White house smacks down public option rumor

[ProSense]

The Public Option: Rumor Check

Posted by Dan Pfeiffer on October 25, 2009

A rumor is making the rounds that the White House and Senator Reid are pursuing different strategies on the public option. Those rumors are absolutely false.

In his September 9th address to Congress, President Obama made clear that he supports the public option because it has the potential to play an essential role in holding insurance companies accountable through choice and competition. That continues to be the President's position.

Senator Reid and his leadership team are now working to get the most effective bill possible approved by the Senate. President Obama completely supports their efforts and has full confidence they will succeed and continue the unprecedented progress that is being made in both the House and Senate.

[Clio the Leo]

1. he he .... can I repost this in three hours?

and then again tomorrow morning?

:evilgrin:

nah, I'll behave.

Instead, I think I'll sit and wait for someone to try and make "completely supports their efforts" mean "Obama supports a trigger."

[ProSense]

2. Yeah, but be warned:

by that time, there will be a new rumor.

:rofl:

[Hutzpa]

30. Yeah like death panel is back on the table

}(

[HughMoran]

100. I love death panels!!

I wanna give a death panel a big ol' hug - they may have just helped us finally pas healthcare reform.

[Cha]

90. And, who benefits from these rumors?

I mean besides the perpetual handwringers on DU who need a constant fix?

[Canuckistanian]

3. So, can we take this as support for a straight, robust PO?

OK, maybe not. Reid's still involved.

[MNDemNY]

40. No, not at all. Obama will cave at every turn, just to get any bill.

His opening move was "surrender". It's been down hill since.

[Beetwasher]

52. Yeah, Caving, Here We Are After 70 Years Of Fighting

And it's gone from "Oh no! The tea baggers are going to win and scuttle HC!!!" to "Oh no! There's going to be coops!!" to "Oh no, there won't be a public option!!" to "Oh no triggers!" to "Oh no, it's going to be a weak public option!!"...

Pathetic.

We're closer than ever to having substantial (yes, substantial, regardless of what YOU think) health care reform for the first time ever. It's going to happen. It's going to have a public option. But all you can do is whine that Obama is caving.

So, he gets all the "credit" for "caving" but none for getting use HERE, on the verge of passing HCR, something no one else in the history of this country has ever been able to accomplish. That's some "surrendering". It's nice when you get to redefine words to mean whatever the hell you want them to.

[Name removed]

58. Deleted sub-thread

Sub-thread removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Flying Dream Blues]

61. Great post, beetwasher. nt

[MNDemNY]

62. Yup, if you happen to favor the protection of Insurance industry profits at all cost.

Is that your stance, as well?:crazy:

[Aramchek]

65. Because we all know how much the Insurance Industry loves the idea of a Public Option

:sarcasm:

[MNDemNY]

66. There is NO real Public Option on the table.

And, yes, the insurance industry loves that fact. (no sarcasm here)Will they work to further weaken the bill? Yes. Are the happy with where it is at now? You bet they are. Are you blind?

[Aramchek]

73. You don't know what you're talking about.

and what's sad is you don't even realize it.

[Name removed]

78. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[MNDemNY]

87. ..

Run! Hide!:puke: :shrug:

[Beetwasher]

95. Whatsa Matter? Look in A Mirror?

I thought I wasn't worthy of response from you anymore? :rofl:

[BREMPRO]

101. well said Beetwasher- i agree. this is monumental legislation that took unprecedented political

leadership, negotiation, and maneuvering to get us here, especially considering the toxic political and economic climate and budget concerns. Credit where credit is due.

[placton]

93. Yes, it appears this is nothing but the usual

Obama fluff job

[demwing]

99. And I wondered why I had you on ignore

now I wonder why I took you off. Back you go.

[CatWoman]

4. thank you for this

:hi:

Arianna needs her ass kicked.

[HopeOverFear]

5. thanks!

[bluestateguy]

6. Recommended

and I request others do so as well.

[bleever]

7. Thank you

for being a consistent voice for those of us who are very confident that we're going to see a very good bill signed into law, complete with a vigorous public option.

[DJ13]

8. Its no ones fault but the WH that Obama's message gets mangled

If Obama would have laid it out that he is such a strong proponent of the public option that he would veto any bill that fails to include it there would be no doubt.

But they are playing it too close to the vest, which is actually a signal he isnt as strong on it as they claim when they are pushed into denying rumors.

