It is good to be a Republican these days:
Senate Republicans fulfilled a threat on Wednesday to require chamber staffers to read Democrats’ healthcare amendments aloud on the floor of the Senate.
When Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) took the floor to begin debate on his proposal to establish a single-payer healthcare system, Sen. Tom Coburn (R-Okla.) interjected on behalf of his party, requesting Sanders’s 767-page amendment be read in full.
Their strategery is real simple- keep slowing things down and keep reading amendments while the Democrats in-fight until they finally kill the bill. And have you noticed that the Republicans have finally started to take my advice and are being quiet and just let the Democrats damage themselves? Stop being jerks, and let the Democratic circular firing squad do the dirty work. Nelson and Lieberman will come through, and if that fails, you’ve always got C-Streeter Bart Stupak in the House to fall back on.
BTW- I’m going to go on record and state I have never seen anything dumber than an ad focused on trashing the President’s Chief of Staff. Really. That is some sad shit that anyone think this will have any impact on the debate whatsoever. We’re talking teabagger grade stupidity. How much money did they burn on that foolishness? What did they think they were accomplishing? Negative ads sure are going to hurt Rahm in his 2010 race for another term as Chief of Staff. Wait. What? The guy works at the will and pleasure of the President.
gex
Willful stupidity wins the day. Again.
Sigh.
Amanda in the South Bay
Honestly, it does seem like invoking the dreaded “circular firing squad” seems like a good way to stop debate and criticism, and just going with the flow. I see what you are saying, but there’s no inherent moral high ground invoking the CFS.
Bubblegum Tate
@gex:
You were expecting something different?
Noonan
If they really want to slow this thing down they could have Tom Coburn sound out every amendment.
John Cole
@Amanda in the South Bay: Ok. I’ll pretend there is no circular firing squad at work right now.
Everything is fixed!
McGeorge Bundy
The Rahm ad is stupid.
As for the bill, if it were anything worth defending I’d be upset about the cowardice and the “circular firing squad.” But it’s a terrible bill.
mk3872
How can the press and Dems let Repubs get away with this?
These are REAL issues effecting REAL people in this country.
If you read ABC News blogs or Politico, you’d think this is all perfectly fine & dandy political theatre that makes the press want to orgasm.
Everything the Dems do is printed as “embarassing” or “disarray”.
But when the Repubs act like jouvenile children, it is either cheered or ignored.
Jody
Meh. It’s already too late.
Whether or not this bill gets passed, the wind has been sucked out of the Democrat’s sails. And next year being an election year, they’re not going to tackle anything else ‘controversial’, leaving the momentum in the hands of the teabaggers.
Way to lead, Obama. And thank Rahm for me while you’re at it.
valdivia
but Rahm is evil and it is highly satisfying no to yell about him and yell Kill The Bill, because if things get bad enough then Kucinich can be president in 2012.
I am getting off the internet for a few days because the self injury right now on the left is too painful to even contemplate.
danimal
Zifnab
@John Cole: There’s nothing circular about it. You’ve got the liberals on one end and the conservatives on the other.
The only difference between today and six months ago is that the conservative Democrats aren’t as terrible at defending the insurance companies as their Republican counterparts.
This isn’t a firing squad. This is a civil war. Kinda big difference.
licensed to kill time
__
Oh, John….stop already with the advice! They surround us, and they are listening …
Gah, I seriously despise those people.
danimal
Gotta disagree, JC. They’re still jerks. Otherwise, you’re spot on.
cleek
@Jody:
way to support, “Democrats” !
with a party like this, who needs an opposition ?
Sentient Puddle
And what you are saying now is also not controversial.
OK but seriously, I propose an open thread or something. I don’t want all the oxygen today get sucked up by the Senate health care bill.
Amanda in the South Bay
@John Cole
So…I get to look forward to buying mandated insurance on my already pathetic income that won’t cover any of *my* health issues? Thanks a lot.
bayville
Mmmm. I might have been drunk for a few months, but I really don’t remember Rahm giving a speech to 60,000 thousand people in Denver this summer. And I can’t find my old Rahm/Biden ’08 bumper stickers… but I’m still looking.
Can’t the faux lefties just play it safe and blame Nader for everything? It makes much more sense.
Kristine
When Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) took the floor to begin debate on his proposal to establish a single-payer healthcare system, Sen. Tom Coburn (R-Okla.) interjected on behalf of his party, requesting Sanders’s 767-page amendment be read in full.
Isn’t there any procedure that allows Sanders to decline? A superficially polite “kiss my ass” to counter Coburn’s? Because the Republicans are pushing these delaying tactics well beyond the pale, and there needs to be some rule somewhere that gives Dems some recourse. Isn’t there? Buehler?
winguts to iraq
Max Baucus and Ben Nelson are Democrats? Who knew?! And FUCK JOE LIEBERMAN. That guy is an asshole. Plain and simple. I hope the old dems in Conn who voted for him 04 are happy.
He’s with us on everything except, well, everything…
Zifnab
Speaking of that “Why would anyone want to be in the House?” question you were asking.
http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2009/12/16/815202/-Report:-Pelosi-will-insist-Senate-act-first-on-controversial-bills
An interesting strategy at least. Shame it wasn’t invoked in 2009. I think this card is a little late to be played.
Maude
They can read?
Joshua
Well, there was that whole “mail coat hangers to Stupak” thing a couple of weeks ago.
scarshapedstar
I’m with Zifnab. This is not a circular firing squad. This is 4 turncoat Blue Dogs standing in the bell tower taking potshots at the rest of the party and, by extension, the 150+ million Americans who elected them. And then a couple liberals shooting back.
Davis X. Machina
Bills or amendments not being read in their entirety is the result of request for a unanimous consent to dispense with the the reading of a bill or amendment.
Reading is the default option.
Unanimous consent. Routinely granted as a courtesy. But still a courtesy.
marjo
I too am worried about this bill and esp. the insurance mandates. But I work for a (non-profit) insurance company, and frankly I would rather have the insurers win than have the Republicans win.
Insurers winning means my job is more secure. (I am pro-reform, single payer, public option, whatever it takes to solve the health care crisis in this country. But the reality is… my employer does have a stake in this and thus, so do I, as much as I disagree with some aspects of their position.)
Republicans winning means months and years of listening to them declaring victory over Obama and dems, and further empowering them to do more of the same every time Dems want to accomplish anything at all. Not to say that losing would discourage these tactics for them, but maybe the volume would go down a bit.
Grand Obstructionist Party
Gotta hand it to the G(NO)P they’re taking pages right out of the whiny five year old brat playbook. Do whatever it takes to get your way. They’d get along just fine with this guy.
http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,760539,00.html
Joe K.
