home

Progressive Group Ad To Pressure Obama On Public Option

By Big Tent Democrat, Section Other Politics
Posted on Sun Oct 25, 2009 at 10:27:34 AM EST
Tags: (all tags)
Share This: Digg! StumbleUpon del.icio.us reddit reddit

What will Obama do? It is quite remarkable it seems to me that whether Obama will support a public option is an open question. It's one thing to be a bystander, quite another to wade in in favor of Snowe's trigger. And yet, it appears that privately that is what the President is doing. Harry Reid is going to bring a public option to a vote. Will Obama lobby against it publically? I think he might. Amazing.

Speaking for me only

< HuffPo: Obama Pushing Against Public Option In Senate | Killing While Ambien'ed >

  • The Online Magazine with Liberal coverage of crime-related political and injustice news

  • Contribute To TalkLeft


    • Display: Sort:
    Progressive Group Ad To Pressure Obama On Public Option | 82 comments (82 topical)

    Readers Must Login or Create an Account to Comment

    No sense whatsoever. (5.00 / 1) (#3)
    by Addison on Sun Oct 25, 2009 at 11:01:50 AM EST
    It seems to me that Barack Obama is doing all of this purely for the perceived political benefit of having a bipartisan bill. More specifically, that the Blue Dogs have told him -- or he judges -- that a bipartisan bill will be easy to "explain" in next year's mid-term elections.

    This is unfathomably strange reasoning to me because: (a) no one much cares if a bill is bipartisan if that means ONE Republican voted for it; everyone will know only ONE Republican voted for it because this is absolutely the biggest news story of the year; and (c) that ONE Republican is Olympia Snowe who is famous nationally for one thing only: being the ONE Republicans.

    Who benefits from this madness? No one! Maybe every Republican who isn't Olympia Snowe. And the health care companies.

    Also, can this post please signal the death knell of leak-based "__ says Obama is pushing for the public option. Good for him." stories posted here? Those statements are interesting only as part of the ongoing kabuki/smokescreen or less charitably, lies.

    The progressive block just needs to threaten to not vote the bill, do more ads like this, come up with some memorable slogan, "We won't pull the trigger!" and get on TV a lot until Rahm gets a sore throat from yelling obscenities at them and, thus silenced, can't further influence the debate.

    Where will the ads be broadcast? (5.00 / 2) (#19)
    by Inspector Gadget on Sun Oct 25, 2009 at 11:51:22 AM EST
    It's clear that Obama will do whatever Obama needs to in order to meet the promises and debts he owes to corporate pharma and insurance.

    The ability for anyone to get the WH to respond to what's best for the people of this country seems remote. However, we certainly can impact the votes of our Senators and representatives if enough people call, write, and fax.

    The WH may not care one way or the other which party is in the majority (seems they can find an excuse for not being democrats in their policy design even with a big majority), but the people who risk losing their jobs in this disaster of an economy may listen.

    Parent

    The death of leak based posting (none / 0) (#4)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Sun Oct 25, 2009 at 11:03:23 AM EST
    will come with the death of leaks.

    But I am getting more confident that Obama is about to go public with his support for triggers.

    Parent

    GO TRIGGERS! (5.00 / 2) (#7)
    by Fabian on Sun Oct 25, 2009 at 11:13:00 AM EST
    </major sarcasm>

    I don't care what anyone says, if Obama actually support A Public Option then the narrative would be:


    Obama reaffirmed his support/demand for a robust public option today, calling on both Democrats and Republicans to provide a meaningful, accessible health care option for all Americans.

    We've just been through three months of "Does he or doesn't he?" which doesn't say "We don't know" to me as much as "Obama refuses to commit to the public option even as time runs out.".

    Parent

    Obama supports the public option! (5.00 / 5) (#10)
    by Addison on Sun Oct 25, 2009 at 11:22:26 AM EST
    Oh, Obama supports the public option. No, really he does! He is -- according to all evidence and his lack of backing any concrete proposal -- just against including it in any actual bill.

