President Snowe Displeased That Obama Embraced The Public Option

By Big Tent Democrat, Section Other Politics
Posted on Thu Sep 10, 2009 at 08:46:22 AM EST
Tags: (all tags)

Share This: Digg!

Brian Beutler:

"I appreciate that President Obama shared many of the details of his vision for health reform at this pivotal and historic moment, and signaled a willingness to work across party lines," Snowe said. "At the same time, as I continue to oppose the inclusion of a public option in any package, I would have preferred that the issue were taken off the table as I have urged the President - given that any bill with a public option will not pass the Senate and this divisive subject is unnecessarily delaying our ability to reach common ground."

Translation - President Snowe wants what she wants and that's that. Senator Schumer needs to remind the guy who was elected in November that there is this process called reconciliation. He also needs to remind Obama that he is the President, not Olympia Snowe.

Speaking for me only

< Malkin On Manufactured Outrage | Thursday 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.

President Snowe Displeased That Obama Embraced The Public Option | 71 comments (71 topical)

Readers Must Login or Create an Account to Comment

i just realized (5.00 / 1) (#1)
by The Last Whimzy on Thu Sep 10, 2009 at 08:50:34 AM EST

we have our first woman president! i thought it would be a dem, but hey! at least it wasn't palin.

I have to give her credit (5.00 / 2) (#5)
by Fabian on Thu Sep 10, 2009 at 08:55:08 AM EST

for being willing to throw her weight around.

Of course she only has as much political capital as others (misterobamasir!) allow her to have.


Yup. (5.00 / 1) (#8)
by dk on Thu Sep 10, 2009 at 08:57:52 AM EST

She's doing the dirty work of Obama and the Congressional Democratic leadership. If she didn't exist, they would have to invent another one.


Her good friend Joe Lieberman (5.00 / 3) (#11)
by ruffian on Thu Sep 10, 2009 at 09:01:34 AM EST

would have to be front and center. He seems to be chafing at taking the back seat to her though.


Yah, it could be Joe. (5.00 / 1) (#13)
by dk on Thu Sep 10, 2009 at 09:02:35 AM EST

Or, maybe Susan Collins.

In other words, if Snowe is President, who is Vice President?


Gotta be Joe - he won't let anyone else (5.00 / 1) (#22)
by ruffian on Thu Sep 10, 2009 at 09:06:58 AM EST

get in his way there.


: Perhaps. (none / 0) (#31)
by dk on Thu Sep 10, 2009 at 09:16:33 AM EST

Though, he's from Connecticut of all places. Where the insurance companies are. Seems a bit on the nose.
I could see them sticking with the flinty Mainer type. Better optics.

i don't want to give her credit (5.00 / 1) (#14)
by The Last Whimzy on Thu Sep 10, 2009 at 09:02:39 AM EST

but she is calling the shots at this point.


They gave her an inch (none / 0) (#24)
by Fabian on Thu Sep 10, 2009 at 09:07:19 AM EST

and she's taking a mile.


They gave her a mile (5.00 / 1) (#27)
by Militarytracy on Thu Sep 10, 2009 at 09:09:41 AM EST

Dang. (5.00 / 2) (#33)
by Fabian on Thu Sep 10, 2009 at 09:16:42 AM EST

Why couldn't we have done this during Bush's eight years?

Oh, yeah. Because Bush didn't play at post partisan unity, that's why.


If he says it ever again in a big speech (5.00 / 2) (#43)
by Militarytracy on Thu Sep 10, 2009 at 09:22:44 AM EST

I'm going to run down the street naked tearing my hair out. I noticed this morning that Atrios' live blog instructions were "drink everytime he says bipartisan".


: Another Get Drunk (5.00 / 1) (#68)
by cal1942 on Thu Sep 10, 2009 at 11:26:33 AM EST

quick game.
Had that been followed last night I would be too hungover to move today and at my age tomorrow as well.

If he says it ever again in a big speech (none / 0) (#42)
by Militarytracy on Thu Sep 10, 2009 at 09:21:29 AM EST

I'm going to run down the street naked tearing my hair out. I noticed this morning that Atrios' "live blog" was


: oops (none / 0) (#44)
by Militarytracy on Thu Sep 10, 2009 at 09:22:59 AM EST

My Sherrod Brown imitation (5.00 / 2) (#2)
by Big Tent Democrat on Thu Sep 10, 2009 at 08:50:43 AM EST

in the title.

: I caught that - nice touch! (none / 0) (#16)
by ruffian on Thu Sep 10, 2009 at 09:02:42 AM EST

Fake it till you make it, as Oprah says. OK, maybe that was another inspirational speaker.

