Sherrod Brown: You Own Health Care Now, Mr. President, Time To Lead
Strong stuff from Dem Senator Sherrod Brown, who tells Glenn Thrush in no uncertain terms that it’s time for the President to lead on health care:
“I hope the president speaks out strongly for the public option — this health care bill really becomes his at this point,” said Sen. Sherrod Brown, one of about 30 Democrats who have pressured Reid to back the controversial option.
“[Reid] took the temperature of his caucus and found that he had to go with the public option,” added Brown. “And now it’s the president’s turn….He needs to speak out strongly on a number of issues…affordability…the subsidy question — really on the whole package.”
White House advisers can’t be thrilled about Brown’s gauntlet-throwing at a time when they’re working hard to tamp down the meme that Obama was MIA on the public option as the Senate grappled over the way forward. It’s unclear how widespread within the Dem caucus Brown’s sentiment is, but it’s suggestive that a Dem Senator went ahead and voiced it so bluntly.
This blog’s homepage is here. RSS feed here. Twitter feed here. Email me here.
@Greg: You’ve heard that Lieberman has promised to filibuster with the Republicans? Politico…
I heard, sbj, but I heard it from TPM, not Politico
TPM – always first. (Are you boycotting Politico as well as FNC?)
Seems to me that such a stark declaration is quite important to the debate.
Meh, another nontroversy ginned up by the media.
““[Reid] took the temperature of his caucus and found that he had to go with the public option,” added Brown. “And now it’s the president’s turn….He needs to speak out strongly on a number of issues…affordability…the subsidy question — really on the whole package.””
Yeah and then just like last time, the President will speak and the media will say he’s boorish and overexposed.
“The subsidy question” is awfully important. The House and Senate were miles apart on this awhile ago…
Greg, nice swipe at politico. sbj can go, suck an egg.
Reality Check,
Since Traitor Joe, and Snowe Job will only support a bill without any PO, even just a Trigger, those two are dead to us. We do not need them.
we can not pass their version, because over 50 Democrats will not support it.
I think getting more that 50 on board, is far more important than getting Traitor Joe, or Snowe Job on board.
Time to put those two on the pay no mind list. Also, since Snowe Job says that she would never vote for a bill with a Trigger Option, then the claim that President Obama was holding out for the Trigger Option to get Snowe Job’s vote, is patently false. She said she would not vote for it, so why would the White House then push for it, on her behalf.
Come on now. Do some real reporting instead of just dreaming up illogical nonsense.
@liam: You need 60 votes.
“Lieberman is saying that he’s pretty much OK with letting senators offer amendments–try to change the legislation, move it in any direction they deem necessary. But when that process is all over, and Harry Reid wants to hold an up or down vote on the final product, Lieberman’s saying he’ll join that filibuster, if he’s not happy with the finished product. Point blank.”
http://tpmdc.talkingpointsmemo.com/2009/10/lieberman-sure-id-filibuster-a-health-care-reform-bill.php?ref=fpa
Obama is still in campaign mode, and has yet to lead on anything. What makes Senator Brown think he can lead on Health care?
Absurdly off-topic, but I’ve just got to share this:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/10/27/scalia-on-brown-v-board-o_n_335591.html
I’m a little speechless.
So sbj, should we all just give up because of what Lieberman says today? Any chance he could be persuaded by something, anything? Dems will move ahead and try to bring these folks along with them at some point.
@tena: You seem to be having a bit of a pasting issue?
http://theplumline.whorunsgov.com/political-media/media-deemed-white-house-attacks-on-fox-to-be-as-newsworthy-as-swine-flu/#comment-100576
SBJ,
For the last time. We can not get the Majority of the Democrats to vote for a bill without an option, so your sixty votes rubbish is just that.
It does not matter if Lieberman and Snowe would vote for a bill without any version of the PO, not even a Trigger Option, because o all the other Republicans will still vote against it, and the vast Majority of Democrats will not support it.
There are no where near fifty votes for what Traitor Joe, and Snowe Job are insisting on, so they are dead to us.
@lmsinca: “So sbj, should we all just give up because of what Lieberman says today?”
Heck no – you’ve got to fight for what you believe in. But remember pragmatism?
“Any chance he could be persuaded by something, anything?”
There’s always money, or maybe he could replace Biden as the VP? He’s said he’s almost certain to permit debate – so that’s obviously where we head next. My guess is that the PO gets stripped in debate.
Hoyer is talking about a PO that is NOT tied to Medicare in the House, too.
“We can not get the Majority of the Democrats to vote for a bill without an option.”
