(8:00PM EST – promoted by Nightprowlkitty)
I am beginning to see the inevitable healthcare “compromise” as the product of a political song and dance conducted by Democrats and Republicans solely to appease various constituencies within their parties — and nothing else. Remarkably, The Onion accurately assessed the situation several months ago with the satirical essay “Congress Deadlocked Over How To Not Provide Health Care.” The Onion “quotes” Nancy Pelosi in a very smart passage:
Both parties understand that the current system is broken,” House Speaker Nancy Pelosi told reporters Monday. “But what we can’t seem to agree upon is how to best keep it broken, while still ensuring that no elected official takes any political risk whatsoever. It’s a very complicated issue
Hmmm. Seems like the Onion is on to something.
But the author, Darren Hutchinson, of the Salon article asks a very legitimate question at the end just directing it at the the wrong group of people.
To liberals who still believe that criticizing the Obama Administration is treasonous, I ask the following question: What must the White House do to receive legitimate criticism from the Left?
While Mr. Hutchinson makes some pretty good points about this debacle, I think the main point he is missing is pretty clear from the title..”Protecting Joe Lieberman”. More like President Obama is using him to further his own agenda which is, as Russ Feingold said, get the bill he wanted all along.
Sen. Russ Feingold (D-Wis.), among the most vocal supporters of the public option, said it would be unfair to blame Lieberman for its apparent demise. Feingold said that responsibility ultimately rests with President Barack Obama and he could have insisted on a higher standard for the legislation.
“This bill appears to be legislation that the president wanted in the first place, so I don’t think focusing it on Lieberman really hits the truth,” said Feingold. “I think they could have been higher. I certainly think a stronger bill would have been better in every respect.”
Has the White House threatened Democrats in the House with refusing to back their re-election unless they capitulate on HCR like they were forced to do over the war funding bill last June?
The White House is playing hardball with Democrats who intend to vote against the supplemental war spending bill, threatening freshmen who oppose it that they won’t get help with reelection and will be cut off from the White House, Rep. Lynn Woolsey (D-Calif.) said Friday.
“We’re not going to help you. You’ll never hear from us again,” Woolsey said the White House is telling freshmen. She wouldn’t say who is issuing the threats, and the White House didn’t immediately return a call. [UPDATE: White House spokesman Nick Shapiro says Woolsey’s charge is not true.]
Woolsey said she herself had not been pressured because the White House and leadership know she’s a firm no vote. But she had heard from other members about the White House pressure.
Obama supported Lieberman in his last race. Now, is this is the favor returned? Is Lieberman taking the heat for the President?
Who’s zooming who?
h/t also to Glen Greenwald
(all emphasis is mine)