What I’m hoping for, in my heart of hearts, is that by Nov 2010 everything is so completely fucked up that every single member of congress whose term is up gets tossed out on their ass and they’re all replaced with, idunno, waitresses and sanitation workers.
John Cole
@scarshapedstar: Nonsense. The Republicans are not in the picture right now. The real battle is between Dean and the progressive wing who want to blow this shit up and the folks like Rockefeller, Brown, Wyden, the WH and others who want to pass this. This is the very definition of a circular firing squad.
John S.
For the last fucking time, the problem isn’t Republicans — it’s DEMOCRATS.
It’s nice to have a majority. It’s nice to have a big tent. But when you have a majority AND a big tent, you have to recognize that there will be no toeing of the party line. Democrats aren’t Republicans – never have been, never will be. And there will never be a true progressive majority in Congress within my lifetime as far as I can tell.
You deal with the Congress you have, not the Congress you WISH you had.
As for the press, they’re a lost fucking cause. They reflexively feed off the GOP puke funnel, and even when they don’t, all they care about is “he said, she said” horse race bullshit.
Napoleon
As much as I hate to say it at this point Sanders and anyone Dem who has an amendment pending that doesn’t have a chance of passing has to pull the amendment. Everyone knows single payer isn’t going to pass. If it was the bill Dingell had introduced every year since something like 1958 (seriously) which itself was introduced every year by his dad since the late 30’s or whatever would have gotten a more serious hearing.
Jody
Cleek:
I, and every one I know, supported Obama. We still do. He did NOT take the reins on this issue and left it in the hands of the prima donnas in congress.
Would the bill still be in the same bad shape it is now? Perhaps. But at least then we could say “Hey, you tried” and be mad at someone else.
Deciding he was above a crucial centerpiece of Democratic legislation was an epic fail on his part.
The Moar You Know
I sometimes forget that you haven’t been a Democrat very long. For my first presidential election my option was Mondale.
He was a superstar compared to my next choice, Dukakis.
We have wells of idiocy and stupidity that are so deep and capacious that you’ll find yourself in stunned awe, like the astronaut looking into the giant monolith at the end of the movie 2001.
“My God! It’s full of self-pwnage!”
FlipYrWhig
@valdivia:
I tried that a few days ago. Sadly, it didn’t take.
The “getting off the internet” part, I mean, not the self-injury. Although there’s always time.
I still gotta go with the Outrage Envy hypothesis. People on the left want to mimic the roiling enthusiasm of the crazies on the right, because the teabag crowd got attention and put some fear into the mainstream of their party. But mostly, like the teabaggers, they look and sound like dicks (dickbaggers?), and it’s going to turn people right the fuck off. It’s turning me off, and I’m a godless statist who people mistake for gay.
Lisa K.
This is exactly why in recent years Democrats never get elected to majorities, andwehen they do (because of Republican bullshit, not because the public is that in love with the Democratic platform) they get voted out rather rapidly.
Screw it. I am so tired of carrying water for these fuck ups. If they cannot get their acts together and pass good legislation with a 60-seat Senate majority, they deserve to be ousted.
Kristine
@Davis X. Machina:
I’m assuming this rule was instituted prior to the age of the 1000+ page bill?
I am just…tired. And I’m just an observer. And I know that those who don’t want any of these bills to pass are counting on that fatigue and misplaced anger, and it makes me despise them even more. This whole muckenfuss makes me want to attach a cow-catcher to the front of a semi and bulldoze through the halls of the Senate Office Building.
I know that wouldn’t solve a damned thing, except to ensure my living the rest of my life as a guest of the Feds, but damn it would be satisfying.
cat48
FDL is convinced that Rahm runs everything & BHO is just his puppet and does exactly what he tells him to do. This ad proves how deranged these individuals are. Let’s see here….we will shame Rahm with an ad & get Lieberman’s wife fired from her volunteer job…..that will show everybody we mean business!! Heh
Hunter Gathers
@John Cole: You will just love this.
Now that’s a classy move.
IndieTarheel
I have faith in nothing but this – when the republic collapses and dies, there will be three survivors – the oligarchs, the cockroaches, and the Villagers aspiring to be as useful as the cockroaches.
FlipYrWhig
@cat48: Jane Hamsher : Hadassah Lieberman :: Glenn Beck : Van Jones.
FlipYrWhig
@IndieTarheel:
And one guy yelling about corporate power.
freejack
So THat’s what the sound of every lobbyist on K Street getting a boner would be like.
cleek
@Jody:
unless you count running for 30 months on the idea of HCR, doing countless townhalls and speeches on it, going on national TV to talk about it, etc. etc..
it’s not like everybody who wants to know hasn’t known for two and a half years exactly what Obama’s opinions and goals were. this HCR thing is not a surprise to anyone. nobody didn’t see it coming. nobody didn’t know what Obama was asking for.
the House sure got the message. they passed their bill PDQ. the Senate, where the Dems do not have the 60 votes needed, is the problem.
tell us: what power does Obama have over the Senate ?
what are these “reins” you speak of, and what are they attached to?
Morbo
What, you don’t remember all the ads the Republicans ran about the ineffectiveness of Andy Card?
John S.
Yes, because when the President “took the reins” on this issue back in ’94, it really worked out so well.
See, the thing about prima donnas is that they don’t like to be circumvented and made irrelevant. If you think doing so would have been a strategy for success, you haven’t been paying attention.
He has the power to consume the recalcitrant Senators with fireballs from his eyes and bolts of lightning from his arse.
Lurker with a Preexisting Condition
@Amanda in the South Bay:
I look forwards to buying mandated health insurance. As a cancer survivor, I’ve had my applications for individual private insurance rejected by two major health insurers.
This bill should be a step up for genetic misfits like me.
Zifnab
@John Cole: Oh please, you can’t be serious. This has been a bitter fight with Nelson and Lieberman from the start. I heard Brown on NPR just last night saying how disappointed and angry he is. The idea that Brown and Dean are at odds is insane. Dean is just trying to apply the kind of pressure that the Conservacrats apply so readily.
The bill’s been gutted. The progressives have to apply some pressure to repair it. But the moment Dean raises his voice, you’re all “Circular Firing Squad! Quit ruining this sweet, sweet deal we’ve got going!”
Whatever, John. Drop the Stockholm Syndrome. This bill isn’t even out of the Senate yet, because Lieberman’s still playing coy. It’s still got a few more weeks to get much, much worse. And you’re throwing a fit over the first sign of push back.
