The rumors, innuendos, uncited sources, cited sources, blanket statements, vague statements, speeches, the word "public option", Olympia Snowe, scurred Democratic Senators, fierce House Progressives, The White House and Barack Obama.
Yes, I am sick of all of the above.
Why?
Because in the end, as of today, we still don't know what the hell will happen.
I have been laid back the past few weeks, getting myself back in the work mode, but have not stopped following the biggest spectacle that does not have its own television show, "The Public Option Drama Hour".
Yes, the public option show.
There is a diary on the recommended list that states everything that I feel, by AdamGreen, my utter confusion, still.
At this point, everyone who frequents Daily Kos and has followed the congress knows which Democrats side with the public option being included in the final bill and which Democrats do not. We know that.
My frustration is at the White House and why we need to have Senator Olympia Snowe to sign off on any final health care legislation? I have YET, to hear the White House explain this in reality terms, when the fight is amongst ourselves, the Democrats.
Is the word bipartisan that important to President Obama and the Obama White House? If it is, I have news for you, "One vote from a Republican does not make it bipartisan. It makes it a joke if you try to tout it as such." Is the Obama White House getting this message? Are the light bulbs on at that joint? I don't think so.
The public wants a government run public option. The public wants competition with insurance companies. The part of AdamGreen's diary which has President Obama stating the following, "..the bill that 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....", bothers me tremendously. The Baucus Bill gives cover, a hand slap, more business to one industry, the health insurance industry. No one should be jumping out of their seats for THAT.
I have yet, to hear anything from the Obama White House on triggers. I mean, where do they stand, EXACTLY, when triggers are in play? I ask this because as they continue to want Senator Olympia Snowe, a.k.a., President Snowe around here, to be the lone Republican vote then they must have a trigger. I have yet to hear any denouncement of this option. That should be a concern for everyone around here. Remember, Medicare D, the disastrous prescription drug plan has a trigger and has YET to be used and the costs for prescription drugs have continued to skyrocket. The insurance industry knows how to get around this, so why would anyone expect them to not get around any legislation with a trigger for a public option?
Many were upset at Huffington Post calling the Democrats "Leaderless" over the weekend in their headline. I was kind of stumped on that one, but obviously there is a fight going on here. Why? Because it is Washington, DC and everyone is not on the same page in the White House over this public option. This is how leaks, unnamed sources, etc., comes to fruition. Bullshit leaks are easily denounced, but the ones that continue on the same line, theme are the ones to watch out for and it all is about Olympia Snowe, trigger, and opt-out. That is what you need to follow. And we all know this because it happened on the Bush Administration watch when the leaks became a flood and the real truth was exposed.
Lastly, President Obama will sign a bill with a public option, he has always supported it, but the problem is that he never thought the public would embrace it. The public has embraced it and expects it and that is his problem while he continues to want a bipartisan bill. Newsflash, President Obama, as long as you are at 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue, don't expect the Republicans to support JACK, so the sooner you realize this the better. The public gets it and don't blame you for your efforts, we applaud it, but at this point we don't give a mickey-fick about a bipartisan bill, we just want the final bill with a PUBLIC OPTION. Not a co-opt, not state only driven, not watered down, but a government run public option exchange.
Please Democrats, Obama White House please understand that, embrace it, get the bill done, over with so we can MOVE ON.
NOTE: A great comment from the good the bad the dumb on anonymous sources:
I think people are wrong to have a knee-jerk negative reaction to the use of anonymous sources. And, as I mentioned in another thread, people's dislike of anonymous sources seems much greater when they don't like what the anonymous sources are saying. I'm quite comfortable with what we reported. And the White House denials, if you look closely at them, are quite thin.
On the subject of anonymous sources, do you (and I mean people in general) want to know what the White House's negotiators are saying behind closed doors? We are reporting what credible sources who are in a position to know directly are telling us they're saying. To say that that is not valuable information because the sources are not willing to go on the record (which is essentially impossible in a case like this) does not make sense to me. We made extensive use of anonymous sources when we reported the US Atty story and it would have been quite simply impossible to have reported otherwise. How many currently serving DOJ employees or defense lawyers involved in current cases do you think we were going to get to go on the record to tell us all that stuff?
The use of anonymous sources can definitely be and has frequently been abused. But the fairly new idea that using anon sources is problematic in itself simply does not hold water. TPM
He's spot on. Did anybody here defend the Bush administration when Josh broke the US Atty scandal with anonymous sources? The Plame scandal? Do people around here think that whistleblowers deserve anonymity? Is whistleblowing unreliable if it is done anonymously?
It is not that anonymous sources are being used, it is that many don't like what they are reading and hearing coming from this White House from these sources. So, the attempt is to say these sources are untrue, when in fact many of these sources probably are true and many JUST DON'T LIKE IT. Folks, can't have it both ways. No one on this site was debunking all the Bush Administration anonymous sources about that White House, in fact it was relished here, but now that the foot is on the other shoe, we don't like it much. In the end, can't have it both ways.
••
This Week With Barack Obama