When did speculative AP headlines become the be all and end all for the left?

[Political Tiger]

Just wondering??

[villager]

1. when the trial balloons from the White House tend to confirm them?

n/t

[jesus_of_suburbia]

3. I'm still thinking (hoping) we can get public option. We have to keep fighting right now.

Which is what we are doing. The anger is a good thing right now (so that our reps will know they can't get away with it this time!)

We don't need 60 freaking votes. If some of the idiot bluedogs want to vote against it, let them. And we need to primary them (I believe Dr Dean will help us with that).

[Cha]

33. You are sucked into the corporatemediawhores'

neverending attempts to bring down the Democrats..you're sucked right into the vacumn bc you want to be.

[Warren Stupidity]

2. When did DU start?

That would be about the same time that whiplash chain jerkery commenced here.

[HughMoran]

4. "White House appears ready to drop 'public option'"

How else does one interpret that shit?

[Egnever]

6. if it came from fox would you still hold to it?

Or is it just the narative you want to believe so you buy it.

[HughMoran]

12. I don't want to believe it - I just saw it on Boston.com - a reliable source for me

I didn't read it before coming here and I'm glad that the interpretation may be incorrect!

[Political Tiger]

16. As an opinion? As speculation? A headline intent on getting attention?

How many times did we hear, during the Bush years, that the 'White House appears ready to strike Iran' or 'Israel appears ready to attack Iran?' Never happened.

How man times have we hears this politician or that politician 'appears to be readying for White House run' only for it to never happen?

How many times during the primaries did we hear 'Hillary Clinton appears to have the Democratic nomination clinched?'

How often has your local news station said 'it appears that rain is on the way' and it turned out to be a sunny day?

We go through this every Sunday. Some White House or other "official" says something on the Sunday talk shows and the news services, especially AP, takes one or two lines of that they said and runs with it while ignoring everything else that was said. And people freak out.

[HughMoran]

22. I hope you are right

I am just a little miffed about seeing this headline as soon as I opened Boston.com.

[Political Tiger]

25. But the boston.com headline is just a repost of the AP story.

They're just repeating what AP said, word for word.

That's the problem. The AP "reports" a story and all the major newspapers simply print the AP story in their paper or on their website.

[HughMoran]

26. Well, they changed it!! "White House may drop public health care option"

MAY!!!!!!!!

lol

[Egnever]

5. This place is full of people waiting to be lead by the nose

nothing new here.

[CJCRANE]

7. Rule No. 1: Go to the source and read the exact transcript

of every word that was said. Do not rely on the MSM to interpret for you.

[CTLawGuy]

8. I dunno

what I don't get is how the White House can "drop" the public option when it isn't the legislative branch and doesn't control what bills get to the floor?

[quakerboy]

10. really?

So you see no way that the president, with his veto pen, bully pulpit, national popularity, and coattails in future elections could have any control over any legislation that might go through the senate?

He is clearly no dictator, but he is the biggest man in the room. I don't see any realistic way around that.

[CTLawGuy]

13. no

he can advocate for certain bills, which he is out there at town halls trying to do, but it is Harry Reid and Nancy Pelosi who are the crucial people. The president can only sign bills that come to his desk. If Harry and Nancy don't put a bill with a public option on his desk, what can he do? What is the point of screaming at Obama? He wants to sign a public option.

[quakerboy]

21. You dont think senators and congresspersons

take into account what the president says?

If he said, flat out, no compromise, that he would veto anything that did not include a public option, you think that would not play a major part in their considerations? And that the converse is not true as well, that statements indicating it is only one small part of this potential legislation do not play heavily in their considerations?

[CTLawGuy]

34. Not really

the president doesn't decide whether they come back in '10, their constituents do. If they (wrongly) think supporting a public option will cost them at election time in their conservative state/district, they won't support it.

[quakerboy]

37. That seems like a cop out

The support (or rejection) of a popular president could well determine whether they come back in '10. As well, I could be wrong, but the president might have something to say about who gets the full voiced support of the national party as well, and that support has an aweful lot to do with who will be coming back in 2010.

