Endgame In the 11 Dimensional Chess Match?

By Big Tent Democrat, Section Obama Administration
Posted on Tue Sep 01, 2009 at 12:19:59 PM EST
Tags: (all tags)

Share This: Digg!

If Ezra Klein is to be believed, this is irrelevant:

This time, the President is going to be specific. Next week, President Obama is going to give Democrats a health care plan they can begin to sell. He plans to list specific goals that any health insurance reform plan that arrives at his desk must achieve, according to Democratic strategists familiar with the plan.

The specifics: (1) anti-discrimination restrictions on insurance companies; and (2) minimum subsidy levels. On the public option?

Obama will say that his preferred mechanism remains a government-subsidized public health insurance option, but he will remain agnostic about whether the plan must include a robust public option.

Hmmm. This seems a rehash to me. Ezra is right. This is irrelevant.

Speaking for me only

< Ezra Klein: President Still Irrelevant to Heath Care Debate | Tuesday Morning Open Thread >

Legal

Nothing on this site should be construed as legal advice. TalkLeft does not give legal advice.

TalkLeft is not responsible for and often disagrees with material posted in the comments section. Read at your own risk.

Endgame In the 11 Dimensional Chess Match? | 31 comments (31 topical)

Readers Must Login or Create an Account to Comment

This is getting sad (5.00 / 2) (#1)
by andgarden on Tue Sep 01, 2009 at 12:22:24 PM EST

Forgetting about selling it to the public. Pass the effing bill!

: Try selling it to Congress. (5.00 / 3) (#4)
by Fabian on Tue Sep 01, 2009 at 12:36:53 PM EST

He passed on the opportunity to sell it to the public. Congress is a captive audience - sell it to them.

: I disagree-- he needs to start over (none / 0) (#29)
by Exeter on Wed Sep 02, 2009 at 07:47:32 AM EST

Definition is the foundation of all politics.
He erred in letting the GOP nuts define the health care bill as socialists killing grandma.
He needs to start over. Who cares if its the same old, same old. Most Americans still haven't heard anything about the health care plan other than right wing spin.

Health Plan? (5.00 / 1) (#2)
by waldenpond on Tue Sep 01, 2009 at 12:29:54 PM EST

Is the gang of six going to have a bill next week? My understanding is they won't. Haven't Congresspersons already listened to their constituents? Seems to me, once a bill comes out of the gang it's a done deal and it will be up to the left of the left to get on board. I don't see the purpose of the phrase 'selling it.' Won't all of the votes be known at that time and further input from constituents are irrelevant?

Man (5.00 / 4) (#3)
by lilburro on Tue Sep 01, 2009 at 12:35:00 PM EST

Obama has so not been reading your series on political bargaining.

Agnostic? No, it's sacrilegious (5.00 / 3) (#5)
by Cream City on Tue Sep 01, 2009 at 12:38:44 PM EST

to call himself a Dem and not support serious health care reform aka the public option -- at minimum.

So I s'pose that makes Obama (5.00 / 2) (#6)
by Cream City on Tue Sep 01, 2009 at 12:39:32 PM EST

irreverent in the Church of the Dem Party as well as irrelevant.


and the Dem party irretrievable (none / 0) (#19)
by ruffian on Tue Sep 01, 2009 at 01:45:13 PM EST

: Well, so it goes. If the principles (5.00 / 1) (#25)
by Cream City on Tue Sep 01, 2009 at 02:38:55 PM EST

of the platform have to come back under a new name, a new home for liberals and progressives to find their way home, so be it.
But it has proved to be an adaptable party over time, so I'm betting that after the next shock -- 2010, 2012, whenever -- it cycles back again to reconnecting with its base, its principles and procedures so devastated lately by this new leadership and other distractions from its core.
Dems cab be quite the bar flirts, quite the lusty wanderers looking for love in all the wrong places again and again, but they can crawl back home to their belief system and swear undying love for it again.

Oh, come on, is he kidding? (5.00 / 8) (#15)
by Anne on Tue Sep 01, 2009 at 01:07:44 PM EST

If this is Obama's idea of "specific," I guess that's one more word whose definition has been, um, changed.

His "preferred" mechanism? He remains "agnostic?"

And this?

Though officials would not provide the numbers Obama plans to use, they say that the goal is to give his side -- Democrats -- a true presidential plan that they can sell. That includes the rebranding of several consensus initiatives, like the insurance reforms, as his own. The effect of this sales job, if it works, will be to associate the president with parts of the reform bills that are almost certainly likely to pass -- assuming the Senate doesn't bog down.

What? Does he want a plan that actually might be good for the people, might actually accomplish all the things real reform needs to do to be successful? Of course not, because this is New-Def Leadership, where all that matters is closing the sale - who cares if it's broken before it ever gets out of the box?

And he only wants the association with the good stuff? Classic Obama - not even hiding that he wants credit for things he didn't actually work for, but look like they might be popular. God forbid he take up an element of reform that didn't have consensus backing, that might have him actually sticking his neck out and taking a risk or two for something that matters. Perish the thought and pass the smelling salts!

A true presidential plan. Well, all I can say is, if this is the best he can do, it's even worse than I thought.