Back that up with something?
There are several people on these boards yesterday who mocked and insulted those who questioned Reid’s supposedly superduper awesome vote gathering abilities. I wonder what those geniuses have to say now, now that it is obvious this turkey isn’t going to get sixty votes.
Would you like some whine with your crow?
Liam and SBJ,
There’s always reconciliation and no need for 60. I know this is the harder way but it’s still out there.
There were several people that should say.
Can anyone find out if Lieberman is holding out because of this administrations reluctance to give free reign of Iraqi air space to the Israeli air force?
“sbj | October 27th, 2009 at 02:27 pm
@tena: You seem to be having a bit of a pasting issue?”
thanks for all your tender concern.
And for those touting reconciliation, there is no way you will get the Democratic Caucus to go along with that, particularly those Democrats who literally spent months crafting a bill in the Finance Committe that didn’t have a public option to begin with. Why would they go nuclear to insert a plan they didn’t want in there themselves? To salvage Harry Reid’s career? It ain’t gonna happen.
Lieberman said he would vote for cloture to debate the bill, then he wants an arm full of goodies (saying he will not support the bill “as it stands”). He did not say he is against the public option w/opt-out (as he has in the past), he is obviously just putting a negotiating position on the table.
The President has owned this from the beginning, we all know success or failure of health care reform will be laid at Obama’s feet. The question is, will Obama come out supporting an opt out and push for testy Dems to allow the vote to come to the floor for the bill? The answer is likely “yes”. But quotes like Brown’s will be the focus of the discussion instead of Obama’s support for the process, because critiquing the way in which he supports things is much more than than talking about what Obama actually supports.
Mike, what do you think the odds are that somebody can really find that out? LOL! I wish…
“Can anyone find out if Lieberman is holding out because of this administrations reluctance to give free reign of Iraqi air space to the Israeli air force?”
Wow, it took a grand total of five minutes for the classic “Israel first” anti-semitic argument to appear. I wonder how long it will be before we start hearing nose jokes and reading about diamond brokers and control of the world’s banks?
I just read the Politico article. Lieberman is bluffing and just wants attention. He claims that he spoke to Reid about this so why would Reid go out yesterday if Lieberman was going to do this for real?
The man is bluffing and is just continuing his revenge tour.
“ecause critiquing the way in which he supports things is much more than than talking about what Obama actually supports.”
I think I just fell in love with you –
Thank you so damn much for making that distinction.
“thanks for all your tender concern”
Not concerned – annoyed.
“[Lieberman] did not say he is against the public option w/opt-out (as he has in the past)”
Er, yes he did.
“I can’t see a way in which I could vote for cloture on any bill that contained a creation of a government-operated-run insurance company,” Lieberman added…
“I feel this way about a national, government-created health insurance company – whether it’s a trigger or not,” he said. “My answer is – we’re – we have the opportunity to do some great reforms here. These exchanges that we’re talking about, I think, are going to drive competition and probably bring the cost of health insurance down or at least contain the cost increases for a lot of people.”
He’ll go with the Baucus bill, as will Snowe.
Bob65, give it a rest.
Concern about having Israel preemptively start a mid-east war is not anti-semitic you imbecile.
@mike: You pretty clearly implied that Lieberman was putting the interests of Israel before the USA…
“Not concerned – annoyed.”
LOL!
You shouldn’t have told me that.
For instance, look where we are now. IAEA inspectors are currently inspecting the Qom nuclear reactor the neo-cons wanted to allow Israel to take out.
What would that attack have done to the stability of the mid-east?
Seriously, bozo’s like yourself need to step into reality occasionally.
The Vast Majority of The Senate Democratic Caucus insisted on a Public Option. So was their Majority Leader not supposed to go with what the vast majority wanted. Get a clue folks.
Leiberman and Snowe are not going to be the small mangy tail that wags the big robust dog.
If SBJ is pushing a scenario, then you know that it is rubbish, because he is FUDmaster SBJ.
The Qom nuclear reactor has nothing to do with the implication that Lieberman would place the interests of Israel before those of the US.
sbj. That is hardly anti-Semitic.
Lieberman is a hawk who is with Israel regardless of the consequences.
I, along with many believe it is in our own best interest NOT to have Israel unilaterally attacking Iran. It would completely destabilize the region and oil prices would go through the roof over night.
“So was their Majority Leader not supposed to go with what the vast majority wanted.”
It should be fairly obvious that Reid is just trying to appease the progressive wing.
sbj, it has nothing to do with putting Israels interest first.
