Multi Medium

Question

Why is it that Republicans and conservadems seem perfectly okay with American jobs going overseas, but completely freak out over the idea of foreigners showing up here to collect them in person?

Add comment March 18th, 2010 at 07:33pm Posted by Eli

Great Moments In Democratic Strategery

First it looked like the Democrats might use reconciliation to restore the very popular public option.  Then it looked like they were going to use it to pass a grab-bag of minor fixes.  Now it looks like they’re going to use it to make sure that the voters hate them even more:

We’ve been waiting for days to see the CBO score to see how much the final health care bill will cost, with the goals being to both reduce the deficit and to fit under the arbitrary $900 billion cap posed by Obama.

It seems they’ve been unable to do so, as Ben Smith now reports that AFL-CIO President Richard Trumka is on his way to the White House to discuss plans by Democrats to actually raise the tax on middle class health care plans in order to pay for the bill.

(…)

Jon Walker notes that adding a public option would save at least $25 billion in the bill.  The House paid for its bill by taxing the richest Americans.

And yet, faced will trying to contain the costs of this bill, Democrats’ first instinct is to raise taxes on the middle class even further. Brilliant!

Wow.  Just wow.  Has any political party ever displayed this kind of electoral death wish before?  And this isn’t LBJ writing off the South because it was important to do the right thing on civil rights; this is a prolonged pattern of promoting predatory corporate interests.

At this point I have to believe that Obama has decided that it’s in his best interest to have a Republican Congress, but I’m not sure what’s in it for all the Democrats who are going to be losing their seats.  Cushy healthcare lobbying gigs, I guess.

Add comment March 18th, 2010 at 11:27am Posted by Eli

Purity

Perhaps I’m just imagining it, but the enemies of womens’ choice seem to be a lot more universally opposed to the Nelson “compromise” in the Senate bill than liberal healthcare advocates are to its lack of a public option.  Despite the fact that Nelson is a lot closer to Stupak than No Public Option is to Public Option, and the fact that reconciliation could be used to pass the public option, but not to pass Stupak.

At any rate, I certainly don’t see a whole lot of bishops or Blue Dogs saying, “Come on!  This is a historic once-in-a-lifetime opportunity to roll back women’s rights!  Don’t let the perfect be the enemy of the good!”

I really really hated having to choose between choice and the public option, but choosing between choice and forcing people to buy crappy private insurance policies they probably can’t afford to use isn’t very difficult at all.  But one that, amazingly, Obama and the Democrats are still on the brink of getting wrong.

It’s a double epic fail.  Like saying that everyone has to give up their bathroom privileges in exchange for mandatory shit sandwich lunches every day (”But look! Now everyone gets a lunch! Isn’t that awesome?”).

Add comment March 18th, 2010 at 07:25am Posted by Eli

Why I’m Fed Up

As Gregg very effectively points out, it’s funny how Obama and the Democrats couldn’t be bothered to make an effort on behalf of the public option, much less single payer, dithering endlessly and fruitlessly with Republicans and immediately capitulating when conservative wankers like Joe Lieberman and Ben Nelson say they’ll vote no… yet now that the healthcare reform bill has transformed into a huge windfall for the insurance industry (and antichoice fanatics), they’ve pulled out all the stops to push for its passage and aggressively (and apparently effectively) attack any Democrats who hold out.  They’re even getting creative with arcane procedural workarounds.

So, to sum up: Public option/single payer?  Not worth the slightest effort to defend.  Gutting abortion rights and forcing people to buy insurance from the private companies who made healthcare suck in the first place?  The most important bill ever, and woe unto any Democrat who votes against it.

I guess it’s all just a matter of priorities, and Obama and the Democrats clearly have the wrong ones.

Add comment March 17th, 2010 at 07:25am Posted by Eli

Remarkable.

That Pat Caddell and Doug Schoen could write so many words about how healthcare reform is doomed and everybody hates it because they hate Big Government without ever once mentioning the public option and how overwhelmingly popular it is.

I’m sure it’s just an oversight; so many people seem to have forgotten all about the public option lately.

Add comment March 12th, 2010 at 11:32am Posted by Eli

Wankers Of The Day

Harry Reid and Dick Durbin.

