Folks, Obama is basically saying "This HCR Bill is the best my leadership can get!"

[KansasVoter]

I think we needs to pass this Bill because I think Obama has thrown in the towel and is trying to make us understand that this Bill is the best he can do with his current level of influence.

He cannot muster enough support to do any better. He does not have enough power to switch Lieberman or any Republicans. And he would be the first to admit it.

This is the best we can get, and if we go back to square one I think Obama has LESS power than he does now because he losing influence, not gaining it. The GOP sees how they have controlled the direction of the HCR and are getting more confident.

I admit, am giving in to the "this is better than nothing" crowd since reading Krugman's article.

Obama did the best he could with the power he has.

[phleshdef]

1. Prepare for people to come in and throw the word leadership around and demand thuggery from the Pres

[tekisui]

23. How dare anyone suggest that Obama should be a leader,

after showing how effective a leader he has the potential to be during the campaign. He left that role as a strong leader at the Inauguration.

[treestar]

25. Yes how dare they suggest that he's not a monarch

and that Congress exists and has power.

Gee, I wonder if a "leader" is supposed to dictate to the courts, too? I'm sure we'll find that out the first SCOTUS decision anyone doesn't like.

[tekisui]

27. So you are admitting that Obama is powerless in Congress?

That is sad. He doesn't have to be a monarch, but he could be a helluva lot bolder and effective. I've seen him do it. He chose not to. He didn't think the cause was worth his political capital.

[treestar]

30. Oh wait, you've seen him do it?

I can't believe you have a positive example.

Of course he is "powerless" in Congress, he is supposed to be! Do you equally lambast individual Senators for not being able to convince Obama their way is the only way?

You're focusing on the President as if he is a monarch. Don't do what the President wants, off with their heads!

If he can't convince enough of the elected Senators to go his way, then he doesn't get what he wants. That's why he has to make compromises. If you want to argue his powers of persuasion are low, go ahead. Though I doubt such a person would be able to get elected President. And powers of persuasion have to do with situations and people as they are, they are not hypnotic. He'd have to convince Lieberman or Nelson that something was in their interests, if it's not, they aren't going to be persuaded by anyone no matter how skillful they are.

This meme fits dangerously into the right wing bit that we expected Obama to be a messiah.

[tekisui]

38. Excuses for ineffective leadership from the Dems.

That is all I hear. I would rather see results than hear excuses.

Why are we always reminded what cannot be done when Democrats are in power?

It is not only that Obama is ineffective with Congress, he is ineffective as the head of the party. We chose him to lead the Democratic Party, he is unable to do it, it appears.

[still_one]

2. The truth is he didn't do the best he could. He didn't visit states like Nebraska and Maine

and explain why a public option would be in their best interests

He allowed others to speak for him, without a consistent message

[villager]

19. +1

n/t

[treestar]

26. So this is the new meme about what would've worked?

God, it's too bad you didn't get elected President. You know exactly how to do the job!

You would have skipped Copenhagen and gone to Nebraska! If only Obama had realized that!

[still_one]

29. "Too bad you didn't get elected President"??? What is YOUR problem? Can't I make a criticism?

This should have started months ago, not this late in the game so it has NOTHING TO DO WITH COPENHAGEN

where have YOU been

I could understand you defending Obama for some of the remarks going on here at DU, but for a simple fact that HE WASN'T ENGAGED as much as he should have been, tells me just how objective you are

You want to discuss or argue the point I made, then show me where he lead on this?

[treestar]

33. Well you'd discount his speeches as just words

You'd discount his meetings with Senators and Congress because he didn't convince them to do exactly as you want. He brokered some deals with them, but that's a failure since it's not exactly what we want.

Wow, he didn't think of going to Red Nebraska and convincing those voters to be progressives!

That flirts dangerously with the idea that we expected him to be a messiah who could sway the crowds with his magicalness. Just go to Nebraska or Maine and speak to them and magic! Those voters will call up Snowe and Nelson and threaten them with losing their seat next time if they don't go Obama's way.

Sure you can make criticism and it's obviously something you enjoy doing. So long as we don't have to put up with insults for defending the President (and defending is not the same as praising).

[still_one]

35. Good, at least now you are responding with arguments. No, I don't discount his speeches

However, from the start there were mixed messages. For one thing, groups that advocated single payer were excluded from the initial talks that should not have happened

Then in August, senior advisor's from his administration came out criticizing the "left" as the only ones making a fuss about a public option

As far as visiting the states, a majority of the people in Maine support a public option, and if Obama had gone there who knows what would have happened. Snowe after all is NOT a Democrat, so who cares if she loses.

