Obama surrenders

[Democratic Hawk]

To all you disappointed Democrats,

Would you prefer this President to govern as divisively as he who preceded him? He's not just president of the left of the Democratic Party, he's president of ALL Americans

With Bush it might have been government for 51% and the hell with the rest; but Obama's a pragmatist not some dogmatoid arthritic. Did Americans vote pragmatism in 2008 or didn't they? That's a view many editorials took when 1) they endorsed Obama and 2) he was elected. Furthermore, the president seems loathe to use budget reconciliation to "force" legislation through. It's a tactic, IIRC, which he criticises in the The Audacity of Hope

Maybe a public option would have nailed all the lies and deceit coming from the Right - once it was in effect - but Max Baucus has as good as hit the town saying the public option is "dead"

Remember that the Democratic Party isn't some monolithic ideological block and that is only ever going to mean a lot of give and take from within let alone getting any Republicans on board. Seeking consensus is not a sign of surrender, far from it. There are days Obama must feel like he's president of 300 million presidents. In his victory speech, the president said that he would listen, especially, to those with whom he disagreed (or words to that effect)

My one big criticism of the Democrats', of course, was the fact they couldn't seem to thrash all the "nitty gritty" out in private; instead, sending out signals of dissent, division and disarray. That hasn't done Democrats any favors

Trust me, I'm livid with Republicans peddling flat out lies about the NHS [Not that kind of system was even going to be an option, far from it]

Why not wait and see what comes of the final bill, first , once it has evolved through Congress, and then decide on whether it can deliver on its objectives - and yours!

Signed: Friend

[Democratic Hawk]

My, my, at Waterloo Napoleon did surrender
Oh yeah, and I have met my destiny in quite a similar way
The history book on the shelf
Is always repeating itself

Waterloo - I was defeated, you won the war
Waterloo - Promise to love you for ever more
Waterloo - Couldn't escape if I wanted to
Waterloo - Knowing my fate is to be with you
Waterloo - Finally facing my Waterloo

My, my, I tried to hold you back but you were stronger
Oh yeah, and now it seems my only chance is giving up the fight
And how could I ever refuse
I feel like I win when I lose

Waterloo - I was defeated, you won the war
Waterloo - Promise to love you for ever more
Waterloo - Couldn't escape if I wanted to
Waterloo - Knowing my fate is to be with you
Waterloo - Finally facing my Waterloo

So how could I ever refuse
I feel like I win when I lose -

Waterloo - Couldn't escape if I wanted to
Waterloo - Knowing my fate is to be with you
Waterloo - Finally facing my Waterloo

I've more or less covered the issue of "surrender", Ford . I see it differently

[Democratic Hawk]

To all you disappointed Democrats,

Would you prefer this President to govern as divisively as he who preceded him? He's not just president of the left of the Democratic Party, he's president of ALL Americans

With Bush it might have been government for 51% and the hell with the rest; but Obama's a pragmatist not some dogmatoid arthritic. Did Americans vote pragmatism in 2008 or didn't they? That's a view many editorials took when 1) they endorsed Obama and 2) he was elected. Furthermore, the president seems loathe to use budget reconciliation to "force" legislation through. It's a tactic, IIRC, which he criticises in the The Audacity of Hope

Maybe a public option would have nailed all the lies and deceit coming from the Right - once it was in effect - but Max Baucus has as good as hit the town saying the public option is "dead"

Remember that the Democratic Party isn't some monolithic ideological block and that is only ever going to mean a lot of give and take from within let alone getting any Republicans on board. Seeking consensus is not a sign of surrender, far from it. There are days Obama must feel like he's president of 300 million presidents. In his victory speech, the president said that he would listen, especially, to those with whom he disagreed (or words to that effect)

My one big criticism of the Democrats', of course, was the fact they couldn't seem to thrash all the "nitty gritty" out in private; instead, sending out signals of dissent, division and disarray. That hasn't done Democrats any favors

Trust me, I'm livid with Republicans peddling flat out lies about the NHS [Not that kind of system was even going to be an option, far from it]

Why not wait and see what comes of the final bill, first , once it has evolved through Congress, and then decide on whether it can deliver on its objectives - and yours!

