Sigh, I'll ask again; What could Obama do to legally FORCE Nelson or Lieberman to vote his way?

[uponit7771]

Please note: The people with unfocused frustration and anger wont answer the question factually...

The more I read post expressing disappointment in Obama for not doing something he didn't have the ability to do (force a couple of people to do something they didn't want to do) the more the people who express such feelings sound like they're just repeating what the MSM says.

It's this irrational thinking that permeated the Bush years

[rfranklin]

1. They did vote his way...

What makes you think otherwise?

[uponit7771]

3. On the public option? Please link and quote Obama saying he didn't want it...

[jgraz]

19. Got it in one.

:thumbsup:

[johnaries]

34. Hmmmm, unfocused attention and anger. Check!

[newfie11]

2. yep!

Why are more people not angry with the repugs that refused to support this bill even though much of it was watered down at their request.

[uponit7771]

4. Yeap, I'll admit democrats are again counter punching but the dem base should pay more attention to

...what happened and focus their anger like you said.

[Kahuna]

13. That's what I want to know. Not even good old olympia snowe voted with us.

nt

[LiberalFighter]

5. Remember that there is suppose to be separation of the branches of government.

Also remember that the Legislative branch is first in the Constitution. Then the Executive and lastly the Judicial.

[vi5]

6. I think this misses the point......

No, there's nothing LEGALLY he could have done to FORCE them to vote for a bill with a public option and/or many better features and less industry friendly.

But that does not mean that he did everything he could or fought as vigorously as he could.

So yeah, the issue that many of us (I can only speak for myself obviously) is not that we think there's something he legally could have done to force them. But it's that the gap between legally forcing them and what he actually did to push the issue or "shame them" or more specifically pointing out the dollars and cents of it is what bothers a lot of people.

The perception was that it wasn't a negotiation it was an immediate capitulation. He seemed more interested in starting from a point of "What can we do to get Lieberman and Nelson and Lincoln to vote for the bill, and then spent the rest of the time convincing everyone to the left of that to shut the fuck up and accept it.

And if someone thinks that's o.k. then fine and more power to them. We can agree to disagree. But let's not act like there were only 2 options on the table: what he actually did, or forcing them to do something legally.

[uponit7771]

9. "But that does not mean that he did everything he could or fought as vigorously as he could." Please

...back this up with facts not "Feelings" not "perceptions" not "seemings" cold hard facts.

I don't see this in your assessment, just a persons view...which is subjective

[ClassWarrior]

20. Ahhh... prove a negative?

:rofl:

NGU.

[vi5]

22. O.K. then prove that he did everything...

I mean seriously. Prove a negative. What a wonderful and brilliant rhetorical device.

How many speeches did he point out how much money Baucus, Lincoln, and others who were holding the process hostage etc. got from the healthcare industry? How many speeches did he give where he specifically pointed out how much money the public option or single payer, etc. would save? How many times did he make speeches and in interviews point out that in poll after poll the public supported the public option and ask why those blocking it were fighting against the will of the American people? I mean I'd be more than happy to admit my gut instinct is wrong if you can provide me those links where he did any of those things AT LEAST in 50% of his speeches on the subject and not just ones where he more or less said some variation of "Yeah a public option would be nice, but it's not a deal breaker." How many times did he meet with and stand with Sanders, or any of the other liberal advocates of a public option or medicare buy in? Was it even a fraction of the time he spent kissing Olympia Snowe's behind?


All of this, on both sides are based on nothing more than "feelings". You have no more "proof" that Obama really was aggressive and championed the public option at every opportunity and really laid out the financial benefits of doing things differently than Nelson and Lieberman and Lincoln, etc. demanded they do than I do that he didn't. So please let's neither of us pretend that we have any proof of anything.

Yes, I know how the Senate and Congress and all that work. And if he fought the good fight and didn't win because of the obstructionism then I'd be more than o.k. with that. I really would. And I am not even one of these people who think the bill entirely sucks and is without merit and should be killed. But please don't ask me to throw my lot in with the cheerleading "clap louder for dear leader because he was so successful or shut the fuck up and join the republicans" crowd because I won't.

[ClassWarrior]

25. .

[ClassWarrior]

28. .

[goclark]

24. I'm with you ~ I'd like to ask the poster

was he or she THERE when he had to make decisions?

[dkf]

7. Tell Harry Reid to punish them if they don't.

Nothing for their states. EVER.

[uponit7771]

8. Punish them LEGALLY how? and "nothing for their states" isn't legal

[dkf]

10. No earmarks, no special projects, no chairs, no influence.

Strip them of any personal privileges possible. Turn them into pariahs.