After all their pro-public-option posturing, now they’re urging Senate Democrats to vote against any amendments to the woefully inadequate and public-optionless reconciliation bill, even if they’re popular and/or they personally support them.

Great plan, make Democrats vote against popular healthcare policies that they support… in an election year.  They must be worried that the base isn’t depressed enough.

(Gee, I guess Bernie didn’t get the memo…)

Add comment March 11th, 2010 at 08:41pm Posted by Eli

What Could Possibly Go Wrong?

Messrs. Barry Friedman and Andrew Martin have A Cunning Plan to overcome the Republican filibuster:

[T]he Democrats need to take three steps: First, they should announce the order in which they will take up their legislative agenda. Next, they should declare that they will no longer be using dual tracking, so that the Senate will hear just one issue at a time. Finally, Democrats should require those who want to filibuster legislation or appointments to actually do so, by holding the floor, talking the issue to death and bringing everything to a halt.

The new-school filibuster would preserve minority rights in the Senate, while imposing significant costs on obstructionist members, changing the calculus that causes today’s logjam. Stuck on the Senate floor, filibustering senators couldn’t meet with lobbyists or attend campaign fund-raising events; they couldn’t do much of anything, really, until their filibuster ended.

Getting rid of dual-tracking would require the minority to make careful choices about what to obstruct, and when to obstruct it. As Senator Bunning’s unsuccessful solo stand against jobless benefits showed, even Republicans have limited tolerance when it comes to stalling legislation for reasons that lack popular support.

After all, filibusters historically broke when public opinion went against the Senate minority. If the Democratic leadership eliminated the dual-track system, serial, single-issue filibusters would give us an opportunity to see where the country actually stands on issues like health care reform and financial regulation — and where the Senate should stand.

First of all, my understanding was that the rules change that lowered the filibuster threshold from 67 to 60 votes also eliminated the requirement for the minority party to actually perform the full-blown cots-and-phonebooks Mr. Smith-style filibuster.  But even if it hadn’t, this strategy sounds a lot like handing your kidnapper a gun and hoping he shoots himself with it.

The Republicans have absolutely no compunction about obstructing everything, the media has no particular interest in accurately reporting what’s going on, and consequently the public backlash Friedman and Martin are counting on would simply never happen.  Either that or the Republican spin (Healthcare reform is a socialist government takeover!  Financial reform/tax increases/environmental regulation will take away your jobs!) will triumph and make their obstructionism look like a heroic effort to Save America.

I would much rather find ways to neutralize the Republicans, not further empower them in hopes that they will commit suicide by overreach.  It took six years for that to work the last time, and the damage was incalculable.  Why would we want to do it again?

Add comment March 10th, 2010 at 07:46pm Posted by Eli

Massa:Beck::Al Capone’s Vault:Rivera?

Poor Glenn Beck.  Massa was serving up all kinds of juicy tidbits about groping and tickling and naked browbeating, but because he wouldn’t come out and say that Rahm or Obama did horrible corrupt illegal conspiracy things to force him out of office, the whole interview was a waste of time.

1 comment March 10th, 2010 at 11:36am Posted by Eli

That’s A Terrible Idea!

I am just not at all comfortable with the idea of making Medicare a government service…

Add comment March 10th, 2010 at 07:07am Posted by Eli

Trying To Pull The Woolsey Over Our Eyes

Lynn Woolsey’s attempt to convince us that she’s not a total spineless weakling on the public option is quite remarkable.  She starts out with an excellent defense of the public option, then pledges to… push for a separate public option bill right after the current monstrosity passes.  Right, because that would totally happen.  The only chance to pass the public option is now, when the White House is desperate for a win on healthcare.

This is strongly reminiscent of Candidate Obama’s promise to fight to strip telecom immunity from the FISA reform bill… immediately after he voted for it.  And look how well that worked out.

Reading Woolsey’s op-ed was like watching Ron Carey in High Anxiety: “I get it… I get it… I get it… I don’t get it.”

(Side question: Has anyone in the Senate leadership yet given any kind of coherent explanation for why the public option isn’t in the reconciliation sidecar?  I know Gibbs – who is not in the Senate – said it didn’t have the votes, but otherwise it seems more like the public option simply hasn’t occurred to Harry, and all the Senators who have signed the public option are just a vague buzzing noise in his ear.)

