Not Since Grade School...

My God! I haven't been fucked like that since grade school.

Marla Singer, Fight Club

DHHS Secretary Kathy Sibelius announces George W. Obama's sellout of his core constituency on their top priority issue:

Health and Human Services Secretary Kathleen Sebelius also told CNN's "State of the Union" Sunday that a public option is "not the essential element" in reform legislation.

As of the time of this writing, the transcript for today's "State of the Union" is not available. I'll post the link and the relevant passages once it becomes available.

In more good news for our little lefty friends, Democratic Senator Kent Conrad went on Fox News and told Chris Wallace that the public option was deader than Arlen Spector's frontal lobes:

"The fact of the matter is there are not the votes in the United States Senate for the public option. There never have been," he said. "So to continue to chase that rabbit I think is just a wasted effort." 

Well, there you have it. Barack Obama has caved, and caved without even the hint of putting up a real fight. And he couldn't even walk out to the podium and announce it himself. He had to send out Kathy Sebelius. 

Kathy Sebelius.

This from the man who let 300+ members of his party publicly walk the plank for the House bill and a public option. Anybody want to bet money on how much enthusiasm he gets the next time he asks Congressional Democrats to do his dirty work for him?

By the way, here's Obama fighting the good fight yesterday in Colorado:

The public option, whether we have it or we don't have it, is not the entirety of healthcare reform. This is just one sliver of it, one aspect of it.

The public option is a "sliver"? Oh, that's gonna go over well with both lefties and Congressional Democrats.

Barack Obama has the backbone of an eclair.

 

"Barack H. Obama, super genius... I like the way that rolls out."

Let the excuse-mongering begin!

Comments

[JeffS]

You're insulting eclairs everywhere, Dennis. But your conclusion is valid; I'm sure that the eclairs will forgive you.

Still, the Dhimmicrats will have to pass something labeled "health care", lest the nutroots go berserk, and the 2010 elections are wracked by some sort of blue-on-blue revolt. That might happen anyway, since the public option is dead.

Hopefully, such a bill would be so watered down as to be worthless, but I wouldn't count on it. The past discussions about a "health care co-op" remain valid.

For my money (and, in some part, it IS my money), even a health care co-op is unacceptable. The Post Office remains a prime example of why government should not run businesses.

[Dennis the Peasant]

Given that Obama has now publicly acknowledged that he has lost the health care reform fight, I would expect the Republicans in the Senate to drive a hard bargain. It is clear that irrespective of their numbers, Senate Democrats are not going to pass a bill that doesn't have at least some Republican supporters.

Crazy ol' Chuck Grassley is now the one in the driver's seat, not Max Baucus.

[markg8]

Once again, calling the game in the 5th inning with the score tied.

[Dennis the Peasant]

Bwahahahahahahaha!!! You just keep tellin' yourself that...

[richard mcenroe]

One wonders what runs the reptile thinks the Democrats have scored...

But wait, maybe Obie dead racist gramma will turn things around! He's an orator, you know!

[JeffS]

The Republicans do have several cards to play, Dennis. But don't underestimate the Dhimmicratic leadership, especially when they may be looking at the loss of considerable influence as a result of their greed, corruption, and incompetence. Desperation is a powerful motivator.

Not to mention that snatching defeat from the jaws of victory is a trait not limited to the likes of Pelosi, Reid, and Obama. Republicans have been known to be stupid; the TARP fiasco comes to mind.

But, yep, the Senate Democrats are on really shaky ground. Further, the House would have to buy off on any compromise bill, and that's where the nutroot influence is significant. So the Republicans have a major advantage right now.

The tide has turned against Obama, and he knows it. He just won't admit it publicly. At least not for a while, so that he isn't painted with this defeat. After all, that's why he has cabinet and staff.....to be thrown under the bus.

[Dennis the Peasant]

Jeff-

What you say may be true, however, at this point, Republicans win by default. It's now to the point where polling suggests a majority is so scared of Obamacare they'll happily do with reform all together.

[Tim P]

I predict more failures and retreat for the dems. Cardcheck? Nada. Cap & Trade? Nope. Nobama's whole approach depended on a blitzkrieg of the public in order to get his agenda passed before anyone really understood what it was. Because they knew that if the public fully understood what their agenda really was about, they didn't have a snowball's chance in hell.
I guess the public wasn't as dumb as he and his metro-boy, Rahm, the democratic house & senate leadership and the MSM thought they were.

Now, if only the republicans can actually learn something from this debacle.

[Dennis the Peasant]

Now, if only the republicans can actually learn something from this debacle.