[ProSense]

9. You're blaming them for people starting rumors, and the people who choose to believe them?

What next: Are they responsible for Fox Noise's lies?

[DJ13]

11. Theres two ways to approach this

Say what you want, but leave details to others to figure out.......which leaves your intent open to interpretation.

Or you come out and say not just what you want, but but you will accept.......which prevents others from interpreting your intent.

By using the first method the WH leaves their goals open to being interpreted by the forces who are aligned against him.

The first method is only the proper course if you go in expecting you might have to compromise your position later on, and you want to claim a "victory" no matter the outcome.

[ProSense]

12. Oh please. He said he wants a public option, that he strongly believes in it and even

demanded that the bill he signs must include a public option. That didn't seem to stop people from distorting and twisting every word.

People spin and distort, it never stops. After all the statements Obama has made, and this OP stating it definitively too, here you are still trying to twist it.

[DJ13]

14. Tell me.... what kind of public option does Obama want?

That shouldnt be hard to do, should it?

Will it have triggers?

How about opt out?

Maybe mandates?

Is it expected to be open to everyone, or a closed system that takes only those the insurance companies cant make any money on?

Will it cover only a small portion of the population, or everyone?

[ProSense]

16. Why not use reasoning to answer your own questions? Let me help:

"Will it have triggers?"

When has Obama ever stated support for a trigger? Never.

"How about opt out?"

Opt out doesn't define a type of public option, it is a clause.

"Maybe mandates?"

Mandates are a type of public option?

[DJ13]

19. When has Obama ever stated support for...

See, thats what Im trying to say.

You dont know WHAT Obama might accept in the final bill because he refuses to take a stand and tell us what he wont accept.

Oh I know you dont care about that, but some of us do.

And it would make these arguments pointless if Obama did take a firm stand AGAINST some things.

[Clio the Leo]

17. Just because we're not getting the answers we want....

.... doesn't mean the questions aren't being answered.

I'd give you the link ....... but I dont need to, do I?

[Clio the Leo]

15. Who's fault is it that five Congressional committees....

.... have passed their version of a health care plan for the first time in history?

Who gets the blame for that one?

[MiniMe]

22. I remember before the election the President told us not to believe it

if we didn't hear it from him. I've been reading all the rumors today, especially the rumor from Huff Post, and thinking who are the sources? So I have been skeptical all day. Turns out I was rightly skeptical.

[MNDemNY]

41. It is intentionally "mangled" to provide cover when he caves, over and over again.

[lunatica]

48. Nah.

"playing it too close to the vest" is only what we see. Do you really think nothing happens behind the scenes? That's where 90% of the action happens. Where do you think the tons of pork come from every time a bill is signed?

[katandmoon]

10. You need to spell out that Obama is OPPOSED to the trigger, Dan.

Obama can say he supports the public option until the cows come home. That does not mean he ONLY supports, and will only ACCEPT, the public option.

"The most effective bill possible approved by the Senate" is a weasel statement, Dan.

[MNDemNY]

42. Can't, he is NOT opposed to the trigger.

Only goal is to get a bill to sign, any bill will do.

[Mass]

13. So, the WH and Reid have the same strategy. Which is it?

I would have felt better with a statement saying they do not support or want trigger (if anything because I do not necessarily trust that Reid is solid on the PO).

(OK, I imagine that this means he does not support trigger, but you do realize this is the type of statement that allows people to interpret it the way they want).

[Clio the Leo]

18. lol, it only allows people to interpret it the way they want....

.... if their minds are already made up.

[katandmoon]

20. That's because it's a WEASEL STATEMENT. Unless Obama says unequivocally that a TRIGGER public option

Is not acceptable then what he says is open to interpretation. And if leaving his options open isn't the whole point, I can't imagine what his lack of specificity is all about.

[jenmito]

24. Valerie Jarrett DENIED that Obama prefers/is pushing for a trigger.

Joe: "Hey, Valerie, we had Mike Allen from Politico on earlier this morning, he said Nancy Pelosi didn't have the votes for a public option and said that there was some suggestion that the President wants a health care reform bill that doesn't have a public option, but has a TRIGGER in case insurance companies don't start playing ball. Is that a fair description of the president's current position?"

