Anyone Blaming Obama for the Loss of a Public Option Should be Ashamed of Themselves

[iceman66]

It is very easy to say that he didn't push hard enough, or lacked "leadership", but the simple fact is that as long as Harry Reid was refusing to go to reconciliation, there is NO WAY that any sort of public option was going to pass the Senate.

Obama could have talked public option until he was blue in the face, and it would have not have gotten Ben Nelson and Lieberman on board. Nelson is not only in bed with the insurance lobby, but comes from one of the reddest states in the country, and the would face absolutely no fallout politically from voting against the bill. Lieberman simply does not want to hand Obama any sort of substantial victory because he still wishes McCain would have won the election, and probably wants to see a Republican win in 2012.

The President should be commended for getting the other 58 Democrats to sign on to either a public option or medicare buy-in, a task that seemed impossible just a few months ago.

Obama's goal from the beginning has been to pass the strongest health care bill possible, emphasis on "possible."

Anyone who thinks otherwise is ignoring the political realities of the situation.

[NYC_SKP]

1. K & R nt

[FiveGoodMen]

2. What color is the sky on your planet?

[HipChick]

3. finally...a post that has some reality..

[grytpype]

29. Not much reality on this board anymore.

[Neecy]

4. Who in the hell are you?

Ashamed of ourselves?

Good god, the silly nanny lectures around here are so ridiculous.

[iceman66]

9. I'll guarantee you one thing

If Obama loses the next election because people like you stay home, by mid-2013 you'll be wishing like hell you had him back.

[Neecy]

12. people like me...lol

If he had kept his campaign promises to 'people like me' I might actually look forward to voting for him again.

Now he's just made me completely apathetic. And the gay community used to be a loyal part of the base. Not anymore.

[iceman66]

18. Obama is a President, not a dictator

He does not have the power to unilaterally enact sweeping policy changes.

He also is less than a year into his term, so there is plenty of time for him to keep campaign promises.

[Neecy]

28. Yes, he's a President

And if he had asked Congress to deliver a bill to his desk revoking DADT by the end of the year it would have been done.

Instead, we get Warren shoved in our face, little jokes at our expense, and the justice department refusing a lawful court order to give health care to a partner of a lesbian Federal employee.

Two of my best friends are a gay couple. These guys were die-hard Democrats, volunteered, donated, plastered campaign signs everywhere. They just changed their party registration to Independent. You have no idea how much rage is in the gay community right now, so shove your 'he isn't a dictator' right up yer butt.

[iceman66]

34. This is beyond the scope of this thread,

but again wait and see what happens in the next few years.

If DADT is still official policy in 2012, by all means sit out the election.

[Neecy]

37. It isn't beyond the scope of this thread

You think we all should be ashamed of ourselves for not being Obama groupies. I'm trying to explain to you why he's lost so many of us.

I'm not waiting a few years. We'll probably lose the House next year and there will go our best chance in decades for meaningful change because our President doesn't like gay people.

[iceman66]

51. That's really not fair.

His attention has been focused on other issues, like health care and the economy.

[roguevalley]

44. he has the power to lead. he has the biggest bully pulpit in the world.l

if a sick little fucker like Bush could slam through the crap he wanted to do, there is no excuse for obama.

[iceman66]

52. Bush had a Senate that was willing to use reconciliation.

Obama does not.

Remember Reid was widely criticized, and rightly so, for being a weak and ineffectual majority leader for two years BEFORE Obama took office.

[Liberal Veteran]

58. And what was the President's response to lack of testicular fortitude on Reid's part?

He merely accepted it. That is prima facie evidence that he let the Senate lead him around by the nose, knowing full well that Reid has less spine than the average jellyfish.

[iceman66]

64. He didn't have much of an alternative,

other than watching the whole process go up in smoke.

[jonnyblitz]

20. you make it sound like there's this big difference. I am NOT

seeing it these days.

[iceman66]

23. There is a bigger difference than you think.

Mark my words.

[roguevalley]

42. if he loses the election he will have himself to blame. you assume

we will stay home? really? How magical of you.

[iceman66]

49. I assume nothing.

Many of the regular posters here have said as much themselves.

[roguevalley]

53. so what. 2012 is far off. there are a helluva lot of ways he can

mess things up between then and now.

[Oregone]

5. Im not

(ashamed of myself)

[BobRossi]

6. Right..

His leadership is deafening.

