"And they have only begun to surrender."

Truer words, I'm afraid, were never written.

This sounds too good to be true and it probably is.

It's only been a couple of weeks since Congress went on recess. I don't believe for a single second that Obama is giving up just like that, after a handful of staged townhalls over the weekend.

It's a ploy to incite mass hysteria among the progressives and bully the Blue Dogs into voting for it.

"If this is true, then there's no longer any reason for progressives to pretend that the health insurance reform effort is worth supporting." Are you going to take your ball and go home?

"If he doesn't even have the balls to stick to his own public option plan then I move from the deeply disappointed column to disgusted." - By design, he has never totally defined how his version of a public option would work. But of course yo don't want to hear that. As you should know there are different versions of the public option in both the House and Senate bills. You also appear to think that the president is an omnipotent being. Infantile, utterly infantile.

And mine...democrats can go suck air.

C

Hope springs eternal eh, lalo?

You're kidding, right?

bluebell, I saw that you changed your avatar--will you be changing your name as well?

I've been in this limbo since the Clinton years, but the Dem Party has (or had) a lot of meaning for me because of what they stood for, who they represented and a family history of fighting the greater of two evils in the past. So many great accomplishments were achieved by Dems in the last century; so many malicious acts accomplished by Republicans.

I have to wonder, why the capitulation now? Look at the arc of the HCR "debate" from even before Obama took office. Isn't the recent media coverage of screaming meemies planted in staged 'town hall' meetings spitting absurd talking points just a little too convenient an excuse to throw in the towel now? Congress is still debating the proposals. It isn't the American people that are being signaled to drop the pulic option; it's congress.

Many of us have yearned for a third party takeover. The good news is it has happened. The bad news? It is the Corporate Party that has seized (or retained) control, but quietly, of course, as a kind of silent partner to our democratic government.

Everyone needs to put the heat on the White House. We need to flood their system. I know for a fact THEY are listening. Not so sure about Congress and Senate.

If everyone who voted for Obama would take a second and email the White House, they'd wake up really f_ing quick.

http://www.whitehouse.gov/contact/

quit bitching and do it.

PUBLIC OPTION IS NOT NEGOTIABLE!

ps forward this to everyone.

My attitude is that when we allowed a healthcare bill to become an insurance bill we were baited and switched into an entirely different goal. I don't support financial industry welfare. I support the delivery of universal healthcare. The bill has a lot more to do with preserving the health of insurance industry profits than it does with the health of Americans. It will grow worse as it becomes the Blue Cross/Blue Dog bill.

Your comments are nonsensical.

It is no longer relevant to discuss the different versions of a public option since they are hightailing it out of that alternative altogether like the cowards they are. They are chickening out. Running away. Surrendering. How you extrapolate I think that the President is omnimpotent because I think he ought to have the balls to stand by his own proposal of having a public option is completely unclear.

Done.

You are right about the Corporate Party and it was a weak leader, Barack Obama, who handed the last vestiges of independence in Democratic Party to the corporate interests. That's what baffles me most. He surrnders to them with no fight at all. And the surrender was not only unnecessary but we get nothing in return for it.

I'm not sure that's true. I do believe, as Tom Wright said here that getting rid of rescission and pre-existing condition bans would improve things. But, without a real public option (by which I mean where every American with insurance now gets to choose between their current plan and a government plan so that insurers have to offer more services at better prices just to keep their clients) the health bill as I understand it now simply won't change much for most people. Insuring the uninsured will also, of course, be a good thing.

That's a problem because those people will rightly ask what they went through all of this for and any of them who have to pay higher taxes for it are going to wonder why.

It's not good and it's not right to have gone through all of this without providing some sort of pay off for the vast majority of Americans. The point here is to free people from the very real death panels at work in society.

Insuring the uninsured and changing the rescission and exclusion rules matters but it amounts to tweaking the system for most people. That's not what we're trying to do here.

Well, it lost a little in the translation but I guess the Blue Dogs took a few slices off the ends. It's a small price to pay for my Independence.

Think what you want. It looks like the only thing you have the balls to do is complain. Narrow left wing views are just as obnoxious as narrow right wing views. Same tactics. Call the other guy nonsensical or stupid and then declare victory. You are unable to accept that there are differeing points of view because you're too busy listening to yourself or others like you. I'm outta here. Happy now - you won - or so you think.

Well said. They have surrendered after a non-battle, after a non-struggle. Like you the Democrats have now become "them" for me.

