-
Website
http://www.americablog.com/ -
Original page
http://www.americablog.com/2009/09/how-do-you-think-obama-is-handling.html -
Subscribe
All Comments -
Community
-
-
Top Commenters
-
Popular Threads
All Comments
Single payer, public option, co-ops? To be honest, I don't know which one is better. To be honest, I don't really care. I just want a bill that seriously cuts down the likely hood anyone else will hear "she didn't need to die". If the President can do that I will be grateful. How he did it won't matter.
The bipartisan pitch is clearly being derailed by the REPUBLICANS. Gibbs made this point yesterday about Enzi. The letter Grassley sent will show just how bad their faith has been.
So, as September rolls around, people will see the the Repubs want NOTHING and are the party of no. The ad running in Iowa that talks about Grassley getting over 2 million dollars from the insurance industry is very effective.
The death of Ted Kennedy will be the catalyst for this surge.
The really troubling part in all this is the complacency of the corporate media in not calling out these lawmakers when they have been on camera with their lies. Letting Sarah Palin get away with passing misinformation via her facebook notebook is terrible. They give her credence and viability everytime they talk about it. They say they have dispelled the lies and myths, but they give them air time and let them just blow lies out their mouths and then end the interview. Very upsetting.
Obama is a smart man. Has kind of bumbled a couple of things. We were saying the same last August. Then look what happened.
Thanks John for all you do. Glad to hear that you are on the mend!
Why would you undercount the $?
You know Republicans would of said 3 million.
( It's little things like that that Demcorats do wrong...that piss me off.)
Obama has done exactly what he was supposed to do and responded virtually according to script: The insurance/pharma/republican script.
Republicans/corporations wanted to cloud, derail and obfuscate the process, distract and mire while occluding their position weaknesses. They deployed their audience to these ends: disruption and intimidation. This is analogous to any typical blog thread troll.
Blog thread trolls are notorious for high-jacking threads. They can only accomplish this feat by first introducing diversion, hyperbole and fallacy and then baiting the proponents into chasing the trolls' geese.
Leaving the crux and heart issue undefended and abandoned; vulnerable to misrepresentation and distortion.
The key is a forged, steely case for reform, one that contains valid and rational talking points. These need to be hammered consistently and often. Single payer's strength lies in it's authentic validity and credibility. The numbers exist. The proof exists. Systemic superiority exists. Fallacies need to be dealt with succinctly, with as little energy expense/divergence as feasible, and with a hint of derision; (a variation of the ubiquitous republican smirk that was employed condescendingly to any 'apparently' unsophisticated opposition.)
Obama has, instead, let the process (read opposition) define the issue and lost control of the crux and heart issue entirely. Republicans, veteran disruptors, have had a cakewalk at the novice's absolute expense, abetted by a thoroughly weak congress. Obama did not forge what we wanted. What 75% of us needed.
Obama did not listen to us. Obama did not build an airtight case, replete with fortified talking points and an 'all-but-obvious' style hammered on our behalf.
That is why he has failed. That is why he has failed us.
I remember getting extremely frustrated with Obama during the general campaign because it didn't seem like he was putting up a fight against McCain. And then he won.
I remember getting extremely frustrated with Obama during the Stimulus Bill because it didn't seem like he was fighting to get anything passed. And then he won.
With Health Care, I've decided to skip stage 1 and just wait for stage 2. He's trying to do what Roosevelt, Truman, Kennedy, Carter, and Clinton couldn't do before him - in such instances, patience is a virtue.
1. obama ran a great campaign that just barely beat hillary only because hillary self-immolated in the southern states and obama got to iowa first.
2. anybody could have beaten mccain/palin in 2008.
3. obama actually lost the stimulus. he ceded a critical 40% before he was even asked and got nothing in return.
I don't think he won the stimulus debate. They passed a bill which was 40% tax cuts, drastically shifted money, $3.9 billion to the coal industry (that just drives me up the wall), and was smaller than the cuts to state and local governments meaning the drop in demand on the economy was lessened but it wasn't a stimulus.
When there is an either or option he wins. Now he has four basic options: concede defeat, fight for a good plan and lose (win with the left and independents who want government who appear to do stuff and hate the GOP), pass a craptacular bill, or pass a good bill. How he goes about the 2nd two options is irrelevant only the outcome.
This is a different math than the primary and general. If Edwards and maybe Richardson had been more viable candidates, the calculus of the situation would be different. He might think he is playing 11th dimensional chess, but he doesn't seem to understand why the "horsies" don't capture pieces they jump over. His strategy would not have worked; although, the claim victories on cap-and-trade, the stimulus, the bailout, all these crappy volunteering things, the credit card bill. Its very easy to say there weren't victories for the American people.
