Valerie Jarrett On Healthcare

1 comment August 15th, 2009at 09:58am Posted by Eli

Well, I just heard Valerie Jarrett tell the Netroots Nation audience that:

A) Obama will not pressure the Blue Dogs to vote for the public option – he’s going to rely on us to do it for him.  Fantastic.  How about both, eh?


B) That Obama wants the public option, but she doesn’t want to look ahead to the end of the process to say whether or not he would veto a bill without a public option.

I am more and more convinced that Obama will leave Congress to its own devices and then happily sign whatever they pass.  And if it’s a massively unpopular fiasco, he’ll just blame it on us for not giving the public option the support he supposedly wanted.

Oh, and she said we don’t need to release the torture pictures because everyone already knows what’s in them, so why stir things up unnecessarily, and when asked about how Obama would respond to pressure from the left, she chose to redefine “pressure” as “ideas.”  So does that mean we’re just supposed to offer the Blue Dogs ideas, then?

Entry Filed under: Democrats,Healthcare,Obama,Politics

1 Comment

  • 1. Reggie Greene / The Logistician  |  August 15th, 2009 at 6:45 pm

    At this point, although the debate and spin continue, this bill is essentially dead from an emotional and mandate perspective, even if some version gets passed. Whether it ultimately proves to be of any benefit to society, or a detriment, will take years, if not decades, to appreciate.

    This bill, and virtually anything that might be done to improve our healthcare system, involves too much complexity with which we are emotionally motivated to deal. In addition, there are too many factions with entrenched economic and/or financial interests to permit it to become a true health initiative.

    There’s been too much arguing about the details. People can not describe in 2 or 3 sentences the conceptual parameters of the effort and what it is supposed to accomplish. Unfortunately, people can describe how they feel about it in 1 or 2 words, and that’s not good. And that’s not to mention the elements which have whipped up hysteria by suggesting, with certainty, what will occur once the final product (which does not yet exist) emerges.

    If either side of the debate has to work this hard arguing about something which theoretically should improve the lives of the masses of people, there’s a big problem.

    Even more so than how something is done, people are interested in results, not the details. And once again, as is frequently the case with much of human processing, the facts don’t really matter. How people view the world, what they value, and what they want, matters.

    And there is nothing collaborative in nature about that. Factor in the strong individualistic American DNA, and this effort is emotionally toast.

Contact Eli



Most Recent Posts




August 2009
« Jul   Sep »

Thinking Blogger

Pittsburgh Webloggers

Site Meter

View My Stats *