I'm still mulling this over oleeb. The only thing that prevents me from endorsing your point of view now, is the insurance and med infrastructure cos would be delighted with such an outcome. Total speculation here, but if they pass a truncated healthcare reform bill now that is costly, and without legs to reduce those costs, then it might, (and I emphasize 'might'), amount to a Trojan horse, that would demand actual reform down the road. Of course doing nothing might lead to the same result, although either way, the insurers may clean up their act just enough to stay ahead of public opinion. As I said, I'm still chewing on this one, and am doing what I can via letters to congress, to prod the congressional, I'd call them whores, but I hate to denigrate honest working women as such.

The Republicans and the industry lobbyists raise a bogus stink about "death panels" and the White House and Democratic Congress cave on the public option.
The Democrats have just handed their opposition the template they will use on any issue that Obama tries to address throughout his administration.
Embarrassing!

So, we're basing our opinions on something that "might" be true? Obama "might" be signaling acceptance of the co-op idea? Might it not be another con job? Get democrats to turn their backs and pack it in?

It ain't over 'til its over.

Obama was just here in Colorado and his comment to the effect of the public option being "just one sliver" of the overall debate is what the media goobers are basing their stories on.

And, of course, certain TPMers are eating it up. Talk about self-fulfilling prophesy.

I'm saying it again: if health care reform tanks, then thank yourselves.

What Dems, the non-capitalist ones?
Obama's giving them all cover. If it doesn't pass, it's Obama's fault; he should have tried harder. Obama will blame Congress. 50% of voters will blame one or the other. Rebellion contained, back to polarization, back to infighting of the working class. As long as the focus is off of the Master class
If you need another diversion, start a war against terrorism.

The election of Obama was the pressure relief valve. Capitalism saved.
Having saved the Federal Reserve and its Masters, it's a matter of returning to status quo.
Masters and slaves, Rich or poor
The Masters saying "Let the people eat cake, like us."

Until the next election and then they'll tell us about what we fear, and how if elected, BY God they’ll be different, they'll bring Change.
SUCKER BORN EVERYDAY

I've often thought Obama was playing chess while others play checkers. That's thinking more then a few moves ahead. I like the outcome you are suggesting. I'm skeptical. But it would be a very smooth maneuver if it is true.

I stated we need healthcare reform, not health insurance. The White House needs to tell the stories of the victims of insurance and remind everyone of the neighbors we all know who have been screwed by their insurers.

You're simply wrong on this.

It isn't as though the news reports are based on rumor. Secretary Sebelius made clear they are ready to dump the public option. An piece on Politico says:

"Health and Human Services Secretary Kathleen Sebelius said Sunday that the public option was “not the essential element” of the overhaul."

What, after all, do you think something like that means? It is quite clear and obvious what it means.

You are suffering from a serious case of denial if you simply ignore the facts, but that's your choice. Just don't blame those who recognize what's going on for Obama and company caving in on the Public Option like a bunch of terrified children because of the predictable and expected opposition of the special interests.

Citizens want reform. The healthcare industry (largely insurers) is where the opposition is coming from. Because congress is owned by the industry is why this is happening. Insurers grossly inflated revenues are fully intentional. Anything they can do to make the system enhance revenue and thus profit but isn't illegal, they'll do.

What really sucks is a lot of investors are foreign and we are effectively paying them and getting nothing in return. Plus I doubt that even one of the major insurers ever pays the 35% number that is the supposed corporate rate on income. Most pay between 15% and 20%. I wish I could figure out a way to reduce my taxes by a third of the established rate.

The genius in accepting your perspective on Obama's strategy here, lalo, is that it doesn't require progressives to be quiet any longer. I am about as angry as I can remember being about the cesspool politics in Washington. I can most certainly not sit back and "go along to get along," as the Obama forces have continually suggested is the proper course of action to be taken.

If Obama cares to use the anger stirred among progressives to at last effectively show some backbone and send the rats scurrying into their astro-turf tenements, then I say "Bravo" for adopting a brilliant strategy.

But that's only if he's successful in gaining legitimate health care reform in the end. I would otherwise suggest that he was too cute by half in playing such brinksmanship at best, and at worst showed that he is no less a tool of Washington's corporate owners than the GOP and Blue Dog Dems, etc.

Time will tell. Meanwhile, contempt for all involved remains the proper response to such an assault on our health care needs as is represented by this "Insurance Profit Enhancement Program."

There is no third party. There is in fact no two-party system. We have a single party that owns Washington, and the Insurance Industry wing of that corporate party is showing us all just who is boss.

And I remember the hairs on the back of my neck standing straight up the first time Obama introduced "health insurance reform" into his speeches in place of the original mandate for health care reform. Disgustingly apparent who was in charge on this one, eh?