[CTLawGuy]

38. is that why there are 535 Democrats in congress?

Obama isn't popular in every district. He lost Montana for example.

[quakerboy]

40. And Dont forget Oklahoma hates Obama

He bloody well won one electoral vote out of Nebraska. Along with hundreds of others. Obama is not universally popular. That does not change the fact that his popularity had a large effect in the 08 elections, and the energy he does or does not put into '10 and '12 will make or break some races. The money that the Democratic party that he as president is nominally leader of puts into those same races will make or break more.

[bvar22]

31. LBJ and FDR did mich more than just "advocate".

You should read up on how FDR got Social Security passed.
Same for LBJ and Medicare.

[Boomerang Diddle]

32. Aren't you putting the cart before the horse?

And Obama is not FDR or LBJ he's BHO!

[CTLawGuy]

35. LBJ and FDR

lived in a markedly less partisan political environment where there were liberal republicans as well as conservative democrats. There was no Rush limbaugh or RW noise machine to keep pugs in line. Then, representatives were more collegial and willing to compromise. Today, the Republican party is virtually united in trying to bring down this administration by torpedoing reform, and conservative democrats still remain.

[quakerboy]

9. When we are all operating from a servere lack of information

You can blame that on people not seeking that info out. You can blame that on the corpmedia for skewing the void to their ownership. Or you can blame the people who leave that void open.

Personally, I think there is fault in all three sections, and no one is blameless.

[John Q. Citizen]

11. I'm still fighting for single payer. i know it's the best and why not the best?

I'm not fighting for second best, though. Somebody else can fight for second best if they want to, but that's not the way I am.

[noiretextatique]

14. single payer is the solution

but clearly many of our elected officials are interested in solving the problem.

[mopinko]

15. i dunno, but it is the same every sunday.

the gas bags push the spin, and so many here do the dance. stupid.

[Political Tiger]

19. Exactly! n/t

[flpoljunkie]

17. Calling the public option a 'sliver' of health care does not jibe with what Obama said one month ago

A month ago, Obama said in his weekly radio and Internet address that “any plan I sign must include an insurance exchange: a one-stop shopping marketplace where you can compare the benefits, cost and track records of a variety of plans – including a public option to increase competition and keep insurance companies honest – and choose what’s best for your family.” 

http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0809/26158.html

[Political Tiger]

24. Too bad Politico did post the the entirety of what Obama said.

He was answering a question from one of the attendees. The question was:

"My question is this. And also, I'd love to have a debate, just all out, anytime, Oxford-style, if you'd like. (Laughter.) I understand -- I'm willing to do that. But my question is this. We all know the best way to reduce prices in this economy is to increase competition. How in the world can a private corporation providing insurance compete with an entity that does not have to worry about making a profit, does not have to pay local property taxes -- (applause) -- they do not have to -- they're not subject to local regulations? How can a company compete with that? And I'm not looking for anything -- I don't want generalities. I don't want philosophical arguments. I'm just asking a question."

The President's answer, when taken in full context, is clear. This is what he said:

"That's a great question. Thank you for the question. (Applause.)

Now, I just want to point out that I partially answered the question earlier by explaining that certainly they can't compete if the taxpayer is standing behind the public option just shoveling more and more money at it, right? That's certainly not fair. And so I've already said I would not be in favor of a public option of that sort because that would just mean more expenses out of our pockets and we wouldn't be seeing much improvement in quality.

It is true that there are certain costs associated with a private business that a government would not have to worry about; you mentioned a couple of them. It's not just, by the way, property taxes; it's also things like just the cost of capital. In terms of the cost of borrowing, a public option -- insurance companies have to have a lot of money on hand and it's conceivable that a private entity that's having to pay a certain interest rate for their money would be really undermined if the government is able to get money much cheaper implicitly because Uncle Sam backs this operation.

So that's why I say, this is actually a legitimate debate. I think that we can craft a system in which you've got a public option that has to operate independently, not subsidized by taxpayers -- it would be nonprofit, but we've already got nonprofits out there like BlueCross BlueShield -- that they would have to go on the market and get a market price for capital, so they wouldn't be able to just have the Federal Reserve write them a check. I think there are ways that we can address those competitive issues. And you're absolutely right, if they're not entirely addressed, then that raises a set of legitimate problems.