Signed: Friend

The problem is that people like me ultimately want government run single payer, while the right wants no government interference at all.

The compromise was insurance reform with a public option for those who wanted the public option.

But that wasn't good enough either.  The Republicans will bitch and moan and stomp their feet and scream like little babies no matter what happens.  They have no ideas.  Just a lot of faux outrage and a liberal use of the word "no". 

The Republicans are masters at being the perveyors of lies and deceit. It's not like they have anything much positive to run on (given their track record). More of the same - but not as much spending. That was Bush's only fault apparently. More Republican dogmatically-driven ineptitude, sooner or later, is inevitable given the acute state of dogmatoid arthritis, which - I shouldn't mock - afflicts it

Democrats can't govern in so far as they are so ideologically disparate they can't so much as form a group of two ; while the  Republicans just won't govern - period! Win-win, if you happen to be a libertarian

[Democratic Hawk]

I'm not convinced about the merits of a public plan, but from my observations (however limited)...it seemed like a public plan or at least option was a pretty big deal to the Democrats and or their base (Obama too despite his backtracking now)...for him to seemingly give up on it  with pretty decent control over congress just strikes me as weak.

Come on Moose , you should know by now that Congressional Democrats can't so much form a group of two

Seriously, though, Obama seems loathe to use budget reconciliation to "force" a public plan through the Senate and Max Baucus has as as good as said its "dead".

In all honesty, I've more respect for those who seek 'consensus' approach to governing, as opposed to those who are only too willing to take the 'divide and rule' approach. Maybe it's because I'm just not THAT ideological

[Democratic Hawk]

I'm not convinced about the merits of a public plan, but from my observations (however limited)...it seemed like a public plan or at least option was a pretty big deal to the Democrats and or their base (Obama too despite his backtracking now)...for him to seemingly give up on it  with pretty decent control over congress just strikes me as weak.

Come on Moose , you should know by now that Congressional Democrats can't so much form a group of two

Seriously, though, Obama seems loathe to use budget reconciliation to "force" a public plan through the Senate and Max Baucus has as as good as said its "dead".

In all honesty, I've more respect for those who seek 'consensus' approach to governing, as opposed to those who are only too willing to take the 'divide and rule' approach. Maybe it's because I'm just not THAT ideological

Could have fooled me...

Just because I'm critical of the dogmatoid arthritic right-wing of the Republican Party, it doesn't follow that I'm some fire-breathing lefty, Rowan . Fire-breathing perhaps

[Democratic Hawk]

The Republicans are masters at being the perveyors of lies and deceit.

Just like Democrats did with Social Security reform


To you Democrats whining and becoming all depressed, just accept that you live in a center-right country. Recent events prove that.

Of course, the Republican Party is anything but center-right

[Democratic Hawk]

If I ran the Republican party I wouldn't budge an inch due to this. Republicans need to refocus their message on the fact that covering the 46 million uninsured is costly and not necessary due to the fact that much of the uninsured consist of students, people who can afford insurance but choose not to, non-citizens, and people who are already eligible for other government programs.

Why would you want the Republican't Party budge an inch on this? Aren't you are more vested in this president failing, since that will enable the Republicans to perpetuate more of their own (if recent form, at the federal level of government, is anything to go by)

The president's plan $900m over 10 years is nowhere near as costly as the fiscally reckless Bush tax cuts - all $1.6 trillion of which failed to prevent the 'Great Recession'

How costly was Part D - Medicare because there wasn't so much as dime raised to pay for it? That was more of course about throwing largesse the way of big pharma than it was about helping seniors. A political ploy, of course, to lock in Florida's electoral college votes

So come on all this outrage about cost sounds pretty faux to me. There was no fiscal responsiblity on the part of Bush and the Republicans whatsoever and you know it

Funny how spending - and the deficit (and the president is seeking neutrality on healthcare, to his credit) - only seem to matter now

You must be logged in to read this quote.