No, oleeb, you misundrstand. We are supposed to keep our powder dry until it becomes completely apparent that the battle is in fact lost.

What a crock is served up by these "go along to get along" "centrists" who think the worldview is so much better when you bend over and grab your ankles.

ROTFLOL! When are people going to start calling every step back taken by this administration something other than 'a cunning plan'?

SleepinJ,

When Obama got elected I made the observation that
he had the opportunity to either go up on Mount Rushmore or become known as the biggest snake oil salesman to occupy the Oval Office.

He's adopted many of the Bush ideas on terrorism, privacy/transparency, unitarian Presidency, etc.
And, rather than redefining the mission, he's expanding the war in Afghanistan.

He's showing absolutely NO leadership on this health reform issue, rather, he's just reacting to what the Republicans and right wing are throwing out there.

His lack of leadership, along with Red State Democrats, will cause the Democrats to lose seats in Congress in 2010. They will lose seats because many independents will go Republican and many of the base won't turn out as they did in the last election.

I now you are right, john. From a purely political standpoint, Obama has been an abysmal wreck. The Repubs deserve to be pushed so far to the margins that the only thing between them and oblivion would be "lipstick," yet they are in the ascendancy with all this "death panels" crap and other absolute nonsense that remains unchallenged.

In other words, the GOP has presented such a terrific target with all their lunacy, and yet all Obama has been able to do is shoot himself in the foot.

And unfortunately all the "Insurance" in the world ain't gonna stop the bleeding.

I don't understand the criterion you're operating with here Oleeb. To me, the question is "does the bill improve or worsen the situation?", or "does it move things in the right direction?" You don't argue on these terms at all. For whatever reason, a bill without a public option is not strong enough. And from the pragmatic side, you want an even stronger bill put forward in january. where are the votes for that supposed to come from? I take it that you want to push this better bill through the same political and corporate media system that this weak bill has failed. It doesn't make any sense to me.

As for whether this bill is overall an improvement, I'm inclining towards the negative. At some point legislation has to stop being more and more food for the corporate beast as they are left free to fix prices, socialize increased costs through subsidies of various sorts, and continue abusive practices. This bill just makes the corporate sector that much stronger, making future attempts at cost-controls that much harder to push through. So I'm half-heartedly with you.

But the idea of pushing a stronger bill next year seems quixotic. I'd rather dump this bill, and push through partial fixes - expansion of medicaid, schip, Medicare, Empowering Medicare to negotiate, and pay it all with a surtax on the wealthy. In the absence of cost-controls like the public option, subsidizing insurance for lower-income families just adds to insurers' bottom line while premiums go through the roof.

One that will assure them they have acces to care that can't be arbitrarily dropped and that covers whatever they happen to need.

And doesn't discriminate when they change employers or become unemployed only to find they can't get coverage because of a pre-existing condition.

And lastly one that doesn't cost the nation double percapita compared to other developed countries. And on a ratings basis, doesn't have us running 37th even though our costs are far in excess of any other nation in the world.

Those are good for starters.

However, IMHO reform would look more like nationalizing the entire system and after modernizing their operations for efficiency, sell them off to investors with forever restrictions to prevent screwing it up again. The same applies to banking and insurance. They are also very broken. But then you know that. And Oh Yeah. Remove any entitlement of corporations being citizens. Becasue they ain't.

Done.

C'mon everyone. This is how things happen - with a non-negotiable demand for what we voted for, for what we need. There's no excuse for not taking action.

"A man can't ride your back unless it's bent."
- Martin Luther King

Bushama has them right where he wants them?
-Sorry, but my cynicism has moved on into contempt. I allowed myself to believe that O was going to be OUR president. Good enough for everyone. I spent my money and time and a fair amount of 'social capital' electing a fraud. I thought we were taking OUR country back. We were just being taken.
This will not end well.

What universe are you people living in?

Obama has done more for health care reform and progressive causes in the last six months than anyone else has in the last 20 years, and all you can do is carp and whine and say you're never going to vote for Democrats anymore. I can hear the Republicans chuckling.

Health Care reform is a long hard slog - FDR, Truman, Kennedy, LBJ, Clinton all tried it and couldn't get it. If it were easy we would have done it 60 years ago. We're not going to get everything we want on the first round.

However, if we listen to naysayers like you, all were going to get is conservatives back in power and another decade of regresssion.

Stop the crap and get behind our side!

What a bunch of hooey once again. You keep disparaging leftists, libruls, extremists, or whatever your label du jour is at the time. But it stands to reason that you centrists - you who propose a centrist ideology - are about as impotent as any eunuch in an Insurance Potentate's Washington brothel (aka The U.S. Congress) without assistance from the left AND the right.

