The problem the Democrats are having with this bill

[Hannah Bell]

is that they oversold what they would do, and underfought the bill--very, very, very, publicly...

From the get go they refused to aggressively market a single set of bullet points that were clear, cogent, and defensible.

Then they refused to activate their own activist network.

They refused to demonize a subset of their opposition to force another subset to compromise.

They didn't drum up enough support in the country as a whole--for instance, they didn't back and organize the free health clinics that we later saw emerge.

They allowed Baucus to move from a supporter to an enemy of reform and to drag the entire process out of whack in August. They didn't organize and orchestrate the August Town Halls and they let them be taken over by the Tea Partiers.

Because of their own refusal to activate Obama's network--which came about because they didn't want to back actually popular reforms and were wedded to the most insurance friendly set of minor tinkers--they lost the August recess.

They didn't send the Democratic Senators and House members out with a single set of talking points.

They didn't strong arm the weak or conservative members of their own caucus.

Worse, they undercut and undersold the most progressive members of both the Senate and the House while cozening up to, and bargaining with, Pharma, the Insurance Companies, the Hospitals, the Blue Dogs, Baucus, Lieberman, Snowe, Collins, and all the rest of them...

Obama and TPM, and others take the attitude that the progressives--hell, just your run of the mill democrats--should trust Obama and Reid and to somehow take a bad bill and make it better "later..." Its a fair argument--if it hadn't already been gutted by our experience with Obama and Reid and the Democrats during the run up to the bill itself.

There's no doubt in my mind that Obama would have a better shot at making this argument--in fact, would never be in the position of pleading with his own supporters to support his own bill--if he'd shown any respect for the progressives and their amendments earlier. Or any serious passion for getting it right...

I'm saying that Obama and Rahm and Reid have, in effect, broken any tacit promises to support their own supporters. They never went to the mat--even rhetorically--for their own side: not women, with Stupak, not the public with a good public option, not their new constituency for medicare at 55. When they relentlessly courted the worst elements of the center/right they were also repudiating or undercutting their own supporters at every turn...

Obama and Reid showed their own side that principle, even the principle of winning, meant nothing to them. Its been all tactics and no strategy and the tactics were all capitulation.

Obama and Reid together have shown that there is nothing that a center/right Senator or Congressman can do that will earn any punishment, and that there is nothing that a progressive can do that will earn any support.

Now they want to make the argument that, in the long run, they will have a strategy to make up lost ground? They've already lost that argument. Does anyone believe that these guys have a long range strategy that is progressive? Because I don't. They've lost the trust of their own membership, just as they are losing the trust of their own voters for very good reason...

http://nomoremister.blogspot.com/2009/12/you-cant-always-get-what-you-want-no.html

[leftstreet]

1. It's true Obama shouldn't have to be begging his supporters for support

That's a very bad sign.

what a clusterfuck

[donheld]

38. It's also true

Obama shouldn't be lying to his supporters then expecting support

[Skittles]

2. it's like he finally got around to remembering us

and wonders why the fuck we're so upset - I think he is clueless

[laughingliberal]

4. hard to believe he is clueless but I guess that's one explanation

or maybe they really did think we were stupid and would support anything called HCR.

[laughingliberal]

3. They watered and fed the Finance Committee Bill and let the other 3 die of neglect nt

[snot]

5. K&R'd

[Goldstein1984]

6. I remember well, wondering where the President was

during the process? Why wasn't he rallying the people the way FDR did.

I believe he had the backing form Main Street to make the Senate give him a good bill. He seems to be a good speaker, not not that bold of a leader.

I won't speculate any further than that.

[tblue]

8. Probably because he didn't want to.

I take him at face value.

[Goldstein1984]

9. I'm from Alaska, and I always say the same thing when people

ask me about Sarah Palin--Take her at face value; she is what she appears to be.

I believe Obama was answering to other interests when he didn't push for single payer or a public option.

[tblue]

14. Yes, and that was his choice. He owns his actions.

And I think he's man enough to accept that, even if he does sound a little weaselly lateyly.

[Goldstein1984]

16. I was giving him a little more credit than "weaselly," but

I don't much care for his revising history.

I like to think he'll turn things around if he hears enough from the people.