1 comment March 9th, 2010 at 07:22am Posted by Eli

Wanker Of The Day

Blanche Lincoln:

“The larger message being sent to the administration and Congress is: You are with us or you are against us,” said Patterson, Lincoln’s campaign manager. “The left feels frustrated after eight years [of President George W. Bush] their agenda should be at the forefront and should be passed in its entirety in the first year. That didn’t happen and that anger, some of that is being magnified in our race.”

This might – I repeat, might - be a plausible defense for the Obama administration, which can claim that it’s had to make unpalatable compromises because its awesome progressive agenda has been obstructed by Congress, but it is disingenuous at best coming from one of the obstructors herself.

Instead, Lincoln’s campaign manager pretends that his boss is just some kind of innocent bystander, caught up in “the left’s” overall frustration with Congress, and not one of the primary causes of it.

3 comments March 8th, 2010 at 07:10am Posted by Eli

Great Moments In Sales

In their latest e-mail blast, apparently the DNC actually thinks this is a good thing:

On Fox News Sunday this morning Mitt Romney defended the individual mandate, which was in the health care plan he championed as Governor, as the “ultimate conservative plan”

See it HERE:  http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GzdhJ3CsYLQ

DNC National Press Secretary Hari Sevugan offered the following response to Romney’s declaration:

“We know that ensuring everyone is covered and expanding the risk pool will lower costs, but it certainly speaks to the bipartisan nature of the President’s plan that Governor Romney calls the idea of an individual mandate the “ultimate conservative plan.”

Romney Defends Individual Mandate as “Conservative.” “What we did, I think, is the ultimate conservative plan. We said people have to take responsibility for getting insurance, if they can afford it, or paying their own way. No more free-riders.” [FOX News, 3/7/10, See it HERE:  http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GzdhJ3CsYLQ]

DNC National Press Secretary Hari Sevugan offered the following response to Romney’s declaration:

“We know that ensuring everyone is covered and expanding the risk pool will lower costs, but it certainly speaks to the bipartisan nature of the President’s plan that Governor Romney calls the idea of an individual mandate the “ultimate conservative plan.”

Oh yeah, I am soooo stoked to run out and support the Senate’s healthcare plan now that I know that Mitt Romney has endorsed the individual mandate as “the ultimate conservative plan” – I’m gonna get on the phone to my congressman right away!

2 comments March 7th, 2010 at 03:27pm Posted by Eli

Question Of The Day

Does The Obama Administration Even Want To Win In November?

Johnson’s bafflement is an excellent companion piece to Scarecrow’s.

My take on it is that a Republican-controlled (or Republican + Blue Dog-controlled) Congress gives Obama an excuse to pursue the Republican policies that he apparently wants to pursue anyway.  “Oh gee, I really wanted to do something about healthcare/unemployment/financial shenanigans/global warming/EFCA/DADT, but my hands are tied by all those Republicans.  How about some nice shiny tax cuts?”

What I don’t get is how Obama actually thinks that leading his party into a rout in 2010 and then using that as an excuse to govern like a full-blown Republican is going to win him any votes in 2012.  Maybe he’s counting on the Republicans nominating someone terrifyingly, unelectably insane.  Which is not completely out of the question.

Add comment March 6th, 2010 at 01:11pm Posted by Eli

Epic Win

This. Is. Awesome.

Republicans like a politician who stands up for what he believes — even if he believes the Republican Party is populated by a bunch of “knuckle-dragging Neanderthals.”

The candidate leading the Florida GOP primary to determine who will take on Rep. Alan Grayson, the Democrat who represents the Orlando-based district, is none other than Grayson himself, according to a poll paid for by his campaign. Grayson is a freshman congressman who has drawn scorn from the GOP and has quickly built a nationwide following of progressives.

The poll has Grayson leading the 13 Republicans — among Republicans — with 27.8 percent of the vote. The congressman who mocked the GOP health care plan by saying that it amounts to telling people not to get sick and if they do, to die quickly, received more support than all of the Republican candidates combined.

No GOP candidate scored above 3.7 percent; 57.7 percent said they were undecided.

HAHAHAHAHAHA!!!  Oh yeah, he’s really in Desperate Electoral Peril all right.

I know it’s his own poll, but if the numbers are even close to right it’s hugely embarrassing for the Republicans.  It’s also some pretty brilliant and creative campaign messaging.