My memory of this is very different. He invested enormous political capital to get the stimulus bill passed.
there was also a lot of anger and fear about health care. an overwhelming majority of voters favored some kind of "invasion" of the health care industry. obama's main campaign issue helped win him a huge victory. unfortunately, his braintrust after the election didn't know how to focus and frame the anger and fear. they were constantly reacting to the way the industry was framing the issue. they went for the wonky speeches instead of the populist appeals. they empowered and apologized to the opposition instead of undermining them. it's true that the traditional media were always going to be anti-reform and pro-war no matter what. but obama's folks didn't even handle the media bias well. they actually helped legitimize the teabaggers and townhall screamers. they tried to interfere with issue ads targeting anti-reform corporate politicians. they disparaged the liberal blogs. they abandoned their internet base. they turned off independents and seniors with their waffling.
was this all part of a grand reverse-psychology, give-them-enough-rope, strategy? that's just not credible to me. the polls don't lie. obama lost the solid majority that used to trust his solutions. did fox news lose their support by orchestrating the tea parties? i don't think so.
norm ornstein isn't very bright. comparing 2009 to 1993? that's just ignorant. saying that ted kennedy's vote could have been the deciding factor? stupid.
without kennedy's vote there are 59 democratic votes. isn't that a deciding vote then?
Liebermann
Specter
Still, that's more than 50, isn't it. All they have to do is tie, then Biden will vote for it. Unless Rham calls him to task for being too liberal.
They SHOULD be put out of business, out of the business of providing primary insurance, something that they inherently suck at. They can be in the business of providing optional 'add-on' coverage where the competition can be fierce, the payout ratios publicized, etc.
And you know what? Six of the top ten money making pharmaceutical companies are European. What did he tell them: it's okay to continue to rob Americans while providing people in your own countries with affordable medicines? That's health care reform?
It is not just health care reform. Look at a long list of campaign promises and how he did a 180 on most of them. It pisses me off that he can blow off his campaign promises and stiff his "base." So I look at becoming an Independent again. Republicrats/Demopublicans; one party, two wings. Money talks and we get screwed; again; as usual.
His defenders are too naive. He did what he had to do to get elected, raising our hopes high with the promise and hope of change, but it is turning out politics as usual. That is why he is down to 45% approval rating. People don't want politics as usual. But corporate money talks louder than what the people want.
So in terms of that, he's a success. But to be a true success in terms of health care reform, the public option/single payer needs to be passed.
of Americans that support a true public option exactly where they stand. I
also doubt the Repugs have what it takes to put on a real filibuster.
Word on the street is that in 10 years, insurance premiums will have doubled, and at that time I will have 2 kids in college and one just graduated (hopefully). How the heck will I afford insurance then. We live modestly, within our means, yet it is a struggle.
We are pretty lucky compared to other health ins. issues and at this point I'd rather there be no public option than some bogus reform put through. But I am extremely liberal and I can't believe that we can't find the grace and moral fortitude as a nation to make sure everyone has some preventative care, and basic coverage. The emergency room does not count as public health care!
I wish Obama would just tell people straight up that this is our moral obligation to help those less fortunate. Instead of giving long winded answers to the press (answering 11 questions in one hour), he should give short succinct answers with real info. Use the thousands of stories Americans have written in to the White House.
Forget bi-partisanship, these people that celebrate the ruckus at the town hall meetings have no plan to back health care/insurance reform. And for the most part, the people that are yelling will never take the time to read info off the gov't website regarding the truth.
I voted for Obama and would have preferred a more liberal President, however, I am so disgusted, not only with Obama's handling of this, but also the congress that is caving to insurance companies. I refuse to give to any more money to a politician that is not Liberal with a capital L.
That last line, "there is no support for change." Does the author of that understand Obama is losing support among people who think is commitment to healthcare is less than solid. The 11th dimensional chess crowd loves him anyway and blindly follows, but they think he gives a shit about healthcare. (He might, but I've seen no real evidence.)
The problem is we have a country where the political elite don't understand policy matters. To them its a crap shoot. Obama is trying to appear nice, because people like nice. People occasionally need mean and he's not prepared to do that. Personally I think he is paralyzed as President because I don't think he had any idea the scale of the problems facing the country and if he accepts the size of the problem he has to question if he was the right person for the job and everything thats wrong with his Presidency descends from that issue.
I call BS on that!
Just because we don't show up to townhalls with AR-15s strapped to our backs and draw the cameras with our violent rhetoric and wild accusations does not mean we are not there!
Have you ever surveyed one of these meetings to find out how many people are "for" or "against"? No? Read the blueprint! They have told their people to get there early and salt themselves into the crowd to make it appear that their numbers are larger than they actually are. Didn't know that? Look at the faces around them. Notice the horrified looks? The grimacing faces? No?
The "groundswell" is what got Obama elected, and all we want is what we were promised. We're not "left of the left". We just want what we were promised! Healthcare was one of the overriding issues during the election, and we rejected McCain's "everything's OK" and "tax gold-plated insurance plans" approach. We were promised more than that.
How is it that the lessons from the election have been unlearned so quickly? How is it that we are now being sold the McCain plan - by Obama?!?!? And the GOP is STILL rejecting it????
