Politico: Nameless Obama Aides Want Him To Confront Left To Look Tough
So some Obama advisers think there’s a political upside in foregoing the public option, getting the left to scream, then having Obama stand up to the screamers in order to look tough? That’s what Politico is reporting, citing unnamed administration aides.
It’s hard to tell whether this really represents West Wing thinking or whether it’s just Politico writing the story they want to write. But some Obama officials seem to be saying this:
On health care, Obama’s willingness to forgo the public option is sure to anger his party’s liberal base. But some administration officials welcome a showdown with liberal lawmakers if they argue they would rather have no health care law than an incremental one. The confrontation would allow Obama to show he is willing to stare down his own party to get things done.
“We have been saying all along that the most important part of this debate is not the public option, but rather ensuring choice and competition,” an aide said. “There are lots of different ways to get there.”
Liberals will ask why unnamed advisers aren’t showing the same zeal for “staring down” Republicans and centrist Dems. After all, the GOP’s approval rating still languishes; GOP leaders have ruled out compromise unless Obama dramatically scales down his ambitions; and the GOP Senator leading negotiations is openly working to defeat “Obamacare.”
But the unbreakable rule is that when Dems confront the left, it’s the right kind of tough, and when they stand up to Republicans, it’s the bad, shrill kind. And of course party leaders can’t take on moderate Dems, because that would be showing disrespect for the “center.”
Given that Obama aides frequently ridicule D.C. conventional wisdom, it’s hard to imagine them in the grip of thinking as tired and conventional as this. But someone or some faction in the administration (or perhaps mainly Politico) seems to want this idea out there.
****************************************
Update: Maybe administration insiders are hitting the panic button because of poll numbers like these.
This blog’s homepage is here. RSS feed here. Twitter feed here. Email me here.
Unnamed sources in a Politico story.
*yawn*
Mr. Sargeant:
“But the unbreakable rule is that when Dems confront the left, it’s the right kind of tough, and when they stand up to Republicans, it’s the bad, shrill kind. And of course party leaders can’t take on moderate Dems, because that would be showing disrespect for the “center.””
The unbreakable fact is that America is a cenetr-right country. They tried demonizing the opposition,(to the point of his OFA calling us “Right Wing Domestic Terrorists” on their blog,(since pulled, but we have screenshots of it), and that kind of pitch got his approval rating below 50%.
“Given that Obama aides frequently ridicule D.C. conventional wisdom, it’s hard to imagine them in the grip of thinking as tired and conventional as this. But someone or some faction in the administration seems to want this idea out there”
Maybe Obama and/or his aides would like to have a second term in office. You Far Lefties don’t have the numbers…quit making up your own reality and then bitterly clinging to it.
I told you before that the Left eats it’s own. It’s now time for you folks to be the daily lunch special.
And I suspect that Obama, at some level, would dearly love to tell all of you people who think that you’re his “boss-man” where to get the hell off.
Greg:
FYI, your link to “are in fact saying this:” doesn’t seem to work.
links fixed. apologies.
Since it isn’t a direct quote and it is Politico. I would take what was said in that article with a grain of salt. NO OTHER article out there from AP to NYT to WaPo has this same info.
I trust Politico as much as I trust the rest of the establishment media, but actually this is what I always expected to happen anyway.
This is how the Democrats roll now. It’s the primary reason I am now an ex-Democrat.
The netroots/Sister Souljah caucus are there just for the Democratic “leadership” to kick in the teeth. Again and again and again. And they keep coming back for more. Again and again and again.
Nothing new here. The best move the ReThugs ever made was to infiltrate the Democratic Party through the DLC…
Like it or not the independents are the swing block of voters in this country. The election of Obama has emboldene progressives and maybe bit by bit progressives can/will redefine the middle as they lure independents into their camp. BUT I am beginning to believe that Obama didn’t use his rhetorical skills to sell health care (and specifically the public option) because he has no intention of being a “liberal lion” or spokesperson on behalf of progressive ideas (at least not now). I know the progressives will be terribly disappointed and angry but will they walk away? I think there is a much higher risk of losing the middle than losing the left–no matter what legislation is enacted.
I am of mixed mind-on one hand I always believe that if a dem president is successful there is a powerful and positive trickle down effect in terms of implementing and expanding progressive policies. On the other hand pandering to the middle and compromising the hell out of a bill as a means to success seems to lack leadership and dilutes power. He is at risk of looking weak.
Bilgeman has an appropriate moniker.
“The unbreakable fact is that America is a cenetr-right country. ”
Bull. See, I just broke that “fact”. It was easy because it isn’t true. And “right wing terrorist” was a self appellation there dummy.
Now for serious discussion with adults.
It would political suicide for Obama to make such a move. All his backing, all his momentum, all his strongest support comes not from the GOP or Blue Dogs or “center right” but from passionately committed citizens who the media classify as “left” (but we know that 79% of the country is now considered the left of the left).
Politico sucks. And “unnamed sources” suck too (except in very special circumstances). That makes this gossip a double suck.
To suggest that Obama should confront the hard left of his party is to suggest that he “confront” himself. How cheaply calclating, how cynical, how unsurprising.
