Now It’s 17 for the Public Option

I won’t get my hopes up, but this rate hike by California Anthem Blue Cross is really making the case for it. For curiousity, I went to the ABC web site and checked premium prices. The teaser rate for the only ploicy I could afford required a $10,000.00 deductable. Good freakin’ grief. Add a preexisting or health risk to that rate, factor in the rate increase, and you got the biggest advertisement for the public option right there.

Now, here’s a heapin’ helpin’ of FU for my fellow seniors and their “keep your stinking govmint hands off my Medicare” BS:Premiums jump 14 percent on Medicare private planshttp://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20100219/ap_on_bi_ge/us_medicare_costsI’ve said it before and I’ll say it again: These Advantage plans suck!They’re great for healthier and wealthier seniors, but for those of us with horrific ongoing medical problems they absolutely suck!Dumb. Asses.

Sebelius: “Well, I think if it’s…Certainly. If it’s part of the decision of the Senate leadership to move forward, absolutely.”You know what would be fucking awesome? If the White House would take a firm position on the public option instead of this constant “Well, whatever you guys decide.”

@Nano: what would be great is if the Senate would make up their minds on the PO and the rest of the bill instead of having their colleagues and the president publicly and vocally support something that they can’t get the votes for.

While it would be nice if the President came out and strongly supported it, he still doesn’t get a vote! I’m sick of the Senators blaming the President for their own lack of will. Perhaps they haven’t noticed but the public option has broad support from the voters. Why don’t they just put it into the bill and pass it? What the fuck does the President’s position have to do with their own lack of courage? The President still wants to close GITMO but, now some of the Senators are backing away. What’s to stop these same assholes from doing it on the public option?

Well, I would have thought the polls showing 70% of Americans wanted a PO last year would have been enough. I would have thought the teenager dying unnecessarily b/c she was denied treatment by her insurance company would have been the last straw–on top of so many other last straws. I would have thought babies and young children being denied coverage…I’ve lost the ability to get excited over any news regarding the PO. Unfortunately, I haven’t lost the anger over our current system or the frustration over the sell-out politicians who made their priorities crystal clear throughout this process. It sure would be nice for the PO to be included after all this. It would be a fairly remarkable accomplishment.

I don’t want to speculate anymore on why the White House can’t offer strong and unequivocal support for the public option. Fear? Tone deafness? They actually don’t want it? Who knows. I just want them to take a position and say this is what we want, whatever the fuck that is.I’m with you on Congress being spineless, but the public option is critical enough for the president to suck it up and take the lead.Also, I’m listening to Tiger Woods talk about overcoming shit. You cheated on your wife? Join the club. Just get the fuck off my news cycle, asshole.

Nano, I have to agree with Roxy on this. It doesn’t matter what the Pres does or doesn’t say at this point. The legislature should be a seperate entity and should make their own stand. I think the Admin has been thinking that by supporting the PO openly would actually damage it’s chances of getting passed. Perhaps the pres has been reacting to the unified resistance to any idea he proposes from Rethugs. Senators should get some testicles, recognize that is the case and LEAD. You could make the argument that the being the case, the Pres, no matter what he does, is damned, so he should do what he thinks is right. But I would argue that the result in this case is what matters, not his words. And if Pres. Obama needs the Dems in Congress to lead in order to make the PO happen, what does it ultimately matter what he has to say in the meantime?PS: Does anyone believe in “sex addiction”? I believe addiction to other things is a disease, but sex? And why do I give a crap who Tiger sleeps with?! He’s a golfer for Christ sake….a man who gets paid billions of dollars for chasing a small white dimpled ball around with an iron club. Again, Americans and our lack of perspective about what is important…..

The president doesn’t have to lead in the sense that he picks up the phone and orders people about. He could lead through a strong stance on the PO, and many congressmen would rally to him. That’s what leadership is.He seemed to have no problem leading on the issue of HCR being deficit neutral and in fact was quite clear about that. See? He was leading on that issue. Granted, it was a bone being thrown to the Right (and, yes yes yes, they will never vote in favor of the presidents policies no matter how Republican they are), but he still mentioned it every chance he got.Why not the same stance on the PO?All I’m asking for is clarity.Adding… I agree that no matter what he does, the Republicans will vote “no”. So. Why not just go balls to the wall on HCR and let them vote no?

I wish Tiger’s press conference would have been, “I had sex with lots of women ’cause I’m Tiger fucking Woods. Any questions?” Because Irish Girl is right, what possible difference does any of that make? He’s not a spiritual leader or a leader at all. He’s an athlete…er…golfer anyway.The president listened to Rahm and decided to not take a position as a stupid reaction to the Clintons’ position in the 90s. I don’t think they expected the repubs to take as hard an obstructionist line as they have. I don’t think anyone really thought they would be so insane even so far as to fight against things they suggested. Oy! Either way, that should all be clear now and everyone here is right that the pres needs to take a firm position and he needs to support the PO frankly.I can’t figure out why they can’t understand that supporting progressive legislation will help them politically as well as being the right thing to do.

Irish Girl, sex can viewed as a behavior with a short term positive pay off, just like shopping, gambling, alcohol or drug use. Saying you are addicted to something simply states that you feel compelled to engage in a given activity despite the fact that the activity is damaging to you. You could certainly argue that things are not TRULY addictive unless there is some long term change in brain chemistry as a result of the activity in which case, shopping gambling and other behavioral addictions are out. IMO, there isn’t a big enough difference in what our bodies might be telling us we need and what are minds night be telling us we need, so I consider behavior and substances to be equally “addictive”.And I also don’t give a rats ass what Tiger Woods puts his penis in. The whole thing is just more mind numbing spectacle of “shiney things” folks seem drawn to these days.