Lieberman’s interest are more in line with the hard liners of Israel along with many neo-cons.
I just happen to think all of them are wrong in regards to how to proceed in the middle east.
It’s become apparent now the diplomatic method seems to be working vs. the bomb at the slightest impulse.
“Can anyone find out if Lieberman is holding out because of this administrations reluctance to give free reign of Iraqi air space to the Israeli air force?”
As for Iraqi air space and the Israeli Air Force, it would not be the choice of this administration whether or not “free reign” is given. I seem to remember that the Iraqi’s have a functioning government.
Lieberman betrayed his party over and over, so why is it so far fetched to believe that Traitor Joe would not also betray his country. His history from 2001 to now, show that he has no problem behaving like a traitor.
It’s tiresome when criticism of the neo-con/Israeli approach to mid-east peace is countered with insults of anti-Semitism.
You can play the anti-Semitic card only so often. After a while, it turns into the cry wolf story, people just tune you out.
Wow!
A vote against the PO now means you’re a traitor – if you’re a Jew or a hawk.
” I seem to remember that the Iraqi’s have a functioning government.”
Yeah, for an occupied country. You really think the Iraqis control their air space?
[rollseyes]
You were not critiquing someone’s “approach to mid-east peace.” You were implying that he was acting as a traitor by placing the interests of another country above his own.
sbj, stfu. Seriously, now your just being a moron.
So let me get this straight; a small country, with over a hundred nuclear warheads, want to attack another country to stop them from getting even one warhead. Is that what we are dealing with here folks.
Nukes for us. No Nukes for your. Reminds me of that Seinfeld soup vendor.
sbj, I wasn’t implying ****.
You’re just playing your dumb *** self speculating with your demented thought process.
I explained myself. If you refuse to believe me go **** yourself.
@mike: “Can anyone find out if Lieberman is holding out because of this administrations reluctance to give free reign of Iraqi air space to the Israeli air force?”
You can’t put lipstick on that pig. “Criticism of the neo-con/Israeli approach to mid-east peace” indeed. Do you think the liberal progressives on this blog can’t read?
sbj, I believe that quote is earlier than the current one in which he does say that he “thinks” he will support allowing the bill to be opened for debate. At which point he will ask for bribes to close the debate. It is a simple extortion, not a real stand or principles or anything fancy like that.
And thanks for the kind words Tena, it’s always nice to knwo your words have an impact.
@sbj
“My guess is that the PO gets stripped in debate.”
Removing the PO from the bill would require 60 votes. That means every Republican vote, plus 20 Democrats. Seems unlikely.
Lieberman loves attention, and he wants consessions. He’ll get something, then claim victory and vote for cloture. Thank god this will be his last term as a US Senator.
“Nukes for us. No Nukes for you.”
Uh, yes. More nukes is generally regarded as a bad thing. For instance, I believe President Obama holds that view.
SBJ is just playing The Race Card. He will have to go vote against himself in the next election. He just will not tolerate anyone, including himself, playing the race card.
How about a counter-factual exercise.
If Iran had the 100 or more Nukes, and Israel was just starting their secret development Nuclear Weapons program, would Iran have the same right to bomb Israel to stop them from getting the bomb?
@paul: “I believe that quote is earlier than the current one in which he does say that he “thinks” he will support allowing the bill to be opened for debate.”
Well, it comes from today’s Politico article:
http://www.politico.com/news/stories/1009/28788.html
OK sbj. I’ll explain this to you one last time since you seem to be dense.
Peoples ideas as to how to proceed in foreign policy differ.
McCain/Lieberman and their foreign adviser Scheunermann during the campaign have one belief. They didn’t believe we could negotiate with Iran. They believe Israel has the right to defend its self regardless of the consequences in stability in the region. At least this is the impression they give.
Now, there is another stance on this issue.
Negotiation and diplomacy.
I’m suggesting Lieberman would rather get his position on the mid-east solutions pushed forth rather than this administrations.
It’s not being a traitor like you said. It’s not because he’s a Jew. It’s just a difference of opinion which lost on Nov. 4th.
Now go f yourself.
@liam: “If Iran had the 100 or more Nukes…”
Hey, hey, hey! You made it very very clear that “what if” scenarios were not permitted.
“Lieberman loves attention, and he wants consessions. He’ll get something, then claim victory and vote for cloture. Thank god this will be his last term as a US Senator.”
It’s obvious all the way around. The Democrats were moving ahead, everyone is ready to go, we have some version of PO and we’re moving moving moving and Droopy sez: “not so fast.”