After all, what is there to define "centrist" if not the ideologues on the left and the right. Your ridiculous assertion that FDR, LBJ, et.al., simply pulled ideas out of their centrist ass and - voila! - we have progressive policies is ludicrous. There was alot of pushing and loud voices and so-called "extremist"politics on behalf of Progressives that was engaged before any action was ever taken that advanced the Progressive cause, however incremental it may have been.

And my guess is that LBJ, FDR, MLK, and all the others would take offense to being portrayed as spineless weasels who carried with them no progressive ideology of their own. They would most certainly be more inclined to let you cover that territory all to yourself.

Did they know the art of compromise? Of course. But there is not ONE Progressive policy that was ever enhanced by selling out wholesale to the highest bidder. And this shit has gotta' stop! It is time to punch the Insurance Industry in the nose on this one, and keep punching and punching until they scream "No mas!" After all, they are defenseless in this struggle, and should be called out for the parasites they are that bleed our health care system for their profits without regard for or legitimate contribution to the common good.

And then we need to take on Dick Armey and Grassley and all the others who promote fear-mongering in support of their corporate owners. "Shame on you, Senator Grassley, for scaring Grandma into believing ANYONE is out to kill her!" We need to lay these lies at the doorstep of the corporations and their lackeys, and insist they tell us the reason they need to rely upon this kind of sinister nonsense rather than try to deal directly with the issues.

Finally, we need to validate the anger and the sense of frustration and impotence that has been expressed at the Town Hall Meetings. And we need to make it very plain that it isn't "guvmint" or "socialists" or "death panels" that are the real source of their misery, but rather the very corporations that have so cynically manipulated them in this process.

Sometimes, you need to stand on principle if you have them. It's a sorry state of affairs, jason, if you are indeed so handicapped in that regard, but it's of no consequence to the discussion that needs to be engaged. So get out of the way. Let the games begin!

This ain't tiddlywinks, jason. If you can't stand the heat, get out of the kitchen. (Said by another of your supposed "centrist" ideologues, I suppose. My gawd!) We're coming after you and the rest of the "politics as usual" crowd on this one. And it's about time!

please document the advances made by Obama? They sure aren't apparent to tye naked eye.

Look elsewhere on the thread, and you find actual instances enumerated where he is more comfortable continuing the policies and practices of the Bush Administration, fer chrissakes! And this latest suggestion that he is willing to capitulate fully to the Insurance Industry is beyond anything I could imagine the GOP accomplishing if they were in power.

With friends like this....

When the Liberals lost control of the Democratic party to the Clinton/DLC wing, 90% of the public lost 90% of their representation. (arbitrary numbers)

Today we get trickle down economics from the Republicans and trickle down government from the Democrats; a little bit of minimum wage, a little bit of environmentalism, some odds and ends, etc,; the business community gets served first by the Democratic leadership and the Republicans and we get what scraps fall off the table.

If there is no public OPTION, (that's option, not mandatory) we will get window dressing. No more discrimination against pre existing conditions? WOW, GREAT! Um, I have emphysema, how much will this policy that doesn't discriminate cost me?
Asthma? Diabetes? Heart Disease? How much?

When we elected Obama and sent more Democrats to the House and Senate I felt that maybe there was finally a resurgence in the Liberal wing of the party.....OLD DOPEY ME.

AS for passing what we can first and then coming back to expand; remember Clinton signing NAFTA with the promise to come back later to enact Labor and environmental rules to NAFTA?

I'm still waiting.

miguelitoh2o: Right. I think we can all disabuse ourselves from the "Obama is a chess player" self-deception. He's been way, way off the board since the Skip Gates message-killing fiasco.

all great points needing to be considered john. And well said! Thanks for this!

Maybe your naked eye needs glasses. Just that fact that we are talking about health care reform at all is a huge step forward. With a Republican in office, it wouldn't even be on the table. Big legislative victories don't happen in six months. Health reform will be a slow incremental process - we won't get it all the first round. Meanwhile, look at what the Obama administration is doing internationally, with the courts, the environment, etc. A thousand daily decisions are now being made by Democrats and progressives rather than Republican right-wingers.

If we listen to people like you and turn on our side just because the gratification isn't instant, we lose everything. People who think like you are the biggest danger to our side right now!

Obama = Bush Three.

Maybe the Republicans are right - now might not be the right time for health care reform. Let's skip the rest of this year's legislative session and instead turn the full attention of Congress to a substantive accounting of the preceding eight years of mismanagement, torture and illegal spying.

Very well put SJ!