He needs to listen to progressives--they will make or break him in 2012.

I think he is a good man that maybe wasn't quite ready for the job.

[tblue]

18. That's an intriguing perspective, Goldstein.

My language gets a little raw at this time of night. I hope he's a good person. I have no reason to doubt that so far.

But yes he is green, and he's a quick study, so hopefully he will learn. -- and learn the right lessons. Remember how rocky Clinton's first few months were? And he adjusted. I just don't know what kind of president Obama will be in a year or two. He couldn't possibly want us to feel he is weak, a sellout, or a liar. So you're giving me some hope. Thanks for that.

I gotta go to bed now. I enjoy your posts. Hopefully we'll connect again soon. Merry Christmas Eve!!!

[Goldstein1984]

19. Have a Happy Christmas Eve and Day

I'm very disappointed, but there is some hope that the first 11 months have been a breaking in period. From community organizer and professor, to senator, to leader of the most powerful empire in the history of the world.

I'm afraid my disappointment might be rooted in unrealistic expectations. Not that reversing all the damage done during the Bush/Cheney Error is an unreasonable desire, only that the system is probably so corrupt that nobody could do it in such a short time.

He has three years to win me back. Until then, he's going to hear from me frequently. I hope a lot of people complaining about him will do him the courtesy of letting him hear from them as well.

As you said, it's late, and I may be feeling mellow and optimistic because I'm tired. I think I was a little more pissed off when I was writing earlier today.

We're spending the next two days with our daughter and two or our grandchildren. Another reason to want to be optimistic--we're talking about the world they're inheriting.

[tblue]

28. I like your thinking.

I'm gonna try to take the same approach. You've enlightened me. We can and should be the loyal opposition, not a seething nest of vipers (with me being the biggest bellyacher). I never totally withdrew my support from Obama. I just want him to keep his mighty army of hopers together and on his side. It would be the worst tragedy to let all that wonderful inspired energy devolve into cynicism and disconnection. But we cannot stay united if his policies and positions undercut us. And people yelling at us to stay in line won't cut it. It's Obama's call; it's in his hands. Let's chat again later....

[Goldstein1984]

29. With the lousy Senate version of HCR passing last night

I'm on the down side again.

But there is still time for Obama and Congress to turn my anti-incumbent feelings around.

It's really not about loyalty, it's about holding elected representatives accountable. The people who elected Obama are looking for a reason to continue supporting him. It isn't our job to make excuses for him, it's his responsibility to give us reason to continue with our support.

[truedelphi]

42. Some of his progressive base is out of here

He gave the Banksters everything they wanted at the expense of the middle incomed.

He gave away the country to the Big Insurers at the expense of the middle inocmed.

he gave the MIC their big war expansion in Afghanistan, and our paid penalties for the Big Insurance Health Care rip off will pay for that war!

And he has the Monsanto Franken Food people in top positions so our food will be permanently altered.

He cannot undo thie damage done. As far as this hosuehold, he is finished!

[chimpymustgo]

21. And we were admonished to "sit tight" while the masterful chess player brought us great health care

reform.

As plank after plank of the platform fell away, we were told, "Chill. Obama's GOT this." Now, we're left teetering on the precipice of disaster, and we're told, "We never promised that - and these mandates with no cost controls are FUCKING WONDERFUL!"

Is he clueless, a sell-out, a con-man?

[tblue]

7. It's not just healthcare either.

But what you've outlined is an unmitigated cl-----f---.

[Goldstein1984]

10. No, it isn't. The disappointments are many

I was hoping for a major break with Bush/Cheney policies where civil liberties and illegal wars are concerned. It's almost as if there has been no change at all in these areas.

[truedelphi]

11. they would have done everything you suggest that they needed to do

If those pulling the strings had wanted those things done.

But those pulling the strings got exactly the bill that they wanted. Note how much the Health Insurance stocks surged this week.

[truedelphi]

12. Also, in late October of last year, Obama promised us that

If the Bailout turned out to not work out well for Middle America, he would see that the Bailout was overhauled. Now he has clearly forgotten that pledge, and instead he has turned to "urging" the Big Bankster/Fraudster crowd to treat Us Consumers better.

