... Obama is, at bottom, a conservative, notwithstanding some cultural inclinations to the contrary. When all is said and done, he wants to change things as little as possible, his desire for change is driven by a perceived necessity to avoid disaster, and the priorities and parameters of change are dictated by doing as much as possible for those representing existing power, and doing as little as possible for everyone else. This is what classic Burkean conservatives believe in, along with the ideal of unifying the polity, and marginalizing all divisive forces.
Divisive forces, for those not clued in, means you and me, pardners. Every bit as much as Rush Limbaugh and Glenn Beck. For a classic conservative like Obama, it really makes no difference whatsoever if the divisive forces are right or rational. All that matters is that they resist going along. And because of Obama's essential conservatism, it's you and I who are the problem in Obama's eyes. Not Baucus, Nelson, Lieberman & the like. You and I. We are the problem.
And since we are the problem, we've got to get a whole lot better at it. Because if we can make ourselves insoluble, then that will force Obama to accept us, however much he may hate doing so.
And that is the only way that we will get what we want.
...
... (T)oward that end, we need to become very, very good at separating the wheat from the chaff. And very, very good at saying, "No!" and sticking with it.
In order to do this, we must be willing to risk taking losses. Because, quite frankly, losses are always a possibility--and generally become even more likely whenever you go on defense, no matter how reasonable it may seem. That's why I've argued that we should not, and cannot support a bill with individual mandates and no public option. This will be political poison, and the only question is "How fast will it act?"
