Denial and Reality

Posted on 10/26/2009 at 11:50 am by Bob Cesca

You know what denial is? Deliberately ignoring reality in order to back up a kneejerk conclusion based upon unsourced anonymous quotes and uneducated hunches. That’s denial, sir.

Fact: Healthcare reform depended upon the Finance Committee’s participation due to Senate jurisdiction rules. The president didn’t “choose” to align with Max Baucus. Without Baucus, there wouldn’t be any sort of real healthcare reform — at least reform that included Medicare, Medicaid and so forth.

Fact: As of the weekend, Harry Reid didn’t have 60 votes for cloture on the opt-out public option.

Fact: Without Ben Nelson committing to cloture, an alternative path to 60 votes was Olympia Snowe. Like it or not.

Fact: Of all Democratic leaders, President Obama has been one of the most vocal supporters of the public option.

Fact: President Obama never once promised single-payer. Ever.

Show me hard evidence that any of these things are untrue, sir, and I’ll correct the record.

At every step along the way, I’ve been writing about the public option and healthcare reform with an eye on what I’d like to see as a result, but also within the context of political reality. I didn’t think it was productive to spend my limited blogging time ripping apart the White House strategy and, instead, chose to make a case for good policy, while also targeting lawmakers for bungling it.

There are frustrating aspects of congressional procedure and politics, one which is this notion that the legislative branch, you know, legislates. And in the course of the reform process, it made more sense to point out the flaws and fumbles in the legislative process rather than endlessly speculating about what may or may not be happening within the executive branch.

The Obama administration has surely made mistakes in this thing and there are a variety of blogs that endlessly cover that angle. Fine. Have at it. When it comes to healthcare reform, it’s not my priority.

This entry was posted in Healthcare and tagged , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.
  • roxsteady

    This has been exactly what I’ve been trying to say lately. I’ll admit I allowed these unidentified sources to twist me in knots previously but, a few weeks ago I vowed not to let people too cowardly to identify themselves to rule my resolve.What I look forward to most now is seeing the beltway wisdom explain how the progressives and liberals have proven them wrong again.Perhaps Harry Reid’s 3:15pm News Conference this afternoon will be the beginning of the end for their bullshit take on this fight.

  • iLLogicaL

    Sorry to hear about this drama between friends. Health care reform is a big issue and passions run high, but it’s sad when we let issues we largely agree on divide us in ways that benefit no one but our political enemies.Just sayin’…

  • DaBomb

    Here’s another person who is seeing the light at the end of the tunnel.Booman as always is sensible.http://www.boomantribune.com/story/2009/10/26/13159/249#2

  • Eric

    Thanks for sharing the link, DaBomb. I thought that was an excellent analysis.

  • http://nanotyrnns.blogspot.com/ Nanotyrannus

    Thanks for that link, DaBomb. That cleared up quite a few things for me.

  • DaBomb

    @Eric and Nano: I like reading Booman. He doesn’t have that throw the President over a cliff mentality. Also it doesn’t hurt that the guy was on a press conference with President Obama back in July, so he kinda has an idea of what he is talking about. At least he didn’t use an anonymous source.

  • http://CMLA CMLA

    Bob, Youre right about President Obama never promising single payer, but I’m almost positive candidate Obama did. I might be wrong, but I think not.

  • Stranahan

    There’s no point, Bob – because you’re arguing straw men. And if I point that Obama hasn’t shown strong leadership on the Public Option, you’ll say he did. You’ll point to the few speeches where it was mentioned and you’ll ignore his downplaying of it.If I point out he broken campaign promises – goddamn important ones – about transparency and negotiating with lobbyists – you’ll say, it’s the past, forget it.The reality is that it’s spazzy people in the progressive blogosphere PUSHING BACK on the President’s mistakes that saved this thing because they saw we were SERIOUS about health care. It’s not apologists sitting silently and attacking people who dared ctiticize the President for what they NOW admit were ‘mistakes’.You’re welcome.

  • http://www.bobcesca.com Bob_Cesca

    Stranahan wrote:

    There’s no point, Bob – because you’re arguing straw men.

