In other words, if the Party continues to put banks, Wall Street, health insurance companies, military contractors, and other corporate interests, before its duty to its historic constituency, it will be time for a new political Party; a Real Democratic Party, to take the American stage, simply because, without its cause, and without its dream, the Democratic Party isn’t needed, and doesn’t deserve to exist.

So well expressed, lets! Love the last line especially. YES! I always wonder if admirable Carter is doing amends post-presidency for omissions of conscience and courage during his presidency.

Teddy spoke about heart and soul! Why are so many willing to wimpily settle. If Obama is compromised we don’t have to be, out of cronyism with him now. Tough love to Obama.

“Obama and Dems are forsaking their real constituency. I will keep calling for single payer.”

here, in the context of Teddy Kennedy’s death. The Democrats have been abandoning their real constituency since Jimmy Carter was sold the balanced budget (not that he ever acheived that) old timey religion, amidst the now plainly premature, but then, avant garde, rejection of Keynesian principles.
Suddenly, it was more important for Democrats to balance the budget than it was for them to invest in human capital: to pass health care, to rebuild our urban areas, to educate out children, to create economic and social justice. The Carter Administration began that neglect of Roosevelt’s “common man.” It’s now more than 30 years old.

I agree lets. And obama is squandering his political capital that came in passion more than philosophy. I once heard someone complaining about her lack of assertiveness. She said I used to beg for crumbs. I am now begging for croutons. I think Obama is leading the progressives to ask and settle for croutons. The structure of single payer works. It is change we can believe in and trust and will bring relief economically and physically to this nation. Obama and Dems are forsaking their real constituency. I will keep calling for single payer. Yeah, maybe I am an ant trying to move that rubber tree plant. But we passionate ones have long memories so Obama and non-reforming self-aggrandizing Dems take note.

This should have been obvious from the very beginning, and should certainly be so now. So why are the progressive organizations wasting their time trying to mobilize progressives around the PO? Are they just too inflexible to change course, or is it that they can’t admit their PO strategy was wrong? Either way, if organizations like Move-on don’t change course now, they’ll never get another dime from me, and, I suspect, from very few others who really believe in Medicare for All.

One more thing, I’m willing to compromise on a good PO, if that’s absolutely necessary. But “I’m from Missouri,” and those who claim it’s not feasible, need to show me that by putting themselves and progressives generally on the line for it, and not just by blowing smoke about its impracticality up my rear end. If Medicare for All can’t be done at that point, I might be willing to go the barricades for the PO as a necessary compromise. But show me, dammit. First things first.

“Fighting for a compromised public option I fear will be a Trojan Horse for MORE health care corporate abuse disconnects my heart from my activism.” Exactly. Hard to fight for a captive market for the private insurers.

I am commenting late. I am confused by Teddy. So admiring still but I wonder what the deal was with him backing an Obama who has shunned single payer people, NEVER inviting them to any roundtables, and I honestly wonder where Teddy stood. Did he feel single payer was not practical? I loved hearing the old Charlie Rose interview where he said he wanted universal single payer, this during the Dem primaries while discussing John Edwards.

I know it is not the week maybe to put such a cold focus on a national leader as Teddy, but I appreciate the freedom at FDL to utter and fret honestly.

So much compromising (?) or faux compromising when the fix is in in The Senate and House, so much social and political cronyism with lobbyists and the corporate and military elites.

Obama’s speech so elegant and passionate. Please walk the walk, Barack.

I support single payer because I need to feel the fire in my belly when I fight for justice. I need that to feel spiritually aligned. Fighting for a compromised public option I fear will be a Trojan Horse for MORE health care corporate abuse disconnects my heart from my activism. Single payer activism feeds that passion and gives me hope and inspiration. I call from my list of house reps each night and leave a voice mail about the vote in the fall about Weiner’s bill 676–single payer. I also mention I want full top echelon accountability for the torture depravity. Ralph Nader said that out of 300 million of us, if 1 million really got proactive on single payer those in Congress just might take note. That would be a “change” I could REALLY believe in. Obama has Lucy and the footballed me and the liberals just toooooo many times.

Uh, who are the “others”? I supported Hillary in the primary, and the moment she didn’t come out for single payer, I found my way to her staff and told them repeatedly every way from Sunday, that she had effed up, and that as a health policy expert(particularly of OECD countries) she knew better. I contend then and now she lost the primary because she did not take up the mantle for Medicare for All. But you know what. one reason I supported her, was because there was no way in hell the progressive activists and blogosphere would blindly follow her where ever she wanted to go on health care, as I knew they would with Obama. No way single payer would have been dismissed out of hand, secret deals would have been blamed on her Chief of Staff, or lack of Presidential leadership would have been ignored by progressives because they had a healthy sense of skepticism toward her. So if you think every Clinton advocate who supports single payer is doing so out of spite, well, you are deluding yourself. And, the so-called primary wars were not “wars” they were legitimate differences of opinion on who was better to serve and who had the more liberal, or for some, progressive agenda.