    Parent
    But what will Booman do then? (5.00 / 2) (#11)
    by Faust on Sun Oct 25, 2009 at 11:24:51 AM EST


    Parent
    We have always been allied with the trigger (5.00 / 5) (#13)
    by andgarden on Sun Oct 25, 2009 at 11:27:51 AM EST


    Parent
    That shouldn't make me laugh (5.00 / 1) (#18)
    by Faust on Sun Oct 25, 2009 at 11:47:07 AM EST
    but it does.

    :(

    Parent

    The thought of it (5.00 / 4) (#25)
    by Militarytracy on Sun Oct 25, 2009 at 12:34:08 PM EST
    just made my head explode.  And when this guy won't pull out of Iraq because that is decisive and taints him with responsibility....and he won't commit to Afghanistan because that is decisive and stains him with responsibility, and the photos of the dead women and children come in due to the airstrikes and our military death tolls climb at the same time......while the economy continues to stew in its own toxic juices.....I smell the possibility of one term.  Who has this much political capital to spend?  And do I care anymore if this is a one term President?  

    Parent
    I didn't turn my Opera on either yet this (none / 0) (#26)
    by Militarytracy on Sun Oct 25, 2009 at 12:36:50 PM EST
    morning.  What am I doing?

    Parent
    Not Opera today on KUSC (none / 0) (#27)
    by Militarytracy on Sun Oct 25, 2009 at 12:41:28 PM EST
    but my head is already deflating :)

    Parent
    Tonight. 9 pm PDT. (5.00 / 1) (#43)
    by oculus on Sun Oct 25, 2009 at 01:23:49 PM EST


    Parent
    If he did so... (none / 0) (#6)
    by Addison on Sun Oct 25, 2009 at 11:10:26 AM EST
    ...what would he do if the Congress managed to ditch Snowe and get the robust PO through? Sign it with clenched teeth? Applaud it as if it was his plan all along? Humbly say it's better than many, including himself, expected? Veto it?

    I don't think he's come all this way without an opinion to give one now. If he supports the trigger the progressive Dems might revolt and somehow cajole some sort of public option to get out of Congress without the Blue Dogs' full support. Obama would lose so much face in that scenario, having to sign a piece of legislation that he fought against but which everyone who voted for him agreed with. It would be such a bizarre situation.

    Or would Obama's support of triggers break the progressive's back and either kill the PO or ensure a trigger bill?

    Parent

    Errr.... (5.00 / 1) (#8)
    by Addison on Sun Oct 25, 2009 at 11:19:21 AM EST
    ...kill health care reform (progressives don't cave, but can't get anything past Obama-bolstered Blue Dogs) or ensure a trigger option (progressives cave).

    So there seem to be 4 options if Obama supports triggers

    1. Trigger Bill that alienates Dems everywhere
    2. PO Bill that Obama has to deal with
    3. HCR as a substantial piece of legislation one way or the other is dead because no one is powerful enough to get anything through.

    I think #3 might be most likely if Obama supports triggers.

    Parent
    #3 is the likeliest (5.00 / 4) (#15)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Sun Oct 25, 2009 at 11:29:22 AM EST
    And Obama will own it.

    Parent
    Heh... (5.00 / 4) (#23)
    by lambert on Sun Oct 25, 2009 at 12:07:11 PM EST
    We end up in the same place, I think. I'd rather fight the 2010 primaries on a Dem FAIL than wait 'til 2013...

    Parent
    With all due respect, (5.00 / 1) (#28)
    by ghost2 on Sun Oct 25, 2009 at 12:47:00 PM EST
    would you, in that case, be willing to revisit your primary line, which as I recollect were, "there isn't a dime of difference between Hillary and Obama, but Obama is the press darling, and can actually implement those policies?"

    How is that working out?

    The toughest thing to do in life is to admit that you have been wrong.  It's nice to do it when it still matter, but yet, it's never too late.