What. The fuck. Ever.
licensed to kill time
@Hunter Gathers:
Wow! Do we get to call them traitors now ? Think of the troops! They’ll be disheartened ! Where’s Cheney?
Sly
@FlipYrWhig
And one guy yelling about illegal cockroaches taking all the good jobs and having anchor larvae to get on welfare.
Phil P.
Yeah, I got an email from those Progressive Change Campaign Committee people fund-raising for that Rahm ad. (I gave some money to them during the 2008 elections.) I couldn’t believe what I was reading. I responded, telling them they would never get another penny from me — clearly they are too f——- stupid to put my money to good use.
John S.
Screeching about scrapping the entire bill unless you get your way (gee that sounds eerily familiar to what certain persona non-grata Senators are doing) is the first sign of push back?
What. The fuck. Ever.
martha
@FlipYrWhig: FTW
By the by, I may agree with Jane that Mrs. L is and has been a paid shill of the insurance industry for years (hello Mrs. Bayh, I’m looking at you too…), but in this situation, she’s not helping by attacking her with such venom. Just stupid.
Olly McPherson
@cleek:
I don’t know what Obama’s opinions and goals are, and I follow politics daily. He’s failed in basic advocacy of his own positions.
martha
@Olly McPherson: You must not read very well.
Elie
@valdivia:
Totally agree and hear ya…
Its actually intentionally destructive, not inadvertant in my opinion.
I have to think about this whole experience and the role of the blogs in fomenting this real failure of community — of standing with each other to do something difficult and necessary.
We are a bunch of cream puffs. No ability to hang in and tough it out. Easily discouraged, easily divided.
Woodrow "asim" Jarvis Hill
I’m with Josh Marshall on this:
It occurs to me that Obama’s OFA group is organizing another series of calls to Congress today to push for health care, trying to get to 1 million of them. That’s on top of other efforts I know they’re making in other areas; I live in Upstate SC, and, well, we ain’t moving our Congresspeople on this.
Just an option for those who might want to put some skin in the game. ’cause it’s clear, from this new Troop stunt, the GOP is scared of something being passed. And — if I have to choose a partisan approach — I’d rather be scaring them than shooting my fellow Democrats.
gex
@Olly McPherson: Obama is not an advocate, except perhaps to process.
Elie
@cleek:
Cleek:
Dont waste your time. It is very deep and it will kill your optimism and sense of possibility trying to “explain” to many on this blog. You easily can spot who they are and their purpose is to demoralize since it is obvious that any information that you give is completely ignored.
Save your energy and your dedication to the effort where it can actually make an impact. It will not be many who are posting here who purportedly are “progressive” — they are not that, whatever they are.
If some had been sent in to destroy solidarity and community, one could not hope for better results.
FlipYrWhig
@martha: Obviously Hamsher has nowhere near the reach or influence of Beck, and the Jane Hamsher Show might even be entertaining to watch/listen to. But I keep being struck with the tension between our desire to mock the teabaggers, their conspiracy theories, and their ideological purges on the one hand, and some of our most vocal and visible voices just itching to concoct conspiracy theories and conduct ideological purges of their own.
Olly McPherson
@martha:
You’re right–I’m borderline illiterate.
Surely this grievous failing is all my own and unshared by others on this board, much less the tens of millions of people in the larger world who are largely uninterested in politics.
I didn’t know that being up on the President’s priorities and goals was a full-time job, as many here seem to indicate.
Elie
@Lurker with a Preexisting Condition:
Sorry, that is just not good enough (snark)
Don’t you know your coverage costs are going to bankrupt you and that your benefits are just going to suck? What? No final bill yet, you say? Well, we KNOW for sure its going to suck anyway cause it is and I say so cause I know for sure nothing is going to happen cause Obama is evil and insurance companies are evil and why didnt he do it my way and single payer could have happened if Obama and the Congress werent incompetent and it would have been free of any cost I know because I know…
Olly McPherson
@gex:
I’m not sure what you’re saying there. Doesn’t it fall within any President’s role to forcefully advocate his priorities? As much as I hate him, Bush didn’t have a problem doing that.
Rick Taylor
__
__
I’ve seen some extraordinarily dumb stuff these past couple years so I couldn’t go that far; but yes, this plays into the stereotype that progressives are politically naive.
__
Booman argued that Reid was overly optimistic about having the votes to put the public option in the base bill, while Rahm was skeptical (and in hindsight, correct). Assuming that’s the case it doesn’t make sense to blame Rahm for trying to clean up after Rahm’s blunder.
__
By the way, I really recommend Booman’s blog, and would recommend it for the bookmarks on this page. He brings an interesting perspective I haven’t seen much of anywhere else: progressive, but politically savvy, emphasizing distinguishing between goals and tactics.
Da Bomb
@Olly McPherson: Then apparently you suffer from hearing and comprehension problems.
How is I know what his positions are and pay attention to politics everyday, but you don’t?
Interesting…
@martha: THIS.
Da Bomb
@Elie: As I have said before, if we were still fighting for the Civil Rights Act of the 60’s, we would still be riding in the back of the bus, and drinking from separate water fountains. They would have given up.
Every major social change and bill in this country has came in increments. Every single last one. You have to fight for your rights, and build from some sort of foundation. But people have forgotten about that I think.
donovong
@cleek: Amen.
cleek
@Olly McPherson:
here’s what he thinks they are.
Martin
@McGeorge Bundy:
No, it’s really not. I’m sorry that nobody has taken the time to really understand the bill or how this works, but my immediate family members are health care and health insurance CEOs. This is our thanksgiving discussion. This will be our christmas discussion. I’ve got everyone in one room that is affected by this from top to bottom – from people that run hospitals to people that run insurance companies.
It’s a good bill. There are parts of it that everyone hates, but they agree that it will bring down costs and expand coverage. It will create problems that will need to be fixed later, but we already have that, so nothing changes.
The insurers would prefer that state regulation get scrapped for federal – it makes them uncompetitive at state borders which is stupid. It’s so expensive to enter a new state that nobody but the for-profits are willing to take the risk. That’s how the monopolies formed. The care providers would prefer that everyone have coverage so they don’t need to massively overcharge the people that are insured (which is part of why the premiums go up so fast). They wish that Medicare incentivized better care – it hasn’t kept up with changes in the industry and in many cases better care isn’t reimbursed as well as worse care, even when it’s also cheaper.