To foster better competition and mobility, one worthwhile option to consider would be changing the tax incentive structure. But Obama can’t honestly do that since he condemned, in most dishonest fashion, John McCain for proposing that.
Welcome to the mess you made Mr. Obama. Most Americans aren’t socialists after all. Didn’t we try to tell you that?
“but we know that 79% of the country is now considered the left of the left”
Too hilarious even to comment upon. This is a goldfish bowl in which you are swimming, gonzone, not the real world.
The byline bears the name of conservative hack Mike Allen, so the article is by definition dishonest and should be regarded as such.
I’ll believe it when I hear it. Unnamed sources say a lot. And they seem to say it to Politico a lot.
Let’s see what the President says next week. Other sources indicate tehir is a firm policy statement coming with some wiggle room on public option. Let’s see what is said.
And I think the Obama people are smart enough to know the conventional wisdom is outdated and jsut ahsn’t caught up with the new age. If my freshman congressman can realize that you can’t please the screamers and the right no matter what you do and these are not people who are going to vote for you I think the President can figure this out. Independants just wnat to see some firm leadership – I don’t think we care if he is standing up to his base. Do we respect a man for fighting with his friends or do we respect a man for sticking up for his friends and himself against his enemies? I’m going with the guy who sticks up for himself and his friends.
And please forgive my typo filled last post. Sorry.
gonzone:
but we know that 79% of the country is now considered the left of the left
How do we know that?
Alan:
Independants just wnat to see some firm leadership
Surely it matter at least a little where they are being led.
Article needed two or three more “don’t listen to Politico” caveats. /not snark/
If this is true, which I will wait and see, I wish OFA would quit asking me for money and gathering all of us together in vigils and silent marches. I have one toningt in front of my Congressman’s office and one tomorrow in front of Boxers SBD office. I will continue to support our president until he proves himself a liar.
Scarecrow at FDL thinks that Poltico is just making this up. I tend to doubt that. To me, the WH has been perfectly consistent on the public option–that the whole thing is an optional part of the larger deal. And if by ditching the PO, BO looks tougher by treading over the shrill left, then so much the better. I’m sure Rahm has been annoyed by all this PO stuff from the left, and I have no doubt he wouldn’t mind dealing them a blow, just to show who’s boss.
Scott C.
I am one of those independents, albeit left of center, and of course it matters where we are being led. But it also matters who is doing the leading. We’ll take a smart, articulate president trying to makes a few changes rather than the status quo.
Christine Romer – “As of the end of June, more than $100 billion had been spent.4 Those numbers are rising each week, and we are on track to have spent 70 percent of the total by the end of the next fiscal year.”
Did everyone see this or read it…..not even 3/4 of the money will be spent by 2011. Is that the “jolt” you and I were all expecting? Or is it just a spending spree by politicians to their pet projects?
Did you get your stimulus money? Are part time jobs and summer jobs considered to be stimulative to the economy or bandaids?
We’re starting to see how nothing is working from the O administration…healthcare falling out of bed, cap and trade pushed back to next year(probably doa), and now the R&R Act is not really a stimulus after all.
Repeal or amend this puppy…I know this won’t many of you on PL happy, but these are facts from Romer…..it isn’t stimulating anything.
Time to repeal
Hey really really dumb guy, that was the whole point of the stimulus bill from the get go. It was ALWAYS a two year plan to get the economy back on track. If YOU didn’t know that its because YOU weren’t paying attention. Don’t blame all of us because you were watching FoxNews.
As for this non news report from Politico, first of all I have seen several journalists on Twitter act like this post was earth shattering or something but there is no actual news in it. First it starts off with the premise that President Obama will get “tougher”. But then it goes on to say that he won’t draw any lines in the sand including for the public option. Then they say they will change tactics. But those “changed tactics” are to continue talking about access and choice, basically the same message he has been selling. And as for the unnamed Obama aide who might be the damn chef for all we know, its really simple. Conservatives aren’t going to vote for Obama. If the left leaves not only will he not get reelected, the party will get slammed in the midterms next year. It ain’t the “middle” that phone banks and goes door to door in GOTV efforts. Its the face painters. And when you lose the face painters you lose elections. It is what it is.
gon zone:
“Bull. See, I just broke that “fact”. It was easy because it isn’t true. And “right wing terrorist” was a self appellation there dummy”
Oh, really?
Link with the screen-capture. Suck on it, moon-bat:
http://blog.heritage.org/2009/09/01/obamas-team-crosses-the-rhetorical-line/
Repeal:
I bought my first home today. The only reason I could afford the it is because of the home buyer/weatherization tax credits package in the stimulus. This house was bought in MI, which has one of the highest unemployment rates, so I know a few contractors and appliance suppliers getting some cash soon. The stimulus package also boosted work for me, so I get to keep my job and stay with my family, friends, and the state I want to bring back to life.
Obama’s stimulus lets me start my life at 23 in the worst economy since the great depression and provide work for members of my community. Please shut the hell up.
Is Lanny Davis now an Obama advisor?
From Bilgeman’s link to his “evidence”
.
(Update #2: Several readers have asked us whether this posting on barackobama.com was “user-generated” rather than a staff posting. From what we can tell, this may have been the case.