    How so?

    And if I point that Obama hasn’t shown strong leadership on the Public Option, you’ll say he did. You’ll point to the few speeches where it was mentioned and you’ll ignore his downplaying of it.If I point out he broken campaign promises – goddamn important ones – about transparency and negotiating with lobbyists – you’ll say, it’s the past, forget it.

    Now who’s arguing straw men?

    The reality is that it’s spazzy people in the progressive blogosphere PUSHING BACK on the President’s mistakes that saved this thing because they saw we were SERIOUS about health care.

    Uh-huh. So pissing yourself every time Politico posts another anonymous quote is push back?

    It’s not apologists sitting silently and attacking people who dared ctiticize the President for what they NOW admit were ‘mistakes’.

    Oh fcuk you, Lee. I’ve been fighting every day for healthcare reform and the public option and you know it. I’ve simply chosen to pursue a policy and lawmaking approach rather than chasing down anonymous hearsay. I’ve done so with passion and tenacity.

    You’re welcome.

    Really? Seriously, Lee? Did you just write “You’re welcome?”

  • Stranahan

    I’ll ignore the insults, Bob. Let’s be very specific about what ‘denial’ is in this case.Credible journalists write about reports they have gotten from multiple sources. Bob Cesca gives those reports zero credence because the reports don’t conform his best hopes about President Obama.That was the issue. That’s the definition of denial.An example of a straw man “Fact: President Obama never once promised single-payer. Ever.”Lee Stranahan never once said he did. Ever. Hence, straw man.I said it was bad strategy to not put single payer on the table. Many people agree with me on that.

  • http://www.bobcesca.com Bob_Cesca

    Lee wrote:>>>I said it was bad strategy to not put single payer on the table.And my response is that he never planned to, so it shouldn’t have been a shocker. That’s not a straw man argument. That’s my response to your single-payer attack.>>>Credible journalists write about reports they have gotten from multiple sources.Like, say, John Harwood’s quote about bloggers in pajamas that he retracted the next day? Or what about the multiple other anonymous quotes that were refuted or disproved within 24 hours or less? Your faith in the veracity of the establishment press is touching.By the way, don’t give me any shit about insults, Lee, since it was your Twitter account that contained the “denial” insult in the first place followed closely by your initial comment here about how I’m using straw man arguments and how I’ve been “sitting silently” when all I’ve been doing on this blog and Huff Post since May is fighting for healthcare reform; posting phone numbers here to mobilize call-in campaigns (including the White House number to lobby Rahm Emanuel); and calling out congressional leadership for waffling on reform.I still hold out hope that one of these days, you’ll concede that there are certain procedural aspects to the reform process that were mandatory. But I’m not holding my breath. After all, it’s easier to just bitch about anonymous quotes than to actually analyze the process.

  • Stranahan

    Why are you mentioning the Harwood thing? Totally irrelevant.Your faith in the press is touching, too – when it comes to proving your own points. Bob – let’s remember…weeks ago, you banned me from using the Politico as a source here on the blog and then YOU used them the next day.It wasn’t an insult to say you were in denial because you were denying what credible journalists were saying.And here’s a named source proving that you were wrong, Bob – the journalists you maligned were right. The Obama White House wanted to go with the Trigger.http://tpmdc.talkingpointsmemo.com/2009/10/schumer-we-prevailed-on-the-white-house-that-public-option-was-the-way-to-go.phpAnd the first comment from that piece sums up my feeling….”I am sure we will hear from the Obamanation that all along this is just what Obama REALLY wanted; he just felt it was better to be dragged kicking and screaming to actually , you know support, a strong public option rather than be out front fighting for it which, you know, might have turned a few people off. Rope-a-dope again. What a clever politician. A politician’s politician.”I know you’re a fierce advocate for the Public Option, Bob. So I am, obviously. That’s why for the life of me, I don’t understand why you won’t face the facts on President Obama’s mistakes in both strategy and tactics on this issue and moreover – I will never understand why you’ve been such a goddamn prick to me about it for speaking my mind and trying to state the trith as I see it.