I'm not holding my breath on that one.

[JeffS]

I'm not holding my breath on that one.

Me neither.

[JeffS]

BTW, Dennis, I agree that the Republicans win by default. I just hope the Republican leadership knows that.

[markg8]

I'd to know what runs Republicans have scored. I'd like to know what they think they're trying to win for the American people. I'd like to know what you think Grassley and company expect to get with "hard bargaining"?

Protecting huge insurance company profits in a rigged market? Maintaining a 19th century health care record keeping system? Outlawing end of life counseling that every state has, that Repubs put in the Medicare drug bill themselves, that Republicans wrote for the HELP bill? Absolutely no government regulation of any aspect of health care for people under 64?

Legislation of course can't be scored like a baseball game. And neither can the court of public opinion. As David Frum said if Republicans do manage to scuttle reform it'll be "an ashen victory".

What then? Dennis thinks the American public will blame Obama for failing to deliver reform of this ghastly system. You guys ignore the repercussions for the party that is fighting against it. You do know almost every Republican politician acknowledges we need reform. Frank Luntz told them to back in the spring because being against health care reform would be disastrous politically. And yet killing reform is what Republicans are banking on?

Democrats aren't going to get many if any Republicans votes for a bill. They may be able to pick off a senator or two but that's it. The leadership and base overwhelmingly agree defeating Obama is more important than fixing this system. Hard bargaining Republicans won't vote for the final bill anyway. We've already seen that in the HELP committee where most of the amendments, 161 out of 197 are Republican but the bill passed on a straight party line vote. In the House E&L committee 52 out of 162 amendments I think it was were Republican. Again a party line vote to get it out of committee.

So to pass a bill Democrats are going to have to do it with Democratic votes alone. The vast majority of Democrats want a public option in the bill. Dems have the numbers in both houses to pass a bill without Republican support. No politician wants to kill a major initiative of his own party's president. In the end it'll pass.

[Dennis the Peasant]

Oh. Well. If David Frum says it, it must be true...

Barack Obama has surrendered on the public option. And without a fight. Just like he surrendered on single payer. Also without a fight. There isn't a moderate Democrat, must less a Blue Dog Democrat, that will now do anything other than what they want to do. That's because Obama's also managed to pull the rug out from under both Pelosi and Reid.

It's over. The best thing Obama can hope for it a modest reform of the insurance industry and the co-op feature.

Big.Deal.

[Norman Rogers]

Mr. Peasant, sir:

You know, when I began to express my suspicions that President Obama was going to sell us all down the river, abandon the 50 state strategy, screw up the war in Afghanistan, and let Rahm "Chicago style politics" Emmanuel run things, I was howled out of polite society and shunned by people who were smart enough to know better. They went on ignoring what was happening, I went to work documenting the atrocities.

Sadly, I was not able to do as good of a job as you have of laying the roadmap for the path to oblivion. The only thing left now is for the Republican Party to choose the person who will be demonized as being "worse than even Obama" in the years ahead.

Excellent work, sir. You put me to shame. I have to find the grindstone and apply some nose to it.

[markg8]

There isn't a moderate Democrat, must (sic) less a Blue Dog Democrat, that doesn't know who lost their seats in 1994 when Clinton's plan failed. It wasn't lefty Democrats in safe seats Dennis, it was moderates and blue dogs in competitive districts who got the boot. We don't need all of them in either house. There will be enough to pass this bill.

[richard mcenroe]

Tell us again how all the Democrats in 1994 had to lock their doors and hire union goons, uncle reptile! Tell us, tell us!

[just passin by]

Not good for the Messiah so far.

Let's tally up his losses/wins so far...

Foreign policy:
Win: Allowing the SEALs to do their job on 3 Somali pirates

Losses: Going hat in hand to the Euros, and coming back, hat (only) in hand.
Kneeling down and gargling dictator juice from both Imadinnerjacket and Kim Il within a month of each other.

Tossup: Continuing Bush's security policy in Gitmo, Afganistan, wiretapping,and Iraq. I consider this to be a tossup b/c while it addresses the jihad problem, it continues Bush's lack of devotion to resolving the issue. Comes close to a win for me coz it demonstrates to the Nutsroots what a liar The One is.

Domestic Policy:
Wins: Continued lapdog adoration from the media.
Public opinion for the man is still high.
First bailout/kickback scheme succeeded (win for Dear Leader, if not for America)

Losses:
Cap & Tax
Promised But Not Quite Delivered Cash For Clunkers
Health Care Devastation...err, Reform

Considering his big win overall was allowing the Navy to do it's job, it's easy to see that our (conservatives) pre-election depiction of the man as a pretentious empty suit was spot on.