.
Do better wingnut. At least read your own frikkin links. lol
Patches..
So when O’s spending money stops, you’ll then be out of a job, foreclosed on your home and we’re right back where we started?….
Now, on to Obama:
Why is it that putting the left down gives people credibility but putting down those on the right makes you shrill?
We’ve been right on the right side of history with Iraq, the economy, health care, civil rights, most any major issue in the last 120 years. I guess having hippies in your political spectrum is more devasting than having racists, religious fanatics, and chest-beating hawks.
I think he’d have more credibility with sane people if he’d shut down the crazies. But I guess I’m wrong in assuming sanity holds a majority in the country…
@time to repeal
Wall Street Journal this morning…
“U.S. Economy Gets Lift From Stimulus”
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB125185379218478087.html
Make Obama weak and appear to have lost his base.
Divide and conquer.
And unfortunately, it’s working because a lot on the left are freaking out and not questioning the source (Politico and DRUdGE) or their underlying motives.
This independent voted for Obama to get health care reform done, and that includes a public option. It is also one of the reasons why my ex-Republican husband voted for him.
It is why I am donating a dollar a day until it is done, and it is why I am making calls, writing letters, and why I visited my Congressman. I will never vote for another republican until they own up and take responsibility for the last eight years. But I will be hard pressed to vote for a Democratic candidate if health care reform is not done, and done well.
As far as tax credits to subsidize the untenable patched together too expensive health care system we currently have, that is one of the least viable suggestions to fix this mess I have ever heard. After ten years as a tax consultant for a Big Four firm, who needed to retire because of health reasons, I believe a major tax overhaul is certainly necessary, but not so that we can continue to subsidize the bloated health care system we currently have.
LindaS.:
We’ll take a smart, articulate president trying to makes a few changes rather than the status quo.
I thought now that Obama was in office, that was the status quo?
Anyway, I think Obama is in a bind now because his campaign was largely about him, not about policy. Sure, he staked out some positions, but his appeal to a large swath of those that voted for him was not his policy positions, but rather his personality. His policy agenda is going to upset a lot of people who were supporters…one way or another. Either the ideological left is going to be mad if he caves to middle America, or middle America is going to be mad if he caves to the ideological left.
I think the ideological left is fooling itself if it thinks Obama got elected because mainstream America has moved leftwards.
I read that WSJ article this morning Bernie. When the stimulus affects the unemployment rate in a positive way, and I hope it will, the pres’s favorability rates will rise again.
So when O’s spending money stops, you’ll then be out of a job, foreclosed on your home and we’re right back where we started?…
Noticed i said keep my job. As though that means I couldn’t find another one. I choose a career that is highly recession proof even in MI. The stimulus allowed me the startup money to buy the house I wouldn’t have been able to for several years. People get money now, when they need it in order to get by till the economy recovers. It’s econ 101.
I have a job that will remain constant and spending what I have so that others can get by is an honor to me.
And thanks for assuming I’m so stupid that I’d buy a house I can’t afford, even though this is the best buyer’s market ever. You wasted my money in Iraq. I’m using your’s to rebuild this country. Who’s really the bigger fool?
Finally; the President may be getting the message, and will snap out of his lethargy, and actually start to lead the fight for Health Care Reform.
This is what I said, yesterday, and it is similar to what I have said before.
Down at the bottom I am posting a link to a report, today, from AP, that the President might finally be getting the message, and is actually going to spell out what he wants.
# Liam | September 1st, 2009 at 11:48 am
President Obama has done a very poor job in spelling out what he wants. I still have no idea, what his bottom line is, and what a bill must contain, or he will veto it. The reason I, a support of him, do not know this, is because he has never spelled out what he must have in a bill.
That is because the President never acted like he should have, and kept us all informed on what he was demanding to have.
He left a leadership vacuum by being so hung up on not coming across as being partisan, that he left the field open for the opponents of any reform to rush in, an define what the President wanted.
Further more, after the opponents mal-defined what the President was seeking, he never put his vaunted rapid response operation into action, to counter all the false claims, that opponents were making.
The “death panels” claims, is a prime example of the President failing to rebut rapidly and strongly.
As far as I am concerned, the poll numbers are because President Obama has not lead in a clear, strongly messaged, and persistent manner, so that people knew what he wanted in a bill, and how it would affect their lives.
He has been far too passive, and he has lost control of the issue.
Here is the AP report.
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090902/ap_on_go_pr_wh/us_obama_health_care_overhaul_4
“President Barack Obama has talked a lot about health care lately, but some allies say he has been too vague. Now he’s thinking of throwing more details and personal weight into the debate, which polls indicate Republicans have been winning in recent weeks.”
sgwhiteinfla:
“Do better wingnut. At least read your own frikkin links. lol”
Oh, I read it. The very fact that this even went out on OFA is very telling.
You don’t put language like this out on the President’s campaign blog…was everyone asleep over there?
No, Someone had drunk more than their share of Moonbat Koolaid, and agreed with this and let it through.
And then when the more sober crew read it, they yanked it down.
But the damage has been done.
According to an AARP poll, 79% of Americans support a public option.
Scott C.