: lol (none / 0) (#17)
by kempis on Thu Sep 10, 2009 at 09:03:01 AM EST

Its a democrat ball game (5.00 / 1) (#3)
by Saul on Thu Sep 10, 2009 at 08:54:20 AM EST

I doubt if Obama would have taken that off the table it would have made that much difference to the republicans. They would just have found another thing to argue about. IMO there is no significant support by the republicans on any crafted Obama plan so why give them anything. Might as well go for broke with inserting a public option.

Time to work alone

True (none / 0) (#7)
by Ga6thDem on Thu Sep 10, 2009 at 08:57:30 AM EST

but Obama continually sets himself up with this PPUS. The tort reform angle was nothing more than begging the GOP to go along with him. if he doesnt get Republicans to go along then the Broders of the world can rain down on him because he's not living up to PPUS. And remember, Obama only really cares what the Broders of the world think.


: Theyll probably (5.00 / 2) (#59)
by cawaltz on Thu Sep 10, 2009 at 10:04:49 AM EST

be given tort reform and still not sign off. Stimulus part duex. Sigh.

Well, that's it then (5.00 / 1) (#23)
by Militarytracy on Thu Sep 10, 2009 at 09:07:16 AM EST

If he jerks it out I won't vote for him a second go around. I just can't. My son has a chronic disease process. Apparently too many people can stick their heads in the sand if they don't have anyone in their immediate vicinity dealing with such a thing and tell themselves things aren't that bad out there. Whatever, the system has its trash and every American would be ashamed of how they have belittle certain members of our society if they weren't so deranged....literally nuts! If Obama is going to allow the nuts of this country to run it I have no use for him. They are hurting people, they are seriously hurting and damaging people! Anybody also notice that we are the last industrialized nation to begin to pull out of this semi-depression? I wonder why? It couldn't be because we have come to embrace a mindless ideology that canabalizes our weakest....and now we discover that we were only ever as strong as our weakest link. I've been decent about Republicans accusing Progressives of practicing Eugencis because perhaps something could finally be done. But I guess I can guess again. The existing system that IS subtly practicing Eugenics will remain in place.

The eugenics is based on money... (5.00 / 1) (#28)
by lambert on Thu Sep 10, 2009 at 09:09:48 AM EST

... and whether you have it.

That's why it's important to transfer more of our wealth to the insurance companies.


Who in turn will treat all family members (none / 0) (#29)
by Militarytracy on Thu Sep 10, 2009 at 09:12:58 AM EST

of leading Republicans immediately with only the best care they have to offer.....voila, the Eugenics of NUTS.


: Yes... (5.00 / 2) (#39)
by lambert on Thu Sep 10, 2009 at 09:20:22 AM EST

... it's been working out quite well for them.

Barney Frank on Maddow last night (5.00 / 7) (#30)
by Dadler on Thu Sep 10, 2009 at 09:16:17 AM EST

On bipartisanship:

The Republicans represent an extremely conservative faction and the notion that those of us who won the election with a solid majority should compromise 50/50 with those who won't... well then why have elections?

[.....]

[T]his annoys me a little bit, this kind of like, I'm above the battle. I think the President underestimated when he came into office exactly how right wing the Republicans are and I'm glad he asked them today to join. I have no great hopes for it because they are in the control of the most conservative, knowing how right wing the Republican party has become, my only bad moment with Barack Obama during the campaign was when he said he was going to be post-partisan, and I got post-partisan depression, because I knew that that meant dealing with these people.

Again, I think they forced him to get to the basics. I think he may have thought that they were more reasonable than they are. This collection of loons that you scrolled down there, I've got to say those people, if anybody needs a health plan in America, it's those people who are in severe need of mental health services.

He's great isn't he? (5.00 / 4) (#37)
by Big Tent Democrat on Thu Sep 10, 2009 at 09:19:32 AM EST

: Yes. He is. n/t (5.00 / 2) (#40)
by oldpro on Thu Sep 10, 2009 at 09:21:18 AM EST

Post-partisan depression? (5.00 / 2) (#49)
by Militarytracy on Thu Sep 10, 2009 at 09:31:27 AM EST

I love it. Those in need of mental health services? I soooo agree


Franken/Frank 2012! (none / 0) (#38)
by Fabian on Thu Sep 10, 2009 at 09:19:59 AM EST

Or Frank/Franken?


: The Jews! ;-) (5.00 / 3) (#61)
by andgarden on Thu Sep 10, 2009 at 10:18:03 AM EST

: either order would be fine with me (none / 0) (#50)
by ruffian on Thu Sep 10, 2009 at 09:32:32 AM EST

Now there would be some speeches I would like!