    Parent

    Not really (5.00 / 1) (#35)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Sun Oct 25, 2009 at 12:55:47 PM EST
    Who knows what Hillary would have done?

    Parent
    You claimed to know. (none / 0) (#38)
    by ghost2 on Sun Oct 25, 2009 at 12:58:14 PM EST
    Hence your line about "obama will accomplish more", or something to that effect.  

    You were the one who claimed to be prophetic.  So you tell us what Hillary would have done.

    Parent

    And there is no way to know (none / 0) (#40)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Sun Oct 25, 2009 at 01:06:35 PM EST
    I claimed to express my opinion.

    Since Hillary is not President, impossible to know, unless we can do a Fringe and travel to an alternate reality.

    Parent

    I'm totally with BTD on this (none / 0) (#71)
    by lambert on Sun Oct 25, 2009 at 04:01:56 PM EST
    1. What Hillary would have done is simply not knowable.

    2. The opportunity cost of engaging in speculative fiction on this, is writing and thinking about what we can do today.

    * * *

    Yes, I think there are many "lessons learned" from the primaries. But what Hillary would have done in an alternative future where she was nominated, elected, and allowed to take office cannot, by definition, be one of those lessons learned.

    Parent

    a dime worth of difference - and on this issue (5.00 / 2) (#45)
    by noholib on Sun Oct 25, 2009 at 01:31:38 PM EST
    Well as astute as I think BTD generally is, I didn't agree about not a dime's worth of difference.  This was one issue where one could hear and sense a much greater difference between the two - in substance and in commitment.

    Parent
    Wrong. LIne was: there isn't a dimes (none / 0) (#31)
    by oculus on Sun Oct 25, 2009 at 12:49:11 PM EST
    worth of difference on issues I care about.

    Parent
    That's why I put: (none / 0) (#32)
    by ghost2 on Sun Oct 25, 2009 at 12:51:20 PM EST
    "as I recollect."

    Still, the point is the same.  And you cannot pretend that BTD doesn't care about TARP, FISA, fiscal policy/regulation, or healthcare.

    Parent

    I gathered health care reform was not (none / 0) (#34)
    by oculus on Sun Oct 25, 2009 at 12:53:02 PM EST
    among the "cared about" issues in the past.  It certainly is now.

    Parent
    My humble opinion: (5.00 / 2) (#37)
    by ghost2 on Sun Oct 25, 2009 at 12:56:42 PM EST
    Nobody who "doesn't care about healthcare reform" should get to call themselves a democrat, or a liberal, or a progressive.  It's a very fundamental issue of life and death for the most vulnerable people.  

    Parent
    Also, (none / 0) (#33)
    by ghost2 on Sun Oct 25, 2009 at 12:52:54 PM EST
    I meant to put, "difference in policy between Obama and Hillary,"

    Must proofread better.

    Parent

    elephant memory (none / 0) (#49)
    by Militarytracy on Sun Oct 25, 2009 at 01:53:48 PM EST
    you're running with jackasses if you're running with us........well, except that BTD calls himself a centrist on everything.  Or am I remembering that one wrong too?

    Parent
    My not-so-great memory says (5.00 / 1) (#53)
    by oculus on Sun Oct 25, 2009 at 02:02:13 PM EST
    "centrist.'  I do not remember "centrist on everything."  

    Parent
    They won't (5.00 / 5) (#14)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Sun Oct 25, 2009 at 11:28:30 AM EST
    that would be the point of Obama going public.

    As I have said, Obama wanted Reid to do his dirty work. Reid can't because he is up for reelection next year.

    Obama has to do his own dirty work.

    Parent

    It's a crying shame (5.00 / 2) (#41)
    by Militarytracy on Sun Oct 25, 2009 at 01:11:11 PM EST


    Parent
    Per Huff Po, Feingold is getting mad and (5.00 / 1) (#44)
    by oculus on Sun Oct 25, 2009 at 01:30:52 PM EST
    threatening to vote against bill if it has no public option.  