Desidero,

Christ, give me a break, you're sounding like a right wingnut.

a public option has been given more weight than it deserves

Since Obama gave it that weight (just one of many links I could provide), he deserves to be denounced if he caves.

Thanks for straightening me out SJ. :)

If Obama and the Democrats give in on the public option that means they're moving to the RIGHT. Haven't we had enough of that shit for the last 15/20 years?

For 8 years, multitudes of Democrats in Congress moved to the right and gave Bush all he wanted, and we won't dig ourselves out of that hole for another 20 years, if ever.

Haven't had enough yet, Bunky?

Seems a helluva lot more Quixotic to me to continue fighting for somethign we're not really enthused about to begin with but feel compelled because we have been repeatedly told not to even try for what we think might be best. Many, including me, believe the Medicare for all approach would be best. But all of our more "pragmatic" and "realistic" friends demand that we follow them down the path of pre-battle surrender of that option and so we go into battle weakened by choice. How stupid is that strategy? And how well has that worked out thus far?

Are there benefits to be had without public option included in a health insurance reform bill? Perhaps, but whatever small benefits there are, are offset by all the new goodies given to the parasites of the insurance and pharma industries, etc... This is a subsidy bill primarily that benefits the parasites far more than the host. That doesn't mean there might not be some good features, but with no public option there's no healthcare reform, only insurance reform and it if you call beefing up their profits in return for paying them even more a reform, well I have to say that's a reform I am not interested in.

It is the foolish attempts to assuage the special interests that botch this sort of thing and if it isn't going to actually reform the healthcare system and on balance won't be much of a benefit (if any) to the average American, why on earth should anyone with common sense support it? Better to let the system go on unrestrained and wreck itself in the next few years than to patch and repair it so it can keep on sucking the lifeblood out of our families and businesses. I'm tired of accepting setback, after defeat, after surrender and then being told we have to support it because something is better than nothing. You have a right to believe that if you wish, but I have a right to believe accepting a bad deal is sometimes worse than nothing. This is one of those times.

Well put Oleeb. Pass the most minor of reforms and regulation: no dropping people, no pre-existing exclusions, insert some regulation on minimum coverage and maximum costs. Come back next year and push for at a minimum a REAL public option. Dare the Democratic Congress (and President) to screw their progressive base in an election year with anger continuing to grow about the bank bailouts while home owners are still facing foreclosure. Dare them to not offer a public option to the uninsured while people are still losing their jobs and health care coverage / COBRA runs out. See if the threat of them losing power is enough to get this legislation passed.

You define centrist as being spineless weasles and expect the rest of the world to follow suit. I define it as the pragmatic march toward progress over a number of years and via a multitude of legislation with the power of the actual historical record to back me up.

None of the men you mention were radicals. They used the power of their pulpits to drive the conversation toward logical compromises that the grassroots of both parties could support.

You don't even understand the history of your own party (let alone the country) well enough to have a reasoned conversation as your continued fringe attacks make more than clear. This is just more distraction and misrepresentation. The same way the Rapture Right worked the edges for so long and made this country a nightmare to try and get things done in.

The democratic party's biggest on-going challenge to accomplishing all their very worthwhile goals is that there are too many democrats in it.

Great comment, Virginia. These are the same sort of "liberals" who would hurl insults at FDR for not getting everything done by August of 1932.

Hi Ready - Obama, in my view, has given a public option the weight it deserves. As your link indicates, he has advocated it strongly, but he has never insisted it was non-negotiable, unlike health care reform itself, which he appropriately deems non-negotiable.

It is a misreading of recent history to claim that Obama has "caved" on anything, but rather has kept his eye on the larger goal, and is doing what is politically feasible to achieve it.

I expect he will, and the resulting reform package will be something transformative for the better in American society. It will be something to celebrate, with or without a public option, and if Obama, like many of us, believes the celebration should be even greater if the option remains, we will have much to celebrate even without it, and much for Americans who are currently denied adequate healthcare access to be grateful for.

Oleeb, you must be hopping mad if you read all that into my comment. I'm saying I'm inclined to AGREE with you on the merits - or rather overall demerits - of the bill. It should be scrapped! Where I do disagree is on the existence of a virtuous middle ground between having the courage of your convictions and selling out to corporate interests. Expanding existing programs such as Medicare, Medicaid, SCHIP to take care of those who need help most desperately can be done without the blatant giveaways in the current bill. and, it CAN PASS. Medicare for All is wonderful, but you're running straight into a wall with that. If you have a plausible story about how it doesn't get immediately blown out of the water by all too many incumbent interests, I'll happily join you in that push. But I prefer smaller changes that have a decent probability of helping those who are suffering right now, than engage in high-minded idealistic battles for the perfect plan...