Billing sucks all around. HIPAA has complicated a great many things and the Feds haven’t done enough to help everyone get it right. The insurers are pissed that the care providers are all over the map on costs and shove the cost of the uninsured against their policy holders (which forces them to either increase premiums or short-pay claims) and the care providers are pissed that the insurers aren’t expanding their customer base and fight them on just recovering their costs. Both groups hate how Pharma subsidizes their development costs by overcharging drugs that are life-critical and how so many corporate plans have to have Viagra coverage on them so the company can attract management.
Everyone is pissed that so many fat, lazy, treat-their-body-like-shit Americans don’t want to be responsible for not getting heart disease in the first place, but then demand a half million dollars in free (or effectively free relative to their premiums) care when their 300 pound body breaks down. And if not them, then moms that take their kid to urgent care every time their nose runs because they have no meaningful co-pay.
Bottom line, everyone is shifting responsibility for this to everyone else. The public expects to take a job and get unlimited and paid-for health care regardless of what they personally do about their health. The care providers expect government and insurers to pay for everything they dial up, even when they’re prescribing antibiotics for a viral infection just to get the patient out of the office and to pay extra for every other treatment because they were forced to treat 20x as many people through their ER as they should have because nobody could be bothered to seek out appropriate levels of care for their situation, and the insurers expect the care providers to take what they offer and all of the people they turn down once they get expensive to just shut up and go away.
And the system is set up in such a way that there are no mandates by anyone other than ERs, so everyone is just passing the problem on to someone else.
All the players know that the only way it’s really going to work is when EVERYONE has a mandate – the doctors, the insurers (or equivalent) and the public. The question is, who is going to go first?
The bill in the Senate puts mandates on all 3 parties. It’s not complete and comprehensive, but the pain is shared. Everyone gets fucked a little bit – that includes the public, but for those of us whose employers are dumping ever increasing percentages of our potential salary into insurance to offset the costs of all of the uninsured out there, tough shit. Everyone has to pay something in for this to work because when you have a heart attack on the sidewalk some day, society doesn’t have the option of just letting you die because you were too fucking selfish and invincible to pay premiums when you were 22. There’s a good but not great subsidy plan here. It’s workable to start. There’s coverage but also premium caps. Most of this will work itself out and the rest will need more legislation to set right.
Don’t want to pay insurance CEO salaries? Tough shit. You pay hospital CEO salaries, pharmaceutical CEO salaries, wheelchair manufacturer CEO salaries, medical billing CEO salaries, and so on. You’re going to be putting some money into corporate profits even in a single payer system. Hell, even in a full-on social!zed UK single payer system there’s plenty of money still going to CEO salaries. That’s never EVER going away. Deal with it.
The plan makes the system better. It needs more after, but it’s unquestionable progress. And it’s substantial progress at that. Quit pissing on the rug.
Nellcote
@Jody:
Yeah, what a jerk, he actually believes that crap about SC, Congress and the President being equal partners in the government.
/snark
Martin
Oh, and FYWP moderation for quarantining a much needed rant.
John S.
Speaking of Booman:
THIS.
Calvin Jones and the 13th Apostle
@Morbo: Then again, Andy Card never wished to be Speaker of the House some day. That’s what Emanuel’s goal was before he accepted Obama’s offer to be CoS. And Emanuel is a problem. When was the last time the asshole beat up on the Ben Nelson types? I thought that politics was letting everyone in your coalition have something to crow about. The appointment of Hilda Solis? The Ledbetter bill(which shouldn’t have need to have happened)?
Da Bomb
@Olly McPherson: Well, since you have decided to flame him at every turn, you might want to know what you are talking about before you make an ass of yourself.
Didn’t you say, that you didn’t know what the President’s priorities were?
There was a whole two years of campaigning and this event called an election happened on November 2008. And I am not the only one who knew what his priorities were, apparently 68 million other people knew as well.
Since, then apparently President Obama was suppose to have solved everything on January 30th, and since it is now December 16th and SNL said he hasn’t accomplished anything then he is a failure.
Da Bomb
@cleek: Double this.
Kristine
@John S.:
Another thread of sanity.
Thank you.
gex
@Olly McPherson: I just think Obama is more process oriented than outcome oriented. He wants Congress to write the legislation. He wants to try to be bipartisan. He may have outcomes he desires, but he does not want to make it happen by force of will.
It might be a chumps game. It might be trying to teach the system that the unitary executive was a passing phase.
mai naem
Here’s what gets me. This admin and the Democratic Leadership(oxymoronic term for sure) has bungled the healthcare insurance reform thing up from the beginning. Fine. Not completely unexpected. Except, that this is from the team who won the presidential election against HRC and McCain. We then come to Afghanistan(mo war mo war mo war) and suddenly this admin. is on all the teevee networks previewing the decision. The next day and weekend, we get reviews. Amazing how well this admin can push an issue when it wants.
Da Bomb
@John S.: That sentiment has been repeated ad naseaum over the past several days by several different commenters and myself included, but as you can tell it hasn’t stopped the teeth gnashing.
gex
@Bubblegum Tate: No. I had no other expectations. Still elicits a sigh though.
eastriver
I disagree. There needs to be some blowback on this against the WH. Rahm is surely in on the political calculations and compromise. Fuck him. Fuck ’em all. There has to be a price to pay for this sell-out. At some point the people who have let this bill exist need to be punished.
Let it be now. And let it be harsh.
Jody
Cleek:
The ‘reins’ are in Lieberman’s hands currently, with Nelson on deck. So rest assured this bill is only going to get worse.
My whole point was that this is a signature issue for Democrats, he campaigned on it, and then over the course of the entire debate he made precisely one speech about it. Trying to speculate what good he may have done when is pointless now. He chose not to involve himself.
And do NOT tell me that poor Obama was helpless against the big bad senate. He and Reid had the ability to discipline Lieberman, who is making them eat shit on a daily basis, and elected instead to tell him how good it tastes.
Obama’s looking like thin gruel now and that’s not a good thing going into 2010.
LittleBit
@winguts to iraq:
With a rusty pitchfork.
Carry on…
Da Bomb
@Jody: He’s made more than one speech about it. He’s attended townhalls about, and gave interviews talking about it.
As President, he isn’t supposed to be crafting legislation and yet again as it has been said before, this is not the final bill.
FlipYrWhig
@Jody:
By doing…?
Emma
Eastriver: way to go. Punish them. Elect Republicans. Fundamentalist republicans, because those are the only ones that get past primaries these days. Go ahead. And when they privatize your social security, take away your parents’ medicare, do away with the minimum wage, and require doctors, hospitals, and clinics to act as police informants against women needing abortions or illegal immigrants trying to deal with their kid’s bronchitis — enjoy the karma.
