Glenn Greenwald takes all of us Lieberman-Nelson-Baucus-etc. haters to task in an article on Salon.com. He makes the claim that the bill emerging from the Senate is the bill Obama wanted all along.
Dick Polman at American Debate has a similar message, though from a different historical perspective
There is likely some truth to the idea that Obama knew he was going to have to give up a lot in order to get any kind of health care bill passed. He did call for a public plan in his speech to a joint session of Congress, but never went out on a limb for it. In all likelihood, it is something he supports and was hoping the Congress would end up including a public plan in the final legislation, but knew it was a long shot.
I wonder if we are witnessing the emergence of an Obama "doctrine". Here is what he said about foreign policy in his Nobel speech:
"I know that engagement with repressive regimes lacks the satisfying purity of indignation. But I also know that sanctions without outreach — and condemnation without discussion — can carry forward a crippling status quo."
In domestic policy the "repressive regimes" are the big industries and their lobbyists. We've heard Obama express his "doctrine" countless times: Life isn't perfect; change doesn't happen overnight; everything is a trade-off; no bill will satisfy everyone; any movement forward is better than the status quo, even if important principles are sacrificed along the way ; it is better to be angry and frustrated and and to accomplish something than to be morally indignant and accomplish nothing.
As I've said before, Obama takes the long view. Perhaps he is looking four or even eight years down the road with the idea that it will take that long to bring about Change We Can Believe In.
I sure hope so.
For more from this writer, please visit: http://bareleft.blogspot.com