Your argument holds up better with Nebraska, due to their conservative lean

Of course you can defend the President, and others have every right to do so, just as the other side does also.

Insults from either side are inane and accomplish nothing but a cathartic experience I guess

Face it, the bill will pass, become law, and will we won't know the full extent of it until 2014, good or bad

The administration, and the Democratic party made a choice, which has made the progressive base none to happy. I am sure that choice was made with the thought it would be better than nothing.
We will only know that in the course of time

[Joe Bacon]

39. Mr. President, you traded orchard after orchard away

And you didn't get a single rotted apple back in return.

You knew you didn't have 60 votes in the senate, you knew that you could get this under reconciliation with 51 votes, you didn't intervene.

You cut the deal with PhRMA to make sure that we pay bloated prices for drugs and you gladly blocked drug reimportation. I'll remember with each dose of my RA supressor I get (over $850 a dose without insurance).

You cut the deal with the insurance companies to keep their monopolies intact.

Just wait. Mr. President, do you remember those angry mobs who protested the Medicare Catastrophic Care? Remember the mob that chased Rostenkowski down the street demanding its repeal? Well, Mr. President? Just wait to see what crowds are going to form when they see those income tax charges on their current plans. Wait till you see those new premium charges. Wait till you see the crowds whose group coverage will be terminated. They're going to come and take it out on you and those Democrats who sold us out at the ballot box.

[PassingFair]

3. Where's the reconciliation tactic?

I'll believe you when I see THAT.

[jefferson_dem]

Sober analysis.

Though I'm not sure the "throwing in the towel" metaphor works. Certainly, this is the best, given the political realities -entrenched Rethugocracy and Health care industry

[BP2]

11. Yeah

Truth hurts :argh:

[freddie mertz]

4. In other words, he has failed us.

And smeared responsible critics in the bargain.

Sorry, no, not going to support it.

[AndyA]

5. Second rate leadership = second rate bill.

And this bill isn't even second rate. What does that say about Obama's "leadership?"

Obama's office demands leadership, and he has not shown any with health care reform. He's the best friend corporate America has right now. :(

[treestar]

6. Overdramatic

Why would any POTUS be able to switch Lieberman? He's from a state dominated by insurance companies.

I'm sick of this idea - the President is not a decider and if Conagress won't go along with him it is not because he "can't lead" but because our system allows that and encourages it. It's so one person doesn't get all he wants.

[ROakes1019]

13. agree

I am a little tired of the temper tantrums here on DU by people wanting EVERYTHING in this bill. Life doesn't work like that and the Senate certainly doesn't. As a liberal I would have a lot of things different in this bill but, in reality, this is the best we can do right now. I'm on Medicare so I don't have a real stake in the bill, other than on the prescription part, but I get my expensive drugs from Canada anyway. I have watched people rail against Harry Reid on this board for months. I've seen Nancy Pelosi called all kind of names here. If you've watched the day-in and day-out negotiating on this bill, on C-span, you'll realize it's been a very hard slog to get this far. So, please, stop attacking the congress for not getting everything you want.

[treestar]

17. Reid and Pelosi, I know

It's like people think it is so easy to do someone else's job. And like they should be able to get whatever they want. Then at the same time, they brag that they don't march in lockstep. Yet they expect Pelosi to be able to get every Democrat in Congress to march in lockstep, even if they are from conservative districts. But at least when they rail against Reid and Pelosi, they're in the right branch!

[still_one]

31. and you have a problem with anyone having any kind of criticism about this it seems /nt

[treestar]

43. No my problem is irrational arguments

And criticism that is overwrought and full of hyperbole.

[tblue]

16. According to your post, it's as if we don't even have a president.

He's irrelevant. Is that right?

[treestar]

18. That is the most ignorant statement I've seen on DU

And that's saying a lot.

[tblue]

37. Agreed! Then why'd you make it?

You sai it. Not me.

[BP2]

7. Just like both times in

Copenhagen - with the Olympics and COP15?

Pretty weak if that's the case.

[rockymountaindem]

8. I don't think he did his best. He could have been more in the public eye

and I think he should have played more real hardball (not the fake-ass Nebraska base closing stuff) until it got people talking. I don't think he did much of that.