And for person who wrote that Obama “let Congress write the bill.” Jeez, there’s this thing, which says that Congress has to write the bills. What’s that piece of worthless paper called again?
Look. As many people have mentioned, as political fight of this magnitude is a long-haul thing, not a short run. Infuriating, but there it is. A much more useful idea would be to target Democrats who are being obstructionist. THe ad should have been aimed at Nelson, not Rahm.
geg6
@John Cole:
It’s been said above (h/t to whomever it was), but it’s not a circular firing squad. And St. Ezra’s paen to them aside, Rockefeller, etc. are not saints, nor are they on the side of the angels.
This is a civil war. Ironically, the one we all hoped the GOP would be having. Instead, it’s us. This is a fight for the heart and soul of the Democratic Party, something that has been a long time coming and that any Dem that’s been around a while could see coming but hoped that Obama’s win would paper over. Well, it hasn’t and it is here.
I’m not a hothead, John. Really, I’m not. And I’m not some wide-eyed, pie in the sky liberal, either. But the fact that I am considering quitting the party says quite a lot about my level of frustration. It won’t stop me from voting for Dems most of the time (which is what I did regardless of my party affiliation), but I simply don’t want to associate with, campaign for, or donate money to a party that won’t stand up for principle. And regardless of what anyone here has said, the party is NOT STANDING UP FOR ITS PURPORTED PRINCIPLES. Not on anything. Not on economics, not on their supposedly most cherished goal of universal and affordable health care, not on education, not on war, not on expanding civil rights, and not on constitutional principles.
I’ve been through this once before. I can’t do it again. I’m 51 years old and I simply won’t.
sparky
@geg6: agreed. if the Ds were standing up for a single aspect of what they purportedly stand for, i might be inclined to cut some slack. but, seriously, this is the same damn oligarchy but with nicer words. in the areas of the National Security State and Wall Street, the Ds have dropped the mask and simply front for power. well, this is the next area where we are about to discover who holds real power.
Jody
Da Bomb and FlipYrWhig: You’re right. This isn’t the final bill. But I have yet to be pleasantly surprised by anything Obama has done. From gay rights to banks to privacy to Afghanistan he has remained silent or actively come out on the wrong side. Hoping he’s going to just do the right thing when he gets to this bill is, at this date, patently crazy.
For the record, I’m an Obama supporter. And I reserve the right to criticize him on things I feel he has handled poorly. He screwed the pooch on this one. At this point, the best he can hope for is to get it out of Lieberman’s hands and somehow try and fix it in committee. And the only way he’s going to do that is if he sees just how mad his supporters are, and why. Again, given his track record, I’m not optimistic on the impact that will make, as he seems entirely too eager to prove his centrist credentials (and in this day and age ‘centrist’ means “halfway between the teabagging nutjobs and everyone else”). But I gotta try.
This bill sucks. Obama showed poor leadership. Dems are demoralized because of it. He’s gotta do something. And I am not optimistic that he will.
Shade Tail
Aack!
hackchokesplutter
Oh gawd…
puke
…….
I.
*HATE*!
That.
Phrase.
It should be banned, right along with “throw under the bus”. That’s the phrase the Bush cabal used to justify a lot of shit. Gonzo said it, Rumsfeld said it, Cheney said it, you could probably count on the fingers of a single hand the number of Bush cronies who *didn’t* say it.
“I don’t recall, and anyway I serve at the pleasure of the President. So I don’t have to answer your questions, Congress.”
….
ahem Not that I disagree with the larger point, I just have a visceral hatred of that particular phrase.
demimondian
“Circular firing squad” is modern day equivalent of “shrill”: it means “gosh, you aren’t following the directives of the leader” (whoever that is right now.)
Da Bomb
@Jody: Apparently, we haven’t been watching the same President at work.
What exactly has he screwed the pooch on?
Olly McPherson
@Da Bomb:
Hey, there are a lot of people of this site–as the past several months have shown–who have drastically different interpretations on the President’s goals and priorities. I’ll admit to being lost, dispirited and a little sure we’re all going to get fucked.
And that’s just on health care reform!
Cleek, I’m familiar with the information presented in the site you linked to. I guess I just think it’s bullshit and already undermined. A lot of people have already called into question the first bullet points re: caps and the presence of “fraud” exceptions allowing companies to drop people.
I mean, where is the “Obama plan” even reflected in current Congressional proposals? How is this “Exchange” being framed? Where’s the “public option” he references? Why should I assume his plan and anything coming out of the Senate are equivalent?
I concede your point about the plan stating Obama’s goals and priorities. It does. I guess I should have framed my critique to say that I don’t think he’s doing enough to make those goals and priorities a reality.
Olly McPherson
@Da Bomb:
Also, I didn’t say “I didn’t know.” I said “I don’t know,” and I don’t think I’m alone in that regard, as I say above.
The last lines of your post are pure straw-man.
Olly McPherson
@gex:
Fair enough. I think that is a chump’s game, especially since he was the one holding the banner on the last election.
Dr. Morpheus
No demimondian, it does not. It means exactly what it says and John Cole is absolutely right.
Killing the bill means death, for tens of thousands. Guaranteed.
Passing the bill, a sop to the insurance companies or not, means millions have insurance and that means people live.
The choice is easy, I choose the outcome that allows people to live.
The rest we can fix later.
Da Bomb
@Olly McPherson:
That’s all you say, when people say things you don’t like. And believe it or not, there aren’t as many people confused about what the President’s priorities are.
There’s a whole world outside of the blogosphere.
SixStringFanatic
Thank you, Martin. That was the most well-reasoned and impassioned entry I have yet to read in this entire debate. It’s just a shame that it appears that no one else here bothered to read it.
Emma
Demimondian: I know that I’m in a circular firing squad when comments like yours start appearing.
I am not an Obama apologist. I voted for him because the alternative was unthinkable, but he was too conservative for my taste. I did like one thing about the man, and that is that he respected the Constitution, the idea of separation of powers and all that it entails. I did not — do not– like imperial presidentships, and I think the last eight years are witness to the terrifying effects of one. But respecting the Constitution means that we have to accept that if one branch of government malfunctions, things are going to be rough. Congress is broken at this point. Getting it back into a functional state might require some serious headbreaking at the senator/congressman level.
My idea of a good campaign would be renting billboards in every major high traffic area in states represented by Blue Dogs with messages like: Senator___________ voted against universal health care. If you have to choose between going to the doctor and feeding your child, thank Senator________.
It’s amazing how that sinks into your consciousness if you take the same road every day to work. High tech is not always the best way to go.
