I’m only 24; how cynical is it that I didn’t imagine that a black man would get elected POTUS in my lifetime?

    Back on topic, as much as I’m unsure about Reid’s whip count, someone as wimpy as he is wouldn’t stick his neck out so far for a public option stronger than the Snowe trigger without having certitude of its passing a filibuster. We’ll see if his gamble pays off.

    As far as Obama is concerned, I don’t see why people are up in arms about the president wanting the legislature to, you know, legislate. Sure, he can be an advocate, but I think he’s doing the right thing by letting Congress shape the details of the bill.

  165. 165.

    slag

    October 27, 2009 at 10:11 am

    TPM has been getting a lot of good seemingly exclusive interviews lately. This makes me happy and wonder if Democrats are finally figuring out how to make the most of their resources.

  166. 166.

    gwangung

    October 27, 2009 at 10:39 am

    As far as Obama is concerned, I don’t see why people are up in arms about the president wanting the legislature to, you know, legislate. Sure, he can be an advocate, but I think he’s doing the right thing by letting Congress shape the details of the bill.

    Tell me again why this would be a bad thing. He makes legislators own the resulting bill. And the opposition comes down on the legislators—but the only EFFECTIVE opposition is from voters in that legislator’s constituency. Beck, Limbaugh, et al can whip up a storm against the legislator, but that’s just as likely to create a counter-reaction against them, in favor of one of their own.

  167. 167.

    sparky

    October 27, 2009 at 11:37 am

    @gwangung: sorry, but i disagree. a blizzard of money is pretty damn important.

    as for this particular event, as usual the devil will be in the details. we shall see.

    ps: no way was this handled this way on purpose–this idea could have been floated months ago but wasn’t. i’m glad someone finally convinced the powers that be it was the way to go, but ascribing this to some master plan of Obama’s? nuh-uh.

    pps: Schumer running the Senate=GS running the planet. seriously. the man has one tool at his disposal: Wall Street. that’s it. he will never–as in not ever–cross it. don’t confuse effectiveness with access to unlimited funds–related but distinctly different items.

  168. 168.

    Joel

    October 27, 2009 at 12:11 pm

    A note on the public postures of Obama and Reid.

    It’s important to note that Obama has more time remaining in his term and will – in all likelihood – have at least majorities in the Senate and House for the second half of his term, so he has to hold his political capital to fight the coming battles (climate change legislation, for example).

    Reid might be gone after next year. He needs a victory now, and he knows that his left flank is exposed. He also knows that as the Senate Majority Leader, he’s going to be painted as radical as the lefternmost member of the Democratic party. So he has very little to lose and everything to gain by putting his stake in on what should be popular legislation.

    Moreover, a lot of people – understandably – have quibbles with Reid and his leadership. But it’s important to remember that the Democrats are the “big tent” now, and that Reid is fairly representative of the right spectrum of the party. People are mistaking an ideological difference (Reid is a conservative by any reasonable measure) for a practical one. He looks like a doddering old fool, but that doesn’t mean he is one.

    Anyhow, this could be a major victory for the Democrats, caveats concerning counting chickens and all that considered.

    About the opt-out, how likely is a state going to follow through with one? I’d say extremely unlikely, and here’s why (using a real-life example to illustrate):

    Imagine that you’re a manufacturing interest in South Carolina, and you want to lure a major manufacturer (Boeing) from the relatively expensive, high cost of living area of Seattle/Everett to your home state. Boeing employees, being unionized, enjoy extensive benefits which you may not be able to provide. Your only substantial advantage is low wages, and benefits cost proportionately more relative to the wages you’re offering. But let’s say the federal government will provide the most expensive benefits for you. That’s an equalizer, isn’t it?

    Now, I’m not intimately familiar with the labor negotiations and all that, but it seems like an incentive for the business community, AFAIK…

  169. 169.

    CalD

    October 27, 2009 at 12:21 pm

    I still think John Cornyn’s return to the Senate should be grounds for a malpractice suit against Mr Schumer. Writing off Texas has to rate among the top ten most tin-eared political decisions I’ve ever seen.

  170. 170.

    Xecky Gilchrist

    October 27, 2009 at 12:42 pm

    @parksideq: And I’m only 24; how cynical is it that I didn’t imagine that a black man would get elected POTUS in my lifetime?

    Not all that cynical, considering what the Bush years were like – and they must have taken up your entire politically-aware lifetime unless you were really precocious that way.

Comments are closed.

Primary Sidebar

Fundraising 2023-24

Wis*Dems Supreme Court + SD-8

Recent Comments

  • mvr on BJ Hive Mind (Open Thread) (Mar 28, 2023 @ 11:18pm)
  • Ivan X on Cake Watch: Day 2 (Mar 28, 2023 @ 11:08pm)
  • Jay on War for Ukraine Day 398: Ukrainian Air Defense! (Mar 28, 2023 @ 11:05pm)
  • Jay on War for Ukraine Day 398: Ukrainian Air Defense! (Mar 28, 2023 @ 10:47pm)
  • Anotherlurker on Russian Affairs Open Thread: The Child Snatchers (Mar 28, 2023 @ 10:45pm)

🎈Keep Balloon Juice Ad Free

Become a Balloon Juice Patreon
Donate with Venmo, Zelle or PayPal

Balloon Juice Posts

View by Topic
View by Author
View by Month & Year
View by Past Author

Featuring

Medium Cool
Artists in Our Midst
Authors in Our Midst
We All Need A Little Kindness
Classified Documents: A Primer
State & Local Elections Discussion

Calling All Jackals

Site Feedback
Nominate a Rotating Tag
Submit Photos to On the Road
Balloon Juice Mailing List Signup
Balloon Juice Anniversary (All Links)
Balloon Juice Anniversary (All Posts)

Twitter / Spoutible

Balloon Juice (Spoutible)
WaterGirl (Spoutible)
TaMara (Spoutible)
John Cole
DougJ (aka NYT Pitchbot)
Betty Cracker
Tom Levenson
TaMara
David Anderson
Major Major Major Major
ActualCitizensUnited

Join the Fight!

Join the Fight Signup Form
All Join the Fight Posts

Balloon Juice Events

5/14  The Apocalypse
5/20  Home Away from Home
5/29  We’re Back, Baby
7/21  Merging!

Balloon Juice for Ukraine

Donate

Site Footer

Come for the politics, stay for the snark.

  • Facebook
  • RSS
  • Twitter
  • YouTube
  • Comment Policy
  • Our Authors
  • Blogroll
  • Our Artists
  • Privacy Policy

Copyright © 2023 Dev Balloon Juice · All Rights Reserved · Powered by BizBudding Inc

Share this ArticleLike this article? Email it to a friend!

Email sent!