OK, so those with pre-existing medical conditions should be potentially just hung out to die then. Nice

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Which would be proof positive that the right-wing dogmatoids have no interested in bi-partisanship whatsoever

On the previous page, I, Rob, already stated that Obama is a miserable failure. What are you "right" about, Mr. Bush-had-a-mandate-but-Obama-doesn't?

God, you are stupid. (That's another insult, since you're keeping track)

Well, it's not worth discussing with the likes of you but quite obviously Obama has pushed his belief in having a mandate over the edge or nearing the edge of a cliff. That's why his popularity is starting to hit the crapper. Bush had least had a somewhat similar ideology to the rest of the nation, that's how he was able to push his agenda.  

And I'm the stupid one? No, I didn't vote for Obama.

Aye, and Lord knows Bush made a frickin arse of things

On the previous page, I, Rob, already stated that Obama is a miserable failure. What are you "right" about, Mr. Bush-had-a-mandate-but-Obama-doesn't?

God, you are stupid. (That's another insult, since you're keeping track)

And you can cut it as well. Is the public plan absolutely essential to fulfilling the president's goals of expanding coverage and reducing costs?

Can't be easy being a pragmatically center-left president leading a country where many citizens remain recalcitrantly right-wing dogmatoids

True to my Christian Democratic convictions, I've still way more confidence in Obama and the Democrats on economic and quality of life issues

I find it hilarious that the party with 40 Senators can still put up enough of a fight to win the battle against the party with 60 in power.

The president seems reluctant to "force" his agenda through budget reconciliation in the Senate. He is critical of that tactic in The Audacity of Hope . Obama is seeking to be a consensus building pragmatist, at home and abroad; Bush's leadership was more confictual and, my oh my, didn't America's standing fall

Furthermore, the Democratic Party is not as ideologically monolithic as the Republican Party, which is, given the decline of its more moderate and pragmatic wing for the most part, stock right-wing dogmatoid - that party seems on autopilot to repeat the same old fiscal policy biased in favor of the rich, if it gets back into power. As if doing the same thing over and over is going to yield different results

Is it any wonder the Anglo-American model of capitalism hit the crappers - given the extent to which the middle and working class, who form the backbone of all major Western economies, have become emaciated through rising costs of healthcare, college tuition, etc. That can only be holding a lot of people back. I read that, in real terms, for most Americans incomes have fallen under Bush. Any one remember those halycon days when America was on the right track - only for them (and not even most) to roll the die on it - PROSPERITY - back in 2000?

Labour is, of course, set for a frashing this side of the Pond. Gordon seemingly thought "boom-and-bust" was over and spent on the back of the boom with not so much as penny set aside for the bust. You could say that he spent the Third Way to death

Can someone explain why the co-op idea is so terrible?

It's not. Co-operative principles are inherently progressive . And if some Republicans are supportive of it, then there is a kernel of hope for some of them yet but would it be deficit neutral and funded without tax increases on those earning less than $250,000?

Considering Bush tried to ram things through without compromise, I would advise Obama against doing that.

Couldn't agree more. This president seems more predisposed to treating Congress with deference. We can all debate whether its too much or too little. But he really needs to do is get congressional leaders - and those of the factions within - and tell them exactly what he wants in the legislation that seeks to realise his goals and objectives. Right now the only message Democrats are sending is one of disarray, which can't exactly inspire much confidence. Have they learnt nothing from 1993?

For Bush, the role of Congress was that of some compliant wife!