Valerie: "No. I think the president has always said that he's committed to the public option, why, because he thinks it will create competition and therefore bring down costs. He's always said he's open to new ideas but at this late stage in the game he still thinks it's the best option..."

http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2009/10/23/796285/-Jarrett-on-Pres.-Obama:-Hes-committed-to-the-public-option

[katandmoon]

55. Dan is NOT Valerie. And Valerie stated what she THOUGHT. She did not put it in writing. Dan put it

In writing. He did NOT PUT IN WRITING that Obama is opposed to the trigger and will not accept a bill that includes the trigger. That's why this is a weasel statement.

[jenmito]

79. Right. Dan ALSO did not put in writing that Obama is opposed to murder or communism.

That doesn't mean he's not against those things. A trigger is not a public option. It's a THREAT of a public option.

[katandmoon]

97. No, because he wasn't talking about those things. Nice try, though.

[jenmito]

98. Again-a trigger is not a public option. It's a THREAT of a public option.

[ProSense]

25. Deny it or it's true? What nonsense. When has Obama ever said he supported a trigger? n/t

[jenmito]

27. That's the logic of Glenn Beck who has a phone on his set waiting for the WH to call him and deny

the daily BS he spews. And when they don't call, he concludes it's true. :eyes:

[Name removed]

38. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[katandmoon]

56. They why was Dan's statement a weasel statement?

[Clio the Leo]

26. I've got news for you.......

..... if a trigger is the ONLY way to get the bill passed then he's not going to be against it. Fortunately, we've moved away from that but the race isn't over yet.

I fail to see how denying health care coverage to 30 million people just because the final bill doesn't meet a progressive purity test is a good thing.

[MNDemNY]

44. He will "cave" on any point, just to get any bill.

Coward corporatist whore.

[elias7]

104. Trolling is so useless to real discussion

[katandmoon]

57. That's the kind of "out" Dan is looking for with his weasel statement.

[dflprincess]

72. If the bill requires a trigger

those 30 million still aren't going to have access to health care (people need to stop equating having coverage to being able to get care). The insurance companies will stall every way possible knowing that their stooges in D.C. will let them get by with it.

I just can't subscribe to the idea that "any bill is better than no bill". Especially when the main point of the bill is to protect the insurance companies.

[dionysus]

64. are you going to have an episode when he signs a bill w/public option?

because it seems you're pushing for him to fail so you can be angry. :shrug:

[jenmito]

21. K&R. Thank you (again) for TRYING to set the record straight. n/t

[MiniMe]

23. Remember, Obama once told us not to believe it unless we heard it from him directly

That was before the election. I try hard to remember that as rumors like these fly. Saved my blood pressure a lot of points today.

[phleshdef]

28. The gullible people and the people that WANT to view this President as a corporatist bought it..

And then pushed it to the moon. The rest of us that know Obama's history in public service and also understand his pragmatic tendencies waited and still wait to see the final product.

[MNDemNY]

46. pragmatism is very close to cowardice.

Especially when it comes from a position of power.

[phleshdef]

63. You need a fucking a dictionary.

[MNDemNY]

68. You should try thinking for yourself,

as opposed to allowing yourself to be spoon-fed pablum. You are a disgrace to DEMOCRATIC principles.

[phleshdef]

74. I see, your argument is failing so now all you can do is resort to cliche nastiness.

Its not wooooooorking.

[MNDemNY]

82. You have made no assertions, other than I am a hater.

What point could I possibly make with that?

[Whisp]

86. and a good box to the fucking ears.

what a malcontent pisser

[MNDemNY]

94. Yes, you are.

Back it up?

[Scurrilous]

29. Kick

:kick:

[slipslidingaway]

31. ProSense you should try and back up your own rumors and accusations...

instead of playing copy and paste games.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=132&topic_id=8715676&mesg_id=8715811

Why don't you address the original post instead of your own made up questions...

Stick to the TOPIC of the original post and back up your accusation.

ORIGINAL POST


Is the HELP bill one public option or several community options...

"The Senate HELP Committee “public option” will be multiple “options,” and these will be run by insurance companies"

By Kip Sullivan, JD

http://pnhp.org/blog/2009/08/14/the-senate-help-committee-%e2%80%9cpublic-option%e2%80%9d-will-be-multiple-%e2%80%9coptions%e2%80%9d-and-these-will-be-run-by-insurance-companies/

YOUR REPLY

"More PNPH misinformation. nt"


Where is Kip Sullivan's analysis of the bill wrong, you said it was more misinformation from PNHP and should be able to back that up with facts.