I ain’t got no money to implement it and the people on my side seem more interested in venting their hatred for Rahm than in getting something done.
Da Bomb
@Martin: That was awesome. Also. too.
Midnight Marauder
@Jody:
Oh, do you mean like the White House tried to do in the beginning before Harry Reid stepped in and was all “No, guys. I got the votes. Don’t you even worry about it”? Because that was the plan from the beginning–get this thing through both houses and the fix the rest in conference. Do you remember Obama himself discussing that way back when this entire process first got under way? Are you really trying to say that now, the best option he has is to DO WHAT THEY WERE TRYING TO DO IN THE FIRST FUCKING PLACE?! And not only that, but that the reason he would do it is because he would “see how mad his supporters are and why”? You have got to be fucking me. Those “supporters” don’t even know what the fuck they are supporting any more at this point, if what you’re articulating here is any indication of their thought process.
“Get it out of Lieberman’s hands and try to fix it in committee.” Why do you think they went after Snowe so vigorously? That is un-fucking-believable. “What he needs to do is get back to the plan that he had in the beginning before The Eternally Feckless Harry Reid fucked it all up.” Wow. Really, that is what you are saying?
Un.fucking.real.
Da Bomb
@Midnight Marauder: Yes. It is un.fucking.real.
He said all of the things you just mentioned. And correct if I am wrong, but didn’t President Obama also plan to get even more involved in the process once the bill got to conference?
Olly McPherson
@Da Bomb:
Ok, quote me on this then:
That’s a straw-man argument. I don’t consider Obama a failure, even if I’m disappointed in him. I think he is failing to change the American public’s frame of “tax cuts good/government bad.” I also think he’s failing to advance his expressed wishes on health care reform–or even to communicate them to the American public in a compelling way.
I know there’s a whole world out there beyond the blogosphere–I live there. And I think Republicans, Democrats and Obama himself are steadily chipping away at enthusiasm for this administration. In part because Obama isn’t leading the way he could.
Just my opinion. But it doesn’t seem to be a solitary one.
Elie
@Emma:
THIS
FlipYrWhig
@Martin:
Wow, I missed that earlier. Very interesting perspective. I think the problem with “There are parts of it that everyone hates” is that 100% of people each hating, say, a different 33% of the bill creates an obscenely high volume of complaint. It registers as “everyone hates all of it.”
danimal
@Martin: This. Very well put.
Also, those complaining that they don’t know about Obama’s thinking are just wrong. He’s made his priorities clear since the campaign. He hasn’t been terribly specific, preferring to let Congress fill in the blanks, but he hasn’t been silent on the issue, either. Behind the scenes, it appears that his administration is very engaged.
Midnight Marauder
@Da Bomb:
No, you are exactly correct. I get people being disappointed with a bill that has yet to be even finalized but is dispiriting just by its very continued existence for many people. I understand that. But this shit about “the White House dropped the ball with HCR”–I’m sorry, but if you are articulating the plan that the White House had FROM DAY 1 as some kind of new, “what they really need to do” alternative, then the chances are very strong that you haven’t been paying attention as closely as you think you have. That shit is just amazing to me.
There are a lot of areas that you can dump on the White House/President Obama for not leading more, but on HCR, with the most recalcitrant Senate in modern history, with one of the most atrocious leaders in the epic history of Leadership, I’m sorry but I cannot agree with that line of argument. Harry Reid fucked this process up so royally when he included that PO in the bill a month ago. My ire is firmly directed at Reid as the 1A, and Lieberman as the 1AA.
I suppose Ben Nelson would be a 1AAA. I guess I’m going to run out of As, because none of these fuckers ranks lower than a 1 on the Scale of Ire.
ignoramus
This post is a such an apology for the defeatist mentality.
Progressives have been abused by the Democrats.
If this was spousal abuse, what would you say? Continue in the relationship because leaving would mean no husband, no money, no place to live?
The thing for progressives to do would be to
(1)Not support a single Democrat other than a progressives.
(2)Run progressives in every Democratic primary. If the progressive does not win, vote for a moderate Republican.
(2)No money to the DSCC or the DCC. Donate direct to progressive candidates.
(3)No money for Obama, or any of his campaign arms. He has betrayed the progressives. Progressives do not owe him anything.
It is absolutely necessary to have politicians who fear progressives. Nobody fears you when you bend down and put up with shit all the time. Fear comes when there are consequences.
IT IS STUPID TO THINK THAT SOMEONE WILL LISTEN TO YOU WHEN THERE ARE NO CONSEQUENCES FOR SCREWING YOU.
I think we have come to a point that Democrats have to lose, for advancing the progressive cause. It would have been best if that happened under the Bush rule, when Dems anyway were out of power.
Lose the battle and win the war.
Da Bomb
@Olly McPherson: Yeah, I didn’t say that you said that.
“Since, then apparently President Obama was suppose to have solved everything on January 30th, and since it is now December 16th and SNL said he hasn’t accomplished anything then he is a failure.”
That was snark.
Elie
@Olly McPherson:
Olly
So if what you say is true, what is your action plan?
Scrap this bill and suddenly Obama and this administration is what? What do you offer as a real and viable alternative that will give us more than complete failure topped with vituperative recriminations among the left progressives? Sure, we have that now, to a large and increasing extent, but we also have a piece of legislation that is in the pipe and can be passed and improved.
If this were a war (and in some ways it is), would you just retreat off of ground already covered and dearly won on the hope, not known reality, that you can again recapture that ground and more in the future, using a diminished army fresh from not victory, but retreat? Where would the momentum come from? How do you think we could accomplish anything even harder — like economic/financial reform if we can’t get this success?
I hear and truly appreciate your idealism but am totally unconvinced that you know how to win the war or achieve the point of the war. I also wish that some of you with such strong opposition to this would allow that many of us incrementalists, are also idealists and hold dear many deeply felt and profound dreams for this country and our people. Although you have been quite civil, others have treated many (not on this thread necessarily) as though we somehow seek accomodation because we have no principles or no vision for what WE believe in…THAT is like rubbing salt in the wound ..
One last thing…it would be enormously easy to plug in folks saying their left wingers who are actually fakers from the right. The goal would be to further split this community and sew discord and more distrust than there already is. Please, everyone, be careful of what you say and how far you take it…the fallout from this could be extremely costly to our mutual progressive and liberal goals…
Olly McPherson
@Da Bomb:
Obviously, but you were trying to swab me with its bullshit.
Da Bomb
@Olly McPherson: Also, I live in an reality-based world, where people who have fought for social justice, understand it comes in increments. That’s my opinion and it’s definitely not a solitary one as well.