1 comment March 5th, 2010 at 11:24am Posted by Eli

So Now He’s In A Hurry?

Funny how Obama’s patience was nearly infinite when the public option was in the Senate healthcare bill with Republicans and conservadems trying to take it out, but now that the public option is out with liberals and moderates trying to put it back in, he can’t get it passed soon enough.

If it weren’t for his solemn promise to “revisit” the public option at some unspecified future time (just like his promise to “revisit” NAFTA!), I might think that he really really doesn’t want it.

Add comment March 5th, 2010 at 07:02am Posted by Eli

Wankers Of The Day

Shorter Tom Harkin and Debbie Wasserman Schultz: We really like the public option, but it is necessary to destroy healthcare reform in order to save it.  Or something.

Democratic support for the public option looks more and more phony and insincere every day.  Like Obama, they want it dead, but they know it’s popular and don’t want to take the blame for killing it, so they play Reluctant Pragmatist Acceding To Reality.  Pathetic.

Add comment March 2nd, 2010 at 11:32am Posted by Eli

Obama Vs. Progressives

Despite Obama’s desperate desire to see the public option finally curl up and die, progressive congressmembers are still trying to keep the dream alive at today’s healthcare summit.  In addition to the use-reconciliation-to-pass-PO letter that’s circulating around the Senate, we also have:

• Bernie Sanders saying the Senate does have the 50 votes needed to pass the PO through reconciliation, and that he’s baffled why Obama keeps trying to bury it.

• Nancy Pelosi reminding Obama that he himself said that the PO would “keep the insurance companies honest and… increase competition” and challenging him to produce a better alternative.  She also pointed out that the public option saves money, which is a very important point that is too often forgotten.

• The Congressional Progressive Caucus objected to their exclusion from the summit, pointed out that the PO is mad popular, and suggested that perhaps the savings from the PO which everybody likes could be used to offset the excise tax which everybody hates.

At this point, I fear the fix is in, that Obama has made up his mind that he would rather piss off the voters than piss off the healthcare industry, but I’m glad to see that the progressives aren’t letting him off the hook.  This should also help them when they all have to run against Obama in the midterms.

Add comment February 25th, 2010 at 08:40pm Posted by Eli

Tales From Bizarro World

…Where Evan Bayh, Kit Bond, Judd Gregg, George Voinovich, Mel Martinez, Jim Bunning, Harry Reid, and John McCain are irreplaceable legislative titans:

With the retirement of Sen. Evan Bayh (Ind.), every Democratic presidential hopeful from 2008 will have exited the Senate by the time the 112th Congress convenes in January — and they’ll have taken an abundance of experience and star power with them.

Bayh joins a group of veteran Democratic and Republican senators, many longtime elected officials, who are set to end their careers at the end of the term. All told, those departures — as well as the death last year of Sen. Edward M. Kennedy (D-Mass.) — will leave the chamber with a deficit of 232 years of legislative know-how and Washington gravitas that has characterized Capitol Hill for a generation.

(…)

Additionally, four GOP senators are calling it quits, while one Republican, Mel Martinez (Fla.), resigned his seat last summer. Among those Republicans leaving are three former governors: Judd Gregg (N.H.) after 18 years, Christopher J. Bond (Mo.) after 24 years and George V. Voinovich (Ohio) after 12 years. Jim Bunning of Kentucky also is retiring after two terms.

One GOP lobbyist said the combination of Democratic and Republican retirements amount to a loss of “eons” of experience and include unique, irreplaceable characters who have left an indelible imprint on the Senate and American politics.

(…)

One former Senate Democratic leadership aide said the potential loss of experience from Reid or McCain — or both — would be a significant blow to the chamber and its ability to tackle large, complex issues.

A-HAHAHAHAHAHA!!!  Because Reid and McCain have done such a great job of shepherding large, complex issues to successful conclusions in the past.  Okay, I’ll give McCain campaign finance reform, but I can’t think of any other major accomplishment other than laundering his image of the stink of the Keating Five.  And Harry Reid is one of the weakest and most ineffectual Majority Leaders of all time.

I’ll miss Byron Dorgan and Teddy, and that’s about it.

Add comment February 23rd, 2010 at 07:23am Posted by Eli

This Just In…

Earth to Obama and Democrats: How many times do we have to tell you that the reason everyone hates the Senate healthcare bill is because it doesn’t have a public option?