Grassley today threw out that the big fear, today, is that there will be an 8% payroll tax on businesses to pay for the plan. 8%?? 8%?? Right now we're at 16% of GDP! 8% of payroll would be a MAJOR improvement. My insurance, between mine and my employer's contribution, is close to 20%!
So, what would I prefer - an 8% payroll tax on my employer (less than what they are already paying) or a 20% slice of my "compensation"?? Umm........
My doctor, last week said she would LOVE to have a "Medicare for all" type plan - she said that now, with Medicare, if you need an MRI she just has to order one. For private insurance? She said its like selling her firstborn (her words, not mine). That EVERY PROCEDURE, EVERY TEST, must be approved by the insurer. Not so with Medicare.
Which would I prefer? Umm......
The right-wingers want us to walk away like we lost the election. They say the rest of the country doesn't want better health care. The way things are going, I almost feel like the Administration agrees!
It is time for the team to SELL this thing like it is the best thing in the history of best things. They also need to find their bumpersticker. Not a reasoned, articulate explanation. A short, powerful slogan that can be repeated ad nauseum. Start thinking in terms of WWRD (What Would Republicans Do). We have a mandate. We won the election. We are the decider. (And its actually true this time).
Go big or go home. !!!
P.S. - MSM? STOP CALLING THEM CONSERVATIVES!!! There is absolutely nothing conservative about the townhall teabaggers. The are extreme radicals. They advocate for the violent overthrow of our elected leaders. They want a revolution, or at least a Civil War.
This is not what "conservatives" do. This is not what "patriots" do.
If you need some context, or a history lesson, check out Kissinger's thesis on the French Revolution. Then, maybe you will understand where they are coming from and where they plan on taking us.
And it ain't pretty.
So he's a typical afraid-of-his-own-shadow Democrat.
The next time a Democrat stands up and fights back, it'll be the first time (first they have get out of that fetal position).
I won't hold my breath waiting for it to happen because as we've seen, Democrats couldn't argue themselves out of a paper bag. A wet paper bag.
What this country needs is a President that's part Teddy Roosevelt, part Harry Truman and a part Bobby Kennedy. Unfortunatly, I don't see any them in Obama.
While I think the president should be showing more leadership, the progressive/liberal Senate Dems in the Senate need to show a LOT more backbone. They need to speak up and tell the Blue Dogs to shut up. Yaright.
However, the biggest blame for the confusion, lies, etc. goes to the mainstream media and their he said, she said style of reporting (with a few exceptions on the left who are shining a light of reason and truth). FAUX will be lies, but the MSM should be responsible.
What else would you have Pelosi and Reid do to get these guys to cooperate with them?
Is the Good Witch of the North, Sara Palin really a Rhodes scholar in disguise who is pretending to be as dumb as Carrie Prejean in order to expose the how stupid some people really are.
Yea. Right.
Obama and his team have blown this. They lost control of the message. I'm so tired of seeing this over and over again. You can't tell me after the last presidential campaign that they thought that they could work with Republicans.
Also, with the tenor of the folks attending those rallies, any communications professional who couldn't see this coming is not worthy of their job unless the real motivation of this administration is to keep the corporate pigs and their enablers feeding at the trough.
He gives the administration too much credit - almost like the 'chess not checkers' kind of ridiculousness that is hardly merited.
He sees 'savvy'.
I see weakness.
I see that this administration cares little for the people, but will bend over backwards and forwards for big corporations at our expense.
No, his critics are not being too harsh.
Maybe not harsh enough.
And yes, his defenders are being naive.
Blind loyalty is not good. In fact, it can be dangerous.
I don't know which one would depress me more.
John may be testing us to see how astute we are.
In Obama's attempt to appear reasonable, he has lost valuable momentum, and has given the opposition time to set the definition of a progressive agenda on its own terms. That is a failure on his part.
Now, could we see a positive ending to the health care insurance reform effort? Sure. But it will not come because Obama made it happen. It will come because he's a lucky SOB who keeps finding a pony in that pile of manure. Do I care who gets the credit? Actually, if Obama does get the credit, he might grow a stiffer spine.
I agree with this Ornstein essay, and I pray that he is right. Obama will prevail, but like a good poker player, he plays it close to the vest.
Not always. His comments about doctors unnecessarily removing tonsils, and doctors neglecting to help patients avoid diabetes because they prefer to amputate limbs --- well this alienated a lot of people who might support him.
He's all-in on a pair of deuces...
He's all-in on a pair of deuces... and the other guys' got trips or better. They KNOW he's bluffing...
Obama wanted to succeed where Clinton had failed. He did not want a bill to force down the throats of congress yet he went the extreme opposite. He allowed them to write the bill and then he would comment on some things that came out. He needs to hold a national press conference and clearly state what he wants in the bill, what he won't accept in the bill and why it is necessary to have health care reform in the version he wants. He needs to show leadership and right now we are absent of leadership in the health care reform area.
Fuck the Jedi and their darkness and light philosophy. They just cast anyone who isn't one of them as the dark (i.e. black).
The proof will be in the pudding. If Obama gets us a health care bill with a public option, then the doubters (myself included) will owe him an apology.