That just screams: “Look at me! I’m getting the last laugh!” The Droopy Revenge Tour as someone called it.
@mike: “Negotiation and diplomacy” have nought to do with what you wrote!
“Can anyone find out if Lieberman is holding out because of this administrations reluctance to give free reign of Iraqi air space to the Israeli air force?”
SBJ says that Israel has the right to bomb Iran, because more Nukes are a bad thing.
OK. Then Israel knows how to reverse the problem. They must get rid of all their Nukes. Some estimates have them having as many as two hundred warheads.
Remember they kidnapped one of their own citizens out of Europe and locked him away for life, for having revealed their secret nuclear weapons program.
Sounds like Israel really was concerned about not having more Nukes in the world. Sure they were.
This just in:
“During a Q&A session with reporters, Reid offered a fairly spirited defense of Lieberman, signaling perhaps that he doesn’t believe Lieberman will ultimately be an obstacle–or at least that he doesn’t want to tip his hat: “I don’t have anyone that I’ve worked harder with, have more respect for, in the Senate than Joe Lieberman. As you know, he’s my friend. There are a lot of senators–Democrat and Republicans–who don’t like [parts of this bill]… Sen. Lieberman will let us get on the bill, and he’ll be involved in the amendment process.”
SBJ, Israel attacking Iran to stop them from developing a Nuke, is the ultimate What If approach, and you are fully behind it. It is Israel’s version of the Neo-Cons’ looming Mushroom Cloud, that calls for preemptive chaos, like in Iraq.
Imsinca – LOL!
I bet after the damn bill is signed into law there will still be these reports that PO is dead, no it isn’t, yes it is.
@Insimca,
There you go bursting SBJ’ lovely fantasy that he convinced himself was going to happen. He was certain that Lieberman was his Black Knight that was going to slay the Reform Dragon!
“SBJ says that Israel has the right to bomb Iran, because more Nukes are a bad thing.”
And we have the right to cut the aid that we give to Israel in half if they do bomb Iran. I doubt it will happen because you’d never get enough votes on either side of the aisle to go through with it. But who knows? And I don’t think Israel knows either, which is why I don’t think they’d ever go through with it unless we gave them the green light. Without even half of the cash we give them each year they’d be in deep doo-doo.
@lmsinca: “Sen. Lieberman will let us get on the bill, and he’ll be involved in the amendment process.”
I hate to be flip but … and? Lieberman said from the start that he was inclined to permit debate/amendment. This is not new information?
OK sbj.
Either your too stupid to understand what I told you or just being a fool.
It may be a bit of both to be honest.
Deep end? Meet Liam.
Liam? Deep end.
@mike: If you’d be willing to say that you didn’t mean what you wrote then I might be inclined to believe you.
Lieberman is bluffing and, as noted, looking for some Sunday show invites. He won’t filibuster this thing. They’ll throw in some meaningless amendment that he will say is very important to him (or an amendment that they were going to add anyway) so that he can say, “Look, I was involved.”
I know everybody makes fun of Harry Reid’s “he’s with us on everything but the war” quote. But before he decided to put everything down on the Iraq War, the dude was a pretty reliable Democratic vote and not somebody I’d consider a conservative Democrat, especially on stuff like healthcare. This is part attention grabbing and part, “I’m still mad about the Lamont thing.” And it’s just freaking childish. Can’t wait to wave goodbye to this jagoff in 2012.
And yeah, Tena. The news reports after the bill are passed will also say Obama didn’t really want a public option and that he sat on his hands for all of 2009. And the blogs will add it was only the unwavering, principled progressives of HuffPo and FDL plus Olbermann who brought health care reform to America.
Right Wing Nut Jobs sure have a strange definition of what, A nation’s right to defend itself, means. It does not mean that they get to attack other countries, that have not attacked them.
Imagine SBJ walking on a city sidewalk, and the person coming toward him, starts to feel scared of SBJ. According to SBJ that would be enough justification for that other person to shoot him, and claim the right to defend himself.
Uh, yeah. Liam? I’m beginning to get a bit worried about you …
sbj, there’s more:
Reid went on, “Some of you will recall one reason that we were able to solve the problem with the nuclear option is that I called Joe Lieberman to my office, and said Joe I want you to join the enemy and get us out of this deal.”
OK sbj. Lets say this.
McCain is an Independent. He’s holding out on a key vote.
I’d suggest he might be pressuring the administration to go along with McChrystal’s plan on Afghanistan prior to committing to vote on cloture.
Does that mean I’m calling McCain a traitor because he’s old and white?