I was referring to the Status Quo the far right is trying to maintain in the our health care system. I think it’s pretty clear it’s status quo at all costs for repub’s.
And I don’t personally care who gets mad in the health care debate as long as we pass reform, that’s why I voted for Obama.
ScottC:
“I think the ideological left is fooling itself if it thinks Obama got elected because mainstream America has moved leftwards.”
But that’s their function…that’s what they DO!
They actually think that government programs are not funded with their OWN money.
They REALLY believe that.
And from that initial self-delusion, all the rest flows.
patches
What is econ 101…what is your belief on how our economy should work?
“The confrontation would allow Obama to show he is willing to stare down his own party to avoid getting things done.”
Fixed the typo…
“ScottC:
“I think the ideological left is fooling itself if it thinks Obama got elected because mainstream America has moved leftwards.”
But that’s their function…that’s what they DO!
They actually think that government programs are not funded with their OWN money.
They REALLY believe that.
And from that initial self-delusion, all the rest flows.”
What a cesspool of right-wing trollery this site has become.
Right Wing Terrorist with initial caps is an implied quote of how that one man described himself, to applause, and to then being called a true American patriot by Rep Herger.
Wingnut meant to call himself an extremist. Oopsie.
http://www.mtshastanews.com/news/x1566714064/Right-wing-terrorist-says-he-misspoke
Bernie:
Wall Street Journal this morning…“U.S. Economy Gets Lift From Stimulus”
If you read the article, you’ll notice the headline is either deceptive or is using “stimulus” generically and not to refer to the president’s stimulus package. The second paragraph says:
“But there’s little agreement about which programs are having the biggest impact. Some economists argue that efforts such as the Federal Reserve’s aggressive buying of Treasury debt and mortgage-backed securities, as well as government efforts to shore up banks, are providing a bigger boost than the administration’s $787 billion stimulus package.”
And later:
“Opinion, however, remains split about which program has had the biggest impact. “I don’t think the stimulus was necessarily as effective as people claimed it to be or claim it will be,” said Joseph LaVorgna, chief U.S. economist with Deutsche Bank Securities Inc. He credits the government’s “stress tests” of banks, which helped boost confidence on Wall Street and allow banks to raise capital and resume lending.”
So obviously there remains a difference of opinion over whether the lift came from the stimulus package or other fed activity.
‘Politico’ is just another word for Propaganda.
Right Wing Terrorist is caps is sarcasm. Right Wing Terrorist said and applauded by the nutters is apparently saracasm. So says the National Review:
The Liberal Mind Cannot Grasp the Nuances of Sarcasm
http://campaignspot.nationalreview.com/post/?q=ZmVmMjVhNGY5ZTg2MTg0NGMyNzUyZDI0OGIyNDRhYzM
The question, b-man, is can you grasp the nuances of sarcasm?
@Bileman
American is a center-left nation. The facts were on display in Nov. of last year, when a center-left politician won a national election in a landslide. And his “evil librul” Congress became even more blue. It doesn’t matter how many times you write it, this is surely NOT a center-right nation. I feel sorry for you, being so unable to accept reality.
@Scott C.
The 79% being “left of the left” was, I assume, a reference to the AARP poll showing 79% of Americans want a Public Option. And that’s a Public Option that’s been demonized as a “Government Takeover of Socialist Fasism” or something.
I don’t think it’s quite that high. The wording of the question can affect the outcome quite a bit. However, when you look across the spectrum of polls – nearly all the polls that clearly state that the Public Option is a CHOICE, while still clearly stating it’s a Government run Health Insurance program…nearly ALL of them have support above 70%, with a select few in the 80’s.
I think it’s an incredibly safe bet to say that as the Public Option is designed now, over 70% of this country supports it.
The WSJ using a deceptive headline? NFW!
BBQ:
“American is a center-left nation. The facts were on display in Nov. of last year, when a center-left politician won a national election in a landslide”
53%-46% is a landslide huh? Okay…I’ll play.
On one day in Novemebr of last year America may have lurched center-left, but it’s sure lurching backwards now.
Say…on how many days in November when we elect Presidentssince 1980 has America been center-right?
2 Reagan
1 Bush
2 bush
versus:
2 Clinton
1 Obama
Still want to argue the point?
Kathleen Hussein:
You should try explaining away the OFA slander at least one more time.
I think you’ve got it in you to yet post your personal best in lame and flaccid buffoonery.
Stay classy.
I see where this is going; someone is cranky because the economy tanked and the gov’t stepped in. Just remember that all this deficit spending wouldn’t have happened if 1) Bush maintained a surplus and 2) Uber Capitalists didn’t pillage the system. If they had been okay with a little government intervention, we wouldn’t have needed a metric ton of it.
And about the left/right thing, we’re a center country that pendulums. We’re not ideologically right, people just love the folksy charm. We could be left, but the left is terrible at messaging the way the right is. FDR-Carter, we were a center-left; reagan-BushII, center-right. Will Obama move us radically to the left… HA! Not liberal enough to pull us the other way. At the end of his presidency, we’ll likely be a center country. Hurrah, everyone can be like JokeLine!!
LindaS.:
I think it’s pretty clear it’s status quo at all costs for repub’s.