: Frank/Franken (none / 0) (#53)
by Militarytracy on Thu Sep 10, 2009 at 09:41:48 AM EST

I still don't know if Franken is a big ole wussy yet. I know Frank isn't.

Thanks Dadler (none / 0) (#69)
by cal1942 on Thu Sep 10, 2009 at 11:34:46 AM EST

for posting this. A breath of fresh air.

Between Frank and Weiner we know that at least some Congressmen spurn politic-speak.


The PO is definitely IN...hence (5.00 / 3) (#36)
by oldpro on Thu Sep 10, 2009 at 09:19:28 AM EST

the worried frown on President Snowe's face.

Grasping at straws is a Democratic specialty and I was well-trained in the 60s and 70s.

: Heh (5.00 / 1) (#47)
by Big Tent Democrat on Thu Sep 10, 2009 at 09:25:32 AM EST

you go with the straws you have.

BTW (5.00 / 2) (#45)
by Big Tent Democrat on Thu Sep 10, 2009 at 09:24:06 AM EST

If you believe my cynical view of politics is something new, you never ever understood what I wrote. Ever.

: Apparently not (none / 0) (#54)
by lambert on Thu Sep 10, 2009 at 09:53:49 AM EST

As I wrote above, and to which, oddly, or not, you do not respond, I don't think that "any stick to beat a dog" is a workable tactic for progressives, on pragmatic grounds (unless "progressive" be defined as somebody who gets to go on the teebee, like young Ezra).
So there we are.

I read the speach (5.00 / 1) (#57)
by CST on Thu Sep 10, 2009 at 09:58:35 AM EST

since I couldn't watch. I thought it was solid, and he was speaking to the voters at home not the members of congress, and I think it worked. Now as BTD has said, worked for what? As to that, only time will tell, but I am liking the post-speach reactions. Snowe displeased and the progressives pretending he drew a line in the sand. Reconciliation here we come?

At the end of the day, the only thing that matters is what gets passed. For that we'll have to wait and see.

You need to watch the speech (5.00 / 5) (#58)
by Militarytracy on Thu Sep 10, 2009 at 10:02:45 AM EST

Simply because you MUST experience post-partisanship. The more he talks about it the crazier they get. It's like watching an abusive marriage.


Heh (5.00 / 3) (#62)
by gyrfalcon on Thu Sep 10, 2009 at 10:22:17 AM EST

Well said.


I just realized (none / 0) (#63)
by CST on Thu Sep 10, 2009 at 10:28:15 AM EST

I mis-spelled speech. Man I hate English some times. I can handle grammar and vocab, but spelling is my downfall. That one's just pathetic.


: Me too (none / 0) (#64)
by Militarytracy on Thu Sep 10, 2009 at 10:34:49 AM EST

My better subjects were Math, Science, and anything considered art :). I owned an extremely well worn dictionary before computers and my papers usually still came back all marked up due to incorrect homonyms and spelling. I can say the words.

I enjoyed Gail Collins (NYTimes, 9/10) (5.00 / 3) (#65)
by KeysDan on Thu Sep 10, 2009 at 10:36:17 AM EST

comment that the definition of "bipartisan" shrank from 70 votes in the Senate to "Olympia Snowe seems to like it."

Time to go to plan B (5.00 / 2) (#66)
by mmc9431 on Thu Sep 10, 2009 at 10:53:05 AM EST

The one who really drew the line in the sand is Snowe. Since she won't work for anything short of a Republican bill, Obama needs to forget about her and the other "moderate" Republican's and just get the bill done.

The Republican concept of bipartisanship is:

It my way or the highway.

All (none / 0) (#4)
by Ga6thDem on Thu Sep 10, 2009 at 08:54:58 AM EST

in all I guess we would all agree that it was another rohrsach moment for Obama. Everybody once again seems to see what they want to see I guess.

Nah (5.00 / 5) (#6)
by Big Tent Democrat on Thu Sep 10, 2009 at 08:55:38 AM EST

He threw the PO under the bus. We are pretending he did not.


Well (none / 0) (#9)
by Ga6thDem on Thu Sep 10, 2009 at 08:58:25 AM EST

I tend to agree with you on this but it seems that everybody here is getting different impressions.


In that people WANT to believe (5.00 / 3) (#15)
by Big Tent Democrat on Thu Sep 10, 2009 at 09:02:41 AM EST

he did not throw the PO under the bus, that works in favor of those of us who want a PO.

I am now fully on board with pretending the President drew a line in the sand on the PO.