Anything less than that will show that we were right to doubt him, and that he did indeed blow an historic opportunity, and that Norm Ornstein has no clue what he's talking about.
I think all of this HAS in fact made a glaring show of exactly what the Republicans are about but he's got to make a move on it soon.
Obama has not flat out, over and over and over told Congress what to write because well that is not his job. He can contribute informally but directly, too much like a dictatorship or Bush Administration tatic. Since no one has leaked informal influence I have no clue if Obama is doing enough or not.
Obama wants something from congress hopefully congress does not serve him a huge pile of crap on a platter. The Dems are not showing much support for the "average american" and getting raging hard ons for the lobbyists. That does not bode well for their future.
If so, that plan could work. When we see who Reid and Pelosi put on that Committee, we will have our first signals that this, indeed, is the plan. The conference committee product will be a straight party line vote, few if any Republicans will vote for it and it will be as progressive as it can be while letting most of the Blue Dogs vote against it, but it will be passed, narrowly, even if reconciliation must be used.
That, anyway, seems to be what Howard Dean said (at NetRoots) and others are saying. If so, Obama will soar in popularity for having pulled this rabbit out of the hat and solved a problem that has bedeviled Democrats since Truman.
Would that it were so.
One of America's leading liberal thinkers agreeing with Ornstein - a member of one of the most conservative think tanks in America (AEI). Who would have thunk?
No PO? Then only maybe.
I am hoping we will see him step up and lead Congress to do the right thing w/o the GOP (emphasis OLD). But I am a foolish optimist.
Obama passes anything short of a public option at his own one term peril.
2. I think Obama didn't think the Republicans would LIE 24/7....no seriously...who would of thunk "death panels"
3. I sort of think Obama knew the that the Republicans would dig themselves in deep with lies ( just not 24/7 lies).
4. It's time to kick ass after Labor Day! ( in regards to Healthcare)
5. The Republicans really have lost creditability.
6. And the added bonus of the idiot Beck... ( to think, is audience has increased so much in the last 2 weeks....JUST IN TIME to see him make a fool out of himself with Olighary.
President Obama should do a Healthcare interview with Rachael Maddow.
Obama has not "handled" the reform efforts. He's been handled.
I was/am not disappointed, because my expectations were low, and Obama lived down to 'em.
Don't mistake me: There will be a "bill," of some sort. It will be touted as the most import piece of legislation since Medicare, the equivalent of Social Security, etc. But it will actually achieve only what the Health Insurance Parasites permit, and that will be the radical expansion of their profits by the mandate that we buy their shitty insurance.
It is obvious the money from Corporate interests controls DC. It is obvious our elected officials don't give a shit what we want and that the President doesn't feel this issue is important enough to spend political capital to get it. So we are left with feeling cheated (perhaps our own fault since we really didn't know Obama, we thought we did from a couple of feel good speechs), disillusioned and betrayed and there is little we can do about it.
Representative Peters:
My thoughts?
My thoughts are that Barack Obama and the majority of the Democrats in Congress are slowly, painfully squandering our best chance ever -- probably our last chance ever -- for any meaningful health care reform. Republicans like Charles Grassley have as much as said that their goal is to kill any reform measures. But it's looking increasingly likely that Republicans won't have to kill a thing. Because the people who are supposed to be on my side -- President Obama and Rahm Emanuel, Max Baucus and Steny Hoyer -- they're killing health care reform quite nicely on their own by negotiating away everything in advance. And for what? To get that mythical, magical bipartisan support that will...that will...?
I don't know what it's supposed to do. A bipartisan vote on a bill does not automatically equate to a good bill. After all, if I'm not mistaken, the vote to authorize going to war against Iraq was a bipartisan vote. How's that working out for us?
Bipartisanship should be embraced when it leads to something good. But it shouldn't be the goal. Good legislation should be the goal. To help achieve good government -- to put a Democrat in the White House backed by a strong majority in both houses of Congress -- I donated many thousands of dollars to the DNC and to individual campaigns over the past few election cycles (including a sizeable chunk to your own campaign). And for what? The 2008 election was supposed to be about change. The American people gave you guys the keys to everything for a reason. To fix what's broken. The election was an overwhelming rejection of the failed Republican policies of the past 30 years. So why is President Obama and everyone else letting the Republicans steer the debate? The Democrats may be in charge but thanks to bipartisanship, Charles Grassley has all the power.
And why? So that President Obama can sign a bipartisan bill. Really, who, outside of Washington, DC, cares about bipartisan support for a bill? All the American people care about is that Congress passes -- and the president signs -- the right bill. A bill that gives every American access to affordable health care.
After November's election I thought I would finally see that. Not any more.
Republicans won't vote for single payer, the best and cheapest way to provide health care to everyone, so let's take that off the table right from the start. At least a strong public option will serve to lower costs. Oh, but then the Republican's say they won't vote for a government run public option so let's take that out too. Anything else they don't like? Obviously, the bulk of any subsidies to help people with low incomes afford their premiums will have to go, too. I'm sure that will somehow become a tax cut for people who don't need it.