[vaberella]

43. Actually what Prosense is doing is far better. Why?

The initial argument didn't start in that thread and it was carried on in many subsequent threads of the same topic. This way there is one topic in order to make it clear. Further more, when people start arguments or discussions on many threads most people don't read through each and every argument and then losing sight of vital information as Prosense has posted here. So you're post is just seeming to want to start an unwarrante argument when in actuality Prosense did the best thing for DUers all around.

[Name removed]

49. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[slipslidingaway]

60. Falsely accusing an organization of spreading misinformation and then running away....

is not in anyone's interest.

While I would prefer to keep the discussion in the original thread she vanished and has not backed up her claim on why the analysis of the bill is incorrect. Instead she answered her own made up questions and continued to copy and paste the same BS.

Attack and run is not something that should be defended.

PNHP is not supporting the public option and because of that some people feel the need to attack the group who have been advocating for a national system for everyone since the mid-1980's.

It is fine to say you disagree with them, or even to say they should be silenced and not be allowed to be part of the discussions.

It is not OK to discredit the entire organization and with that all the work they have done over the past 25 years and then run away, that needs to be challenged IMO.

[Name removed]

47. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[dreamnightwind]

32. None of the proposed PO's are any good

As I understand it, none of the proposed Public Options are robust enough to have any real impact on cost control, or to give the average American any alternative to being forced by a mandate to buy private health insurance.

So, Obama may or may not support a Public Option, and that support may or may not accept a trigger. However, there is nothing I know of in the works that will give most people any real alternative to having their healthcare managed by a mega health insurance corporation (and these corporations are the PROBLEM, not the solution).

Any legitimate Public Option needs to allow anyone who wants to join it, it needs to start ASAP (or as soon as the mandate to purchase insurance starts), and it needs to be national in scope rather than a co-op kinda thing that is too small to negotiate down the corporate profits.

[Divine Discontent]

33. good post

[Enrique]

34. Obama just this week defended the Baucus bill

and now this guy is pointing to the Sept. 9 speech as evidence of Obama's commitment to the public option?

Yeah, we all heard that speech, and endless other statements of Obama's support for the public option. We have also heard him make other statements which cause some of us to question that support.

[Inuca]

36. Defended the Baucus bill??

you mean when he said that even the version of the bill you like the least would still be better than the status quo? What about taking these words at face value? It does not mean he WANTS the Baucus version of the bill, just that he thinks that it would be better than what we have now. I happen to agree.

[vaberella]

45. Don't misconstrue the facts.

He defended the Baucus bill in the sense of what it provides. But also labeled it the worst bill or the most hated bill. He says that clearly...and he also said there is a merger involved since obviously the BAucus is bill is lacking in his own requirements which is a public option. The President clearly stated he would not sign a bill without it. So don't stress too much on that.

[Enrique]

50. here's what he said

At this event, he defended the Baucus bill. He didn't say anything bad about it, which you suggested he did.

He didn't mention the public option at this event. He could have mentioned that earlier that day the CBO reported some very favorable numbers for the public option. But he didn't. He didn't say anything about the public option that day. He defended the bill his audience likes least, but which he himself thinks isn't that bad.

http://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/remarks-president-dnc-fundraiser-hammerstein-ballroom-102009

THE PRESIDENT: Let me say this, because somebody just brought up something. (Laughter.) Among Democrats and progressives there are a whole set of views about how we should do health care. But understand that the bill you least like in Congress right now, the one you least like of the five that are out there would provide 29 million Americans health care -- 29 million Americans who don't have it right now would get it. The bill you least like would prevent insurance companies from barring you from getting health insurance because of preexisting conditions. (Applause.) Whatever the bill you least like would set up an exchange so that people right now who are having to try to bargain for health insurance on their own are suddenly part of a pool of millions that forces insurance companies to compete for their business and give them better deals and lower rates. (Applause.)

So there are going to be some disagreements and details to work out. But to the Democrats, I want to say to you, Democrats, let's make sure that we keep our eye on the prize. (Applause.) And that is, all those millions of Americans who don't have health insurance and all those who do have health insurance that are seeing their costs go up, if we get a bill -- when we get a bill that delivers on those issues --

[Rudy Adams]

35. I will believe.....

...after the signing ceremony. Not a microsec before!

[Life Long Dem]

37. What part of "Those rumors are absolutely false." don't you understand?

No other game plan on the public option has been discussed.