Miguel, I'm a bit quick with the trigger today. This game isn't necessarily over. Though at this point it would be nice if the White House weren't crapping all over the House bill, which is still half-decent. If Pelosi plays hardball in negotiations with the Senate there might at the end of the process be something worth passing. But if that happens it won't be thanks to this sorry excuse for an administration. If Pelosi caves as well, then lets just have a pared down bill expanding existing government programs. Just cut out the corporate subsidies...

Others haven given plenty of good reasons to support reforms absent a government-run public option. I see no need to repeat their worthy contributions.

These bills provide for a lot of fixes to the current system, allows the president a win and resets the "reform meter" to a more reasonable place. They can also garner "conservative" supports at the grassroots which is vital to building majority support in the country as a whole. Much of what is on the table will be a great step in the right direction that keeps reform as the trend rather than gridlock leading to status quo.

Sustainable change is incremental in nature and can be exponential if done right. All or nothing ultimatums usually lead to nothing in this country and starting back at square one. Sorry, but most of the criticism for this legislation seems painfully and hopelessly naive to me.

The wingnuts are not negotiating in the senate finance committee, no matter how things are framed on TV.

The legislation that is likely to come out of conference committee will be very progressive, even if not particular liberal, and will frame the discussion as a win for the democratic party. This isn't about the republican party. They will change in their own time.

This about setting the stage for "bipartisan" reforms as being the desired state and then getting a "win" that cements that feeling. Make republicans run on voting for the reform package in advance of an election year. If the bills remain moderate and measured, it will be political suicide to vote against them when the number start to rise. Americans want health care reform. That is non negotiable. The democratic party itself can't even agree on single payer versus public option versus co-ops.

How does this have anything to do with wingnuts republicans?

I have volunteered for President Obama's campaign and have made over 2,000 phone calls over a 2 month period. I, like many progressives, doctors, nurses, etc., strongly believe a single payer system to be the easiest, most effective way to deal with the health care crisis.

With the understanding that we live in a world of compromise, progressive have settle on the compromised position of a public option in order to accommodate the interests of the much too powerful insurance industry and its representatives in Congress, the Republican party.

The elimination of the public option would be an unacceptable capitulation to the will of the minority (70% of Americans have consistently supported single payer over many years) and for this reason, it will not be something that I, and many other progressives would support.

The President, and the Democratic party should better pay attention to the following: any health care bill that shall pass without a strong public option will simply be seen by progressives like myself as a mandate to deliver more customers to private health insurance companies; and if that is what comes to pass you will have lost my support for the foreseeable future.

If the Democratic party capitulates to the pressures of big business and deny the people the choice of a strong public option, it will be the final nail in the coffin of the party as the representative of working people. I, for one, will actively begin working to build a truly progressive party to the left of the apparently centrist, corporate driven Democratic party.

readytoblowagasket = PUMA

Because it isn't any of the above. It's trying to work in the real political world to get something good done. Politics is the art of the possible.

Well said. I warily entered the Democratic fold from the true liberal flock in order to help elect what I thought tentatively could possibly be someone who, while more centrist than I want, might actually have the political ability and will to enact the liberal ideology that Dems have been paying lip service to for decades. My cautious optimism was proven wrong yet again. No strong climate legislation and rolling over like a dog who wants its belly rubbed to corporations and republicans on health care.

I'm out, no more. Next time around all the energy and money that I spent on Obama is going straight into a true liberal candidate.

you mean these achievements by President Obama;

He stabilized the markets, so 401Ks are starting to slowly come back and we are not about to meltdown anymore. Unemployment numbers are coming down dramatically from when he took over. GDP went from 6.5 shrinkage to 1 shrinkage since he has been in office. Tens of thousands of state employees still have jobs, and services are maintained because of his stimulus.

He ended torture. He IS closing Gitmo.

95% of Americans are receiving a tax DECREASE.

He provided unemployment, food stamps and a 65% reduction in Cobra for those who lost their jobs.

He set new emissions standards.

He protected wilderness land set for oil leases.

He got Pakistan to agree to fight the Taliban, which Bush never could. The top leader was taken out this week.

He nominated and got confirmed the first latina Supreme Court Justice in history.

He signed Equal Pay for Equal Work, Children's Health Bill and Credit Card Reform.

He has a first time home owner's credit, a modification of mortgage plan in place. (This needs work, but it is in place)

He has made it easier for students to get college loans. (UMass just gave a 1500 rebate to all students because of the stimulus money.)

He has improved America's image around the world, especially with Muslim countries.

