Is Joe the reason we are not getting reform or a convenient scapegoat?

[NightWatcher]

All of us on the left can now blame Lieberman for getting no meaningful healthcare reform, but we are getting a bill passed.

A bill that will be a HUGE windfall for the insurance companies, the same companies that donated to Obama, Reid, Pelosi, and ALL of the Representatives...


(Nevermind, As I type this Thom Hartmann is saying the same damn thing on his morning show on KPOJ)
http://www.620kpoj.com/cc-common/ondemand/player.html?world=st

[tekisui]

1. I blame a lack of backbone and leadership.

Why can Democrats be effective leaders? Why are they so spineless and weak in that regard?

Everything else is window dressing. Our leaders never came. Liberman can be scapgoated, but the leadership is to blame.

[rucky]

5. Yep. "Ruthless" Rahm says "give him what he wants"

[lib2DaBone]

15. Yes..presactly... all of the issues contributed...but

....Rahm Emanuel is AIPAC.... Joe is AIPAC.... and you KNOW whose interests they put first.... (Clue: it ain't the USA)

This is not an anti-semitic comment.. just common business sense. If two baseball players are on the same ball team.. wear the same jerseys and have the same coach.. who do you think they are going to score points for?

The ironic part.. is that American Taxpayer money helps support health care in Israel... while American's are forced to do without. What's up with that?

[bemildred]

2. Willing convenient scapegoat.

Most of what passes as "debate" in Congress is about as real as "Days of our Lives". The real stuff never see the light of day.

[Larkspur]

3. Lieberman is a symptom of a larger problem -- corporate buyout of our democracy

We no longer have a democracy. We have a plutocracy.

[rucky]

4. Both: No pass for the conservadems!

[Le Taz Hot]

6. Lieberman is a distraction

and one that seems to have worked REALLY well judging by the dozens of posts about him everyday. The cheerleaders especially like to manufacture lots of distracting Lieberman posts otherwise they'd have to admit their Party of, by and for the corporations has completely sold them out.

[closeupready]

17. Yep. Bad as Lieberman is, he's not a Democrat and he is only one Senator among 100.

Clearly, he is a distraction.

[freddie mertz]

7. In reality, the president must carry the responsibility for the coming failure.

Joe is just an instrument of that failure.

[el_bryanto]

10. I don't think he needs to carry it alone

Congress must bear some of the burden, both for the obstructionist and destructive republicans and weak democrats.

Bryant

[freddie mertz]

16. True enough. It is a Dem party-wide failure.

It is also very disappointing.

[QC]

8. Scapegoat. n/t

[Overseas]

9. Looks like a scapegoat and walks like a scapegoat...

Looks just as ridiculous for Dems to be pandering to him as it did when they were groveling for a 1% bipartisan vote with Olympia Snowe.

As ridiculous as it was to watch Dems who have seen GOP block voting and obstructing, not responding with similar power politics, voting as a block in favor of middle class needs. They could have block voted in favor of the 90% of us that have been crushed incrementally since Reagan.

The 90% of us are very very weak in our current system. GOP solid pro-corporate. Dems pro-corporate with a little compassionate commentary along the way.

I'm really depressed because I hoped we had a 21st Century FDR coming. That would have been the practical thing to do. We've got a plutocracy again and need to rebalance things. That's supposed to be FDR time. It worked last time. Sigh...

[still_one]

11. Both. I have know doubt that he lied, and misled the leadership. I also have no doubt that

this so-called leadership could use reconciliation if they were really serious

[saltpoint]

12. Lieberman is the most visible impediment and receives the strongest

criticism because his obstruction appears purely ego-driven.

Among anyone you may blame, Lieberman appears to me to have most egregiously violated the public interest.

I would expect a Cigna or Aetna lobbyist to be a slime ball. I don't think Senators should be.

[realFedUp]

13. Hiding behind Joe

I agree with you. Joe is a perfect ObamaRahm scapegoat. Why
else would the WH be supporting a deal with the liar.
This doesn't need to get done by Christmas, an artificial
deadline, especially if it's a bill that isn't the best that
can be done.

Yes, we want Medicare for all or bust. At the least, we
want an AFFORDABLE Medicare buy-in, which is realistic, considering
the number who would sign up if it's affordable.

Joe's a liar and a rogue. He should be stripped
of all Democratic leadership roles in the Senate at the very least
and shunned by the Democratic caucus. No deals
should be done by this White House to get something
passed by an artificial deadline.

At the least you have to wonder about why this White
House and ObamaRahm want to make a deal with the devil.

[MineralMan]

14. I'm afraid that a lot of Democratic Senators are

scaredy-cats. They're deathly afraid of doing anything for fear they'll lose the next election and, along with that, the trappings of power they seem to like so much. Not to mention the flow of cash and promises of lucrative future corporate board memberships.

The only answer for this cowardice is to make the penalty for inaction the same. If we can remove a couple of flaccid Democratic Senators in 2010 and replace them with active, non-aligned liberals, we may be able to send a strong message.

This could be the year to do that. With unemployment up and people losing health insurance for lack of money from employment, there may just be a chance to punish inaction...if we take the opportunity and run with it.

Short-term, we have the Senate we have, and the 60-vote majority appears to be a mirage. The answer's not to abandon the party, but to grab the opportunity and turn it to our favor. Lots of naysayers for that concept, but it's the only one that has a chance of being productive. Abandoning the party and going for some third-party strawman will result either in keeping the current Democratic Senators or handing the seat over to some Republican.

We're going to get just a couple of chances to fix the problem: 2010 and 2012. If we don't take those chances, we won't have another for another decade or two. I think there are some choices that need to be made, and I'm not liking the sound of the choice some are making. Not at all.