[vaberella]

39. But...But...my unnamed source says the White House is lieing...

No I can't tell you who my unnamed source since I don't know their names.

[Peacetrain]

51. Unnamed sources, ... go figure

:crazy:

[Samantha]

75. If I ever change my screen name, that will be my new name

I have heard it said so many times here inside the Beltway over the years, "Unnamed Sources", it seems like a natural. Make that in the singular case.

Sam

[Kurt_and_Hunter]

53. Another bizarre non-denial denial

The same number of words could have been used to actually say something.

"White House and Senator Reid are pursuing different strategies on the public option" -- "absolutely false"

Hence White House and Senator Reid are pursuing the same strategy on the public option.

Okay... Does that mean they are pursuing the same public option? Pursuing the same strategy?

Is that a specific narrow legislative strategy or the broad strategy of favoring some sort of public option?

Does the WH consider a triggered PO to be a PO?

The government serves up horse-shit on matters where the public has a right to straightforward information and the response in some quarters is to ask for a bigger spoon.

[ProSense]

54. Really? "That continues to be the President's position. "

When has the President ever supported a trigger?

[MNDemNY]

59. Yup

some more than others.This one seems to want a "ladle"

[slipslidingaway]

67. Health insurance industry poised to reap benefits from healthcare overhaul

http://www.latimes.com/business/la-fi-health-insure26-2009oct26,0,11741,full.story

"...For the health insurance industry, that means millions of new paying customers. What's more, there are likely to be no limits on what insurers can charge, while at the same time the plan is expected to limit competition from any new national government insurance plan that lawmakers create.

These anticipated wins -- from an initiative that has at times been portrayed as doomsday for health insurers -- is the result of a strategy developed by one of Washington's savviest lobbyists, Karen Ignagni. Under Ignagni's leadership, the industry group America's Health Insurance Plans adopted the goal of universal coverage while setting out to shape it in a way that benefited insurers -- a crucial move that aligned their interests with those of other groups, including consumers and hospitals.

...The first public sign of the industry's shifting stance came in November of 2006 when the trade group came out in favor of universal coverage with its reform plan.

That built on the breakthrough idea, propelled early on by Blue Shield of California Chief Executive Bruce Bodaken and Kaiser Permanente CEO George Halvorson, that universal coverage was key to the future of the industry..."


Thread
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=132&topic_id=8715960&mesg_id=8715960

[MNDemNY]

69. Buy stock in the industry!!!

You can not get through to these folks, they think it is a game. All they care about is getting a "win" The "ANY Bill Will Do" crowd are only focused on the political game. Nothing else matters. If you get between them and their perceived "win" you must be a "hater" because that is the only reason any one could disagree with where this "reform" seems headed.

[slipslidingaway]

70. Did that indirectly back in March, thinking biotechs are better as they will win...

with the data exclusivity amendment, which is in the proposed legislation.

I'm still in awe of the marketing campaign to turn people away from a national system to one that keeps the insurance companies in business with millions of new customers.

Most attacks are directed against the messenger with little or nothing to back up the claims.

[MNDemNY]

71. I have a brother in "Medical Records Industry" they are very pleased.

It does really sadden me to see this turned into a game, where the only thing that matters is crossing the "finish line" with a bill, any bill. The marginalization of long-held Democratic Principles here on DU is a sign of just how successful the corporations have been.

[slipslidingaway]

77. I agree with you, it really is mostly a game to fool the people...

sure many actually want to improve the system, but they let the for profit companies interfere too much.

We'll get something, but the results as to whether or not it is good for the country will not be known for years. Then we'll be dealing with trying to pay back the loan from the SS Trust Fund and the influx of people into Medicare. And drug price negotiation for all seniors is not on the table.

:)

[MNDemNY]

81. The only long term good that could come of this "reform"

Will , unfortunately ,come about when the entire system collapses, FORCING us int single payer. But I shudder at the human cost. We have a realistic chance, at this time , to start down the path, however it seems we are taking a very bad turn, one that will only further entrench the for-profit industry in the short-middle term.

[slipslidingaway]

85. We had a chance to at least sell this to the American people even if...

we had to compromise at the end. I agree that we are just giving them more money with which to lobby the people in Congress who vote and we do not need another layer, the exchanges, added to the already fragmented and complex system.

There is already a movement to shift costs from employers to employees, similar to what was done with pension plans and 401K's twenty plus years ago. How could this reform play into that scenario ??? we need to be thinking ahead of the insurance companies.