He got the 2 NK journalists out.

He got the non-proliferation treaties going again, and he will chair the next meeting. Already an agreement exists to reduce Russia's and US's arms.

A significant amount of the bailout money is being paid back. This is a good thing.

He has taken on healthcare, the most difficult thing to pass in the US. I am not completely happy with how he is doing it, but he is doing it.*

He ended the abstinence only thing. And the law that said a pharmacist could refuse to give birth control pills to women if they so chose.

He is sticking to the timetable to withdraw troops from Iraq.

He got funding for the useless bomber cut.And those heliocoptors. He plans to make more weapons' cuts.

He has cut 2 trillion from the budget over the next ten years.

He has taken on energy, the second most difficult thing to pass in the US and it has already passed the House.

He saved the American auto industry. (Cash for clunkers is doing great too, both for the industry and jobs, and for the environment.)

He is building a green economy for the US. First steps in the stimulus, others in the energy bill.

More jobs will be created in transportation when rest of stimulus kicks in in 2010.

He is facing complete disrespect and vilification from the media and the wingnuts,getting more than 30 death threats per day,and still goes on, calmly and with determination and intelligence.

Thank you Oleeb. Here's a video that says it for me.
"Billionaires for Wealthcare"

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jHVwrCzRUX0

I wouldn't say nothing, one always have that secure feeling of the door slappin' one's ass on the way out.

Minor? Eliminating "pre-existing condition" as a reason to not provide a policy is minor? Banning insurance companies from cancelling a policy because the folks covered by the policy had health costs that were "too high" is minor? Setting minimum coverage requirement for all policies is minor? Setting maximum costs for all policies is minor?

Really? These are minor? Very funny--but I do agree let's pass these "minor" reforms since they will benefit a lot of Americans.

They do nothing to limit the ever-escalating costs of health care. These are things which there should be no disagreement on. Change that and save the big battles of the uninsured and public optio for another day. If we pass a mandate wthout a public option and just turn this into a freaking giveaway to the insurance companies that does not bring down costs but gives them new customers, I am going to go apoplectic. And I will not be alone. The "lasting Democratic majority" we elected in 2008 will be facing huge losses in 2010 and beyond.

Good imagery. I hadn't thought of that reward.

Read jonnieohands comment above for a quick list of some of the amazing things that have happened in just half a year of Obama. And you guys want to throw it all away becuase you're not getting everything you want just like that. What a bunch of crybabies!

Well the only thing that makes me more sick than bend-over-and-hold-your-ankles pragmatism is the people out there suffering and dying without healthcare. So I'll look for partial solutions that help as many of these people as possible as soon as possible. This present bill isn't it, though it now may pass. Your bill might be it, but it won't pass. Sorry, blind faith just doesn't do it for me. Expansions of existing programs can work and provide help where it's needed. But I guess we differ on the probability calculations here...

Just address the substance, Jason. It's not hard.

Just call the remaining changes that are needed "The 2010 Medicare Reform Act" and pitch as making the system that everyone loves sustainable. Create the "public option" out of a bipartisan agreement that something needs to be done. Way to keep it real, though. Sometimes, it seems to be just the opposite on your side of the fence.

In a tug of war as this is, he's pulling people with him when he (and WE) takes a step "back"!

It would be nice, if, for once, he took a step forward and asked people to follow him. It's called leadership... He should try it some time.

Jason says:

This about setting the stage for "bipartisan" reforms as being the desired state and then getting a "win" that cements that feeling. Make republicans run on voting for the reform package in advance of an election year. If the bills remain moderate and measured, it will be political suicide to vote against them when the number start to rise.

Jason, I don't feel "Republicans" and "wingnuts"
are interchangeable. John Kyl is a wingnut as is Jim DeMint, Saxby Chambliss, John Cornyn to name a few. Richard Luger, Robert Bennett, Susan Collins and Lamar Alexander are Republicans.

Its my contention that the wingnut branch of the Republican party in Congress don't want the Democrats and/or Obama to pass anything that may benefit the Dems in the next election.

Sonia Sotomayor received just one vote from the Republicans on the Judiciary Committee, the 5 that voted against her weren't worrying about it being a pre election year. Even Orrin Hatch who has a history of accenting a Republican nominee as being "well qualified" voted against the "well qualified" Sotomayor. Hatch certainly won't worry about passing health care in a pre election year.

You mention a bill that's "moderate and measured"; those that are financing this anti-reform bill and their right wing activists, in and out of Congress, will fight any bill regardless of its being labled "moderate and measured." A bill like that will be subject to warped interpretation just as the original.