Then there's pre-exising conditions, lifetime limits, huge premiums for people with an illness, recission where, after years of paying premiums, you're dropped by your insurance company when you most need them because, when you applied for your insurance you forgot to mention you broke a toe back in the 3rd grade. I'm sure any proposals to reform these areas will be watered down quite nicely to accommodate the wishes and desires of Republicans who won't vote for a bill no matter what it contains.
Just like what happened to the stimulus bill. Desperately necessary, it was turned into an impotent, largely ineffective bill of which 40% became tax cuts designed to appease Republicans. Tax cuts whose stimulative effects on the economy will not only be years away, but they're certain to provide a much lower economic stimulus than direct government spending on schools and other infrastructure ever could. And, in the end, how many Republicans voted for that bill? Three. Chances for a good stimulus bill were tossed aside in favor of a so-called bipartisan stimulus bill that got 3 Republican votes.
Right.
And now the Democrats are poised to repeat this debacle with health care.
You asked for your constituents' thoughts on health care reform. And this is mine. The Democrats, for once, need to do what is right. Not what is expedient. Not what Fox News will applaud. Not what Senators and Representatives who warn about death panels will vote for. Quite frankly, I'm not optimistic that the Democratic Party won't buckle once more under the pressure of those on the fringe instead of enacting legislation which will benefit all of America. Polls show that when you take away the lies about death panels and all the rest, 80% of people support a public option. Not 80% of Democrats. 80% of Americans from all parties.
THAT's bipartisanship that actually counts.
The other side has their game plan as well...but I'm beginning to believe the ref has been bought off and that was a huge part of their plan.
Whatever it is we're witnessing....it sure is not leadership for the times we live in.
So, I wouldn't really say what Obama offered was reform. It was rearranging the deck chairs on the Titanic. It left the current insurance company dominated system in place and added a doomed-to-fail "public option." The whole thing was a sham.
And I truly believe he should be having a prime time news conference where he lays things out, plain and simple.
Indigo awards the process 4 Spitballs: * * * * !
He's reactive instead of proactive. He should have begun the process by carpet bombing the Insurance Companies for a few months to soften them up then lay out his demands. Instead he's shown himself to be coward.
Very sad -
The fact that someone wants to win a dance and weight-loss contest to win $100,000 to pay for their partner's cancer treatment because his insurance was canceled is pretty pathetic. That really shows how serious this issue is and the Dims need to fight for everyone to have affordable, accessible and quality health insurance.
In any event, I hope he was creating a new strategy while on "vacation"; if he doesn't hit the ground running when he returns, reform and his second term are toast.
(R)s is retail Political strategy for Independents. And I also think he wants to get the Sentate plan worked up through Reconciliation and blend it with the house in Conference to get a good bill. Question is can Reid muster 50 votes + Biden an can he sufficiently threaten (D)s so as to obtain cloture on the parts that can't be done in Reconciliation.
The claim is made that it's all so complicated, and the public can't understand it. But it isn't. It's simple. It's a four part, interconnected deal and the bits can't be severed.
Access + Mandates + Subsidies + Medicare V2.0
1) Access is standard price insurance without regard to past, present or future health conditions. Everyone wants this. 2) But you have to have a Mandate, otherwise many of us would buy insurance only when we are sick and cancel it the minute we are well again. That won't work.
3) A mandate requires Subsidies, because it is just too much of a burden to place the mandate on the uninsured poor. 4) Subsidies are expensive, and despite the fact that the overall societal savings of reform will pay for much of it, there is difficulty recovering these savings into the federal budget. The role of public option is to cut this cost, by about 20% it is estimated, just on savings in overhead. There is also savings from the industry leader setting effective and efficient norms of care. ....And eventually the public will grasp all of this, unless we cave in and give up in response to Republican lies and prophesies. It won't be easy...but it's a good practice for climate change which won't be any easier. Jim
This is one of those it-ain't-over-till-the-fat-lady sings scenarios. Seeing Obama in action in the past leads me to believe he's quite capable of turning around all the poo flung at him, especially during the August recess, get the public at large to be VOCALLY on his side and point out the Republicans for being the obstructionist that they are. But the time frame for that to hapen is getting more and more narrow. He's got to come out swinging. He's got to name names - THESE are the Republicans who would rather have many of you go bankrupt due to outstanding medical bills (even though many of you HAVE insurance, a high percentage of the insured will go bankrupt for medical bills the insurance companies will reufsr to cover) than come up with viable solution. THESE are the Republicans that would rather have families split apart, because for many people the only way to maintain some of their marital assets after their partner becomes seriously ill is to divorce (family values, my ass). These are the names, and it's because of THESE people that I must now forget the notion of bipartisanship and humbly request the elected majority of Congress to pass healthcare legislation by any means necessary, to save many of you from a dire fate the Republicans would love to consign you to, if it means their buddies in the executive offices of the nation's insurance companies get an extra couple of million, which they'll shelter to lobbying firms to go back in those same Republican treasure chests.
