By Opposing the Health Care Reform bills, I'm (indirectly) helping to pass HCR. (U Heard Me Right)

[Land Shark]

No Congress is going to pass a law perceived to be ALL the way to the Left or the Right (poor as the Left/Right paradigm is on the whole as a description of real politics). No, there's got to be a "wing" out there to make the actual voted outcome appear at least somewhat reasonable (whether that appearance is true or not is beside the point as perception is politics and vice versa).

Those who oppose HCR, unless and until that actually kills all HCR -- are actually creating a "middle space" for HCR to try to pass through into law. I don't see any way around that, and I certainly don't think progressives should keep quiet for any reason stated herein.

A lot of the noise directed against those opposing HCR seems to misunderstand the necessity of the opposition to HCR from the left to sustain the self-styled "compromiser/first stepper" position. If the Left/progressive opposition evaporated, the pressure would be heavy for the bill to get even worse.

FReedom begins when one starts to question structured choices. The "take it or leave it" point we're at right now is a heavily structured choice.

No matter what one's position may be on HCR, here's what I think:

One must give Congress one's TRUE OPINION, or else it's garbage in, garbage out. If one already arrives at Congressional doors with a heavily compromised message one way or another, Congress gets a stilted view -- very much so-- of what public opinion is and that distorts the process. Of course, there are even more powerful forces of distortion acting on Congress right now, nut nevertheless I think COngress deserves the benefit of the True opinion of every DU'er and every constituent -- not one that misrepresents that person's true thoughts from the get go.

Nobody has to change their mind on account of me -- they can say, for example, "I really think single payer's the way to go, but I will nevertheless support HCR as written..." (or what have you.)

We'd still disagree, but if we could all talk about what we really really want as much of the time as possible, we'd be more persuasive all around. That may or may not regain control of Congress, but it will help us persuade our fellow DU'ers and fellow citizens, since what we really want is what we're tending to be passionate and informed on -- key elements in effective persuasion.

[Hello_Kitty]

1. Overton's Window

The cheerleaders would have had us cave in to whatever came out from the get-go. We'd have ended up with a bill that was essentially mandates and little else. Nelson was trying to strip the goddamned Medicaid expansion out!

[RainDog]

2. exactly. n/t

[Hydra]

3. I have an anology

My dog looks at me like I'm stupid when I talk to him and ask him to do something. When I get out a treat for him, he's suddenly very helpful and I can give him complex instructions and he couldn't do them fast enough for me. I call it "speaking the language of treats."

Now, a Congresscritter is no different. You speak to him without a wad of cash in you hand, and he claims to be from another planet and speak a different language. The second you have what he/she/it wants, then it's "How can I make that happen faster for you."

So there really was no debate here. The insurance companies and everyone else came to our Gov't with bigger treats than we had. Is it any wonder they got what they wanted?

[xchrom]

5. +1

[snagglepuss]

4. Spot on. "FReedom begins when one starts to question structured choices.

The "take it or leave it" point we're at right now is a heavily structured choice."


K & R

[Donnachaidh]

6. Eurasia is the true enemy -- white is black, up is down.

The chorus is well versed in 1984 and doublespeak.

[tblue37]

7. That's what happened with Lieberman and the Medicare buy-in. He was all in favor of it, but then

he saw that progressives like Weiner were "too pleased," so he withdrew support for cloture until it was removed from the bill.

http://alleyesonabama.blogspot.com/2009/12/lieberman-im-doing-this-to-poke.html

But in the interview, Mr. Lieberman said that he grew apprehensive when a formal proposal began to take shape. He said he worried that the program would lead to financial trouble and contribute to the instability of the existing Medicare program.

And he said he was particularly troubled by the overly enthusiastic reaction to the proposal by some liberals, including Representative Anthony Weiner, Democrat of New York, who champions a fully government-run health care system.

"Congressman Weiner made a comment that Medicare-buy in is better than a public option, it's the beginning of a road to single-payer," Mr. Lieberman said. "Jacob Hacker, who's a Yale professor who is actually the man who created the public option, said, 'This is a dream. This is better than a public option. This is a giant step.'"

[Land Shark]

8. Thanks for the illustration. nt