She got nine votes in the Senate. There are more than nine republican votes for a moderate and measured reform package like the one emerging in various committee.

Moderate republicans will regain their composure and vote accordingly or there will be hell to pay in next year's primary elections. The majority of Americans want to see health care reform enacted. Obama is ensuring that the bill everyone votes on is something that republicans vote against at their own peril.

This is still a nation in transition, especially amongst the majority of republicans at the grassroots, and I expect voters expectations of both parties will be much higher in the years to come.

Nice clip.
I know many folks who are limned in this dandy vid.
They sure know how to play the knuckleheaded racists crowd like violins. They need them to do their dirty work and there is plenty of it.

I think the "insurance reform" package that is delivered will look something like the cunning bank bailout package we've seen.

can't take the credit jonnie rae (not related lol) at DailyKos compiled it. I fact checked and keep it handy.

The road to hell is congested with those who gave up on the other road.
How about this instead: Eyes on the prize:

1.) Inclusion of coverage of essential medical procedures in the emerging health care plan.
2.) Acceptance of all citizens into insurance plans.
3.) No discrimination by insurance companies (or co-ops!) against citizens with pre-existing medical conditions.
4.) Lifetime coverage for everyone, no cancellations.

Regroup; keep your eye on the donut, not on the hole.

Excellent proposal for the problems of 1990. Too little too late in 2009.

Desidero,

look at the comment you posted, the one I referred to, it wasn't your finest hour.

Actual historical record to back you up? Is that the same historical record that claims FDR and LBJ and MLK and all as fellow centrist weasels who stood not on principle, but rather engaged in "pragmatic" grovelling with a willingness to take what the powers that be deigned to give them?

You insult almost all of the greatest Progressives in history by including them in your manufactured reality. Your insistence on reinventing the careers of these leaders to support a "surrender first, then negotiate" political ideology is incredibly arrogant, to say the least. But then again, arrogance has always been your strong suit, with not much to back it up other than your "hysterical" record.

"Medicare doesn't even work for some, let alone all."

This must be fact, if for no other reason than jason said so.

I'd love nothing more than to follow you around, jason, and watch as you tell seniors you are taking their Medicare away because "it doesn't work." They'd pound you into oblivion.

What a farce! You do little in your prattle but show that it is indeed difficult to see the real world when one's head is shoved so far up one's arse.

If I understand obey's point, it is to say quit the omnibus effort and take incremental steps for now to create genuine health care reform.

Is this ideal? No, but it is too important for those who now have NO coverage to get help to them as soon as possible. And the ascendant "They're gonna kill grandma" crowd has muddied the water too effectively to even get an honest hearing on Medicare for All anytime soon.

Meanwhile, trashing the "Health Insurance Industry Profits Reform" effort allows us all to take a step back and start over - at the beginning this time! The beginning topic for this discussion, after all, should be: "What role does the insurance industry play in a universal health care system?"

The Health Care Insurance Industry was given a free pass in the debate by benefit of an assumption that they are an integral component of any health care system. Common sense and common practice in other industrialized nations say otherwise. Any exploration of the role the Insurance Industry has played in getting us into this mess and any understanding of just how wastefully superfluous they are in a universal health care system will accomplish a great deal in gaining health care savings and a "health care reform plan we can believe in."

They can write? Like in English Composition? Who knew?

Given that cast of assignees, you can bet your bottom health care dollar that the actual bill will be written by the Health Insurance Lobbyists themselves. It's just so much more efficient to let the bosses do it, you know?

I know you have followed this closely, dijamo, and so I ask: What, exactly, does it mean to eliminate exclusions based upon pre-existing conditions? Given that we are all about "for profit" and all, does this mean you are guaranteed a policy, but the Insurance Companies can determine what price the premium? Is this "Change We Can Believe In?"

Not sure how many times I need to provide the same link to the same 2008 Medicare Trustees Annual Report,/a>, but there you go. All the facts you need to finally have an intellectually honest opinion.

As to your hypothetical seniors, I would ask them why they support a party that is ensuring Medicare will fail within the next ten years.

I have never once advocated taking away Medicare. In fact, I said that it would have made much more sense to position the plan as the "public option" in order to get young and healthy people paying into the system at much higher contribution levels.

Again, you us ad hominem attacks and straw men to dispute points I have never made.

Brilliant, jason. I was going to continue the riff, but you deserve the last funny word. You could work it into a blog, however. ;-)

Oleeb: Politico? Politico says so?!? Well butter my butt and call me convinced. No, Oleeb... not buying it for half a sec. (though I must admit that today is a new day and the "no public option" has already been "walked back" on several fronts). I'm replying rather late.