Displaying 17,371 To 17,400 Of 19,504 Comments Hey Sue! My point is that we have to be able to admit when Obama messes up so we’re credible when we campaign for what he’s right about. It seems very clear to me, even your valid point about Dems and Indies not stepping up underlines it, by taking a hands-off approach on the HCR bill, Obama made a big mistake. His involvement and passion would have energized Dems and Indies to step up. He basically admitted this mistake after seeing how it led to Repubs and Teabaggers energizing their mobs by being vocal and turning the town halls and HC debates into travesties. I think it’s very important to acknowledge mistakes so they’re not repeated. I want Obama to come out in 2010 fighting hard for his/our agenda and never sitting back on any issue that’s important again, no matter how strategic it may seem at the moment. » Posted By AdLib On January 20, 2010 @ 10:37 am FrankenPC, yes, you’re right on the money on who I was referring to. The Ariannas and Hamshers and on and on, all the talking heads boasting of being Progressive but de facto trying to undermine the only Progressive agenda we’ve had or will have a chance to achieve in a very long time. They are media whores who are addicted to seeing their faces and hearing their voices everywhere, to feeling that they are smarter than everyone else and have the power to damage a president. They are small minded, egocentric people who should be exposed for who they really are and what they are really doing. I will always criticize President Obama, constructively, when I feel he is doing or has done the wrong thing but I would never encourage attacking the one man who can offer the most promise in fixing so much of what’s wrong in this nation. » Posted By AdLib On January 20, 2010 @ 10:22 am LABC63, here are just a few of the items that have led me to place a lot of responsibility at Rahm’s feet: Announcement of Rahm as COS by Obama: I am pleased to announce that my good friend, Congressman Rahm Emanuel, has agreed to serve as my White House chief of staff. I announce this appointment first because the Chief of Staff is central to the ability of a President and Administration to accomplish an agenda. And no one I know is better at getting things done than Rahm Emanuel. Emanuel: Obama ‘Open To Alternatives’ To Public Option Well, some key senators are saying that Obama’s chief of staff Rahm Emanuel has already reached out to them–and not to express a “strong opinion” about the public option. White House Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel met last night at the U.S. Capitol with Senate Democrats and told them Obama is “open to alternatives” to a new government insurance program in order to get legislation overhauling the health-care system to his desk, said Senator Kent Conrad of North Dakota. “His message was, it’s critical that you do this,” Conrad said. Senate Finance Committee Chairman Max Baucus of Montana said Emanuel urged the senators to seek Republican support and didn’t discourage them from pursuing the use of non-profit cooperatives, an idea Conrad has proposed. http://tpmdc.talkingpointsmemo.com/2009/06/emanuel-obama-open-to-alternatives-to-public-option.php JULY 7, 2009 By LAURA MECKLER and JANET ADAMY WASHINGTON — It is more important that health-care legislation inject stiff competition among insurance plans than it is for Congress to create a pure government-run option, White House Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel said. “The goal is to have a means and a mechanism to keep the private insurers honest,” he said in an interview. “The goal is non-negotiable; the path is” negotiable. http://online.wsj.com/article/SB124692407982802911.html White House aides reaffirm public option is not mandatory By Ceci Connolly http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/10/18/AR2009101802152.html Emanuel Tests Limits of His Persuasion in Health-Care Overhaul By Mike Dorning While President Barack Obama has kept his distance from the legislative maneuvering over health care, his chief of staff has been nudging the process at critical points, corralling powerful interests and coaxing members of Congress, said lobbyists, labor leaders, lawmakers and congressional staff. Kindler and Emanuel declined to comment. » Posted By AdLib On January 20, 2010 @ 8:21 am Thanks bito! » Posted By AdLib On January 20, 2010 @ 7:58 am Yes, fear of being in the minority again and fear of breaking precedent. The Senate makes a big deal about respecting historic practices so it would be a huge breech in decorum to do something like this. IMO, it needs to be done out of respect for democracy. As I mentioned in my article, this year has “nuked” the possibility of either side being willing to be bipartisan probably for at least a generation. That means NOTHING will get done in Congress without 60 votes