[Cronus Protagonist]

7. I Love The Caps On The OP Subject Line

(trying to find something nice to say)

:hi:

[dysfunctional press]

10. ABOLPOSAT...?

but what does it mean?

[Cronus Protagonist]

13. I don't know, but I'm reading Cryptonomicon right now

Maybe I'll be able to decipher it before this thread gets locked. I just need to guess the right key, perhaps from another thread title....

[dysfunctional press]

8. leaders are supposed to lead.

not back-peddle.

and- reid takes his cues from obama, not the other way around.

[iceman66]

11. Obama asked Reid to use reconciliation numerous times.

The most recent of which was only last week and was reported on CNN. Reid refused.

[dysfunctional press]

17. obama also said that a public option wasn't necessary...

after having said that it was a requirement for any bill that he would sign.

[iceman66]

19. Oh, come on!

If he stuck to that, he wouldn't be signing a bill.

Additionally, the BEST public option that Congress could come up with, which would only cover a small minority and not go into effect for 4 years, was hardly a deal-breaker.

[dysfunctional press]

43. then he NEVER should have said it in the first place.

DUH!

[iceman66]

54. He thought with such large majorities in both houses,

that he would be able to get it done.

He underestimated the amount of opposition he would receive from members of his own party.

People, even Presidents, make mistakes.

[Liberal Veteran]

55. So, then you admit that Obama bears a measure of blame in this?

He started out with a position of compromise.

You can't honestly say that one bargains by saying "Well, here are all the things I am willing to give up" in the first round of the negotiation.

[iceman66]

60. Perhaps a small measure of blame,

but Harry Reid and the rest of his Senate cohorts, along with all the 'blue dogs' in the House, are far more to blame.

[Liberal Veteran]

69. His response (or lack thereof) to Reid and the "blue dogs" was his major failing in this.

At some point, it was up to him to provide some backbone, even if it meant taking his case to the people.

He played the role of passenger.

[iceman66]

74. He took his case to the people

when he held all those health care town halls this past Summer.

Of course they were completely overshadowed by media coverage of Palin and the teabaggers.

There was also the press conference, which became all about professor Gates. Again, thank the media.

Even coverage of his speech to Congress focused almost exclusively on the Wilson outburst.

[Liberal Veteran]

76. So, he lost control of the message and couldn't find any way to get it back?

That's hardly a ringing endorsement.

[dysfunctional press]

56. he shouldn't make promises he can't or doesn't intend to keep.

'he thought' is not an excuse in a situation like this.
he should 'KNOW' before he opens his stupid mouth and makes promises to the american people.
HE made the mistake, so HE gets the blame.

that's how it works.
sorry...:shrug:

[Liberal Veteran]

59. I honestly don't understand how anyone can defend his capitulation so early in the game.

We went from "A strong public option is necessary to keep the spiraling costs of health care in check" to "Public option? Who ever said we had to have a public option?" in less time than it takes to get my next DVD from Netflix.

I agree with you. He bungled this badly and as the de facto leader of our party with a majority in both houses of congress, that puts a burden of responsibility on him.

[iceman66]

65. Not so much capitulation as negotiation,

trying to salvage a viable piece of legislation.

[iceman66]

62. He didn't exactly PROMISE a public option,

he consistently said that it was his preference, but that he was open to other ideas.

Aside from that, NO President ever keeps all their campaign promises, and there is no reason Obama should be held to a higher standard.

[Liberal Veteran]

75. And that is where he went wrong.

Instead of "I will have beef for dinner whether it is steak or meatloaf", he instantly went to "I'd prefer to have beef, but I'll settle for Campbell's Chicken Noodle soup or even generic store brand soup if that is more acceptable to you."

[dysfunctional press]

79. he said that it would have to be part of any health bill before he would sign it.

he may have been overly verbose-
but it was still a promise to the american people.

he lied to our faces.
plain and simple.

btw- what do 'campaign promises' have to do with it...? -he said it AFTER being inaugurated.

he's not being a lying fuckwad of a campaigner-
he's being a lying fuckwad of a potus.

[xchrom]

14. Poor poor Obama.

When does the 'leave Obama alone'
you tube come out?