    Parent
    Feingold needs a wave of (5.00 / 3) (#47)
    by Inspector Gadget on Sun Oct 25, 2009 at 01:37:26 PM EST
    public support in letters, calls, contributions :)

    Parent
    I would like to send him some cashola (5.00 / 2) (#48)
    by Militarytracy on Sun Oct 25, 2009 at 01:42:01 PM EST
    but I have to weigh this out.  Is it worth it?  I'm so ticked at all of them right now.

    Parent
    Me, too (5.00 / 2) (#50)
    by Inspector Gadget on Sun Oct 25, 2009 at 01:54:58 PM EST
    I'm so ticked at all of them right now.

    I just think that if anyone in WA DC is going to listen to the people, it's the folks who need our votes and contributions next year. We need to take the focus off Obama, who doesn't give a royal rip about anyone outside his circle of friends and major contributors.

    Parent

    Good (none / 0) (#46)
    by Militarytracy on Sun Oct 25, 2009 at 01:36:47 PM EST
    Off topic....but I see a source that I'm not ready to grab onto claiming that McChrystal has made a formal request to NATO for 85,000 additional troops, and that the U.S. is expected to provide the largest share of those.  McChrystal seems to know something about political bargaining.  And if Obama tried to use Reid as his puppet who is/are his puppets on escalating?

    Parent
    Maybe the leaks (none / 0) (#9)
    by Politalkix on Sun Oct 25, 2009 at 11:20:47 AM EST
    are just to keep the Republicans confused (so that they do not have a fixed target to focus on) and keep the Progressives engaged. The Progressives should just hold firm, get more energized and make ads like these to push Obama, Reid and Pelosi to get the most progressive bill passed.

    Parent
    No. (5.00 / 1) (#12)
    by Addison on Sun Oct 25, 2009 at 11:25:12 AM EST
    The Republicans were already confused, by everything. The past 3+ months of waffling have strengthened them. It's only confused people -- the public as measured by polls, some bloggers -- who seem to be "FOR" the public option and yet AGAINST any bill that contains it. And they explain it by means of conspiracy theories such as yours above.

    Parent
    As it turns out, good policy... (5.00 / 4) (#21)
    by lambert on Sun Oct 25, 2009 at 12:05:18 PM EST
    ... would have been good politics.

    Obama threw "progressives" under the bus, and now they've got nothing for it -- except funding and running an ad that calls Obama out for not supporting a policy where there's no evidence that it will save either money or lives.

    How much better it would have been to call Obama out for single payer! Of course, nobody could have predicted etc.

    I have to be fair to myself (5.00 / 1) (#51)
    by Militarytracy on Sun Oct 25, 2009 at 02:00:49 PM EST
    I knew that Obama probably didn't mean some of his campaign promises....but who could have predicted he would keep none of his campaign promises?

    Parent
    He is a Chicago (5.00 / 1) (#66)
    by Wile ECoyote on Sun Oct 25, 2009 at 03:21:45 PM EST
    democrat.  They are trustworthy as they come, I believed everything he said.

    Parent
    I know (none / 0) (#68)
    by Militarytracy on Sun Oct 25, 2009 at 03:30:42 PM EST
    Yer smarter than me.  So what

    Parent
    On some of those promises, he says (none / 0) (#54)
    by oculus on Sun Oct 25, 2009 at 02:04:22 PM EST
    he will when the time is right.

    Parent
    Heh, I certainly am going googling now (none / 0) (#55)
    by Militarytracy on Sun Oct 25, 2009 at 02:07:54 PM EST
    for refreshing. And you can just put down the Focus Factor.

    Parent
    DADT. (5.00 / 1) (#56)
    by oculus on Sun Oct 25, 2009 at 02:16:57 PM EST


    Parent
    And, BTW, I read recently the (none / 0) (#57)
    by oculus on Sun Oct 25, 2009 at 02:17:54 PM EST
    can't-we-all-just-get-along-together report on abortion is due out soon.

