Jim Cooper writes an op-ed in the Hill:

Not only the Daily Kos but also Firedoglake has accused me of being against “the public option.” The truth is that I have been a leader in trying to define what a public option really could mean, and I have repeatedly stated that there are several definitions that I support. By my calculation, there are about 18 ways to define a public option and at least half of them could win my support and, in my opinion, a majority in Congress.

Sincere apologies to Rep. Cooper if we’ve misstated his position.  Brantley Hargrove of Nashville Scene probably does a better job of catching the nuance of Cooper’s position:

Even though I have stood, arms locked with the GOP, in the path of a public option, I don’t really have a problem with the public option even though the bill I’m pushing does not provide for a public option. So I can say I’m not against a public option and do everything within my ability to prevent its passage.

"Weasel-worded, dissembling obstructionist" is probably a more accurate description.