Lieberman being Jewish is inconsequential in my assumption. It was coincidence. Being Jewish may be what drives his foreign policy, having a spiritual connection with the holy land, I don’t know.
But what I do know is this. Lieberman had a history of voting with Democrats on almost all issues apart from foreign policy. It is not uncommon for Senators to hold out to have leverage on issues they want pressed.
It happens all the time with Presidential appointments.
Obviously my point was misconstrued.
If Reid’s not worried about Lieberman maybe you shouldn’t either.
Well that’s all folks. SBJ is reduced down to just posting vague mutterings now. Poor whiny baby. Can not take his Arse kicking, like an adult.
Please Donate to the Pacifiers For SBJ fund raiser. He has almost sucked his thumb off.
Meanwhile, rank and file Repubs are still waiting for their leaders to present their own bill. IMO this is the best quote from the story. Cracks me up. Welcome to our world.
“Republicans are quick to note they support various healthcare reform initiatives, such as medical liability reform. But getting most, if not all, of the Republican Conference to sign onto a specific plan would be very challenging.”
http://thehill.com/homenews/house/64877-gopers-impatient-on-healthcare-alternative
Mike from A
Everyone got your point but sbj, our resident contrarian.
I do believe that Mike’s point was crystal clear. It’s what we call a “gaffe.” Nice cleanup attempt, though.
@lmsinca: BTW, I don’t mind being called a contrarian – one is needed ’round here.
Right right.
Like I said. You can believe what you want. Which it appears you’ve already made up your mind about and will try to find evidence to support it.
You made an assumption.
I cleared up my position for you.
You stuck with your assumption.
Connect The Dots.
After Senator Reid announced his Public Option with Opt-Out, bill, yesterday;
Health Insurance Stocks plummeted.
Joe Lieberman announces today that he would not support the Reid Bill.
Health Insurance Stocks Soar in prices.
Senator Joe Lieberman from Connecticut; a state where many large Insurance Companies are based.
Connect The Dots.
@sbj
“My guess is that the PO gets stripped in debate.”
Please list the 20 Dems who will vote for an amendment that strips the Public Option from the bill. And obviously, I expect links for every name.
“I cleared up my position for you.”
By claiming that it was “others” who misunderstood you.
Like I said, if you would admit that you didn’t mean what you wrote (it’s right there for all to see), then I would be inclined to believe you.
SBJ,
The argument points you are making against Mike, can be applied to you also. You just surrender your only defense against the charge that you are A Racist.
You tried to clean it up, but you were not convincing; so you Are A Racist.
Views varies from individual to individual and everybody is free to speek,therefore its difficult to exactly assure untill the confirmation.
never mind that, big news here:
http://theplumline.whorunsgov.com/health-care/exclusive-robust-public-option-lacks-votes-to-pass-house-internal-whip-count-document-shows/
“Please list the 20 Dems who will vote for an amendment that strips the Public Option from the bill.”
Um, no? I need to support my “guess” for you? Have you ever been decent to me?
My thinking is that if h/c reform will fail without stripping the PO then the PO will be stripped.
sbj’s just looking for reasons to call people racists.
It gives him hope.
@Mike,
SBJ is just projecting his Racist views on to you. He said he only voted because Obama was on a ticket, and if it had been Hillary and McCain he would not have voted.
SBJ is the real Racist, so of course he is going to do what Racist Weasels always do; try to project and deflect.
Honestly, Mike A, if you will review my remarks you will find that I never once called you an anti-semite/racist.
Too late now SBJ for you to try and clean it up. You just are not convincing. SBJ played the Race card against Mike, when it is SBJ that is the Real Racist.
“A vote against the PO now means you’re a traitor – if you’re a Jew or a hawk.”
wtf is that supposed to mean? Why isolate out his religion? Why would you insinuate I am calling him a traitor if he’s a Jew because of a vote on the PO?
Anyways, I gotta shoo.
@mike: “A vote against the PO now means you’re a traitor – if you’re a Jew or a hawk.”
That was directed at liam: “Lieberman betrayed his party over and over, so why is it so far fetched to believe that Traitor Joe would not also betray his country. His history from 2001 to now, show that he has no problem behaving like a traitor.”
So SBJ, you were playing The Race Card against me. I never said one word about Senator Leiberman’s race or ethnicity. or his religion. You are the one who said “Jew”. I never said any such thing. Nice try Racist, and Race Card player.
@liam:
Brilliant! (Tough day, huh?)
Why would calling you out on your racial ploys give me any hardship. I have been flailing the hides off of bigots and hypocrites for many decades.