But the only point I wanted to make was the notion that somehow just by having a public option you have the entire private marketplace destroyed is just not borne out by the facts. And in fact, right now you've got a lot of private companies who do very well competing against the government. UPS and FedEx are doing a lot better than the post office. (Applause.) No, they are. And so -- but the larger point I want to make -- and it's good to see a young person who's very engaged and confident challenging the President to a Oxford-style debate, I think this is good. (Applause.) You know, the -- this is good. You know, I like that. You got to have a little chutzpah, you know.

This is a legitimate debate to have. All I'm saying is, though, that the public option, whether we have it or we don't have it, is not the entirety of health care reform. This is just one sliver of it, one aspect of it. And by the way, it's both the right and the left that have become so fixated on this that they forget everything else, like the fact that we can help Nathan make sure that he doesn't suddenly find himself -- (applause) -- completely broke in trying to treat his son.

So we are working on a series of proposals to address the questions that you're raising. I believe that we can work them out. But those are specific questions as opposed to broad, philosophical questions about whether government ever has a role to play or not.

Keep in mind, finally -- and this is the last point that I'll make -- that you have a bunch of countries that have systems in which government is involved but you still have a thriving private insurance market -- The Netherlands being a good example. Everybody is covered. Everybody has care. The government has regulations in there. But it does not somehow take over the entire private insurance market. So I just want people to understand nobody is talking about a government takeover of health care. I want to repeat that one last time.

All right. I've got -- I've got one last -- I've got time for one last question. I'm going to call on this young lady right here. Oops, she just lost her question. Go ahead. Who's got a microphone? Right here, right here."

[flpoljunkie]

27. What you post did not come from what Obama said on his radio show one month ago.

A weak public option or co-op will not keep insurance companies honest, but it will increase their already enormous profits.

[Political Tiger]

29. And what I posted said NOTHING about a "weak public option or co-op."

n/t

[flpoljunkie]

41. And?

[debbierlus]

18. The post was about Sebellius stating the public option is not essential

Read the AP article...

She is the HHS.

Stating that the most crucial aspect of the health reform plan is not essential is political speak for 'we don't have to have it'.

WE DO HAVE TO HAVE IT.

[DevonRex]

20. Since all the Obama haters jump on everything, even RW articles, to trash Obama.

And then they spread their "joy" here.

And I'm not backing down one little bit on my opinion.

[firedupdem]

23. +1

Same people all the time. I'm not backing down either. I'll wait to hear it from the horses' mouth.

[hileeopnyn8d]

39. That is the correct answer.

Before I officially joined here, I used to come here for accurate information to counter right-wing lies and misleading media reports. Sadly now it's like looking for a needle in a haystack.

I belong to several general topic message boards, I came here because after the election there were no honest political discussions to be found on those boards. Any attempt was thwarted by crazy faux news watching idiots or a bunch of libertarians threatening to go galt.

I expected more from DU. Granted, my lurkdom only really occurred during elections, but I've been visiting off and on since 2003.

[AlinPA]

28. Sebelius said today that it was not needed.

[Clio the Leo]

30. thank you. we've still got a long way to go nt

[tavalon]

36. It's Sunday

this is just what we do on Sunday. We cannot sleep if we don't, you see, dear?

[SoCalDem]

42. What "other" national newswire services are there anymore?

UPI ..right wing
**crickets**

AP has been more or less the "official" newswire service for a very long time, and in recent years they have been co-opted by the corporate media, just like everything else..

What's lacking is the ability to think critically. It's not taught in schools (apparently), and the populace has been dumbed-down to the point that it's laughable..

[uponit7771]

43. Reuters

[SoCalDem]

44. Reuters is not as often cited here in the US, but I do trust them a bit more..

not much..but a bit more:)

AFP is good, but not used much here either

[Arkana]

45. Since they became critical of the Democratic president

and people feel the need to fall all over themselves to criticize him in the interest of "fairness"?