All that is clear to me is the the R’s don’t want a particular kind of reform. Most R’s would almost certainly be in favor of tort reform. Likewise changing the tax code to put employer provided insurance and individually purchased insurance on the same tax footing. There are, of course, other reforms they advocate. It is wrong to suppose that if someone opposes your reform, they oppose all reform.
It is true that the R’s are probably not any more willing to focus on the real problem regarding health care costs than are the Dems. Even the R’s like to please people by promising them something for nothing.
Bilgeman:
“You don’t put language like this out on the President’s campaign blog…was everyone asleep over there?”
You’re really reaching. Just admit you’re wrong and move on, even if only to yourself.
Unlike most right wing sites, which either don’t allow commenting, or have a moderated queue, most left of center sites (including OFA, and Dailykos) simply let people post and if they post something objectionable, reserve the right to delete it.
So no, finding something on OFA or dailykos you object to by some random person on the interenet isn’t indicative of anything or “very telling” – it’s just free speech. The fact that it got taken down indicates OFA doesn’t agree with what it said either, which somehow fails to reassure you.
They can’t win – if they left it up, you’d complain and claim they must agree, and now that they take it down, it’s a cover up or something.
“Random guy said X on the internet” isn’t a story.
With a tip of the hat to Hofstadter’s The Paranoid Style in American Politics…
“”If something is not done shortly, this country is going the way of…Italy, Germany…or Russia, and it is high time we did something,” exclaimed Irénée du Pont, one of the more prominent conservatives of the 1930s. Many of his fellow Americans agreed there was good cause to be alarmed: a new Democratic president was proposing an unprecedented expansion of federal power that would increase taxes on the well-off and dole out benefits to the jobless and other unfortunates. Several spokesmen on the right made more ominous vows: “So help me God, I will be instrumental in taking a Communist from the chair once occupied by Washington,” declared Father Charles Coughlin, who commanded one of the largest radio audiences in the nation.”
http://www.thenation.com/doc/20090914/kazin
Obama and his aides need to remember what they were elected to do. Create universal health insurance. Get tne economy under control. Get us out of unwinable wars that we never should have started. He has gone in the exact opposite direction.
It’s the independent voters that the Dims need most to worry about and it was their votes that swing victory to the Dims. That’s who the congressmen are fighting for
If R’s wanted a change in health reform, they would have started several years ago.
They don’t want a change because they don’t really feel there is a problem. Just like 60 years ago, and 16 yrs ago. Their true intent is to obstruct – period. They’ve said so repeatedly, loud and clear.
It’s also laughable that they argue “government between doctors” talking point. Ummm, do they even remember their actions regarding Terry Sciavo?
Bilgeman is full of himself!
Look, if you can’t take a little sarcasm, remember how you and your co-ideologues, or, aptly, tribesmen, vilified those of us who were objecting to the illegal war your boy W started and who were objecting to illegal surveillance and torture by calling us “pro-terrorist”, traitors, anti-American etc. That WASN’T
More bilgeman:
“2 Reagan
1 Bush
2 bush”
If you’re going to use Presidential elections to determine the popular sentiment in the country, you need to use popular vote, and so, correction:
2 Reagan
1 Bush Sr
1 Gore (remember, he got more votes)
1 Bush Jr
And 53/46 is a landslide when it accompanies gaining 21 in the house, 9 in the senate, and winning North Carolina, an EV in Nebraska and Indiana. Bush Sr got 53% in 1988, but actually lost seats in the House and Senate.
Sorry for the accidental post.
That WASN’T sarcasm on your part. Trying to bully people now isn’t going to work so well for you. Try thinking with your brain instead of your bilge-hole.
Flaccid? Stop projecting, it’s TMI.
I wish people wouldn’t get all caught up in the ’strange psychology’ of all this. Because yes, it sounds strange, their confronting the left when the right seems at its weakest.
I mean, $it’s $all $such $a $crazy $mishmash $of $contradictory $attitudes $and $strange $self-defeating $behavior, $who $could $ever $hope $to $unravel $why $those $we $elected $are $acting $so $strangely?
Tragically Flip:
“Unlike most right wing sites, which either don’t allow commenting, or have a moderated queue, most left of center sites (including OFA, and Dailykos) simply let people post and if they post something objectionable, reserve the right to delete it.”
Mr. Cooper at The Foundry put it well in his second update:
“This was not an ill-advised comment on a blog, but rather an organizing activity that used hateful language to describe the opposition. The President and his political advisors should immediately denounce this language and continue to remove it from their website. And in the long run, they should discontinue the ‘Organizing for America’ website entirely to remove any suspicion that the President shares the views of its participants. There is a time for campaigning, and a time for leading. Now is the time for the President to lead.)”
Someone at OFA should be packing their desk and looking for work by 5 pm today.
BBQ:
I think it’s an incredibly safe bet to say that as the Public Option is designed now, over 70% of this country supports it.
Perhaps, but do they support the necessary and/or probable implications of it? I am doubtful.
We know that many democrats view (smartly, I think) the public option as a means towards transitioning to a single payer system. There is nothing inconsistent with someone who looks at the public option “choice” as a reasonable one for themselves, but balks when considering what is likely to happen after it becomes a reality. And that includes not just a transition into a single payer system, but higher taxes, spiralling deficit, etc.