Here's my problem: When conservatives are in charge, they push hard for what they want and actually coddle their conservative base - to hell with the liberals. When liberals are in charge, they are more likely to try to work with both sides.
Working with both sides is how it should be. But Republicans have become more and more radical. To appease them, you have to move the bipartisan goalpost further and further to the right. When you do this, you start leaving the left behind.
So now, as a liberal, we are feeling left out. WE are the reason the Democrats are in power now! When will we get the stuff we want and the attention we seek from our elected leaders that conservatives get from theirs? At what point can we get some legislation for a truly progressive agenda?
Perhaps my impression of how Republicans deal with their base is not really how it is (abortion legislation comes to mind), but the perception is real - and in politics, that matters a big deal.
We don't have to win every battle, but let's stop surrendering before it even begins!
What I do not see is a fighter or a "fierce advocate."...for anything
My layman's take on what sunk Clinton(s) was it / she / they went so far into all the details they were wrapped up and sunk by them. What does it look like now? The same to me.
The President leads, gathers, makes deals, but CAN add the bully pulpit, the moral compass, the Big Picture, the simplicity behind the obfuscating detail throwing that is being used to kill kill kill. (The bill(s, ) Obama's effectiveness, and actual PEOPLE without adequate insurance.)
Given that we are not privy to the behind-the-scenes action / non-action, (and hence do not really know what he's really been doing,) why has he seemingly publicly vacillated? Why would he look like that if he were not that?? And if he is being like that in public what is he in private??? He has thusly damaged himself - why?
Health care is a RIGHT: Own it. [Just like prosecuting torture is a responsibility, etc.] He's becoming a moral equivalency FAIL. I can't imagine what he's traded for it.
And he's letting LIES rule what passes for debate. He's losing his message, presuming he ever had it. WHY? And Rome still burns.
“You can please some of the people all of the time, you can please all of the people some of the time, but you can’t please all of the people all of the time.” - From Obama's hero LINCOLN. Do ya need to prove it? You can't negotiate with dogs, the insane, liars, morons, or worse - the Republicans and half of Democrats. Use a Teddy Roosevelt stick.
Better to fail on your own terms than fail on others' - or worse - succeed.
AND to imply all eggs are in this one basket invites all enemies to go after it. I think the whole issue could have been approached in a less grand manner, piece by piece, and will have to be. The dog's dinner the bills are now is some reform wrapped in a Patriot Act of crap. There are other ways to shame Congress than to gratuitously inflict it on the vulnerable,
NOT. WHAT. I. VOTED. FOR.
In fact, neocons DID write that article, repeatedly, and we DID mock them, mercilessly.
My hope wanes, but I've read about Obama and seen him in action enough to know that he's very good at pulling support at the last minute, but my gut tells me he waited too long to get aggressive (and then going on vacation didn't matter any). I know, Congress has to take the reins on a healthcare bill, but Obama was in a fine position, public relations wise, to cheerlead and telegraph exactly what the public wanted in a healthcare reform package. And it really should've been shouted from the roof of the White Houe morning noon and night. Would Republican have mocked him for his seemingly single-minded purpose? Sure, but WTF, they're mocking him now. Worse, they're accusing him of wanting to kill old people, rounding up Republicans to stow away in concentration camps and kill Sara Palin's baby. What so bad about being called obsessed with healthcare (that will benefit MILLIONS) after all that poo flung at him?
It's come to the point where, IF Obama is serious about reform, IF he wasn't just playing lip-service to a desperate left, then he's got to start naming names. He's got to start demonizing those on the right standing in the way of true reform. He's got to use (the point of abuse) his office to point highlight the people who want more Americans to go bankrupt, even if they're insured, because their particular health needs were conveniently not covered, or their thresholds were crossed. He's got to boldly underline the names of "family values" repubs who want to see married couples divorce so that some assets can be protected in the event one spouse becomes catastrophically ill. He's got point out the co-ink-a-dinks twixt those who are fighting healthcare reform, and how much they get from the insurance lobby. Bipartisanship be damned, he risks another decade-plus of people dying because they can't afford primary care and then the care they need becomes catastrophic. And he risks Republicans gaining traction due to lies and deceit that are categorically untrue, which in turn will embolden them to lie to us forever. If he's lost his spine, then resign. Joe might not be as savvy as Obama at his best, but either Obama's not at his best, or worse, he is, and he's decided that his promises don't matter.
To be sucessful, the Democrats have to shout louder than the corporate giants, get a unified plan and then let everyone know what is in it, and what improvements there will be for them.
The conversation is dominated by a few really crazy people and in my mind the Democrats are responsible for letting that happen.
Obama is one of those Democrats. He seems to have set out to sell out the principles we elected him on.
When I hear him speak, he is still eloquent, and can briefly inspire me with more positive feelings about him ...
But the whole mess is inexcusable. The deal with Big Pharma is inexcusable. Rahm Emmanual's reported dealings with liberals are inexcusable.
