Progressive are up in arms not because Obama is failing to deliver on a popular campaign promise, but because he refused to expend any effort to even try to follow through on his promise.

obama also campaigned against individual mandates. that’s a campaign promise i’d like to see followed up on.

Some are claiming that Obama’s hands-off approach is masterful.

That he has steely nerves and a steady hand.

And that the emergent forces in society are coalescing around exactly and precisely the things that Obama has decided are the ones that matter.

We are told that Obama has got the military right where he wants them, regarding Afghanistan. (Where does he want them? The military are still there … and only the questions concerning the legitimacy of the Afghan “election” have slowed the process, not forceful or even CLEAR inputs from Obama.)

To suggest that a swirling confusion is proof of Obama’s sure “grasp” seems, to me at least, to be the most pathetic of wishful thinking, as it is based on nothing but supposition and sanguine hopiness.

Obama must, at least, whisper his preferences for what he would like to happen.

And that whispering needs to be someplace besides Rahm’s ear or when he’s talking to the dog.

DW

If not fight for it–at least say something like: “I, Obama, think that a public option plan is a critical part of the exchange”.

Or how about “I think it is very important to have a public option plan available to Americans”.

To my knowlege, Obama has failed to even approach this level of “fighting”.

One can most easily draw the conclusion that Obama really doesn’t want a public option, lip service notwithstanding. He has used absolutely none of his political capital to make it happen. The wishy-washy “I’d like it if it happens” is really killing it with faint support. A real leader who wanted it would make it happen. The only real obstacle at this point is upsetting a few bleating republicans. But they’re supposed to be irrelevant as the minority.

Occam’s razor requires that conclusion, I agree.

Republicans prove their masculinity by standing up for their base.
Democrats prove their masculinity by standing up to their base.

I get a deeper sense that he is holding back allowing Americans their Reps and the Insurance companies go at it.

In many ways he has not held back. Listen to his latest pounding of the Insurance companies.

He does not say “public option” but the message is clear.

http://www.examiner.com/x-6356-Wichita-Independent-Examiner~y2009m10d17-Obamas-weekly-address-on-health-care-reform-bashes-insurance-industry-with-deceit-of-its-own

Gee, allan, I thought that the Dems simply stood ON their base, while telling that “base” just how lucky they are to be in such a position, to “Shut up and let the adults do it” (sort of “Take off yer jammies and get … real”), and to realize that they’ve no place else to “go”.

Obama certainly has not disappointed in that “regard”.

DW

As Jane and Rep. Raul Grijalva have been telling folks for months now, the whole reason the health care lobby has until this month refrained from running the big expensive TV ads bashing reform (you know, the ads that run during all your favorite sports programs?) is because they’d cut a deal with Obama and Rahm that the PO would be given weak-tea lip service only to be tossed onto the railroad tracks at the last minute, thus giving the industry stakeholders (and recent converts to donating to Democrats; up until the 2008 cycle most of their money had gone to the GOP) the forced-mandate (and trillions from us) they coveted without a pesky public option to keep them from gouging their newly-captive customer base.

Big talk.

Little do.

What of Wall Street?

What of Gitmo?

What of a genuine stimulus for an increasingly desperate working class?

What of a DOD that supported the 30 Repub’s position on rape in the workplace?

What of Afghanistan?

Of Irak?

Of torture (and the pictures etc.)

Of spying on Americans and protecting, as “part of the government” those corporations which did Bush’s and now Obama’s bidding for how much etc. etc.?

Well, you get the idea.

;~(

Hugh put together a LIST of what Bu$hCO did.

Do we need a list of what OBamaCO hasn’t, can’t, won’t or isn’t interested in doing?

Just for perspective?

When Obama does, really DOES something, stands up for something, even acts like he can do more than string pretty and stirring words together, then and only then, will I say, if it is deserved AND appropriate, Hooray!!!

DW

And there you have it–so Jon Walker’s title should read “…because Obama Agreed Not to Stand Up for It”.

Obama’s speech at the OFA made it fairly clear that he is not going to push for the public option, if his reticence to speak out on it forcefully until now wasn’t proof enough. I watched it on the net, and I believe he referred to “the option you least like” (meaning the Baucus bill) five separate times, telling the audience about all the good stuff in it.

To OFA. On the day that they are organizing over 200,000 phone calls in support of the public option. That juxtaposition can’t be coincidental.

“Among Democrats and progressives, there are a whole set of views about how we can deal with health care. But know this. The bill you least like would provide 29 million Americans with health care. The bill you least like would bar denial of health insurance for pre-existing conditions. The bill you least like would set up an exchange where people can use some leverage and bargain for better rates [...]“