[Donnachaidh]

27. I wish it wasn't break time for the schools

I'd send my kid in with the crying youtube vid to do some sound dubbing just to post it here :rofl:

[Fire_Medic_Dave]

15. No shame here.

[HughMoran]

26. Yeah, we know

where you're coming from.

[Fire_Medic_Dave]

32. Just so we're all on the same sheet of music.

:nopity: :toast:

[vi5]

16. Assuming you are right...

...what would have been the harm for advocating for it more strongly? What would have been the harm in speaking out for it as the best option with more force and more vigor and listing more of the facts that made this the case? If it was going to end up this way anyway, and Nelson and Lieberman were going to do what they were going to do no matter what, then why not at least educate the public? Why not explain the hows, wheres and whys that it was the best option? What possible negative could have come from that? He could have even ended up giving Lieberman and Nelson what he gave anyway.

It's not that we lost the PO. That was always a possibility. It's not that Nelson and Lieberman were self serving assholes. That was always a given on par with the sun rising and water being wet. It's that he barely seemed to try. The public already supported the public option and the medicare buy in even with his half assed sales job and lackluster leadership on the issue. Imagine what could have been if he were out there explaining the economics of it. And how everyone would benefit from the PO except Insurance company executives.

Yes, it is what it is. I'm not going to whine about it and I'm not going to pout about it. I'll hope for the best and hope this bill is a start and hope it can be improved on. But if anyone expects me to say "Thank you!" to Obama for barely trying and for ceding control of the entire debate to the Nelson's and the Lincoln's and the Liebermans and for dismissing the progressives and the liberals in our party out of hand as he has then that's where I'm going to have to say "No Thanks."

[iceman66]

31. If he had advocated it more strongly, he would have lost some more votes.

Obama quickly realized that he does not have a functional majority, especially in the Senate.

He has essentially been walking a tightrope through this entire process and decided early on that the watered-down public option that was actually being proposed by Congress - and was the only version that might actually get passed - was not worth going to the mat over.

It didn't help that the media politicized the issue to the point where many so-called moderate Democrats were afraid to support any kind of public option, lest they be branded 'socialists'.

[Liberal Veteran]

36. I'm not sure that saving face is a valid argument for failing to lead.

YMMV.

[iceman66]

45. It's not so much saving face,

as trying to accomplish at least some of the original goal, as opposed to certain defeat.

[vi5]

47. He didn't have to call names or be insulting....

..he could have presented facts. Here is what doing this will offer. Here's how it will save money. Here's how it will benefit most people. Here's how it will reign in costs. Here's how it will make it reasonable to mandate everyone have insurance.

Even being as generous as one can possibly be about the political reality of it, he still did not do even close to enough to make it anything more than a complete caving to special interests.

You (and anyone else) can dismiss me as some sort of whining, raging lefty if you want but I'm actually very moderate, very reasonable and was not even a single payer uber alles type or even someone who thought the Public Option was the be all end all of health care reform. But not fighting for the public option in any tangible, unequivical way AND allowing a watering down of the bill in other ways, and completely ceding control of the terms of the debate are not the actions of someone who I'm going to hail as some sort of great leader. I'm not going to sit here and say "HE"S AS BAD AS BUSH!!!!" or declare him a facist or a corporate stooge or any of that. But I'm also not going to praise him as a good leader or in any way be able to convince people that he's doing what's in the best interest of the country rather than the best interests in just basic power retention.

[iceman66]

66. He did just about everything you accuse him of not doing.

Over and over again.

You wouldn't know it because the media chose to focus instead on death panels and teabaggers.

[leftstreet]

21. He said we needed a Public Option to keep the Insurance companies HONEST

So what's the friggin backup plan?

:shrug:

[katandmoon]

33. Yes, he sure did. So what changed, Obama? Not them. Must have been YOU.

[Liberal Veteran]

22. Better to have led and failed than to sit back and let it die due to silence.

At least then we could say, "He tried".

[iceman66]

40. He HAS tried.

Where have you been the last several months?

He managed to get a halfway decent bill through the House, and would have done the same in the Senate if not for a few assholes who care more about what is good for themselves rather than what is best for the country.

No other President has even come CLOSE to what Obama has accomplished on this issue.

[Liberal Veteran]

46. Sorry, chuckles. Sell that unwashed bill of goods to someone else.

He went down like a dime store hooker for a 100 dollar bill.