I know this is hard and painful for you to hear, but you would actually improve your re-election chances by moving left, not right.  But perhaps you’re less worried about staying in office than you are about your employment after office.

(h/t Phoenix Woman)

Add comment February 22nd, 2010 at 07:18pm Posted by Eli

Breakthrough, Or The Great Punkin’?

On the one hand, Harry Reid has announced his… non-opposition to passing the public option via reconciliation:

With more and more Senators signing on to the letter urging Reid to hold an up or down vote on the public option under reconciliation rules, Reid spokesman Rodell Mollineau sends over a statement signaling Reid’s qualified support for the move:

Senator Reid has always and continues to support the public option as a way to drive down costs and create competition. That is why he included the measure in his original health care proposal.

If a decision is made to use reconciliation to advance health care, Senator Reid will work with the White House, the House, and members of his caucus in an effort to craft a public option that can overcome procedural obstacles and secure enough votes.

Woohoo.  But here’s what scares me:

To be sure, public option supporters still face a steep climb. It’s far from decided whether reconciliation will ultimately be used to pass reform. What’s more, senior Senate aides still think there’s a procedural obstacle in their path: They insist that in order for them to pass a fix to their bill via reconciliation, the House must pass it first — something House leaders oppose.

While I do believe that most of the Senators who have signed the PO letter are sincere, I can’t help but think that Reid (and probably Obama) are trying to make the reconciliation sidecar’s chances look as strong as possible to con the House into voting on the current Senate bill without it.  I’m glad the House leadership still isn’t buying it, but the Senate’s continued insistence that the House must pass the crappy bill first looks like a big ol’ red flag to me.

Add comment February 20th, 2010 at 11:37am Posted by Eli

Obama Will Lead If Someone Else Leads First

I suppose it’s a good thing that Obama will push for the public option that he promised and repeatedly claimed he wanted… if Harry Reid will:

Maddow: “The private insurance company writ large hasn’t done a great job. That’s why we want a public option to compete with them. These 18 Democratic senators want to bring that back into the fold. If that happened, would the administration fight for it?”

Sebelius: “Well, I think if it’s…Certainly. If it’s part of the decision of the Senate leadership to move forward, absolutely.”

Especially since both Chuck Schumer and most of Nevada are in favor of it (and against healthcare reform without it), which puts extra pressure on Harry to support it.

But how pitiful is it that Obama is only willing to fight for the public option if one of the weakest Majority Leaders ever fights for it first?  Isn’t the President supposed to be a leader, not a follower?  He’s been in the White House for over a year now, and I’m having a hard time thinking of a time where he’s demonstrated anything remotely resembling leadership or courage.

Add comment February 19th, 2010 at 07:14am Posted by Eli

Evan Bayh, Good Government Crusader

Yes, it’s all well and good that retiring-in-the-douchebaggiest-possible-way Evan Bayh is suddenly on board with the filibuster reform that can’t even be voted on until after his retirement takes effect, but I have to wonder whether he really wants to reduce the filibuster threshold to eliminate gridlock, or to preserve the co-presidency of his conservadem buddies Ben Nelson and Joe Lieberman.

If the Senate ends up split 50-50 in 2011, I wouldn’t be at all surprised to see the idea of eliminating the filibuster completely start gaining momentum…

Add comment February 17th, 2010 at 07:28pm Posted by Eli

Wait… What?

Marc Ambinder explains why Evan Bayh quit:

Bayh is an anomaly of sorts; he really grew to dislike the influence of liberal activists on his Senate colleagues. To him, these activists increased the cost of doing business. Reaching out to the other side became more risky than rallying around an ideological pole, even though that rallying around contributed to stasis. When it became clear to Bayh that the White House wasn’t going to play his game — wasn’t going to sell out liberals at every turn — Bayh decided he had had enough.

What on Earth is he talking about?  In what universe do liberal activists have influence on the Senate?  In what universe is Obama not selling us out at every turn?

This is a great time to be a conservative Democrat: You have a President and a Majority Leader who will bend over backwards to give you whatever you want, even if it means gutting the President’s signature objectives and campaign promises, and you’re quitting? It’s like Ben Nelson or Joe Lieberman walking away because they don’t think they have enough influence.