As I have said before, the single, solitary reason for advocating a public option as opposed to simply a private, non-profit insurance option is in order to shift costs from the insured to the taxpayer.
They tried demonizing the opposition,(to the point of his OFA calling us “Right Wing Domestic Terrorists”
Which they are. The conservative that shot those three cops in Pittsburgh was one. Tim McVeigh was another.
Seems as you conservatives should get your own house in order before criticizing anyone else. Preferably in your natural home of Saudi Arabia.
Trying again
Greg – Politico ? Really ? Unnamed sources ? Really, really ?
reverter:
“vilified those of us who were objecting to the illegal war your boy W started and who were objecting to illegal surveillance and torture by calling us “pro-terrorist”, traitors, anti-American etc.”
Sigh…what is it with you people and your “illegal war” babble? The Congress voted the AUMF…will you at some point deal with the reality that IS? Even as your champion Obama continues the campaigns?
Sure, there was a lot of rhetoric tossed around, but when did Bush’s own campaign website refer to the opposition as traitors for not supporting his Medicare Prescription Drug Benefit legislation?
Dude, he treated you with more class than that, and certainly more class than his Obots are treating us.
Dr, Squid:
“Which they are. ”
You didn’t get the memo…that talking point was pulled by O-quarters.
But you’ve just proven my point.
Thankee
Seems weird that an unnamed advisor would want Obama to “stand up” to the left on an issue where 80% of the public agrees with the left, in order to stand with a Republican caucus that has 20% approval ratings.
It would be useful to stop thinking of all matters in terms of “left” and “right”, but rather in terms of “voters” and “money”. Money (in terms of the insurance lobby) doesn’t want health care reform. Voters do.
(And no, the idea that the US is a “center-right” country isn’t an “unbreakable fact”. That’s known as “begging the question”. The US is not fixed in space and time and neither are our politics. The “center-right” coalition has won exactly one of the past 10 Congressional elections and one of the past five Presidential elections. At what point will people admit that it’s not 1984 any more?)
Scott C
I’ll call your tort reform, changes to the tax code, and even throw in crossing state lines, but raise you actual reform that will bring down the cost of insurance. Many of us see the public option as a means to bring competition back to the insurance market.
Right now as a small business owner, we’re dealing with incredible stress on our ability to function as a profitable business with the rising costs of health care. Our choices, lose a couple of employees, force them to pay a portion of their insurance (up to 50%), cut their hours to part-time and not cover them at all, give up group insurance altogether and buy our own through HIPAA.
I understand your pre-tax, after-tax argument, but I don’t see that as significant enough. Most of the other reform measures such as pre-existing conditions, recission and mandates benefit the insurance companies but do nothing to address cost containment.
Bernie:
Several spokesmen on the right made more ominous vows: “So help me God, I will be instrumental in taking a Communist from the chair once occupied by Washington,” declared Father Charles Coughlin, who commanded one of the largest radio audiences in the nation.”
You really shouldn’t promote the myth that Coughlin was a man of the right.
Coughlin:
1) Supported Roosevelt’s early new deal policies.
2) When he came to oppose Roosevelt, he claimed Roosevelt was a “tool of Wall Street”.
3) He regularly railed against capitalism, saying “”We maintain the principle that there can be no lasting prosperity if free competition exists in industry. Therefore, it is the business of government not only to legislate for a minimum annual wage and maximum working schedule to be observed by industry, but also to curtail individualism that, if necessary, factories shall be licensed and their output shall be limited.”[
4) He advocated wealth redistribution and government control of resources for “the public good”
Oh, and he was from Canada.
Sounds to me like he had more in common with someone on this board than anyone on the right.
bilgeman:
“Mr. Cooper at The Foundry put it well in his second update:
“This was not an ill-advised comment on a blog, but rather an organizing activity that used hateful language to describe the opposition. The President and his political advisors should immediately denounce this language [...]”
What evidence is there that this was an “organizing activity” rather than a post by some random person? Because Cooper says so?
And the President should denounce it? RNC Chair Steele won’t denounce the Repubican members of congress pushing the death panel lie, why should the leader of the Democratic party have to discipline anonymous members of the public. Weren’t you guys upset when he said a cop acted stupidly? Now you want him to say some other citizen did?
As for shutting down OFA, yes, wouldn’t you like that. How typical for the authoritarian right, “it’s time for the president to lead” – so all the followers should just shut down and await instructions. That’s not the ethos in operation here. Organizing continues. Elections are just 1 event. Organizing and citizen involvement is an ongoing process.
Most R’s would almost certainly be in favor of tort reform.
Well, of course they would — it’s a cash giveaway to insurance companies and doctors that doesn’t actually do anything to improve patient care or keep costs down. Of course Republicans love it.
Which they are. The conservative that shot those three cops in Pittsburgh was one. Tim McVeigh was another.
As was the Holocaust museum shooter, and the guy who killed Dr. Tiller inside his church, and the guy who decided to kill him some liberals at that Unitarian Universalist church in Tennessee last year, and the guy who killed 4 women in a gym less than a month ago.