:)

[Myrina]

76. How dare you post the truth?

:sarcasm:

Don't you know we don't believe FACTS around here, we only believe what the corporate representatives - um, our Congressfolks, I mean, tell us. :eyes:

Kinda like the other side did for the past 8 years.

[slipslidingaway]

80. You bring up a major problem, we need to police our own members...

more than we do the "neighbors"

If we all did that the country would be better off IMO.

Sometimes you have to post articles in the threads that get all the recs.

:)

[MNDemNY]

84. Watch as posts "critical" disappear.

[slipslidingaway]

88. That happened to one of my threads back in August about the Hacker plan...

all that was left were the "facts" ProSense posted.

;)

Well that really stinks, my posts in your thread about the original Hacker plans have now been deleted.

All that is left are Your facts.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=132&topic_id=8606842&mesg_id=8606870

[MNDemNY]

91. It is a pattern.

A mouse in her pocket?

[Hissyspit]

83. DKos Diary:

http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2009/10/25/797100/-A-response-to-tonights-White-House-statement

A response to tonight's White House statement
by AdamGreen


Sun Oct 25, 2009 at 10:59:36 PM EST

Hi. This is Adam Green with the Progressive Change Campaign Committee. Some late-night news broke tonight.

White House Deputy Communications Director Dan Pfeiffer posted this on the White House blog:

A rumor is making the rounds that the White House and Senator Reid are pursuing different strategies on the public option.

Those rumors are absolutely false. In his September 9th address to Congress, President Obama made clear that he supports the public option because it has the potential to play an essential role in holding insurance companies accountable through choice and competition. That continues to be the President's position.

Senator Reid and his leadership team are now working to get the most effective bill possible approved by the Senate. President Obama completely supports their efforts and has full confidence they will succeed and continue the unprecedented progress that is being made in both the House and Senate.

AdamGreen's diary :: ::

Silly rumors.

From the Washington Post's Ezra Klein:

On Thursday night, Reid went over to the White House for a talk with the president. The conversation centered on Reid's desire to put Schumer's national opt-out plan into the base bill. White House officials were not necessarily pleased, and they made that known. Everyone agrees that they didn't embrace Reid's new strategy. Everyone agrees that the White House wants Snowe on the bill...

More from TPM's Brian Beutler:

Multiple sources tell TPMDC that Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid is very close to rounding up 60 members in support of a public option with an opt out clause, and are continuing to push skeptical members. But they also say that the White House is pushing back against the idea, in a bid to retain the support of Sen. Olympia Snowe (R-ME).

- snip -

Yay bill we least like! Yay insurance for 29 million people -- by mandating they buy insurance from rip-off artists with no choice of a public option!

Here's what the White House needs to understand:

Expressing a preference for the public option is not the same as fighting for the public option. Telling Harry Reid "good luck with that" is not the same as the president saying, "I am there helping Reid fight for those final votes."

MORE

[Javaman]

89. So, does this mean that Reid doesn't support a "trigger" option? nt

[DWilliamsamh]

92. Weak sauce. The WH isn't dithering on Afghanistan, but they are on Pub Opt.

[phleshdef]

96. PO is going in the bill, Reid just said so, said it was part of WH consensus... you lose.

[DWilliamsamh]

102. No, I win if there is a public option we all do

...but that doesn't chance the fact of White failure to take a strong stand. Lest we forget giving up single payer before the battle was joined?

[DesertDiamond]

103. Lesson Learned! Rumors seem to prove our worst fears - that our Prez will let us down.

He won't be true to his word, he'll cave, he'll leave us high and dry. But set aside those rumors, and listen ONLY to WHAT HE HIMSELF SAYS, and you do not hear the caving. You hear a leader who is standing strong. I was as worried as anyone, but from now on, if I don't hear it from his mouth, it's bogus.

[usregimechange]

105. = They have the votes to withstand filibuster

[usregimechange]

106. dupe

[Zavulon]

107. "Leadership team." 'Tis to laugh.

I haven't seen an iota of leadership from Reid (or, really, anyone on Capitol Hill) on this issue. "we have a public option." "No, we don't." "It has to be part of the bill." "No, it doesn't." "President Obama supports the public option." "No, he doesn't." "Yes, he does."

This whole thing has been the type of clusterfuck that makes me doubt anyone can even pass a bill, much less write a good one. We certainly haven't seen a good one so far.