This sounds a bit like Lucy slowly convincing Charlie Brown to take another run at the football. Is the PO football being used to crank up the stalled process? “Careful… if we don’t pass something, we could get stuck with a PO!” Are the letter signers out to score cheap points with some constituents? “Hell yes I’ll sign… (this thing doesn’t have a chance of getting 51 votes!)” Lucy ALWAYS yanks away the football. I’m having trouble believing it’s somwhow going to be different this time.

@Nano: No the Dems in congress would not rally behind him and they haven’t rallied before. At all levels of his approval rating, Dems in congress have been very stingy in their public support of the president. I just read a post yesterday (I forget where) where a Dem strategist said Dems are acting like Obama has a 30% percent approval rating. And that’s exactly what I’ve been thinking for several months. I get your point, I really do, but I’m sick and tired of people putting all the work of selling legislation on Obama’s shoulders. Out of the hundreds of Dems in Congress, the party can’t find a dozen or so people who can talk loudly, fiercely, articulately, and consistently about HCR and the PO?

Sorry to keep hijacking the PO thread, but I was SO PISSED at hearing the Tiger news conference LIVE on every radio station on my way in this morning. Meanwhile, how many people have lost their health insurance? Or how many people have lost their homes this week? “Hey look over there!”

Jesus, here we go with Rahm again. President can’t think for himself so let’s put it all on Rahm.

@gescove Great analogy! I always hated Lucy with a burning passion but as I grew older I began to hate Charlie Brown more for being such a sucker. I WILL NOT BE a Charlie Brown. I refuse to get excited by all this talk of the PO being revived….And I don’t care why the football is being stuck out there….if its 11 dimensional chess, a scourge to the right, whatever, immaterial. As Pres. Shrub once said, “Fool me once, uh, shame of me, um….won’t get fooled again….uh…..”

Allonfla, no need to get snippy. I don’t mean to say Rahm is solely responsible, but I do believe his influence is heavily weighed in the president’s decisions. Rahm is certainly a big personality who can convince people to take his side so the president will hear a chorus all chanting the same thing. That’s not really surprising, though, is it?The president of course CAN think for himself, but I believe (please note this is just my belief) he has not. I believe he has allowed Rahm’s influence to guide him too much whether that influence has come directly from Rahm or from others who have been swayed by Rahm or like-minded individuals. Either way, his influence is strong, and I don’t like him, and I think he is doing a disservice to the President and to progressives and to the country.

I am so with you, Allonfla. I am so incredibly full of people implying that Obama is incapable of thinking for himself, and that’s exactly what they are saying when they want to place the blame on Rahm Emmanuel. Somehow, the man made it to being elected president, but he’s now just a puppet for Rahm and the conservadems. I’m fuckin’ sick of it! Something doesn’t go our way, let’s find somebody we don’t like to blame it on. How about leaving the blame exactly where it belongs, on Congress? The amazing thing is that these same folks, if managed by their boss like they want Obama to micromanage Congress would just get really resentful. Why would they think senators and congressmen would react any differently? For me, give me my job, let me know your desired results and let me get to work. There is no need to stand over my shoulder every minute. Why do we expect less of the people that have been elected to office?

@staci – I appreciate your comment and your job analogy made me think. But isn’t it precisely in “let me know the desired results” that the problem lies? A clear and unwavering declaration that the result must include a public option to provide competition and drive down costs — wouldn’t that give the focus needed to “get to work?” I think this is at the heart of some of the comments here. Your analogy works too regarding Rahm… he’s like that manager who comes in after you’ve worked your ass off and says “that’s not what the boss wants… do it over this way!” Pretty soon all the workers are wondering just what job it is that the boss wants done.

Plus, Obama was pretty explicit when he was running for president. He said clearly he was for certain things that he will no longer commit to. And I realize some of that is just the difference between the campaign and the reality of being president. Still, those strategies are so vastly at odds that that it can’t all be placed on that difference. The strategists themselves deserve recognition. Look at the different styles and strategies of Plouffe versus Rahm. You can clearly see which strategy was used during the campaign and which has been used since.And begging your pardon, but I am in no way saying Obama is incapable of thinking for himself. He has chosen to follow a strategy that is not working. I don’t believe Rahm is running things, I believe he is very persuasive and the president is choosing, after thinking it through, to make the wrong moves in many of these situations.The president has chosen to take a safe political path and has chosen to be business friendly and relatively centrist, and I think he did that because he genuinely thought it bring people to the table and encourage bipartisan decision making. What I am saying is he needs to stop choosing to take the Rahm path and choose to take the progressive path because it seems apparent that the latter has proven to be better. That’s all. There’s no need to be all “fuckin’ sick” of anything here.

Camel: It ain’t necessarily just the folks here that my frustration is directed at with the whole Obama needs to lead meme. I probably read way too much of this shit all over the place. The problem for me is that I come here because most folks here see the whole picture — jeez, lots of these posters I really look forward to reading. The hysteria is always at a minimum. I get absolutely distressed to hear people on this blog promoting the idea that Obama is weak enough to hand his legacy over to Rahm Emmanuel. If Obama is screwing this thing up, why not just lay it at his feet, give him the responsibility for it? Why blame it on somebody else? On most issues, all of us give Obama tons of credit for being the really thoughtful, intelligent, humane man. Why would that opinion change when the subject is healthcare and the public option?

One last thing: Assuming Obama is reading the same polls, listening to the same voters, hearing all the voices from the middle and the left that WE all hear, how do you come to the conclusion that he is being led by anybody else?