Gosh, I can’t imagine why people would worry about right-wing terrorists picking up guns and killing people just because right-wing terrorists have started picking up guns and killing people. Such a mystery.
But you’ve just proven my point.
Conservatives don’t have points. Points are liberal, and you can’t have that.
Besides, it was a Bush-administration-commissioned paper that called them right-wing terrorists. But maybe that conservative at Wally Herger’s townhall didn’t really exist. Because if he did, it would disprove your ‘point’. And everyone knows that facts should be submissive to conservatism, because conservatives are just so AWEsome because they said so and no conservative has ever been wrong about anything because if they were wrong they wouldn’t be conservative, and have you mentioned lately how conservative you are because you couldn’t be a conservative without saying how conservative you are as often as possible.
Or something like that.
I think this is the crux of the White House’s cluelessness:
“There are lots of different ways to get there.”
This baseless assertion has also been made by another nameless White House aide a few weeks ago, and I think it actually reflects the president’s thinking. But my god, it’s just not true. There are NOT currently ANY other ways to get there. No one has proposed any specific mechanisms, beyond the laughable “co-op” rejoinder, to ensure choice and competition.
The Health Care Exchange does some of that work, but if it were enough, we wouldn’t even be talking about a public option.
Exactly what are the numerous ways to get there, O Nameless White House Aide?
Thanks “along,” those were my thoughts exactly. We’ve been hearing for some time now that the public option is not a dealbreaker for the bill, but rather the ends the public option achieves are something that must be in the bill. However, I have yet to hear a SINGLE idea that would replace the public option in achieving the President’s stated goals.
The White House can talk about “lots of different ways to get there” all they want, but until they show us even one way, progressives are going to continue to demand the public option.
Mnemosyne:
[Tort reform is] a cash giveaway to insurance companies and doctors that doesn’t actually do anything to improve patient care or keep costs down.
It is not meant to improve patient care, and of course it will keep costs down. Doctors/medicine providers pass on the cost of liability insurance on to their patients. Lower the liability insurance, you lower costs.
Scott C.
Do you really believe tort reform will lower costs that will be passed on to patients? I sort of think it will line the pockets of CEO’s because I’m pretty sure their $3000-$8000 per hour isn’t enough.
Tort reform has been tried in numerous states and did not drive costs down. For conservatives to federalize tort limitations means they want to stomp on the 10th amendment and states rights they claim to love so much.
The states have tried. It doesn’t work. The reason is simple: Liability just isn’t that big a chunk of the rising costs, and frivolous lawsuits and “runaway juries” are mostly anecdotes made to look much more common than they really are.
Anyone who doubts this should look into the real details of the McDonalds’ hot coffee lady’s lawsuit. It wasn’t a frivolous case at all, it was just made to look that way by tort reformers cherry picking the details to tell a misleading story of what happened.
@Scott C. | September 2nd, 2009 at 11:59 am
Mnemosyne is correct. At least if state efforts at “tort reform” are any indicator. Texas has had this for years and only the insurance companies profited, oh, and incompetent doctors. Never have the patients gained from “tort reform”
As a matter of fact, if statistics are to be believed, the costs of medical malpractice and insurance for said runs about 1% of total costs. As such, if you totally eliminate all malpractice law suits and even the insurance against them (total fantasy, I know), you would save very little.
“Tort reform” is an old winger meme to rail against “trial lawyers” while at the same time they are filing lawsuits as fast as they can suing everyone they can. Example:Tom Delay. And did you know? “Trial lawyers” give money to the Dems. Never mind that the insurance companies feed the “trial lawyers” trolls! It would not fit the Villagers mediated meme to mention that now, would it?
If insurance companies really want juries to start treating them better then I recommend they start treating us jurists better. Who does NOT have a horror story about dealing with an insurance company?
Linda:
Posted my last to the wrong comments. See:
http://theplumline.whorunsgov.com/political-media/obama-slips-below-50-in-pollster-coms-aggregate-approval-rating/#comment-66153
I always found the Republican love of tort reform to be intriguing. The party of states’ rights and devolution of power wants the Federal government to mandate that civil courts put caps on damages through a statute that can only be modified by an act of Congress. I guess they’re for giving as much power to the states and individuals as possible except when they aren’t.
Personally, I’d rather trust a jury.
As for whipping the left, I sincerely don’t care about anyone from the West Wing moaning about the Progressive Caucus mildly souring all their fine negotiations with the Insurance and Pharmaceutical lobbies. If Obama never wanted a public option, which is necessary if you want to change insurance incentives (unless you want to go all Netherlands and regulate the insurance industry up the wazoo, price schedules and all), he shouldn’t have campaigned on it. But he did, and he’s still pushing it.
People should also remember that most of this kind of **** exists just to make dinner parties in Georgetown more interesting, and Politco fits that niche rather well.
“Nameless Obama Aides Want Him To Confront Left To Look Tough”
Here’s my take. Obama is going to be forced to sign h/c reform that does not contain a public option. The angry left will howl. Better to position himself right now as having stood up to the far left fringe than as having lost to the right wing extremists.