Once this recession passes, Obama and the Democrats will endeavour to be more fiscally responsible than Bush and the Republicans ever were. Any Tom, Dick or George can cut taxes, politically, it must be the easiest thing to accomplish but it takes guts to raise them, however, modestly. Obama and the Democrats, moving forward, are going to have to make the kind of tough decisions that Bush was, seemingly, able to avoid. Now that would be leadership! The president has already had to take decisive action on General Motors, which wasn't by any means the most popular road to take if the polls were anything to go by. One minute he's damned because jobs are being lost and the next he's damned for doing what he can to save them. This president cares about people

[Democratic Hawk]

Good bye 8% tax on businesses to pay for this program.  The 8% tax was what demonstrated that liberal Democrats are clearly out of touch with reality.  In a good year, a business only make 2.5% profit.  An 8% tax would have forced thousands of businesses to either close their doors or engage in some serious downsizing that still wouldn't have saved them the next year around.

Alternatively, Obama and the Democrats could be as fiscally irresponsible as Bush and the Republicans and just add everything to the deficit but I can't say I'd agree with those 'means' of paying for it. There has to be better ways than that

[Democratic Hawk]

RIP Health care reform.

Again.

And say goodbye to my support in the next election, Obama.

Hillary Clinton 2012!

If Obama keeps doing this in the future, I won't support him. One of the reasons he beat Hillary In the Primaries is because he made so many good promises, but now they seem to be slipping away.

We are being harsh aren't we? Max Baucus and Kent Conrad have said the "public option" is dead. Whether it can be revived or not. It's congressional Democrats who are pissing me most off. If they got their act together worked out their differences first, in concert with the administration, the Republicans might not have 'won' the spin war. Never underestimate that when it comes to purveying lies and deceit, they are the masters

Often in politics to accomplish much of anything there has to be give and take . Wait and see what happens once silly season is over and Congress is back in session

[Democratic Hawk]

I wonder if IBD - that rightwing dogmatoid purveyor of lies - has apologised to Stephen Hawking yet?

[Democratic Hawk]

I'm not convinced about the merits of a public plan, but from my observations (however limited)...it seemed like a public plan or at least option was a pretty big deal to the Democrats and or their base (Obama too despite his backtracking now)...for him to seemingly give up on it  with pretty decent control over congress just strikes me as weak.

Come on Moose , you should know by now that Congressional Democrats can't so much form a group of two

Seriously, though, Obama seems loathe to use budget reconciliation to "force" a public plan through the Senate and Max Baucus has as as good as said its "dead".

In all honesty, I've more respect for those who seek 'consensus' approach to governing, as opposed to those who are only too willing to take the 'divide and rule' approach. Maybe it's because I'm just not THAT ideological

Could have fooled me...

Just because I'm critical of the dogmatoid arthritic right-wing of the Republican Party, it doesn't follow that I'm some fire-breathing lefty, Rowan . Fire-breathing perhaps

We'll see the hypocrisy of that statement when Oil reaches $300 a barrel and all the Dems can come out with is Alternatives that won't do a damn thing for at least 20 years, and unconstitutional limits on Commodities trading. Got to please those Enviro-facists who think $6 a gallon gas is the best thing for America, you know. We will see who the party of the Middle class is then and we will see through your partisan rhetoric on dogmatism. You guys were losing on this and would have lost the election on this the way things were going had it not been for the collaspe in mid Sept.

I speak my mind without fear or favor - and its not unusual for me to kick Democratic butts whenever they warrant it. I've been critical of how healthcare reform has been handled. So many "mixed" messages only sends out a message of disarray

I don't think $6 a gallon is the best thing for Americans. And just because I said Democrats were not in denial on climate change, it doesn't follow that I'd oppose oil drilling in the immediate term to boost supply and keep prices down

But, at the end of the day, I identify with the Democratic Party even if my personal convictions are more of populist, rather than liberal, hue

And when I disagree with the president I'll be saying so. I'm giving him his fair shot, just as I've done every other before him. I don't think any Republican, in time, came to irk me as much as GWB. Obama seems to have connected with me on a more stronger personal level than any I can think of. I like him personally - and hence, a tiger-like defense of him especially whenever I come across this 'Marxist', 'socialist' kind of nonsense

In the meantime, NC Yankee , I'll try and tone down the rhetoric  ... That's going to be easier said than done!