Howard Dean Won't "Vigorously" Support Obama's Re-Election Bid

[Badger]

I don't fault his principles...I have a lot respect for him and his ideas, but I consider the healthcare compromise to be a HELL of a lot better than nothing.

I think he's just being unrealistic and irresponsible.

For once I agree with him.........you can call it Health Care Reform til you're blue in the face.  That doesn't make it so.

What's wrong with it?

I think it's a pretty good market friendly bill actually.

The insurance companies aren't trying to kill it in its present form like they were.......

I agree with you GG in disappointment in the bill. However it's still markedly better than the status quo, and it's shortcomings have much more to do with Sens. Lincoln, Nelson and (especially) Lieberman than Obama.

Dean does need to chill, IMHO. Criticize the bill for what it doesn't accomplish, yes, but abandoning Obama for Mitt, T-Paw or the Huckster??!? Chill Deanie babe, chill.

[Badger]

Byahhhhhhhhhhhhh!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Noooooooooooooo!!!!!!!!!!

[Badger]

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/12/17/howard-dean-i-wont-suppor_n_395599.html

Former Democratic National Committee Chairman Howard Dean told the Huffington Post that he was misinterpreted and, subsequently misquoted when discussing his support for President Barack Obama on a morning cable show Thursday. Dean said that despite his call to defeat the health-care bill Obama is championing, he is prepared to campaign for Obama vigorously come 2012.


Oops.

Looks like someone had a trip to the woodshed....

[Badger]

Although a Zionist hack, Dean still would have made a better president than Obama or Kerry.

Willing to elaborate on this?

[Badger]

Hey Guys:

I understand Obama's the prez and the buck stops here and all, but aren't we misplacing the anger over the lack of a public option a bit? Obama clearly wanted a public option and fought for it. Maybe not tooth and nail, but how much did he want to kill the supermajority by pushing Nelson or Lieberman into the GOP?

The real culprits here whom I place my unadulterated blame on are (in order):

1) The GOP which, other than a wee flickering candle of moderation from the Maine sisters, is so utterly and completely taken over by hardcore conservatives that moderation and compromise have become dirty words. This is further compounded by the hardcore rule of 60 implemented after losing the Senate in 2006 that damn near everthing more partisan than a resolution honoring the girl scouts that can be fillibustered requires a 60 vote cloture motion to pass. Can you imagine the outcry this would have caused if Democrats tried this in 2003? You can call it the Senate Republicans simply being more ruthless than the Democrats; I prefer the more accurate term of being out and out bastards.

2) A handful of conservative Democrats who used the rule of 60 to scuttle the process. Some for electoral pressures (Lincoln, Landreau), one for convictions on abortion (Nelson), and one who just wants to stick it to the Democrats out of spite despite pushing for universal health insurance only months ago (Lieberman).

Obama doesn't have a magic wand. Give him two more progressive Democratic senators to replace Lieberman or Nelson (or--better still--any single Republican) and you get a public option.

Want the public option? Don't blame Obama--save your ire for Mitch McConnell and Leiberman who truly deserve it.

[Badger]

Although a Zionist hack, Dean still would have made a better president than Obama or Kerry.

That reeks of antisemitism, perhaps in reference to his Jewish wife.

Well, it is from Libertas....