Skip to main content

View Diary: Behind the Deal to Kill the Public Option... (101 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  He's never shown himself to be short-sighted (0+ / 0-)

    or simple-minded, or impatient, or smug (think "mission accomplished").

    I'd be very surprised if in the coming weeks and months he doesn't temper every response about the success of the bill with the notion that it's "just the beginning."

    •  And your expectation is that... (0+ / 0-)

      he will follow up on that claim with an actual effort to change the situation through legislation?

      •  Not by himself (0+ / 0-)

        One of the things he's up to is challenging other institutions besides the White House to participate constructively. That includes Congress, the media, and us.

        Seems like a lot of us here would prefer a president who screams all the right things instead of someone who methodically gets things done.

        Me -- I need insurance.

        •  I don't want anyone who screams anything. (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:

          And I resent the insinuation that I am being childish for being unhappy with the manner in which our party and our President has let this debate unfold.

          My job, as a citizen, is to speak out for what I think ought to be done.

          The media's job, as undeniably corporate-owned entities, is to support the status quo, whatever that may be on any given subject.

          The Republicans' job, as opponents of progress and liberalism, is to obstruct the forward movement of this President's agenda.

          The President and our party have the unenviable task of actually doing whatever it takes to enact that progress. I do not accept the claim that publicly supporting a policy proposal is enough. If I did accept such a claim, I would have spent eight years of my life cheering for the last President, who apparently wanted to do everything from balancing the budget to reforming education.

          •  We don't disagree in theory (0+ / 0-)

            But it's a judgment call as to what constitutes constructive challenges and destructive kneecapping. We probably disagree here.

            Regarding how the whole things has unfolded: I think it's too early to say anything definitive. I'd be surprised, though, if by the end of Obama's first term, we aren't able to look back at a string of progressive accomplishments that are awfully impressive, if imperfect -- and much more than a true-blue Kucinich type could have accomplished.

            •  I don't want Kucinich. (1+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:

              I don't need a Department of Peace, though it would be pretty nifty. But don't you agree it would be nice to have a President who understands the immorality of forcing Americans to pay a tax to private, for-profit, monopolistic corporations? Wouldn't it be just grand if we had a President whose Chief of Staff spent his days threatening to cut off Ben Nelson and Joe Lieberman instead of the Progressive Caucus? Wouldn't it just make you cry if we could have a President who doesn't believe in imprisoning human beings forever without any due process?

              •  Fantasies are fine... (0+ / 0-)

                But I'm glad to have a realist-in-chief.

                Again, the proof will be in the pudding. Let's check back in three years to see who's right.

                But I can't believe you really think Obama doesn't understand the immorality of the healthcare system. But his job is to be an effective politician, not to play God.

                •  Yes, pure fantasy that... (1+ / 0-)
                  Recommended by:

                  any President would refuse to force Americans to pay taxes to corporations. Further fantasy that said President would refuse to imprison human beings forever without trial of any sort. I'm crazy. Just crazy.

                  •  If you want a good poltitician you'll get someone (0+ / 0-)

                    who enjoys the art of politics.

                    It's awfully rare to find someone with real values and a heart who's willing to dive energetically into the cesspool that is the political process.

                    Thank God we elected one of those rarities.

                    •  Petey, are you hearing me? (1+ / 0-)
                      Recommended by:

                      Do you disagree with my claim that the President favors imprisoning human beings forever with no trial? Do you disagree that health care reform will force Americans to pay a tax to private corporations?

                      I'm not simply offering a bunch of rhetoric meant to evade conversation with you. I really want to know if your understanding of those facts are even vaguely close to what I see.

                      •  Yes, I disagree... (0+ / 0-)

                        Especially with your claim that Obama "favors" imprisoning people forever without trial.

                        I keep bringing the conversation back to politics because politics is about the art of the possible -- which includes imperfect compromises.

                        When these compromises (which can include delays of justice) affect real people it's easy to get dogmatic and emotional. I think Obama has made a "devil's bargain" (to put politics in its least favorable terms) that pragmatically recognizes justice will never be perfect, but it can be improved.

                        So what has he gained by going slow on Gitmo etc? For one thing, he's managed to divide the crazy Liz Cheney's from more mainstream Republicans -- because he's seen as largely NOT radical when it comes to national security.

                        I think largely what you're citing as evidence is not intransigence but rational delays. You may disagree with his reasons, but, no, I do NOT believe he "favors" injustice.

                        Same with corporate health care. It'll take some time for a new paradigm to gradually move mainstream Americans away from thinking the healthcare system ought to be a profit center.

                        •  Not everything is politics. (1+ / 0-)
                          Recommended by:

                          Petey, pragmatism does not excuse anything and everything. I imagine if you, an innocent person, were thrown into this disgusting mess, you might be a bit less forgiving.

                          1. The Obama White House is interfering in the prosecutorial decisions of the DOJ. (Remember when we complained about Karl Rove and Alberto Gonzalez doing that?)
                          1. Barack Obama's Administration (or, rather, his military) has a hit list that includes American citizens who are not on the battlefield fighting troops.
                          1. Barack Obama's Administration argues that the same incredibly overbroad interpretation of "state secrets" adopted by Bush should still be followed. They are using this legal argument to insist that human beings we tortured for months on end should not be allowed to sue the government.
                          1. Barack Obama intends to imprison human beings forever with no substantive due process.
                          1. Barack Obama does not appear to disagree with legislation saying that you can be deemed a terrorist and indefinitely detained by the military.

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site