    Parent
    Please oculus (5.00 / 1) (#58)
    by Militarytracy on Sun Oct 25, 2009 at 02:38:07 PM EST
    I've weeded through a few googlings where Barack Obama is the antichrist...I don't have a winger filter and you aren't helping his case with me :)  And a bunch of Odierno crap too.  If General Odierno is not doing his job for Barack Obama this is an incredibly simple fix.  Barack calls up General Odierno and says, "You are fired, pack your happy a$$ up and get off my battlefield."  Will people ever ever ever stop making excuses for poor helpless innocent Barack Obama?

    Parent
    Do you ever speculate what the flavor (none / 0) (#59)
    by oculus on Sun Oct 25, 2009 at 02:43:06 PM EST
    of TL would be had Hillary Clinton been elected?  Wasn't the theory that Obama was the media darling and if Hillary Clinton were elected nothing would get done period.  Nada.  Gridlock.  Not because of her but because of media and Congressional CDS.    

    Parent
    That was BTDs take (none / 0) (#61)
    by Militarytracy on Sun Oct 25, 2009 at 02:55:23 PM EST
    sad thing is...for the most part he was right about Obama being the absolute media darling.  But none of us could be certain what he would do with that extra capital, and we are coming to understand now.  I think the repubs would have come out spitting and hissing and clawing madly at Hillary though by this time.  How would she have handled it?  And would she sit on her hands when the Pentagon told her that pulling out of Iraq was going to destablize it?  Because we all know it will and always knew it would.  Would she have made better economy decisions?  The past Clinton administration hung out with the deregulators too in the land of milk and honey.  We would all have healthcare though, she owed Newt and every other mutation of Newt since then that one hard!

    Parent
    One blogger reported today's attack (5.00 / 1) (#62)
    by oculus on Sun Oct 25, 2009 at 03:05:45 PM EST
    in Baghdad was "in" the green zone.  But, it wasn't.  "Near."  And the Pres. says attackers were trying to mess up coming election.  Whatever.  We were there, we've drawn down some, and, as predicted, all hell is breaking loose again.

    Parent
    I know, I saw a big ole car bomb (none / 0) (#65)
    by Militarytracy on Sun Oct 25, 2009 at 03:18:10 PM EST
    went off too.

    Parent
    My Sunday hour long soak (none / 0) (#73)
    by Militarytracy on Sun Oct 25, 2009 at 04:06:10 PM EST
    was disturbed by grinding gears upstairs.  You know oculus, if there is any truth to that rumor about who the Republican candidate running against Obama might be, doing everything very very poorly to include two wars could become a very big very real problem for Obama.

    Parent
    The "P" word. He was pretty d#mn (none / 0) (#77)
    by oculus on Sun Oct 25, 2009 at 04:13:13 PM EST
    impressive testifying before those Congressional committees.  

    Parent
    We'll all get government provided health (none / 0) (#79)
    by Militarytracy on Sun Oct 25, 2009 at 04:27:06 PM EST
    insurance.  But you'll have to pick up your monthly health card at the gym after you have completed your monthly prescribed exercises :)    

    Parent
    That's a good thing, since I'm paying (5.00 / 1) (#80)
    by oculus on Sun Oct 25, 2009 at 04:31:38 PM EST
    for the gym card but not very religious in going.

    Parent
    So how many of the "creative class"... (5.00 / 1) (#81)
    by lambert on Sun Oct 25, 2009 at 05:19:22 PM EST
    ... own gyms? Probably not very many. They will, however, be producing the marketing collateral, doing the consulting, doing the IT, and so on and so forth. They will get part of the rent stream, a small part, and be happy. Yay!

    Parent
    I guess it might depend on whether our (5.00 / 1) (#63)
    by oculus on Sun Oct 25, 2009 at 03:07:40 PM EST
    elected people in Congress who supported Obama would have fought with or against Hillary Clinton as President. Espec. the Dems.