from now on and we can’t afford that if we want our nation to come back. » Posted By AdLib On January 20, 2010 @ 2:14 am Oh! Well, you’re absolutely right about that, I don’t think any big changes can get through that way. » Posted By AdLib On January 20, 2010 @ 2:09 am No Child has severely damaged school systems and drained irreplaceable money from them. Passing tests was focused on at the expense of kids being given a full and rounded education. Ask folks today how huge the Bankruptcy bill was, it was indeed huge and the impact has been massive. And Biden co-sponsored it because he’s from DE where many banks are based. While you’re correct about 1/6 of the economy in play, that is irrelevant to most people’s concerns or interest in it. This issue is as important to many as the Medicare B and Iraq War bills. And as for the Iraq War bill, the fear you refer too was trumped up by Bush as President. At the same time, there were massive protests against the bill, more than I’ve seen for or against HCR, though the MSM wouldn’t cover the protests. » Posted By AdLib On January 20, 2010 @ 2:07 am Yes, I saw Fox News has been behind propaganda, trying to brand Reconciliation the Nuclear Option. What assholes! It would likely be taken to court but historically, the courts don’t usually interfere with issues affecting the conduct of the legislative bodies. Ultimately, I would think the courts would turn down the case since the Senate is Constitutionally entitled to decide its own rules. » Posted By AdLib On January 20, 2010 @ 1:57 am KQ, the thing about the Nuke Option is that it is a process that throws out the use of the filibuster in the Senate forever. That’s why it’s called the Nuclear Option, once dropped, the filibuster is history in The Senate from that day forward. » Posted By AdLib On January 20, 2010 @ 1:33 am Whoops! Thanks! » Posted By AdLib On January 20, 2010 @ 1:29 am My POV is that MA wouldn’t have elected a Teabagger Repub in Ted Kennedy’s seat if the majority out there is seeing Obama the way you describe. That doesn’t mean they are right, it just means that’s their perception. And that’s the issue here, we can agree about Obama’s accomplishments but if many voters “feel” that Obama and government isn’t working for them successfully, that’s their reality. That’s why my focus is in moving forward with a new and bold agenda instead of listing previous accomplishments to people whose minds are unlikely to be changed by that. » Posted By AdLib On January 20, 2010 @ 1:28 am Passing the new Bankruptcy laws was huge and continuing No Child even once it was known to harm schools by not being funded was big. And voting to invade Iraq wasn’t too small. Dems were opposed to that until Bush put on the dog and pony show and flooded the airwaves with propoganda. The Dems conceded because the vote was scheduled just before the election and their flawed thinking was, vote for it and take away voting “no” as a campaign issue they could be slammed with. Much as I hate to say it, that was effective strategy, something that has been missing big time from the HCR process. » Posted By AdLib On January 20, 2010 @ 1:19 am Thanks Kalima! I think part of the MSM’s mission is to complicate and obscure common sense, then we need to watch them to explain what we’re supposed to think. » Posted By AdLib On January 20, 2010 @ 1:07 am Nope, just a Point of Order and 51 votes gets rid of the filibuster since it’s not a Constitutional provision. » Posted By AdLib On January 20, 2010 @ 1:05 am What would be great is to compare this list with Bush’s list. We do have to keep in mind though that the problem today needs to be solved with what Obama WILL do in the next three years. His SOTU Address could and should be the springboard to launch a renewed activism. I’m looking forward to it. » Posted By AdLib On January 20, 2010 @ 1:02 am An FYI on how easy it is to exercise the Nuclear Option to get rid of the filibuster in The Senate: The “nuclear option” is an attempt by a majority of the United States Senate to end a filibuster by invoking a point of order to essentially declare the filibuster unconstitutional which can be decided by a simple majority, rather than seeking formal cloture with a supermajority of 60 senators. Although it is not provided for in the formal rules of the Senate, the procedure is the subject of a 1957 parliamentary opinion and has been used on several occasions since. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuclear_option » Posted By AdLib On January 20, 2010 @ 12:58 am True, The President has no Constitutional control over Congress but they do de facto. Presidents are the leaders of their parties and have a lot of levers to pull with Dems in Congress, especially when they are popular. We were told that having Rahm as COS would help Obama get his agenda through Congress. Rahm screwed him and all of us. They proceeded with a hands-off approach to HCR. Instead of presenting his plan for health care to Congress, he sat back so his name wouldn’t be on it and hoping it would help him avoid the HillaryCare fate. And yet, I heard scores of Senators and Reps along the way calling out for Obama to step in and give direction, focus and momentum to the legislation. Obama (and especially Rahm) made a huge mistake with HCR. He concluded that the mistake Hillary made was having ANY involvement in getting HCR passed so he went to great lengths to stay removed from it. Let’s not forget how Single Payer was rejected at the outset by Obama and how Rahm and others in the Admin made very clear early on they were willing to toss the Public Option overboard. This was a surprisingly poor approach to negotiating. Imagine if you went to a car dealership and started your negotiations by saying that you wouldn’t be expecting much for your trade in and you’d be willing to pay close to sticker price? IMO, Obama should have started from a position of Medicare for all/Single Payer and if necessary, negotiate down (via Congress) to Public Option for all. I am an Obama supporter but I think to change course from the undesirable place we are now, where need to know which roads not to go down again. » Posted By AdLib On January 20, 2010 @ 12:53 am There are many substantial accomplishments by Obama in his first year but most were in his first 6 months. He put much on hold while trying to pass HCR and I think this is proving now to have been a mistake. Also, we need to look at where this year has led him to. Record low in approval ratings, a Repub elected in MA taking away the 60 vote filibuster-buster in The Senate, huge compromises on HCR and a base that is in conflict with itself. This is not where any of us would have hoped he or we would be so I can’t call that a success, despite all his achievements. In order to change course, one must concede that the path taken in 2009 was not the ideal path. Doing so doesn’t diss him for his accomplishments, it just hopefully tries to pave the way for much more of them going forward. » Posted By AdLib On January 20, 2010 @ 12:30 am Yes, going through withdrawals is giving me a Hawaiian heart attack…URRRP! Oh, I guess it was just that soul that I digested. » Posted By AdLib On January 20, 2010 @ 12:17 am Though Pres. Obama did declare he would move forward with or without the Repubs, as you say, he and the Senate were still accommodating Lieberman and Nelson who are virtual Republicans anyway. As you say, according to The Constitution, The President does not control Congress…but the Bush Presidency did anyway. Congress can be dominated by a strong presidency, recent history proves this (Reagan and Bush dominated Congress and got nearly everything they wanted). I don’t know that it will work but the case can be made to the Dems in the House that as incumbents and the anger there is out there towards incumbents, just sitting on their hands is no recipe for getting re-elected. The dynamics need to change, people need to feel the government is working for them. Obama has the power to rally that kind of enthusiasm, I think it is possible to make the case that activism is the only way out of this mess. And as for HuffPoop, what else did we expect? Their goals have nothing to do with Obama succeeding as president and Americans being helped. They are due a huge comeuppance. » Posted By AdLib On January 20, 2010 @ 12:13 am Cheers Moongal! The bully pulpit is now required, indeed. I can understand Obama having a concern when he first became president that being too “radical” would panic some people (extremists). As we saw, they screamed that the end of the world was coming when he was moderate so there is nothing to lose now. I’m so pleased that you’re feeling hopeful. This is just one year, three more are coming and so much can be accomplished. That’s why we can be our own best allies or our own worst enemies depending on whether we focus on accomplishing what this nation needs or attacking the one President that could make much of it happen. Get in the game or bathe in blame, those are the choices I see. » Posted By AdLib On January 19, 2010 @ 11:58 pm Thanks WTS! Now, know where I can get some Oxycontin cheap? » Posted By AdLib On January 19, 2010 @ 11:48 pm I agree. There is one enormously great thing that could come out of the Dems being reduced to 59 seats in the Senate…they may realize that the only hope they have to avoid gridlock for 3 years and lose the majority…is to use the Nuclear Option and remove the filibuster. The bottom line is this, with the filibuster gone, not only can Obama continue to accomplish his agenda over the next 3 years BUT they would not have to allow Blue Dogs and the GOP to corrupt bills. They would only need 50 votes because if there was a tie, they have Biden to deliver the 51st