Add comment February 17th, 2010 at 11:24am Posted by Eli

Fingers Crossed

Possible hopeful signs?  Is it possible that congressional Democrats are finally starting to look at self-preservation despite Obama’s insistence that they all commit electoral suicide by backing the Senate bill as is?  For one thing, it looks like they’ve finally realized that the excise tax is hideously unpopular, and for another, it looks like the House letter asking for the Senate to use reconciliation to restore the popular public option has finally crossed over to the Senate.  Only 8 Senate signatures so far, but hopefully more are coming.

Thanks for nothing, Barack.

Add comment February 17th, 2010 at 07:24am Posted by Eli

Fierce Advocacy: Ur Doin It Wrong

Well, Dick Cheney is now to the left of Obama and the Democrats on Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell.  Great job, guys.

As Joe noted below, former vice President, and arch-conservative nemesis of the Obama administration, Dick Cheney said today that he thinks the ban on gays serving in the US military will be lifted, and he thinks it’s time. That means the Obama administration and the Democrats in Congress now having Dick Cheney, Colin Powell, Secretary of Defense Gates, and Chairman of the Joint Chiefs Mullen covering their backside on this issue. So what do they do? Do they push for a repeal now, strike when the iron is hot, take advantage of the once-in-a-lifetime momentum that has developed around this issue in the past two weeks?

No.

After two weeks of no direction whatsoever from the White House as to whether we even should proceed with the repeal of Don’t Ask Don’t Tell this year, more unnamed administration officials are telling AP that they won’t touch the repeal for years to come. (Apparently, according to AP, they want to give the troops time to “get used” to the idea, gentle souls that they are.)

(…)

We now have Colin Powell (Republican), SecDef Gates (Republican appointee), Chairman Mullen (Republican appointee), Dick Cheney (Republican), Ted Olson (Republican), and the torture twins (Republicans), better than the Democratic party on this paramount gay civil rights issue. For years, we’ve been able to laugh in the face of gay Republicans who claimed the GOP was a viable alternative for gay Americans seeking their civil rights. No one is laughing any more. The Democratic party needs to wake up and realize that its political homophobia is losing it a constituency.

Fantastic.  Apparently we’ve reached a point where gays’ best chance for equality is to either vote Republican or hope that one of Obama’s daughters comes out.

Add comment February 14th, 2010 at 01:21pm Posted by Eli

Common Ground

It’s ironic, really.  Both the tea party and Democratic party rank-and-files are completely disgusted by the degree to which our government has been captured into the service of corporate interests, but their leadership is totally on board with it.

Their leadership is reflecting and representing their interests just about as well as ours is; we’re just further along on realizing it.

Add comment February 10th, 2010 at 08:24pm Posted by Eli

Don’t Say I Didn’t Warn Unions…

Back in December when Labor was supporting (or at least holding its fire) on the Senate’s terrible healthcare reform bill in exchange for sugarplum visions of EFCA, I wrote:

I think it’s blindingly obvious at this point that staying on Obama’s good side has bought Labor exactly nothing, and will continue to buy them nothing.  If they don’t start threatening to withhold their support (not just votes, but GOTV and organizational muscle) in the 2010 and 2012 elections, they will continue to get diddly-squat from the Obama White House.

The unions need to stop begging for scraps and start using their leverage.  No more “pretty please”; it’s time for “or else”.

And also:

It is simply amazing to me that the unions are still supporting the terrible Senate healthcare bill in hopes that Obama will push for EFCA in return. How can they possibly still believe that after watching the way the stimulus, bailout, climate reform, financial reform, and healthcare reform have played out?

If Obama “supports” EFCA the way he supported healthcare reform and the public option, union members will end up paying dues directly to their employers.

And what happened?  Scott Brown got elected to Teddy Kennedy’s seat without EFCA getting anywhere near the Senate floor, and now the unions are justifiably pissed.  But it is not strictly accurate to say that the possibility of EFCA passing died in that special election last month; it’s more accurate to say that the useful illusion that EFCA might pass is what died.  Because there was simply no way that EFCA was ever going to pass a Senate ruled by corrupt treacherous scumbags like Joe Lieberman and Ben Nelson.