Since you feel that he is so weak on leadership, there have been several commenters that have asked at several different times, how is President Obama suppose to lead? If you were in his situation, how would you get this piece of legilation passed? How?
Da Bomb
@Olly McPherson: It’s not bullshit.
There’s some hint of truth to it.
We will just have to agree to disagree.
Da Bomb
@Olly McPherson: If it so obviously snarky, then why throw the strawman argument?
Ok.
Jody
M.M.: You’re right. I was wrong. The bill is amazing and there isn’t anything else Obama could have done. Let’s all be happy with the inevitable end result, and not bother to mention our displeasure. And when Obama once again screws the left over at the next step, well, that’s just the way it goes.
Olly McPherson
@Elie:
I don’t see how my plan matters very much. I don’t have any pull. I’m just trying to provide a little counterweight to charges that people who are frustrated with Obama are blind and stupid and ruining everything.
My action plan? Well, it’s pretty much what it’s always been: vote in every election for the most progressive candidate on the ballot and donate money to non-profit organizations I like. (I don’t think I’ll ever give a cent to a political campaign again.)
I mean, look at the dissension on this board–who’s to say what the proper lever is to advance healthcare reform? The bill that exists is a bit of a black box, isn’t it?
Here’s a simple question to people who know more about this than me: what pressure should I exert on my Congressman, given the current bill? If I call them on the phone, what are my talking points? Keep in mind that they’re all liberal and will likely vote in favor of the final bill regardless.
ignoramus
how is President Obama suppose to lead? If you were in his situation, how would you get this piece of legilation passed? How?
Read, and weep.
http://yglesias.thinkprogress.org/archives/2009/12/the-road-not-taken-2.php
The issue is not that we have this bill. Rather, we have this bill advanced with methods for damaging the progressive cause.
We could have arrived at the same biil, and made it crystal clear to a larger set of voters about who is for the public good, and who is not. Even a lost political fight is politically clarifying.
Pray tell me what is this bill doing now for that? The only message this bill sends out is that progressive are losers, and Democrats are losers.
We’re talking about the exact same bill (no public option, no Medicare buy in etc..) one with the progressive cause being advocated and principled, the other where it is scorned and ridiculed.
As I said, read the link. We could have arrived at the same bill and done good. Obama screwed us.
Olly McPherson
@Da Bomb:
I don’t think I can answer that question in a way that will satisfy you or anyone, including me. I’m not a Parlimentarian, nor am I an inside-baseball guy.
But here goes:
I would have also kept at the forefront of my dialogue the daily tragedies of people who have insurance that abandons them and people who suffer because they don’t have insurance at all. More human-interest; less wonk.
I would also provide more of a running commentary on the Senate bill and how it matches with my expectations. I would attempt to lay out criteria for success and criteria for failure.
And I would have tried to frame the debate better before Sarah Fucking Palin and the death panelists could get their hands all over it.
Emma
Jody: No. That’s not the way it works. You take what you can get AND immediately start pushing for more. And maybe next year you get another bit. AND you push for more. Again. Rinse and repeat ad nauseam. That’s the way it works. It sucks. But that’s the way it works. And you work on trying to defeat the troglodytes at every turn. Every time and for every election, even if all you can do is throw in a few dollars in the kitty of some progressive candidate or write a few letters to the editor.
I learned that from reading Molly Ivins. Those Texas liberals… talk about a hard row to hoe. But they kept at it, year after year. Some of them are still at it.
Olly McPherson
@Da Bomb:
You’re using the snark to make a straw-man argument that I–and others who share my views–are ridiculous and unreasonable. That’s obvious, right?
Elie
@Olly McPherson:
I guess I mean, given the enormous criticism for how this initiative was handled, what would you recommend be done on the larger scale? Of course we all plan to vote and support our causes on the personal level. However, given the extensiveness and bitterness of the critique of Obama’s approach and such epithets as “sell out” (not by you but others who you are supporting), what would you recommend be done?
If I read correctly, you at least generally supported retreat and scrapping what we have as just fail. Ok, if that is the “plan”, how do we get where we need to go after such a retreat?
Midnight Marauder
@Jody:
Right. Because that was the point that I was making the entire time–that the bill is “amazing” and that “there isn’t anything else Obama could have done.” Where did I ever say that the bill was “amazing” or anything close to that? I didn’t. Did I even make a comment about the quality of the bill in either of my posts addressing you? No. I. Did. Not. Did I even say anything about “well, Obama did everything he could do, I guess?” Again, wrong on all counts.
What I did write was a very specific criticism to a specific line of argument that you were trying to push. That being, mainly, that the White House/Obama had dropped the ball in dealing with the Senate and about “what they need to do now.” I don’t find it surprising that you failed to address any of those points in your pithy response, because it’s pretty clear from the substance of your comments that they are chock full of bullshit. Not a fucking peep from you about how your Grand Plan to fix this HCR mess is actually the strategy the White House attempted to pursue from the very beginning, until Harry Reid completely fucked things up by deviating from the script by including the opt-out PO in the base Senate bill. In all of these 800+ discussions, I have never said that there weren’t mistakes made by the White House. But for someone to try and claim the things that you did–Wow.
Surely, you cannot be that fucking dense?
@Jody:
Surely, you
cannot beare that fucking dense.Recall
Which has been a lost art in the Democratic party since the 1960’s.
Jody
…and I never said anything but what I meant. The bill sucks. Obama needs to show more leadership. We’re demoralized. If he doesn’t change course soon it’s going to be a GOP congress. And they’ve already committed to not tackling any controversial legislation in 2010.
And I’ve said it before, and I’m sure I’ll say it again. I have yet to be pleasantly surprised by Obama. When he does, I’ll be the first to say so. But I am not going to just be happy with what scraps he chooses to toss our way simply because he is not John McCain. That battle is over. McCain lost. I’m judging Obama by his own actions, and I have been disappointed.
Call me dense as much as you like. It won’t stop this bill from sucking.
Olly McPherson
@Elie:
Honestly, I’d recommend pursuing this at the state level, a la Massachusetts.
Having said that, I’ve never come down on the vote-it-forward or tear-it-up side. My complaints are more with how this process has aligned with Obama’s soft leadership across the board.
And my main worry is losing Congress in 2010, which would make any hopes for progress–limited as they are now–very moot indeed. I think his mandate has fizzled, and that really frustrates me.
Elie
@Jody:
Jody:
You say: “When Obama screws over the left again…”
Is the priority goal here to just give the left or right or anyone what they want ideologically, or to give people without any current access to health care, health care?