    Parent
    But if Pres. Obama fired the General, the (none / 0) (#60)
    by oculus on Sun Oct 25, 2009 at 02:47:04 PM EST
    General, probably now retired, would go on TV and say bad things about the Pres. and his abilities.  Then Pres. would have to bad mouth that channel and channel and GOP would have to say FIRST AMENDMENT and giving aid to enemy etc. and on and on and on.

    Parent
    This President ran for office knowing full well (5.00 / 1) (#64)
    by Militarytracy on Sun Oct 25, 2009 at 03:12:45 PM EST
    he was inheriting two wars.  You want to talk Odierno down?  Then you will have to study war.  You will have to sit down with Generals.....many of them.....you will need many opinions from those who have actually fought and protected and been wounded and held the dying and cleaned up the collateral damage, not stupid military pundits from think tanks or dried up ole Kissingers.  Every General dreams of saving his President therefore I can promise you if Odierno is somehow owned by the past administration Obama will have to find his General and that General is out there.  Or he can sit there and feel sorry for himself. And everyone has to understand that General Petraeus is never going to want Iraq to be a FAILURE.  He has worked his a$$ into the ground trying to save that fiasco, with only the hope of preventing it from becoming worse.  That was his war, and it was where he proved himself worthy of his stars.  But his personal attachments can't determine policy, and if he had a commander in chief that he trusted and who promised him that Iraq wasn't going to go down on his record as his own personal failure if accountability day arrived....well, let's just say I suspect Obama doesn't give a rip who he throws under what bus anymore.  This President is going to have to study war and talk war and be face to face in owning his military, or he is not commanding.  But he can be played, or he can attempt to claim he is being played.  This President though in my book has done little more than cop out on being a Commander in Chief.

    Parent
    And if Odierno even suspected that (none / 0) (#67)
    by Militarytracy on Sun Oct 25, 2009 at 03:30:13 PM EST
    his President was going to go on the air for even 30 seconds and verbally whup his tail into the ground, I don't think he'd even be tempted to say boo.  

    Parent
    IIRC Obama has reforming Social Security (none / 0) (#70)
    by MO Blue on Sun Oct 25, 2009 at 03:59:23 PM EST
    on the agenda for next year. Wonder what ideas the Republicans have on that endeavor since Obama is in favor of minority rule.

    Parent
    Then I will be a teabagger. (5.00 / 1) (#78)
    by oculus on Sun Oct 25, 2009 at 04:13:46 PM EST


    Parent
    Then I will KNOW he is nuts (none / 0) (#76)
    by Militarytracy on Sun Oct 25, 2009 at 04:09:09 PM EST


    Parent
    I hope that commercial gets traction (none / 0) (#1)
    by magster on Sun Oct 25, 2009 at 10:55:48 AM EST
    in the cable chatter.

    I think a lot of Obama bumper stickers might be pulled off of cars in the next week or 2.

    Or, covered up with new ones (5.00 / 2) (#5)
    by Inspector Gadget on Sun Oct 25, 2009 at 11:05:29 AM EST
    I saw a great one the other day. In the vision of "got milk", a white sticker with lower case black letters "got hope?" I took it as a slam against Obama supporters.


    Parent
    Nah, that was a pro-Obama sticker (5.00 / 1) (#16)
    by BDB on Sun Oct 25, 2009 at 11:30:14 AM EST
    during the campaign, it just seems ironic now.

    I'm hoping the stickers get replaced with Elizabeth Warren for President (or Draft Warren in 2012) stickers.  If enough people slap those on the back of the cars, our betters might start to notice.

    Parent

    Ironic, for sure.... (5.00 / 4) (#20)
    by Inspector Gadget on Sun Oct 25, 2009 at 12:02:38 PM EST
    The democrats who are going to change their votes in 2012 probably won't be the youth vote since they don't really understand the healthcare issue having spent all their lives with their parents giving them that protection. It will be those who held their breath while chanting "any democrat is better than a republican" and "pulled the lever" for Obama.