To which the Bankster/Fraudster crowd responded, "Ho! Ho! Ho! Very funny and in your dreams, Mr President."

[tblue]

17. What is wrong with him? Seriously. WTF?

Okay okay, he's sold out, some say. Probably. But does he have a plan for this presidency? The plan seems to have changed so what is it? Is he just gonna continue doing the bidding of his funders for 4 years -- jump when they tell him to? No? So what is this presidency about really? Is it about him or is it about us? Because I don't feel he's being straight with us on the public option, for example. Does he care about us -- us who got him elected and believed in him? What is he willing to risk for us? What would he go to the mat for, for us? Who does he think were those thousands and thousands of people who came to his campaign rallies? Are we more than a repository for promises and speeches? I honestly don't know.

[truedelphi]

31. the folks over at

tinyrevolution.com don't have any answers but their top topic yesterday was about
how if obama really had meant to give us the things he promised, then how did he stumble into depriving us of every single one of them?

Or how is it that he has sold us out on every single thing.

No answers, but great discussions.

[democracy1st]

13. He knew all along what was going to happen K & R

[Hannah Bell]

15. Glenn Greenwald:

“It’s also worth noting how completely antithetical claims are advanced to defend and excuse Obama.

We’ve long heard — from the most blindly loyal cheerleaders and from Emanuel himself — that progressives should place their trust in the Obama White House to get this done the right way, that he’s playing 11-dimensional chess when everyone else is playing checkers, that Obama is the Long Game Master who will always win.

Then, when a bad bill is produced, the exact opposite claim is hauled out: it’s not his fault because he’s totally powerless, has nothing to do with this, and couldn’t possibly have altered the outcome. From his defenders, he’s instantaneously transformed from 11-dimensional chess Master to impotent, victimized bystander. The supreme goal is to shield him from all blame…”

[chimpymustgo]

23. That deserves its own OP.

[glitch]

33. Well at least there is some transparency somewhere.

No credibility, but plenty of transparency.

[democracy1st]

40. +1

[truedelphi]

41. That is what a serious analyst would come up with.

Let's not have any more of this other crap - the Talking Points that Obama never ever mentioned a public option when he campaigned, the guy cannot do more than he is doing because Rahm appointed him to the Presidency, the guy doesn't understand the improtance of SIngle Payer (Not so, he campaigned on Single PAyer throughout his bid for the Illinois Senate) et cetera.

[Little Star]

44. That is exactly what they say. It makes no sense. n/t

[PATRICK]

20. About sums up

the cold reality, the needless aspects of gratuitous reformulating the bill to make it an universal insurance mandate against the people.

The most gratuitous aspect was why the rush to do a bill at all if it was meant to take quick advantage of the Dem majority or the emergency response climate of the financial meltdown? Part of the equation would be the timeliness of all, even on behalf of "beleaguered" healthcare industries facing a surge of high prices and tossing millions more out of health care, giving people something for their bailout of criminal and incompetent fat cats, something when jobs would never recover significantly to prevent a supposed GOP resurgence in the fall of 2010. Why the steadfast doggedness of making everything worse except as another vote losing giveaway to another criminal and incompetent corporate enterprise? You can understand the directly paid Senate employees of Big Pharma, but everyone else?

Way before the dull and miserable unfolding of administration speech and behavior- even when campaign rhetoric(which was not supposed to be on a deception par to bald-faced Bush incoherent garbage) the gratuitous slamming of the base and praise of the unconscionable(correct word) was rife in Obama's public addresses. The basic confused thinking of corporate Dems(some old fashioned and directly corrupt, some dazzled by intelligent but insane rationalizations backed by money and media) is enshrined in these contradictions. The clear bottom line, as evidenced by the SUPPRESSION of Medicare as the future single payer easy answer for many decades, is to make the the government the single payer for all the unrestrained profits of the healthcare industry. The impetus to improve and evolve the first reform has been gutted and fought- by our own party leaders- a leadership that has proven as poor as anything else in the recent horrific past of utter intentional powerlessness under a fraudulent GOP regime.