vote. And we have more than 50 votes for just about every important bill. It’s a nuclear option either way, either nuke the filibuster or be blown up in 2012. » Posted By AdLib On January 19, 2010 @ 2:21 pm I too find #2 impossible. In fact, the very nature of both theories point to a much likelier status, that Brown has a chance of winning simply because Coakley is such a weak candidate and poor campaigner. What member for the Dem party would ever have predicted that a Dem might not win Kennedy’s seat? » Posted By AdLib On January 19, 2010 @ 11:26 am What Martin Luther King Jr. Day means to me Pepe, it is a wrenching adventure that you’ve had under the shadow of racism, thank you so much for sharing it. That moment of realization you described, when you grew old enough to look back and recognize the prejudice that kept you in the basement at your grandparents, is very resonant. As painful is it is to read and confront someone with the prejudiced sensibilities as your father, I’m left optimistic by the inner sense of what was right in you and your siblings, you would not be corrupted by him. It is a conundrum and a challenge to openly discuss hate-speech and hate-think while avoiding hurting others with the very presentation of the hateful words and thoughts one is condemning. I faithfully believe in Freedom of Expression and openly bringing the ugliest things about our society into the light so we can confront them. I think it is important do so honestly but prudently, openly expressing truths while doing our best to balance the impact such words can have on others. In the last two days alone, we have had frank and open discussions at The Planet about race and religion. On most sites that I know, such threads would soon have become war zones. It is saying something special about this community that we can have discussions about such primal and explosive topics, thoughtfully and openly. » Posted By AdLib On January 19, 2010 @ 8:37 am Pepe, only have a moment right now to say thank you for such a poignant article on MLK Day and I will be back in more detail later. Well done! » Posted By AdLib On January 18, 2010 @ 3:01 pm One would have to go back around the time of the Hittites to find religions that worshiped Gaia or God as a female (pagan as they were later called). As one might imagine, these were less aggressive and hostile religions, more holistic…so The Hittites had little trouble conquering or decimating them. I remember someone saying that one person you won’t ever hear fundamentalist and/or Republican Christians quoting is Jesus. He sort of screws up their whole “Christian” agenda with that “meek inheriting Earth” and “wealthy man in heaven/camel through eye of a needle” stuff. It’s only Old Testament Hatin’ for them! » Posted By AdLib On January 17, 2010 @ 10:59 pm Why do creatures like us exist to see the universe? Because logically what » Posted By AdLib On January 17, 2010 @ 10:44 pm Agreed, I don’t see how dualism is compatible with an interventionist, omnipotent God. Unless God has been bought out by a hedge fund. » Posted By AdLib On January 17, 2010 @ 10:32 pm I don’t see how selfishness ever mixes with true spirituality and those who use God as a wishing well for parking spaces or to bring them wealth seem far less in touch with spirituality than atheists. People have exploited religion since the beginning, such exploitation is well entrenched in our civilization at this point and isn’t going anywhere. However. the enlightened can speak out against those who would use it to make themselves wealthy and give themselves power. Maybe the trickle down effect would be the message that spirituality isn’t about you as an individual getting things, it’s about perspective, you as an individual finding a connection between everyone and everything else and you. Even from a strictly scientific perspective, we are all indeed made from the elements and atoms that were once the stuff of stars. Our genetics prove we have an enormous amount in common with every person on the planet, let alone other living things. I think it would be the communal seeing of God/the Universe in every other human being that could bring people together and lead them to the next level of development as human beings and a civilization. Meanwhile, don’t ever feel self conscious about praying or wanting to feel better…you have many people who sincerely want that for you too. » Posted By AdLib On January 17, 2010 @ 10:29 pmComments Posted By AdLib
By Brian Beutler – June 24, 2009, 9:16AM
White House Open to Deal on Public Health Plan
Monday, October 19, 2009
==========
White House Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel, in two television appearances, noted that the public option could provide much-needed competition, but that “it’s not the defining piece of health care.”
Dec. 17 (Bloomberg)
«« Back To Stats Page
Home Stats