That is a very important question because if your goal is necessarily to be placated rather than to give folks access to health care they dont have now, then we are never going to give you, nor would I even want to give you, anything but a hard time.
Now, if we both want to give people health care, and I assume that you do, then we have a starting point for agreement that can be expanded, right? You are starting from the negative, what you don’t agree with and where our goals for that healthcare diverge. THAT is not how you come to agreement or build anything from people with diverse views and perspectives into something that reflects their views and aspirations.
Right now it seems that the left does not like anything in the proposed legislation. That is not going to give you power or help us figure other more significant problems out in the long run. This was a test, and we failed getting to yes. The solution to that is not more no however, but to keep working and thinking positively, not negatively about what IS going to happen and how many people will benefit..
Please explain your plan for how you would do this in a non homogenous world where not everyone believes as you do or has your exact perspective on things. How do you work a deal, Jody? How do you negotiate? What are you willing to trade off? Nothing you say?
Jody
This.
There’s still time for Obama to turn it around, but as I’ve been saying, his track record isn’t cause for optimism.
Midnight Marauder
@Jody:
Again, because that was the conversation we were having and the points of your argument that I was addressing. I get it. You hate the bill. You think it blows. Fine. Just don’t go around stuffing words into people’s mouths and then when they call you on it, not address the issue and just keep repeating your mantra of “This bill sucks” and “Obama hasn’t pleasantly surprised me yet.”
Tax Analyst
@Martin #67 – Re: Rant at 3:04pm – –
Thanks!
scudbucket
FWIW, I have come around a bit on this. It’s not a great bill (it’s a pretty shitty bill!). But it’s better than nothing and does have some good stuff. We just have to see how the cost over-runs get dealt with down the road. The GOP will balk at future funding, the Dems will insist on it. Once it’s in place, the GOP will have a difficult time (completely) dismantling it, and that means there is room for incremental changes.
Jody
M.M: Then don’t go around calling people names. No word-mouth-stuffer I. I’m not making it personal; I’m trying to stick to the point of the argument. I am frustrated over the direction HRC has been taking, and have been from the beginning. Obama has made blunders from the getgo that cause me to question his leadership. When he is faced with policy decisions, he has made the one more frustrating to his base. Finally, when voicing displeasure, I am told to grow up and be happy with what we can get.
Well, what I GOT is McCain not sitting in the Oval Office. And that was nice, don’t get me wrong. But, as stated, pick your battles and move on. That one’s in the past, and I’m holding Obama to what he’s done since he took office. If you are happy with the choices he’s made, good on ya. But I am not, and don’t plan on being silent about why.
Barry
I’m skipping over the last 150 comments, so please forgive me if I’m redundant:
John Cole
“@scarshapedstar: Nonsense. The Republicans are not in the picture right now. The real battle is between Dean and the progressive wing who want to blow this shit up and the folks like Rockefeller, Brown, Wyden, the WH and others who want to pass this. This is the very definition of a circular firing squad.”
John, have you not noticed Joe ‘f*ck the world’ Lieberman playing one-man fillibuster for the past several months? Have you not noticed Ben Nelson? The rest of the ‘centrists’?
I am f*cking stupified and amazed that people can watch this stuff go on for months, with each demand being conceded to leading only to additional demands, …., and people still don’t realize that
these wh*resons don’t want health-care reform. The leftists have not spent the last several months quite publicly stalling and slicing and stalling and slicing……….
The only reason that these guys will ever let health-care reform pass is if it’s to the point where the insurance company stocks double upon news of what’s in the final bill, and the GOP knows that half of the people who voted Democratic in ’08 will switch, once they realize that they were screwed, pure and simple.
To others: I don’t want to hear another liar say a g-d-d-mned word about Obama not being the candidate of ‘hope’, the candidate of ‘change’, and of ‘yes, we can’. Of of him not promising health-care reform. What people are doing now is excusing failure, and we’ve seen where this sh*t gets us – we redefine success downward, and our enemies eagerly help. If Obama has no power over the Senate, then even Sarah Palin will beat his *ss in ’12, because he’ll have four years of accomplishing nothing except helping the rich, and very, very occasionally doing some small thing which is good.
I gotta admit, Obama is right now looking like a perfect aid for a Republican Restoration.
Please note that it’s not the leftist end of the Senate which has conducted itself under the motto of ‘f*ck Democrats’ for the past year; it’s the right end.
Barry
BTW, sorry for the fragmented look; the edit function wasn’t doing what it said it was. The points still stand.
Mike from DC
As a hippy liberal who’s pissed as hell that the HCR bill fell as far short as it did from its potential, I think we really only have one course of action.
1) support the bill and get it out of the congress as quickly as possible before it gets worse.
2) look at where we failed, and begin gearing up for the next fights: Financial Institution regulation, cap and trade, the next stimulus bill…
I read Glenzilla and Firedoglake earlier, and they brought up some interesting points. If Lieberman really pissed all over Reid and Obama as he appeared to have, then why aren’t they mad? Why did Gibbs go after Dean for saying the dems should torpedo the law, and not Lieberman for screwing the Democrats? Their answer (and I agree, unless new evidence is brought forward) is that it was an act. Lieberman did what he did because Obama didn’t want a public option or even Medicare opt-in. This way Lieberman takes the blame, Obama gets the bill he wants, and they keep using us as patsies.
So the point here is that we lost. It’s time to recognize it, and see where we erred, and do better the next time, otherwise the financial institution regulation bill will be a big, giant wet kiss to wall street, and we’ll be here complaining about that.
As I see it, our two big mistakes were these: 1) we trusted Obama too much. He’s a centrist, and we should treat him as such. When he says something that makes us think otherwise, we should take a cold shower, and get back to work. 2) Our other problem was that we gave away far too much too early for very little in return. Next time, when we compromise, we should be getting something in return.
scarshapedstar
I guess the difference between our outlooks on the CFS is that the antagonists – the Blue Dogs and Lieberman – number about 10% of the caucus and do not support any of the Party’s platforms (choice? ending the war? bueller?). Their only recognizable Democratic characteristic is that they voted for Harry Reid as Majority Leader.
Period.
This is what happens when you make a devil’s bargain, to be sure, but I think of a CFS as an evenly divided party squabbling over something stupid. This is a nearly unified party that’s been sabotaged by a very tiny minority. Hence the metaphor of the bell-tower sniper.
T
@Emma: …right… “…political fight of this magnitude is a long-haul thing, not a short run.” So, target the obstructionist so it WON’T be a “…long-haul thing…” and make it a “…short run.” thing. …right…there’s a good bed-wetter.