I've used [pounds head on desk] before... (5.00 / 1) (#21)
by lambert on Thu Sep 10, 2009 at 09:06:50 AM EST

... but I've never used [puts face in hands] before.

Yes, I actually, literally put my face in my hands when I read that comment. This is what we've been reduced to. My head hurts.


You should forget about politics (5.00 / 3) (#25)
by Big Tent Democrat on Thu Sep 10, 2009 at 09:08:18 AM EST

Clearly you do not think that dishonesty has any place in it and are outraged to see it happen.

How you get through a day without your head exploding is beyond me.


(laughing) (5.00 / 1) (#32)
by katiebird on Thu Sep 10, 2009 at 09:16:35 AM EST

I can't help it.


: It is funny (none / 0) (#46)
by Big Tent Democrat on Thu Sep 10, 2009 at 09:24:28 AM EST

This is standard operating procedure (5.00 / 1) (#19)
by lambert on Thu Sep 10, 2009 at 09:04:38 AM EST

(Via) "I serve as a blank screen on which people of vastly different political stripes project their own views."


Target (none / 0) (#67)
by waldenpond on Thu Sep 10, 2009 at 11:07:47 AM EST

I believe he keeps saying he supports it so the Repubs have something to target in conference. Otherwise he'll give up even more.


I'm a little unclear on "embrace" ... (none / 0) (#10)
by lambert on Thu Sep 10, 2009 at 09:01:13 AM EST

Do you really believe that Obama "embraced" the public option? Or are you taking the approach that you recommend here, and repeating that he did so in order to make it come true?

I'm a simple soul, and this 11-dimensional stuff confuses me.

Oops, sorry! (none / 0) (#12)
by lambert on Thu Sep 10, 2009 at 09:02:02 AM EST

I didn't see this.

This is way, way too meta for me!


BTD has moved beyond the 11th and into the 12th (5.00 / 2) (#20)
by kempis on Thu Sep 10, 2009 at 09:05:08 AM EST

: I think, given... (none / 0) (#35)
by lambert on Thu Sep 10, 2009 at 09:19:06 AM EST

... how this is likely to play out, the 13th dimension is more appropriate.

Call me Sherrod (none / 0) (#18)
by Big Tent Democrat on Thu Sep 10, 2009 at 09:03:21 AM EST

: Melville reference? (none / 0) (#26)
by lambert on Thu Sep 10, 2009 at 09:08:34 AM EST

Damn! Where's my harpoon?

At least you did not choose (none / 0) (#41)
by Big Tent Democrat on Thu Sep 10, 2009 at 09:21:18 AM EST

Elijah Lovejoy as your model.

Martyrdom should never be a goal.

: Who said it was? (none / 0) (#55)
by lambert on Thu Sep 10, 2009 at 09:55:15 AM EST

Certainly not me.

"elected in November" (none / 0) (#48)
by diogenes on Thu Sep 10, 2009 at 09:30:50 AM EST

Was he elected in November on a platform of "public option"?

Yes n/t (5.00 / 2) (#51)
by lilburro on Thu Sep 10, 2009 at 09:33:16 AM EST

go look up his health care plan.


Why yes (5.00 / 2) (#52)
by Big Tent Democrat on Thu Sep 10, 2009 at 09:34:31 AM EST

as a matter of fact.

Did you sleep through the election?


Yes and no (none / 0) (#56)
by lambert on Thu Sep 10, 2009 at 09:58:09 AM EST

Obama explicitly ran against the mandate.

So, you can say, if you like, that Obama ran for the public option, or against it. The very lack of clarity is, of course, why "public option" is so successful as a marketing tool, and yet so strangely elusive when it comes of examples of it actually solving any problems (MA and ME are the best we have, and they are not encouraging).


He ran on the public option (5.00 / 1) (#60)
by Big Tent Democrat on Thu Sep 10, 2009 at 10:13:52 AM EST

unreservedly.


: Feh (none / 0) (#70)
by lambert on Thu Sep 10, 2009 at 02:21:11 PM EST

As I point out, and to which you do not or cannot respond, that all depends on how you define "the public option."
Of course, since it's a marketing slogan, it can't really be defined, except of course in the sense that it makes "progressives" feel good about themselves and their putative policy choices...

He acquired Edwards's public option (none / 0) (#72)
by sallywally on Thu Sep 10, 2009 at 08:34:48 PM EST

after the primaries? For some reason, I don't remember that.


Then we must oppose Ms. Snowe (none / 0) (#71)
by AX10 on Thu Sep 10, 2009 at 04:27:31 PM EST

at all times.