[markg8]

Richard tell me what Republicans have to offer the American people other than the same crap they've been peddling for years? What's changed from Bush, Cheney, DeLay and Frist, Gingrich and Gramm?

[JeffS]

mark, tell me what Dhimmicrats have to offer the American people other than the same crap they've been peddling for years? What's changed about Ted Kennedy, Biden, Reid and Boxer, Pelosi and Murtha?

[PeterUK]

"Richard tell me what Republicans have to offer the American people other than the same crap they've been peddling for years?"

Since Obama is peddling the same thing,in his own weedy way,the electorate may as well get it from source.

[markg8]

JeffS what's changed about Ted Kennedy, Biden, Reid and Boxer, Pelosi and Murtha? They have a Democratic president who doesn't veto their bills.

But as Benin says about Republicans:

Bush/Cheney policies failed so spectacularly, Republican candidates and officeholders are generally reluctant to associate themselves with the tarnished name of the previous administration. But Bush/Cheney policies are still those of the contemporary Republican Party. Nothing has changed. Failure and defeat haven't chastened the GOP at all, and if given a chance to govern again, Republican leaders are quite anxious to return to the exact same agenda they embraced when they were in the majority.

The same Republicans -- literally, the self-same individual people -- who were astonishingly wrong about pretty much every area of public policy in recent years, are the same Republicans who feel confident that they're still credible, knowledgeable, and correct. Not because they've changed their larger agenda or worldview, but because a brief period of time has elapsed.

They feel justified proposing a five-year spending freeze in response to the economic crisis. They feel comfortable pretending to care about the "death panels" policy they already endorsed, promoted, and voted for. They have no qualms making bitter complaints about deficits and debts after having spent most of the decade increasing the size of government, increasing federal spending, and creating of some of the largest deficits in American history.

We're not supposed to point and laugh at their humiliating ideas and attacks -- we're supposed to negotiate with them.

What's more, rejected in large numbers by voters nine months ago, and after spending the last seven months acting like confused children, these same Republicans now insist what they really deserve is to be back in the majority again. Seriously.

I suppose the word that keeps coming to mind is "consequences." The Republican Party of the Bush era failed in ways few have even tried, burdening the nation with challenges and crises that are difficult to address and painful to even think about. They believe, however, there should be no consequences for this. There's no need, they say, to alter their political beliefs at all. Indeed, they see their main goal as the loyal opposition to undermine efforts to clean up the mess they left. They're the arsonists hoping to convince the public not to have confidence in the fire department.

Grassley is going to be able to drive a "hard bargain"? Really? With what? He's not going to vote for a bill, any bill that has majority Democratic support and actually reforms health care, he's made that clear. There's no sense in horse trading with someone who doesn't have any horses he's willing to trade and has destroyed his own credibility by talking about death panels.

[JeffS]

JeffS what's changed about Ted Kennedy, Biden, Reid and Boxer, Pelosi and Murtha? They have a Democratic president who doesn't veto their bills.

I presume that you mean Bush 43, given your subsequent screed. Well, during his 8 years in office, Bush exercised his veto privilege exactly 11 times.

Bill Clinton did so 36 times during his 2 terms. Bush 41 did so 39 times in one term. In fact, the last recent President who vetoed so few bills was.....Jimmy Carter, at 13, during his single term.

So if you're going to single out as Bush as being a speed bump for shoving legislation through the system, think again. If your point is that Bush is no longer in office, that's a given.

But if you're highlighting Obama's failure to push through his health care "reform", plus that disastrous cap and trade, in spite of Dhimmicratic control of Congress, well, you're preaching to the choir. We already know that.

[markg8]

Bush didn't use his veto at all while Republicans controlled congress in his first term. As a matter of fact his first veto didn't come til July 2006. Then he had 11 more in his last two years including one pocket veto. He was overridden 4 times. But you go one defending Bush all you want JeffS.

Fact is you guys haven't changed a bit even in the face of overwhelming defeats the last two cycles because you fucked up the country. Yet you think you're gonna get back into power shoveling the same old shit? Wise up.

[Norman Rogers]

Indeed, Republicans do need to eat a little humble pie when it comes to sound public policy.

What would Bill Clinton, circa 1994, have done with a supermajority in the Senate and with the Democrat controlled House?

He would have buried the Republican Party. Buried it.

[JeffS]

Two things, Mark:

1. A lot of conservatives (not necessarily "Republicans") were pissed at Bush for not exercising his veto authority more (myself included). As far as I can tell, the only difference between the pre-2006 Republican controlled Congress and the post-2006 Democrat controlled Congress was the number of "R" and "D"s after the names.