    Parent
    I was certainly telling myself that (none / 0) (#36)
    by Militarytracy on Sun Oct 25, 2009 at 12:56:15 PM EST
    Obama was better than McCain.....but I don't know that on the issue of healthcare.  I don't know how bad McCain would have effed us all over as  President and wearing that entire responsibility.  His idol Reagan seemed to know where the line was in screwing everyone over, and he only ever wanted to do it just enough to keep his friends and allegiances on the having more enough to win with side, not bleeding everyone dead.  But my crystal ball is so broken and all I have is today and this IS my President.

    Parent
    Exactly!! He IS the POTUS to all (5.00 / 1) (#42)
    by Inspector Gadget on Sun Oct 25, 2009 at 01:12:09 PM EST
    of us. Since he isn't listening to the people, the people need to talk to those who are sending legislation to him for signature. If they send bills that are good for the people, but he rejects them, we will know for sure where his loyalties are.

    That would be my preference to him convincing the democratic majority to send him a bill that is for the insurance industry, anyway.

    Parent

    The best argument I've seen for why Obama has (5.00 / 2) (#52)
    by BDB on Sun Oct 25, 2009 at 02:01:36 PM EST
    turned out worse than McCain is this one:

    On the topic of lesser evilism, there's one thing that's now certain: Obama is worse than his predecessor. It's possible that McCain would have managed to be even worse. It's possible he would have had a stroke and President Palin would be in charge. Again, so what? A crank and a loon could as easily have managed to accidentally make things better. What we have now is a bright, rational, thoroughly competent man who is continuing the very same policies that made Cheney/Bush so damaging. He does it in complete sentences, without the twitching and unnerving irritability of the last president. The lurid freak show is outsourced to Biden.

    As for revolution, this is silly, as is the imputed "worse the better" strategy. What grandiosity! You come off like a Freeper fixated on caricatures of hippies. Obama is already making things worse and has done more polarizing than Rumsfeld and Cheney. My god, look what he's done to the pwogs. They're polarized to the point where their only common outlet for activism is shrieking "fascism!" and wailing about the stupidity of the faux grassroots right wingers. They actually have less going for them than they did in the previous regime. Obama has successfully demobilized and atomized them.

    The idea that at least there would be liberal/progressive opposition to McCain and with Obama, there's no push back even when he implements Bush's policies (detention, secrecy, education, etc).

    Now, I voted for Obama, but except in some relatively narrow, albeit not unimportant areas (food policy, for example), I think he's been much worse than even I an Obama skeptic anticipated.  Not so much on healthcare (it was obvious in the primaries that Obama never cared about healthcare, hello Harry & Louise), but on things like financial regulation (none) and the evisceration of the constitution in the "war on terror".   Or take Afghanistan, it's not a surprise Obama wants to surge, but suddenly all those Democrats in Congress demanding timelines on withdrawing from Iraq and Afghanistan aren't anymore.  

    Not sure how I come out on this, but I can tell you Sotomayor is not enough to make up for all the rest.  Given that she isn't all that more liberal than the Republican-appointed David Souter that she replaced,  she's not even close.

    Parent

    Where's the warchest money (none / 0) (#82)
    by jondee on Mon Oct 26, 2009 at 03:45:05 PM EST
    for a genuine, honest-to-god, progressive going to come from vs the warchest money devoted to burying any genuine progressive?

    It's a rigged game at this point. The best we can hope for is the participation of one in the Presidential debates -- as long as he or she dosnt make the Obamas or Hillarys look bad (oh, no!)

    Parent

    Great Ad! (none / 0) (#2)
    by Politalkix on Sun Oct 25, 2009 at 10:55:58 AM EST


    So the only thing left unknown (none / 0) (#17)
    by pluege on Sun Oct 25, 2009 at 11:36:09 AM EST
    is whether or not obamafans will finally get their heads out of their arses and realize that obama is no progressive and that he has been playing them for 2 years.