The dominance of the craziest and stupidest and most frightening right wing fringe supported by the nation's media is terrifying.
If I don't blame the Democrats for not being able to counter that messaging, who can I blame?
Dems have to stand up and be the adults now, and get it done.
the only way to get healthcare done was a bundle deal when he bailed out the banks. Do you think that any of the wall streeters are supporting healthcare reform?
Obama and his family are having a ball with the perks of the presidency!!
Strictly on the substance of health care reform, I actually don't mind that he is considering policies that do not include a "public option". I disagree with it, but there are some true progressives out there who believe that the public option is not the only way to ensure America has universal healthcare, and I respect them and their opinions enough to hear Obama out if he wants to propose something beyond my own specific opinion.
But for me, it is issue #2, the healthcare as proxy issue, that has completely soured me on Obama:
1. He squandered his incredible charisma and political capital by partially handing the health care issue over to the hapless Congressional Democrats, who were quickly and easily rolled by an extremely unpopular Republican party. The Republicans and Blue Dogs continue to wield considerable influence over congress and therefore Obama, making me wonder if Obama has the spine to take on issues like gay marriage, DODT, climate change, etc.
2. He hasn't even been in office for a year, and he has already sold his leadership to the highest bidder -- pharmaceutical companies, financial companies, etc. because he wants a money advantage in 2012. In some ways, the health care debate and the bailout are fundamentally identical insofar as the debate is driven by monied interests and Obama's apparent susceptibility to those interests (probably via Rubin).
I could go on, but those are the two big ones for me: 1) failing to whip congressional democrats into shape and 2) and a susceptibility to monied interests.
It's these issues, these proxy issues, that have led me to withdraw support for Obama. He no longer gets the benefit of the doubt.
-Obama failed in keeping the promise that everyone would have a seat at the table when he shut out the single payer and liberal advocates. Whether single payer had a chance or not, you don't say you will listen to all opinions and than say, "Well, I didn't mean to include *those* people."
-Grossly failed at transparency on the issue.
-Failed at his money/no pushback deal with the pharmaceutical industry. Apparently, that one is gonna cost taxpayers (thanks ever so much, Mr. President).
-Failed at negotiating from a position of strength (with public backing).
-Failed at clear concise messaging.
-Failed to lead.
In fact, if anyone can point out one area where this administration succeeded on the issue of health care in favor of the people and not the industry, please point it out.
This month should tell the tale on whether he can turn some of these failures around or not. Or, is he really some powerless figurehead that some of his most loyal supporters insist he is (although I'm sure that's not their intention).
It couldn't have been said any better.
Obama is doing fine. Sausage-making is hard to watch, no doubt about it. Remember all the hand-wringing over the stimulus bill? The bank bailout, while not popular with many people, actually seems to be working and Uncle Sam is making some profit to boot. Obama's a cool, calculating customer and that style doesn't always sit well with the firebrand ideal that some Dems, lefties, liberals and progressives want. That seems to be interpreted as a lack of passion or commitment.
I fully expect health care and health care insurance reform to happen, but I think the compromise will be Ron Wyden's idea to allow all citizens access to the government insurance plans offered through FEHB. These plans all must meet the same standard required coverage, but are otherwise free to compete AND, just as importantly, you have an open season where you can switch plans and not lose anything. I think with a potential 30-40M new customers, many more plans would chose to participate in FEHB and the ability of consumers to change plans each year would keep prices down and choice up. The administrative structure is also already in place as well.
The issue of Obama's handling of the health care reform push, for lack of a better term, has, though thoughtfully executed... notwithstanding considerable hesitancy... given the history of health care reform efforts opposed by conservative forces fearful of losing status, perceived or otherwise, in a society that first values the imposition of control by "authoritarian forces" over the various substrata of working classes by the fearful elite who dread, not without reason, being compelled to share that very status with those upon whose backs their status was achieved, dominated the debate, or battle, as it were, to such an extent as to garner for better or for worse as much attention as the very issue at the center of the discussion, though much needed in the sense that political dialogue entertains not only the possibilities of reform, but the debaters as well who, given the opportunity, much to the chagrin of those afflicted with the twin scourges of ADT and dyslexia - extremely common among blog posters, I might add, though don't ask me for any link to back that up - must struggle ever more valiantly to comprehend that which, through best intention, has been propagated in prolific verbosity and hoisted upon the weary reader with no thought to the extraordinary synaptic exertion and temporal commitment required to digest.
Huh?
Either that, or he is using the time-dishonored tactic of using language to obscure rather than illuminate.
For shame!
Based on this snipped, I think Ornstein is forgetting what Americans voted for. We voted for change, actual change, and we're not getting it. Does he, or does Obama, think we don't notice? The far right has managed confuse the heck out of many people, not simply by lying through their collective pearly whites, but by refusing to discuss what the real issues (not the boogeyman of socialism, thanks) truly mean.