Another strong interpretation- other than Obama's unfortunately honest and muddled New Democrat leaning is the dominant policy of past administrations. Despite what Americans seem to think about their own myths of the powerful Presidency each successor seems to get into the boat of the predecessor in whatever conditions or false trails left to him and learns the first lesson. Don't rock, keep paddling.
Running against Hillary and trying hardest to get at her power support more than seals what is also inevitable. Bring in the retreads from the last Dem administration, especially since few radicalized GOP crooks can be trusted on the job at all(nonetheless, Gates). Part of the unreality which arguably needs no help from the current party leadership is that the mystery could be explained as a second try-
woefully inadequate to current historical context) by the Clinton people.

Their healthcare reform was also a mandatory insurance bill, but one which had teeth to regulate healthcare costs and fees. This typified the corporate philosophy of making big business an essential but reined in charger to revitalize the economy. After this failed and the majority lost in the Congress, Clinton loosened the reins enough to get things moving without much regard to the personal political mistakes that had been made in not beating the MSM and working Congress. This seems to be a continuation, a Clinton 2 administration. Whatever goodwill or movement that comes from outrage against the bad guys, the eventual realization of the desire for reform by the propagandized and suppressed public opinion has been blithely pissed away to continue the corporate Great Compromise that big business rightly sees as a temporary stage to total feasting on the corpse of humanity.

To them the strategy is brilliant and effective- and in their own way learned from experience it is. They have avoided some of procedural mistakes of the past. Instead of removing the president from the controversy as Bill did by empowering Hillary, they removed the WH entirely and threw it into the recent Vichy laps of the disgraced Congress. The media and GOP assaults, as trite and incredible as ever have simply had time to exhaust themselves against no target. This could have been exhausted and gradually pressed from a struggling Congress into any number of productive reforms. Instead they have continued to let the the other resistance damping strategy continue of not regulating and not confronting the healthcare fat cats write the bill. This also drags your enemies into the process and makes passage more inevitable were it not for the basic decision that corporate business must thrive at all human costs burying even the concept of the future good and the very meaning of reform(even insurance practice reform). The points at which this "Clinton reversed" strategy could have made for at least a beginning have passed silently, except for Congressional progressives whose demonization as the "left" shows the bitter Clinton holdovers and their allies in the WH project the blame for their failure in that direction because they consider their necessary friends to exist only in the realm of big business movers. No matter the reality, the failures, the truth exposed, the public will or the moving of sea and mountains people in power simply do not change easily, if ever at all.

Not only is the health care now a drama whether corporatism succeeds in the twilight of the economy and humanity and whether the "progressive" faction representing reason, the common good and the majority can end this sorry dumbing down of the first Clinton healthcare reform, but the GOP has gratuitously been given the opportunity to pick its advantages at will by casting the blame and the suffering upon the people and their real reps or learn to reap the money from the failed reform they will inevitably vote against- getting a gift both ways if they can manage not to blow this as everything else their greed-soaked insanity touches.

So too all presidential policy- which if run in a Clinton 2 perspective is woefully not correcting its own real mistakes and false perspectives- just physical tactics- and repeating inevitably all the bad results and separation from true leadership of Congress and party and people. The reason I have patience even in the likelihood of lost opportunity and shame with drastic consequences for the little guy(and this time the entire planet) is that how is this not typical of all modern presidents fitting their wheels into the ruts of predecessors and with the exhilaration of empowerment running them right over the cliff piqued only by complaints and warnings shouted from the sidelines. Clinton I did not pursue any accountability over Bush I(still doesn't in the slightest and that is putting it mildly). That extended to not pursuing any changes or purging reforms demanded by simple understanding of Constitution and law. Bush 2 the pretender makes a mockery of any natural sense to this as with all other evils reduced to obvious insanity, but the wheels go on enthusiastically in the ruts he made toward the cliff. So too the humongous and unnecessary wars against pitiful oil wastelands and mythical terror. So too the bad economics of Bush and the rehashing of extremely questionable Clinton I experts replaying old and stupid games beyond the point of tradition, relevancy, experience or whatever human brain can puzzle it out to be.

