gotta have your pablo honey before you can have your kid A

interesting commentary here. i'm trying to figure out if i buy the argument that that public option is not necessary for creating a "reform" here. matt miller has made this point repeatedly on left, right and center, and i hope he is correct.

do these "health care coops" perform the same function as a public option? i don't buy it. i just hope whatever happens is at least incrementally better than what exists now, and not just a new tax burden without some plan to rein in costs, while leaving many still exposed without health insurance (or guaranteed coverage of some sort).

for the life of me, i don't understand why obama is losing this debate, though. or maybe it's americans that i don't understand. who knows...

There's gonna be ads next cycle against incumbents that start out "He voted against a public option for insurance."

I think the administration, the Senate and pharma companies/insurancies companies are vastly underestimating the pushback from progressives that's going to happen.

Progressives aren't going to turn to Republican candidates and the GOP is not getting any bigger. It will mean the backing of new and more progressive candidates. I don't think it means Dems losing seats. it means established Dems losing seats to more progressive Dems.

It isn't the Democratic PARTY that's fucking this up. It's the Senate doing it. The party's not in danger, but the Senators' seats will be.

If they think they can do business as usual, they'll have to confront a democratic party with many cyber-savvy, informed voters who won't play ball next time.

You're all over the place in this thread. That 1957 Civil Rights legislation was failure just like this. It only succeeded in delaying the situation until it came to a critical mass in the 60s. Not to mention it was done with a REPUBLICAN in the White house AND a divided Democrat party. Obama's got a few more cards than that to play.

But I think the comparison isn't apt to begin with. Slavery and racial discrimination harkened back to the founding of the country. Nixon was the first president to propose a government provided health care system. You're only positioning your boy to look good even when he failed by tying him to some of the more successful strategies of LBJ.

I'd like to think this is true.

I am not giving up on the public option... I think you can track a lot of this in a way that there will be legistlation with a public option. The weasel version, the co-op, can be more than a dumbshit compromise. It can open the door for the middle to review "other models." And then we can observe that co-ops don't save much:

http://www.gao.gov/archive/2000/he00049.pdf

And then move on to think about what "option" means in public option. I think we can still get a bill. The fizz on the wingnuts is already dissapating... America has attention deficit on this shit. Most Americans silently want a public option... they just dont' foam at the mouth about it.

I

God I hope you're right.

I think the percentage of people pissed at the Senate for pussfucking around will be pretty high. There actually are a lot of people who want health care reform and who gave Obama the benefit of the doubt that his campaign assurances were at least halfway serious. I never expected miracles, but I certainly expected more than being held hostage to the likes of Baucus and Grassley.

You know the old standyby that a conservative is just a liberal who's been mugged? I'm becoming the antithesis of that. I was a Republican at age 20 and disgust and shame at what other people think it's okay to do to other people in the name of keeping things "they way they are" has settled in. I'll be buttplugging Pete Seeger by the time I'm 50, probably.

Anyway, there are many millions of well-informed people who expected much more of Obama and the Senate, not timidity in the face of corporate titans.

I still think, as Howard Dean says, that a decent bill will be voted on by December, but all the bullshit in the meantime didn't have to happen.

While my two statements are at odds, they were also made at different times during the debate.

Some facts you are missing -- LBJ drive that legislation through to screw the Repubs, because he knew that Eisenhower would have to sign it.

And Truman was the first to propose Universal Healthcare.

I am trying to suss out the political implications for both parties, my future is not tied to Barry's success or failure.

I think Obama is an excellent politician and I'm glad I voted for him, would do it again if he were the nominee, but his desire to be bipartisan has been mostly a crock so far.

His caution implementing campaign promises shows a guy who thinks entrenched interests still have to be assuaged. He should have come out guns blazing on everything and told naysayers to fuck themselves. He had the mandate. He had the popularity. He had the ability. Obama should have told Max Baucus to dig a hole, shit in it and then bury himself in it months ago. And he should have told teabaggers, deathers, birthers, et al that the are being lied to by the Republican Party and the people doing the lies should be ashamed of themselves. He does far too much halfway nice guy condemnation and not enough blunt condemnation.