[usregimechange]

24. Agreed

[liberalmuse]

25. Thank you.

The Obama haters are really foaming at the mouth tonight. Disgusting.

[HuckleB]

30. No one needs to be ashamed of that.

Almost everyone at DU, including me, should be ashamed of how we've treated one another on HCR, however.

[Mojambo]

35. Then he should have come out and said that he tried and failed to get it.

Don't fucking LIE and say he never campaigned on it.

[sendero]

38. You'd have to be some kind of pussy..

... to let Harry Reid push you around.

Not buying it.

[Liberal Veteran]

41. Oh, come now. Harry Reid is veritable tiger of a man.

I...um, want a bill with a public like option thingy and I want, if it is okay with you, it done right...um...I hope my harshness didn't offend you.....can I give you a back rub?

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

39. No longer operable.....?

[Nikki Stone1]

48. If Obama signs this bill, this was what he wanted all along

The people don't want it.

[Swamp Rat]

50. "bama could have talked public option until he was blue in the face" - Barack Obama should have.

He should have talked "public option" until EVERYONE was blue in the face.

If he had, I feel certain Harry Reid would have chosen reconciliation.

"Anyone who thinks otherwise...." please, not this old gimmick.

[iceman66]

70. Can you name one instance in the last 3 years, since he has been majority leader,

where Reid demonstrated any testicular fortitude at all?

Even one?

The Administration repeatedly TRIED to get Reid to go reconciliation, but he wouldn't do it.

[OHdem10]

57. Are you saying that from the beginning he did not give a darn about

the people or anything else. He just wanted any old
bill he could get????

[ShamelessHussy]

61. zzzZZZzzz

[Raine]

63. Ashamed ...

NOT.

[Zenlitened]

67. I think you're misunderstanding what critics of Obama's leadership on this issue are getting at.

It's not about the president haranguing any one senator, or group of senators.

It's about firing up the voters so THEY turn up the pressure on their senators. It's about mobilizing public opinion in such a way or to such a degree that reluctant senators might fall in line, if only out of desire to save their own hides.

Would have been worth a try, no?

A bully pulpit is a public office or other position of authority of sufficiently high rank that provides the holder with an opportunity to speak out and be listened to on any matter. The bully pulpit can bring issues to the forefront that were not initially in debate, due to the office's stature and publicity.

This term was coined by President Theodore Roosevelt, who referred to the White House as a "bully pulpit," by which he meant a terrific platform from which to advocate an agenda. Roosevelt famously used the word bully as an adjective meaning "superb" or "wonderful" (a more common expression in his time than it is today); the term has no relationship to the noun bully, i.e. a harasser or someone who intimidates.

Source:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bully_pulpit

[Pryderi]

68. K&R

[LWolf]

71. No shame here.

You aren't authorized or qualified to attempt to "shame" me for recognizing a bad plan to begin with, and lack of leadership in the whole process.

[jgraz]

72. Anyone Shilling for Obama after his Failure on Healthcare Should be Ashamed of Themselves

See what I did there?

[SaveOurDemocracy]

73. Not ashamed. Obama wasn't even 'Present'. n/t

[flvegan]

77. Your concern has been duly noted. n/t

[laughingliberal]

78. I have seen no evidence Harry 'refused' to do reconciliation

I know he hoped to pass a bill without it and saw a lot of problems with going that route. President Obama killed the last hope of any kind of PO when he sent Rahm over to tell Harry to cave to Lieberman. I, distinctly, saw a statement from Harry that he did not know if he was prepared to do that quite yet. And I know he wanted a public option. He is not, obviously, the most liberal Senator but he is not the most conservative, either. And he was in favor of a public option.


The president got 58 Democrats to sign on to a public option or medicare buy-in???

You're kidding, right? Nary a peep out of the WH when the Medicare buy-in was proposed. Nada, zip, nothing. Couldn't be bothered to show up for most of the debate. Went to talk to the Senate Dems and never mentioned the public option. Went into high gear to get his bill passed after they killed all of it. That is when it became his bill. Harry, for all his problems, at least, violated that message discipline of Rahm's and told us he was told to cave and was not happy about it. Russ Feingold told us, too. He said, "This is the bill the president always wanted." I have to give them credit for giving us a nice heads up about who we are dealing with.

[Bluebear]

80. That's nice. nt

[Silver Gaia]

81. K & R n/t