For instance, my 60-ish year old roommate who seems fairly typical, doesn't know the difference between the public option and single payer. I had to explain the "option" in public option--that she could keep her health insurance if that's what she wanted. Nor does my roommate have a clue about how either one will affect the deficit, which if Robert Reich is correct, and I think he is, is way too small. (See: http://robertreich.blogspot.com/2009/08/dont-su...) The right has been adept at being loud and blowing smoke up our behinds. And the Dems let it happen.
What's worse, Obama and the Dems appear to be caving on health care. (WTF??) I thought they were appallingly wussy before the 2008 election and was pretty disgusted then. But they've only fallen deeper into the mire of cowardice they've created for themselves (and us) so I'm contemptuous. I had no idea my feelings for my former party could run so low. The money-grubbing I've learned to expect over the years, but if little "reforms" are all we get the insurance companies are going to make out like bandits--especially if having health insurance is mandated.
I gotta tell you, I have a chronic health condition that put me on the sidelines for years because there wasn't a medication cocktail that worked for me. So I've been unemployed, right? Here's the Catch-22: if I become employed, I will lose my indigent health insurance and won't be able to afford the meds I now receive free from the manufacturers. To my thinking, once I make enough money to live on, I won't be able to work anymore because I couldn't afford to take my meds. Without a public option that "competes" with insurance companies by negotiating prices (in much the same manner as the University of California does), Americans who become ill and need to *use* their health care coverage will bankrupt themselves. Maybe some of them will be in a position similar to mine. For me, the lack of single payer would do much the same thing, but because the hard right has succeeded in demonizing that alternative, I'm pretty much screwed.
Thanks, Dems. Thanks, Obama.
(Just a thought - Maybe its time for them to start asking why rather than just asking if when they poll approval ratings?)
It is also amazing to me how many of us base life-altering decisions on the intricacies of our medical coverage.
The right-wingers want the US government out of their lives and their decisions about how to live them?? Maybe they could start slinging some of those arrows where they belong - at the insurance companies that already know more about them than Uncle Sam will EVER be able to legally find out, whether they participate in the census or not! ;-)
And good luck getting individual, open-market insurance with your pre-existing condition!
Why is it that we are the ONLY industrialized nation in which health care (not insurance coverage) is NOT considered to be a right?
Complacency and self-delusion, that's why! (And a generous dose of I got mine, screw-everyone-else attitude that seems to permeates these discussions).
Much like Beck's 9/12 organizer that was questioned by O'Donnell who said that she was more than happy with her plan - which had a $5,000 deductible, which she had never met, and therefore had never actually filed a claim with them. How can she be happy with something she pays through the teeth to have, yet continues to pay for ALL of her family's medical costs out-of-pocket? And she expects the rest of us to be happy with that same level of service!?!?!?!?!?!
Health-driven bankruptcies have doubled in the last decade, and 75% of these cases HAVE health insurance!!
Insurance companies have already testified before Congress that they will NOT stop dropping people once they get sick or pregnant (where are the right-to-lifers on this one?).
Drug companies have already backed out of the so-called promise to rein-in cost INCREASES (not even what it costs NOW, much less later!)
Aetna has already dropped more than 800,000 insured from their rolls to meet Wall Street expectations, and plans to cut loose another 75,000 to 80,000 MORE people to meet their expectations for the upcoming quarter.
These people will NOT be able to get insurance from anyone els, under any circumstances (unless they become so poor that Uncle Sam steps in) because they MAY actually USE the insurance that they've paid so dearly for over the years.
How would you feel if you paid your $400 per month (on top of what your employer pays), just to have them drop you at their convenience? How would you feel when you realize that you will get NONE of those premiums back or any benefit from having paid them - like SO MANY other Americans have had happen to them? (California alone has found them to be violating the law in more than 1,200 cases already, and that is just the tip of the iceberg).
And how would you feel, when going to the powers that be to find some form of resolution, that you have NO RECOURSE, and that the companies are exempt from anti-trust regulations to boot?
I know that I would feel pretty screwed!
This is not what MY America is supposed to look like. I WANT healthier children in our schools. I WANT my neighbor to get the skilled nursing care she needs, since she is now completely immobile. I WANT young people, like the young lady shot in the gym whose friends held a car wash for her medical bills, to get the best treatment available for her horrific event! And I am not unrealistic.
I just want the lower cost and the better results that the countries that have a comprehensive public health system already have achieved.
Is that asking too much?
I am not happy with the way Obama has handled health care. There IS not health care reform without a public/single payer choice. It should have been right from the beginning: ?
"We are going to have a single payer option...find a way to make it work." I have lost hope that this will happen possibly in my lifetime. I'm 57yrs old. I hope I'm wrong but I think he blew it. I think Americans have a penchant for stabbing themselves in their own foot. It's sad.
Richard
Obama is failing on his biggest core issue!
Hopefully he still has time to right the ship.
The man's skin color is changing to yellow in front of all to see. I wish he'd grow some juevos and borrow a backbone from someone anyone. Please, we need him to lead.
The majority of Americans want Health Care for all.
What are the Democratic party waiting on?
We have the majority in all phases of leadership and they seem rudderless. Gutless is more like it!