So....last month he called them principles (5.00 / 6) (#16)
by ruffian on Tue Sep 01, 2009 at 01:17:58 PM EST

and now he calls them goals. Main difference is that he can now present the deals he already cut with insurance companies as "goals". Defining the end game down to what he already has. And even has to "sell" that to congress?

I've thought for a long time that we are unlucky in that we do not have leaders at any level equal to the problems of our times. Sometimes in history, that is just the case. Too bad for us.

Yep, nothing new (5.00 / 2) (#20)
by TheRealFrank on Tue Sep 01, 2009 at 01:55:12 PM EST

He's saying what he has always been saying, including not saying anything on the most important item.

At the very least, if he says he's open to other options to bring costs and premiums down, he should say what they are. But, he won't do that.

Of course, I don't know if this report is true at all, but if it is: yawn.

I do not think (5.00 / 4) (#22)
by Steve M on Tue Sep 01, 2009 at 02:12:42 PM EST

that you can simultaneously have a preference and remain agnostic.

: Perhaps not in the limited (5.00 / 4) (#26)
by Anne on Tue Sep 01, 2009 at 02:54:46 PM EST

dimensional world in which most of us live, Steve, but in the 11-dimensional world...well, the mind just reels at the possibilities.

Not heath insurance. (5.00 / 3) (#27)
by Edger on Tue Sep 01, 2009 at 03:21:49 PM EST

Insurance health.

What on earth is he saying? (5.00 / 1) (#28)
by BrassTacks on Tue Sep 01, 2009 at 10:44:34 PM EST

What do these things mean? He remains agnostic? Does that mean he doesn't care? Or something else?

What might this mean "rebranding of several consensus initiatives"?

This is beyond ridiculous. How does he expect support when Americans can't even figure out what he wants and what he's saying? What the heck are we supposed to support? Can't he and his staff say things in regular English that most people can understand? Why do we have to have a PhD in Linguistics to understand what they are telling us?

: I believe (none / 0) (#30)
by sleepingdogs on Wed Sep 02, 2009 at 10:03:41 AM EST

it's called "obfuscating."

Today (5.00 / 1) (#31)
by lilburro on Wed Sep 02, 2009 at 11:32:47 AM EST

Ezra argues that Obama is relevant.

Is there something about the topic of healthcare that just makes people stupid and or insane?

How low can you go (4.80 / 5) (#7)
by mmc9431 on Tue Sep 01, 2009 at 12:40:55 PM EST

I guess Obama figures if you set your standards low enough, anyone can be a winner:

The specifics:
(1) anti-discrimination restrictions on insurance companies;

(2) minimum subsidy levels.

Not much to ask for and certainly not enough to do any good. As my grandfather would say. It's like spitting in Lake Michigan.

Discussed (5.00 / 1) (#8)
by Fabian on Tue Sep 01, 2009 at 12:45:53 PM EST

this over at dkos with someone who cited a pundit that said passing "any bill" would be A Historic Achievement. ::headdesk:: It's all good, y'know! Smile! Be happy! (...and don't get sick)


that pundit (none / 0) (#10)
by lilburro on Tue Sep 01, 2009 at 12:48:04 PM EST

is the one Ezra agrees in his post BTD blogged about below.


If you want to know (none / 0) (#11)
by TeresaInSnow2 on Tue Sep 01, 2009 at 12:48:23 PM EST

Obama's real strategy, then read the comments over at Americablog on the subject. Over there, they have it all figured out.


I guess there really is (5.00 / 1) (#14)
by Capt Howdy on Tue Sep 01, 2009 at 01:04:42 PM EST

a first time for everything


Telepathy is on the rise! (none / 0) (#18)
by Fabian on Tue Sep 01, 2009 at 01:22:08 PM EST

So many people claim that they know what people are thinking that I think it is time to start a Psi Corps.


: The Corps is Mother! (5.00 / 1) (#24)
by EL seattle on Tue Sep 01, 2009 at 02:35:26 PM EST

The Corps is Father!

I'd ask for a veto. (5.00 / 3) (#9)
by Fabian on Tue Sep 01, 2009 at 12:47:49 PM EST

Better to dump bad legislation than let politicians think they've accomplished something and can safely ignore the issue.


#2 (none / 0) (#12)
by TeresaInSnow2 on Tue Sep 01, 2009 at 12:49:04 PM EST

can easily be cut too.


I don't see (none / 0) (#13)
by TeresaInSnow2 on Tue Sep 01, 2009 at 12:50:52 PM EST

mandate anywhere, thankfully...


I think it goes without saying . . . (5.00 / 2) (#17)
by nycstray on Tue Sep 01, 2009 at 01:19:15 PM EST

Absolutely (none / 0) (#21)
by gyrfalcon on Tue Sep 01, 2009 at 01:58:21 PM EST

No mandate, no cooperation from the insu. companies and their congressional courtiers.


: Then please (5.00 / 5) (#23)
by TeresaInSnow2 on Tue Sep 01, 2009 at 02:23:30 PM EST

let it fail.
The only saving grace if it passes is the chuckle I'll get watching his 20-something worshippers sh*t bricks at having to buy expensive junk insurance when they've previously opted for nothing at all. It will breed a whole new crop of Republicans.
All I can say is I'm glad I was born when I was so I don't have to see the mess truly unfold.