2. Obama hasn't changed either. He's still the empty suited loser he's always has been. And always will be. Ditto for the Democrats in Congress.

Norman -- exactly right. The Republicans do indeed need to eat humble pie. Just more than a little.

And Bill Clinton might be a narcissistic, love-sick playboy, but he knows how to get things done. Obama is even more narcissistic, but Bubba had one thing going into the White House Obama didn't: actual, hands on experience running a government. As Dennis put it so eloquently, Obama is:

In.Over.His.Head.

[PeterUK]

You should have asked to see Obama's CV.

[markg8]

JeffS 1. A lot of conservatives (not necessarily "Republicans") were pissed at Bush for not exercising his veto authority more (myself included).

How many times did you vote for him? Pissed my ass.

As far as I can tell, the only difference between the pre-2006 Republican controlled Congress and the post-2006 Democrat controlled Congress was the number of "R" and "D"s after the names.

Let's take a look at the bills Bush vetoed shall we? How many of them do you think would have even made it to the house or senate floor under R's?

1. July 19, 2006: Vetoed H.R. 810, Stem Cell Research Enhancement Act of 2005, a bill to ease restrictions on federal funding for embryonic stem cell research. Override attempt failed in House, 235-193 (286 needed).

2. May 1, 2007: Vetoed H.R. 1591, U.S. Troop Readiness, Veterans' Care, Katrina Recovery, and Iraq Accountability Appropriations Act, 2007. Override attempt failed in House, 222-203 (284 needed). A later version of the bill that excluded certain aspects of the initial legislation that the President disapproved of... H.R. 2206, was enacted as Pub.L. 110-28 with the President's approval.

3. June 20, 2007: Vetoed S. 5, Stem Cell Research Enhancement Act of 2007.

4. October 3, 2007: Vetoed H.R. 976, Children's Health Insurance Program Reauthorization Act of 2007 ("SCHIP"). Override attempt failed in House, 273-156 (286 votes needed).

5. November 2, 2007: Vetoed H.R. 1495, Water Resources Development Act of 2007. Overridden by House, 361-54 (277 votes needed). Overridden by Senate, 79-14 (62 needed), and enacted as Pub.L. 110-114 over President's veto.

6. November 13, 2007: Vetoed H.R. 3043, Departments of Labor, Health and Human Services, and Education, and Related Agencies Appropriations Act of 2008. Override attempt failed in House, 277-141 (279 votes needed).

7. December 12, 2007: Vetoed H.R. 3963, Children's Health Insurance Program Reauthorization Act of 2007.[20] Override attempt failed in House, 260-152 (275 votes needed).

8. December 28, 2007: Pocket Vetoed H.R. 1585, National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2008[21]. A later version of the bill that changed a minor provision of which the President disapproved was quickly passed by Congress (H.R. 4986) and was enacted with the President's approval as Pub.L. 110-181 on 28 January 2008.

9. March 8, 2008: Vetoed H.R. 2082, Intelligence Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2008.[22][23] Override attempt failed in House, 225-188.

10. May 21, 2008: Vetoed H.R. 2419, 2007 U.S. Farm Bill.[24][25] Overridden by House, 316-108 (283 votes needed). Overridden by Senate, 82-13 (64 votes needed). Enacted as Pub.L. 110-234 over the President's veto. Due to a clerical error, this act was repealed by Pub.L. 110-246.

11. 18 June 2008: Vetoed H.R. 6124, 2007 U.S. Farm Bill, re-passed by Congress to correct a clerical error in HR 2419.[26] Overridden by House, 317-109 (284 votes required). Overridden by Senate, 80-14 (63 votes needed). Enacted as Pub.L. 110-246 over the President's veto.

12. July 15, 2008: Vetoed H.R. 6331, Medicare Improvements for Patients and Providers Act.[27] Overridden by House, 383-41 (283 votes required.) Overridden by Senate, 70-26 (64 votes required). Enacted as Pub.L. 110-275 over the President's veto.

2. Obama hasn't changed either. He's still the empty suited loser he's always has been. And always will be. Ditto for the Democrats in Congress.

I guess you must have missed the two elections. Try to be less ridiculous or I'm not gonna waste anymore time on you.

Norman -- exactly right. The Republicans do indeed need to eat humble pie. Just more than a little.

I don't care what they eat, they have to change their stupid lie louder style and actually think about policy. Have you seen the junk that passes for Republican health care proposals? It's pathetic.