New presidents first fear not be fit for the job unless they fall into the invisible traces they all laughably fancy themselves as holding. A new hope would have swept in more totally new faces- with all the naivete and inexperience that are an inherent risk as well in a policy wrecked world. With that we got Arne Duncan and others mysteriously imitating the obscene crooks before them in the worst or most mythically deceived traditions of the most disastrous past. In that alone and in past statements before the final merging with Clinton experience I think you can be assured that things are not going to go much different for the next four to eight years. Now the distracted debate, devoid of ALL confrontation from simple policy error and premises will be whether the economy can flourish enough to make Obama as popular in legend as Clinton I while possibly as unreal as Bush 2. As with the invasion of Iraq and its inevitable disasters it seems more a dreary question of who gets away with what unchallenged and whether complete and total disaster can be avoided without anyone pretending to know it.

A great part of this has to do whether the health care legislation is approved or not. A new ballgame for better or worse would be if it were not.

In the grand scheme we are exactly as most of our DU progressives have reasoned. Building a fragile true public representation against the tides of corruption in a party itself tragically compromised by money corruption for the critical tests. Not in control, not at the center of institutional power with certain advantages becoming ever more apparent by the naked and moronic nature of the lies needed to pose self-interested compromise with disaster as respectable.

[KrR]

25. I read 2 paragrahs and have no idea WTF you are talking about

getting a headache too.

[Cetacea]

26. LOL

Nothing personal, Patrick. Happy Holidays.

[Ignis]

30. Reading is hard work. Welcome to DU.

If you're a fan of extreme brevity, I suggest you simply use "tl;dr" and be done with it.

[glitch]

35. Read one paragraph at a time, as many times as needed before moving on to the next one.

Hang in there, it's worth it!

[glitch]

34. Grim but no doubt true. And quite a few of your sentences are exquisite.

"Way before the dull and miserable unfolding of administration speech and behavior- even when campaign rhetoric(which was not supposed to be on a deception par to bald-faced Bush incoherent garbage) the gratuitous slamming of the base and praise of the unconscionable(correct word) was rife in Obama's public addresses. The basic confused thinking of corporate Dems(some old fashioned and directly corrupt, some dazzled by intelligent but insane rationalizations backed by money and media) is enshrined in these contradictions. The clear bottom line, as evidenced by the SUPPRESSION of Medicare as the future single payer easy answer for many decades, is to make the the government the single payer for all the unrestrained profits of the healthcare industry. The impetus to improve and evolve the first reform has been gutted and fought- by our own party leaders- a leadership that has proven as poor as anything else in the recent horrific past of utter intentional powerlessness under a fraudulent GOP regime."

"As with the invasion of Iraq and its inevitable disasters it seems more a dreary question of who gets away with what unchallenged and whether complete and total disaster can be avoided without anyone pretending to know it."

"Not in control, not at the center of institutional power with certain advantages becoming ever more apparent by the naked and moronic nature of the lies needed to pose self-interested compromise with disaster as respectable."

[malaise]

22. All valid points as usual but

after six decades should I not celebrate the passing of a health Care bill no matter how watered down it is - isn't it a start.

[democracy1st]

24. It's a start but the underlining factors are disturbing

[glitch]

36. It may be a retreat, or the start of something bad.

I hope you are right but the "political ideology" behind this bill I have never thought a good thing. I am sure Fascism is very practical, it did make the trains run on time. But practicality has its limits.

And the hard sell is not making it any more palatable.

[RainDog]

27. excellent points, all.

I am not happy with what constitutes this bill at this time. However, I cannot make common cause with Grover Norquist.

Instead, I will target any money I have to donate to a campaign to attempts to vote blue dogs out of office and to support existing progressive legislators.

I am very disappointed with Obama.

But the only choice at this moment that I can see that is feasible is to get rid of some of the worst of the bill and to demand cost controls.

[bvar22]

32. After the election...

Obama WAS the Leader of a Movement.

If HE had called us to Washington to STAND with him at the Capitol and DEMAND real Health Care Reform, I would have come.
So would several million others.

He didn't LEAD.
Instead, he followed the Republicans chasing "Bi-Partisan Consensus".
WHAT a DISAPPOINTMENT!

[varelse]

39. Your post is the cliff notes version of the op

which is, of course, right on the money.

[depakid]

37. That sums it up as best as any commentary I've seen yet.

[Thickasabrick]

43. Excellent recap Hannah...K&R nt