  • Cody

    “…pissing yourself every time Politico posts another anonymous quote is push back…?”

    What did I say on Twitter, Lee? This is exactly what you were doing there too. It’s not “pushback”, it’s just plain whining.

  • http://www.osborneink.com Matt Osborne

    Lee, every time a Saturday rumor hit about Obama abandoning the public option, Sunday would bring denial and yet ANOTHER email from DFA telling me to call my congresscritter and demand reform.Like it or not, Obama played the politics of divide-and-conquer against the lobbies that opposed reform. He built vocal public support for it and let Congress work through the eleven dimensions of legislation. What was he supposed to do? Twist arms and shout?

  • http://www.bobcesca.com Bob_Cesca

    Stranahan wrote:

    Why are you mentioning the Harwood thing? Totally irrelevant.

    Oh you’re right. An anonymous quote that turned out to be completely false is irrelevant to this conversation about, you know, anonymous quotes.

    Bob – let’s remember…weeks ago, you banned me from using the Politico as a source here on the blog and then YOU used them the next day.

    So this is how Lee operates. Grand standing private conversations in public. Classy.Read your email. I never banned you from anything, Lee.As for Politico, you’re wrong. I merely cited them on something else — NOT an anonymous quote. Nice try, though.

    It wasn’t an insult to say you were in denial because you were denying what credible journalists were saying.

    And other journalists — sometimes the same ones — posted on the record quotes refuting the anonymous quotes. But it’s not about the journalists. They’re doing their job, and in the case of Sam and Ryan, they’re doing it quite well. This is a matter of how we absorb and react to the news they report. Every time there’s a shaky quote from an unnamed source, certain folks flip their shit, and every time there’s one of these quotes, it invariably ends up being shot down within 24 hours — with on-the-record quotes. Am I wrong? See also Harwood as one of many examples.

    And here’s a named source proving that you were wrong, Bob – the journalists you maligned were right. The Obama White House wanted to go with the Trigger.

    I didn’t malign them!! Especially Ryan and Sam. I’m maligning how you and others react to their reporting. As for the trigger, did you read my posts here about it? If the trigger was on the table, it was clear that it was more about the trigger having the votes an the opt-out lagging behind — or something similar.

    I know you’re a fierce advocate for the Public Option, Bob. So I am, obviously. That’s why for the life of me, I don’t understand why you won’t face the facts on President Obama’s mistakes in both strategy and tactics on this issue

    I do! But as I’ve written here a million times, I choose instead to focus on commenting about the policy and the legislative process. Meanwhile, it’s not my thing to write endless “the president should [blank]” posts. While that doesn’t preclude me from ever doing so, it’s not my focus.On top of that, I’ve explained to you dozens of times that I think it’s a better idea to modulate rhetoric rather than flipping our shit with every anonymous quote, which, just in case you missed it, it’s becoming a little embarrassing for the netroots.

    and moreover – I will never understand why you’ve been such a goddamn prick to me about it for speaking my mind and trying to state the trith as I see it.

    I’m being a goddamn prick because talking with you about this is like beating my face against the wall.Here’s just one example: I’ve explained Senate jurisdiction to you over and over, yet you continue to repeat your unfounded hunch that President Obama specifically chose Baucus and the Finance Committee to run the show — you know, because Obama doesn’t want this or that. Responding, I explain back to you that Finance is required to weigh in on Medicare/Medicaid/etc legislation. Then you’ll turn around and repeat the same “Obama aligning himself with Baucus” line as if you didn’t hear a word I’ve said.Consequently, I tend to filter everything you say through this prism and begin to conclude that you’re operating on hunches and hearsay rather than reality. I find this MASSIVELY frustrating. Go figure.Meanwhile, I never once said the White House has been flawless on this. They haven’t. I just choose to focus on the policy and procedure and selling the idea of healthcare reform. Then you turn around and insist that I’m “sitting silently” just because I’m not flipping my shit over every anonymous quote. You’re exhausting, Lee.

  • Stranahan

    Bob’s on the road – so, some other time, perhaps.