I'm not suprised, but I'm irritated because he had the window of opportunity to be Brother Superman. Instead we got Bill from Fat Albert.

I'm thinking maybe Rohm is Obama's Wormtongue, even though I want to like Rohm.

This would have ensured that no vote, on any of his legislation would have ever come to the floor.




While this may be true, it's not his style. He's Joe Cool - and this would let the people see him sweat.

Truman, right. Point remains.

LBJ really screwed the republicans when Strom Thurman was reading the phone book in filabuster.

Thurmond. Read Master of The Senate.

The thing is though, they will be pissed at every obstructing Senator but their own. Nevermind that Dem Senators in redder states (Nelson, Pryor, Landrieu, Bayh, Conrad) don't have much to worry about, especially since Bayh is the only one up for re-election in 2010.

that's a problem

It is sadly predictable that this legislation will be so watered down as to be unrecognizable in terms of what people who really want reform wanted to see. It's even more sad that a candidate finally captures the imagination of the public, wins in a landslide, controls the congress and senate, and still can't get a major platform plank passed without this big of a fight and this much watering down. Doesn't seem to speak well of the political process in my mind...or maybe it just shows the lack of unity in the Democratic Party. Hell, really it probably just shows yet again how much pull the pharmaceutical and insurance lobbies have.

But yeah, the problem with the senate is exactly that, everyone hates the senate...except for their senator. Those guys get entrenched back home. Replacing the more conservative Dems who won't help with this is not at all an easy proposition, especially considering the districts they are coming out of. They've got teams of Loogars back home making sure their boy stays in power and that potential challengers decide to back off and toe the party line. And just like Jesus freaks are gonna keep voting Republican regardless, the liberals are still gonna vote for even conservative Democrats over Republicans.

Eventually Jor-El will have to send Superbaby out in a little crystal ship before the planet breaks up. Al Gore Will be too fat and too old by then, but someone will step up. Like the youngest Jonas Brother or something.

On some level I kind of agree with you. However, I think it might be too cynical. As Gar pointed out, this has been a potentital political landmine for a long time. Moreover, a lot has happened in the Obama administration already in a very short time. I think we might be in the midst of a "change fatigue."

I always thought the smart play was to take out some low hanging fruit in the first term. Expand S-Chip because everyone loves kids, and nobody would oppose it. Expand Medicare because the Elderly are a political 800 pound guerilla with rocket launchers. This narrows the uninsured and undercovered gap. Comeback later and build on that success to overhaul the system.

Nobody does have a point in Dem unity being non-existent, though. Whereas, in the throes of the GOP ascendence -- Bush in the White House, majorities in each legi house -- the party coalesced around the tax cut, NCLB, Medicare 'Script Drug, even the New England wing of the party (Shays, Chaffee, the Maine Jewesses), the party in this case remains divided. The Blue Dogs have not been brought to heel, be it by Pelosi, Reid, Durbin, or Schumer (seriously, what the fuck, Chuck?), & they are steering this debate (off the cliff). It's not the GOP calling shots as Obama is pushing for a bipartisan solution -- it's the Blue Dogs (who are effectively the GOP opposition).

Delay would never have let that happen, never would have let Shays direct the course of events. But Reid? Jesus, he's a Blue Dog (at least with social policy, anyway) himself, so why does he want to see the lib Dems succeed?

I just got a chill.

No stripper balloon-knot left behind.

Oh...and just wanna say, I think people who show up at presidential events carrying guns and walking around carrying posters that advocate his killing have gone far enough that we can consider them threatening the life of the president and remove them. Call me a fascist all you want, but this would honestly be true for me if Bush was still in office.

yeah i think that shit's gone a little far

AR-15s?

i mean, condoms are also good to have around, but you won't see me wearing one in public

Anyone have a link to news articles about guns at these?

Here's one of many stories...

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090818/ap_ ... sters_guns

Reader mail at Talking Points Memo

(Not directly answering your question, just expressing dismay at the prospect of guns at prexy events.)

(Further, let it be a (black) dude bringing a gun to a Wu show, & he's doing 15-to-30. Does this mean RZA's life is more valuable than the Pres's?)