    If obamadmin were to buy the completely useless vote of snowe and loose the fanbase, that would be quite a spectacular loss and miscalculation on the part of obamadmin. But they don't seem to care about that. Expanding unconscionable profits of insurance companies seems to be obamadmin's primary purpose of health care reform, and of course being able to crow that they passed HCR even if it has the stench of roadkill.

    What's unknown about this? (5.00 / 3) (#22)
    by lambert on Sun Oct 25, 2009 at 12:05:48 PM EST
    Just asking.

    Parent
    There are known knowns, (5.00 / 2) (#29)
    by ghost2 on Sun Oct 25, 2009 at 12:48:21 PM EST
    and there are known unknowns ...

    Sorry, couldn't resist.

    Parent

    The nauseating truth (5.00 / 6) (#24)
    by Spamlet on Sun Oct 25, 2009 at 12:29:27 PM EST
    is that the hard-core fan base didn't vote for Obama on health care or any other issue. But the fans do care about their narcissistic self-image as progressives, so they told themselves Obama was progressive, too, in order to be able to vote for their American idol. Obama, of course, being a politician, was happy to play along, knowing why his fans were really voting for him, and betting they would continue to make any and all excuses for his shortcomings as a progressive. Looks like Obama won that bet.

    So the only thing left unknown is whether or not obamafans will finally get their heads out of their arses and realize that obama is no progressive and that he has been playing them for 2 years.


    Parent
    maybe progressive bloggers should dust off the (5.00 / 2) (#39)
    by kempis on Sun Oct 25, 2009 at 01:04:04 PM EST
    phrase "creative class" to help re-frame the defeat of the PO as part of the hip new way to be a progressive.

    Where did that term go, by the way? I'd stub my toe on it (and cuss) daily during the primaries, but then it disappeared and folks became plain old progressives again.

    Parent

    Oh, it's still in use... (none / 0) (#72)
    by lambert on Sun Oct 25, 2009 at 04:05:58 PM EST
    This is the hit for I'm feeling lucky.

    That may have something to do with the rapid abandonment of the term by those to whom it most applies. Heh.

    Parent

    Well, it is not inconceivable, (none / 0) (#30)
    by KeysDan on Sun Oct 25, 2009 at 12:48:46 PM EST
    that this split the difference/attempt to please everyone administration will come down on the side of a public option (or at least a public-oriented plan farmed out to private insurers) with an opt-out provison based on a trigger.  The trigger to be determined by a "balanced"committee on the basis of data acculumated over a period of time. This would nicely include the "best of ideas" to create the worst of times. And, on the other side of the "reform", NYT reports that Richard S. Foster, chief actuary at the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services, said the estimated savings from cutting hundreds of billions of dollars from Medicare payments to hospitals, nursing homes and other provides were unrealistic because they were based on overly optimistic assumptions about gains in productivity. Mr. Foster worries that providers could find it difficult to remain profitable and might end their participation, jeopardizing access to care for beneficiaries. I do too.

    Another aspect of savings not (none / 0) (#74)
    by MO Blue on Sun Oct 25, 2009 at 04:07:10 PM EST
    meeting expectations is that in BaucusCare, there is a mechanism that will automatically reduce subsidies if offsets are lower than expected.

    This so called HCR is a disaster waiting to happen.

    Parent

    Don't laugh... (none / 0) (#69)
    by NYShooter on Sun Oct 25, 2009 at 03:53:01 PM EST
    Obama may be primaried.

    As with all bubbles, the higher & longer they fly, the farther & faster they fall; and Obama has been the biggest bubble of all.

    A one term, dismal failure.

    I hope so (5.00 / 1) (#75)
    by lambert on Sun Oct 25, 2009 at 04:07:15 PM EST
    I'd like to see a Democrat in the White House.

    Parent
    Progressive Group Ad To Pressure Obama On Public Option | 82 comments (82 topical)

    Readers Must Login or Create an Account to Comment