“Here’s my take. Obama is going to be forced to sign h/c reform that does not contain a public option. The angry left will howl. Better to position himself right now as having stood up to the far left fringe than as having lost to the right wing extremists.”
Better for who? Once again the consensus opinion from DC is “the left must be strong by caving to the right”
Funny how Republicans are never expected to piss on their base to avoid looking weak.
gonzone:
Who does NOT have a horror story about dealing with an insurance company?
I don’t. In fact my best insurance company story involves the insurance company getting totally defrauded by an unscrupulous doctor.
Sly:
Personally, I’d rather trust a jury.
I would be happy to trust a jury, if the loser (and their lawyer) had to pay the legal costs of the winner. But as long as plaintiffs/tort lawyers have a free option to sue, their upside should be capped.
Scott C.:
Saying that there are 3,000 insurance companies doing business in the United States doesn’t tell us anything about market concentration, which can actually vary greatly within states. In New York, for example, where I live is more concentrated than NYC and I live about 40 minutes away. You go further west or upstate, and you begin to see levels of concentration similar to Alabama and Arkansas.
The AMA has done some great work in analyzing market concentration on a state-by-state and locality-by-locality basis for the past few years. You can find their 2007-2008 report here: http://www.ama-assn.org/ama1/pub/upload/mm/368/compstudy_52006.pdf
They’ve finished their 2009 study, but as far as I know it hasn’t been publicly released yet.
In terms of medical inflation, there are many reasons for it. More than an increased demand from aging Baby Boomers. An over-reliance on brand-named drugs due to direct advertising, the liability the uninsured and under-insured present to the system, the migration of general practitioners toward becoming specialists, low Medicare reimbursement rates, etc. It’s a combination of many factors that need to be worked out individually.
I doubt you’ll read this far down Greg, but this is a complete Village farce. We have been hearing about this lone (or maybe several) WH advisers who seem to be left over from the Bush administration. Their political calculations, as others above me have already noticed, are so far off base as to be laughable. No one is asking Obama to quiet his base, what they want to hear HIS plan and to have him enact the platform he ran on. So far those have been slow in coming, hence the sinking poll numbers, but that resistance to the President is soft. It seems that he is gearing up to give a big speech within the week, I expect that there will be a hardening of support afterwords. Everything else, like this nonsense about the President passing a Rahm-style bill is just not going to happen.
It is not meant to improve patient care, and of course it will keep costs down.
If it doesn’t improve patient care, all you’re doing is removing people’s ability to get compensation after being injured by an incompetent doctor. If my doctor amputates the wrong leg, do you think it will be much comfort for me to say, “Well, at least he didn’t charge me very much”?
Scott C: “Loser Pays” is an interesting approach, but it has its own problems. Civil Torts are used in more than just the payment of damages incurred, they’ve also played an important part in areas such as civil rights and product liability case law.
There’s also the issue of cost disparities. A business would likely incur more costs in pursuing or defending against a civil tort. Under such a rule, we’d probably see a dramatic rise in class actions to spread costs over many plaintiffs, which diminishes the value of the reward those plaintiffs may actually be owed.
Sly:
Saying that there are 3,000 insurance companies doing business in the United States doesn’t tell us anything about market concentration, which can actually vary greatly within states.
Understood, but the fact remains that we have laws which prevent insurance companies from competing with each other. If more competition is needed, then repeal those laws. Simply adding another insurance company is not the solution.
In terms of medical inflation, there are many reasons for it.
Agreed. It is not nearly as simple-minded as villainous insurance companies ripping people off, as some seem to think.
“Loser Pays” is an interesting approach, but it has its own problems.
True. Nothing is easy, and all action is likely to produce distortions that, at the very least, we are not used to dealing with.
We have been saying all along that the most important part of this debate is not the public option, but rather ensuring choice and competition,
No, you were saying coverage, THEN discussing those two priorities. We haven’t forgotten that. Our eyes are on the ball.
If more competition is needed, then repeal those laws.
yeah, fewer laws is CLEARLY what’s needed.
I have an idea, let’s let pirates take over the Coast Guard – it’s about the same thing as repealing the existing laws.
More trolls on plumbline than I had imagined. Greg, you are too kind.
So….as far as I’m concerned, I don’t believe Politico any farther than I can light it on fire & throw it, but…if it is true that ‘annonymous’ admin folks want to spank the DFHs, I suggest that we get the progressives in the House to sink the bill. No Public Option, no bill. The press will say the left & the Repubs teamed up to sink a crappy bill that did nothing. The Blue Dogs will get voted out of office and we won’t have to deal with their treachery any longer. It’d still be a Democratic majority so, so what? On the other hand, if a bill passes & is signed that does contain a Public option, American small business & the American public will get cheaper healthcare and Democrats will get all the credit…well except from those of you who are Fauxnewsheads.
I’m with kindness. First, No Public Option, no bill. Second, if they jettison the Public Option, stay home during the next 2 elections and let your representatives know why.
Very nice information I am going to make a link area on my site and add you.
I really liked your blog! I have added you to my google news feeder.
I found your blog on google and read a few of your other posts. I just added you to my Google News Reader. Keep up the awesome work Look forward to reading more from you in the future.
Great site been reading and will add your site to mine.