[Kahuna]

11. Lieberman would say, 'Alright. Now I am a republican.' nt

[dkf]

14. And he is.

Frankly I want him OUT of homeland security. I'm not sure which homeland he's protecting.

[vi5]

23. And this would be different how?

The way it would be different is that it would lose him all his media attention. He would immediately lose his chairmanship anyway (yeah I'm sure the Republicans would gladly give up a seat of one of their own for him), he would lose his seniority and would lose much more than he would gain. And he would vote the same damn way he does now except that there would be less incentive for anyone to kiss his ass.

[treestar]

27. There would be 41 Republicans though

No more passage of any bills. Lieberman did vote for this. As a spurned Republican he would join their lockstep.

No, I'm afraid kissing Lieberman's ass is necessary. And it's a miracle of an accomplishment for the President and Reid that they put together something he would vote for. Reality, and it's not optional.

And they haven't lost him for future bills.

[griffi94]

16. support primary challenges to

the ones who who held him up.

[okieinpain]

40. and the rest of the dems would go along with that. you really

think that all of the dems would go for that.

[Laelth]

12. Obama could have done nothing.

And that would have been better than to push for the passage of this bill.

:dem:

-Laelth

[uponit7771]

18. Even with Sanders tripling of CHC's?!?!? Have you read the bill?

[Laelth]

31. Yes, even with Sanders tripling funding for CHCs.

But I was responding to the question posed by the OP.

Kill the bill.

Forcing people to buy insurance is no more the answer to a failed health care system than forcing people to buy houses is the solution to homelessness.

:dem:

-Laelth

[tularetom]

15. Nothing but he could appoint them to his cabinet and then

Fire them as soon as their replacements were seated. Problem with that is that the governors of both their states are repub I think.

[virtualobserver]

17. when I heard Blanche Lincoln speak on the floor of the Senate...

...I knew that there was a snowball's chance in hell.
Some people wanted him to threaten to veto if no PO, but not only would it have failed, it would have weakened him politically.

[totodeinhere]

21. He couldn't have "forced" them to do anything, but...

at least he could have used more forceful leadership on the issue. He comes from Chicago doesn't he? He should have used some hardball Chicago style politics to make it perfectly clear that the full weight of the White House would move against these senators to make their lives totally miserable if they don't cooperate. That includes funding primary candidates against them and leaning on Uncle Reid to strip them of all committee assignments. There is a lot that he could have "legally" done if he had really wanted to, but he seemed to be more interested in kissing Lieberman's ass.

[uponit7771]

35. "...used more forceful leadership ...", Please tell us WTF this practically means to the question?

[Alenne]

26. Nothing really

I guess he could have threatened them but if they still didn't go his way, then what. I think the President realizes he needs these people for more than this vote. So, he compromised. Sometimes you have to to get some of what you want.

[marshall]

29. Define who you mean by "his" in "his way"

That'll make a difference.

[neverforget]

30. Rahm told Reid to "make the deal" with Lieberman. Obama seems to have

some persuasion powers......

[uponit7771]

36. Could you please back this up with facts and insubjective terms

[neverforget]

41. It was all the rage 2 weeks ago

http://tpmdc.talkingpointsmemo.com/2009/12/rahm-to-reid-give-lieberman-what-he-wants.php

Emanuel didn't just leave it to Reid to find a solution. Emanuel specifically suggested Reid give Lieberman the concessions he seeks on issues like the Medicare buy-in and triggers.

"It was all about 'do what you've got to do to get it done. Drop whatever you've got to drop to get it done," the aide said. All of Emanuel's prescriptions, the source said, were aimed at appeasing Lieberman--not twisting his arm.

This is the second Senate aide to provide nearly identical accounts of the White House's intervention. It seems very much as if officials there desperately want the Senate to pass a bill, at all costs.

[depakid]

32. Easier to simply cut them out of the equation through reconciliation

Though knocking heads might have also worked- had the administration not earned a reputation for being pathologically conflict averse with anyone other than their base.

Bottom line: A Republican president would have got it done- and so would LBJ.

[malletgirl02]

33. Congress

Since Congress is independent of the executive branch, the people who should be forcing Lieberman and Nelson to vote with the Democrats are the Majority Leader, Harry Reid and the Majority Whip. The Whip's job is to corral senators of their party to vote with the party, that is why they are called whips.

[uponit7771]

37. Bush had Tom Delay Obama has Harry Reid

[malletgirl02]

38. and that is unfortunate

[Teaser]

39. he could kidnap their families and hold them hostage.

I will never forgive him for not doing this. NEVER.