It’ll be interesting to see just what Labor does now that the Democrats can’t hold EFCA hostage anymore.  Will they simply withhold support, or will they start actively backing primary challengers?  I’m hoping it’s the latter, and I’m hoping Nelson and Lieberman are their top priorities.

Add comment February 10th, 2010 at 06:15pm Posted by Eli

Leadershippiness!

Obama Fail:

Sen. Al Franken ripped into White House senior adviser David Axelrod this week during a tense, closed-door session with Senate Democrats.

Five sources who were in the room tell POLITICO that Franken criticized Axelrod for the administration’s failure to provide clarity or direction on health care and the other big bills it wants Congress to enact.

(…)

“There was a lot of frustration in there,” said a Democratic senator who declined to be identified.

“People were hot,” another Democratic senator said.

Democratic senators are frustrated that the White House hasn’t done more to win over the public on health care reform and other aspects of its ambitious agenda — and angry that, in the wake of Scott Brown’s win in the Massachusetts Senate race, the White House hasn’t done more to chart a course for getting a health care bill to the president’s desk.

In his public session with the senators Wednesday, Obama urged them to “finish the job” on health care but did not lay out a path for doing so. That uncertainty appeared to trigger Franken’s anger, and the sources in the room said he laid out his concerns much more directly than any senator did in the earlier public session.

Maybe I’m just picky and demanding, but Obama’s “leadership” style sounds an awful lot like “make a vague hand gesture and then wander off.”

This doesn’t exactly put my mind at ease either.

6 comments February 5th, 2010 at 11:28am Posted by Eli

Why Doesn’t Obama Listen To This Guy?

He seems to have the right idea:

From there, Obama turned to a more pointed critique of Lincoln’s argument. “If the price of certainty is essentially for us to adopt the exact same proposals that were in place for eight years leading up to the biggest economic crisis since the Great Depression — we don’t tinker with health care, let the insurance companies do what they want, we don’t put in place any insurance reforms, we don’t mess with the banks, let them keep on doing what they’re doing now because we don’t want to stir up Wall Street — the result is going to be the same,” he said. “I don’t know why we would expect a different outcome pursuing the exact same policy that got us into this fix in the first place.”

Middle class Americans, Obama said, “are more and more vulnerable, and they have been for the last decade, treading water. And if our response ends up being, you know, because we don’t want to — we don’t want to stir things up here, we’re just going to do the same thing that was being done before, then I don’t know what differentiates us from the other guys. And I don’t know why people would say, boy, we really want to make sure that those Democrats are in Washington fighting for us.”

Where has that guy been for the past year?

Add comment February 4th, 2010 at 07:27am Posted by Eli

Harry Wants Nancy To Kick The Football

He has no idea how the Senate can pass a reconciliation sidecar fix before the House passes their first healthcare bill – no really – so the House will just have to pass it and hope for the best:

As for reconciliation, the Senate won’t go first.

“We can’t go first,” Reid said . “I don’t know how procedurally we can start reconciliation.”

But Reid acknowledged “that there is consideration of the House passing the reconciliation bill first, followed by the Senate.”  At that point, the House would pass the Senate health bill.

Sure, it’s not like there’s any kind of uncertainty about whether or not the Senate still has 51 votes for the public option, after all.

Fortunately, Nancy wasn’t born yesterday, and appears to be sick of being told what to vote for:

On the call, Pelosi was asked by a reporter whether the Senate would have to go first. “Yes,” she replied, twice, saying her members had repeatedly said they wouldn’t pass the Senate bill if it weren’t fixed before they were asked to vote on it.

Senate aides have privately expressed concern about this course of action being workable. “This is a whole bill that would amend another bill that hasn’t become law,” a senior Dem Senate aide told me yesterday. “How do we do reconciliation before the House passes the Senate bill?”

Some have dismissed the idea that this is a procedural obstacle, and on the call, Pelosi reiterated that she didn’t think it was a problem, saying it’s “not an obstacle,” though she didn’t elaborate. And she repeatedly stressed that the bill would get done.

I’m really really glad that Nancy is not falling for this, as I don’t think there’s anyone who believes that the reconciliation vote won’t encounter some kind of snag if the Senate bill gets passed without it.  I’d be even more glad if she were explicitly demanding that the reconciliation sidecar include the public option and remove the excise tax.

Add comment February 3rd, 2010 at 07:12am Posted by Eli