While I'm not convinced this bill will work at all and that it will probably just bind us tighter to our decrepit private insurance system, I guess there's nothing we can do now except hope it will be improved marginally in conference. A few years from now when it's obviously causing more problems than it solves, perhaps we can try again. The people who say "if we don't fix this now we won't have another chance for years!" make me laugh because they act as if this actually fixes the long-term problem. President Obama's hope that he will be the last President to deal with this will not become reality.

I also hope it doesn't cause a huge backlash against us next year, but we'll see.

[ShortnFiery]

9. Yeah, well it sucks pond water.

:puke:

[GreenArrow]

10. I think we need to take this bill

and shove it up their collective ass.

[jaxx]

12. It took 64 years to get this far.

(I looked Truman up for another thread) 64 years of nothing getting done. Perfect it ain't, but it's the foot in the door we've needed to ever have a comprehensive health care plan for this country. I don't call it throwing in the towel, more like facing reality of the senate make up.

[backscatter712]

34. I'll agree here.

Clinton failed, Ted Kennedy failed in the 70's, LBJ only got partial success (Medicare and Medicaid are immensely helpful, but not universal,) Truman failed, Roosevelt failed, etc.

Health care reform has been THE most politically difficult problem presidents have ever tried to tackle. For President Obama to get as far as he did is no mean feat. Success? Failure? We're paying a heavy price for a bill to cross his desk, but the process got pretty damned far.

[Laelth]

14. Fine. I believe him. Then kill it. It's not good enough.

If this is all that can be passed this year, fine. I accept that. So then kill it. This bill is not good enough.

The electorate will crucify the Democratic Party for the individual mandate (and rightly so). The insurance companies will be enriched and strengthened by this bill. What we are getting out of this bill is not enough to justify those costs.

:dem:

-Laelth

[Armstead]

15. With mandates and no public porograms it is worse than noithing

A weak bill is one thing....A bad bill that sets us in the wrong direction by further entrenching the power of private insurers is something else.

[Bodhi BloodWave]

40. a bad bill that has yet to go into conference

and the house has already stated that they will be fighting to get the public option included in the conference report since its in their bill.

Why is it everybody seems to think that the senate bill is how the final bill will look?

House bill starts and looks like crap; some DUers complain repeatedly about how the bill will be a total disaster; end result above average

Senate bill seems to be going the same way in regards to the behavior on DU, tho end result of senate bill is likely to be below average, likely even closer to dismal

To me it seems like people focus to much on the immediate and forget what happened earlier, or for that matter what will happen next in the process

[impik]

20. So, i guess it's better than the leadership

of 7 previous presidents in almost 100 years. Sorry that you're stuck with such poor leader.

[treestar]

24. lol, don't get in the way of their disappointment that the pres is not Santa Claus

And they don't like the pony he got them. They want a more expensive one, dammit!

[still_one]

32. and you have a problem with people who won't say yes to everything that the party pushes?

or so it seems

[treestar]

44. that makes no sense

If Reid and Pelosi and obama are to be excoriated for not getting all Dems in Congress to vote their way, why would you criticize them? You seem to believe it is wrong to go for "everything the party pushes" so get off their backs then! Are they "spineless" for not getting your agreement on everything?

Which way is it? If it is wrong to march in lockstep then Obama is not a failure as a leader, it is that Democrats are doing the "right thing" and refusing to march in lockstep.

Is it so wrong to not criticize every single thing the Democrats do?

[Jakes Progress]

21. Then he's probably right. Not up to the job. nt

[JVS]

22. Then his leadership is inadequate.

[budkin]

28. What exactly did he do? He was completely hands off.

[polichick]

36. If that's the best he can do with his power, he should be primaried. Use it or lose it. nt

[MissDeeds]

48. +1 n/t

[angee_is_mad]

41. That's what progressives want

for him to be marginalized and then they can try to get someone to primary him.
Hell look at all the anti_obama posts by people who stated that he wasn't their choice.

But remember it isn't personal.

[Citizen Kang]

42. Then he is a very poor leader

eom

[jeanpalmer]

45. It's better to drop it and try again later

Passing this bill will take real HCR off the table for another 10 to 15 years. This bill is not HCR. It's a giant shell game. It's just shifting exorbitant costs from the old and unhealthy to the young and healthy. No significant overall cost reduction = no HCR. And this bill will lock the mandated insurance scam into place. Shitcan this and revisit the subject a few years from now when hopefully we'll have some real leadership that can propose and fight for real HCR.

[MissDeeds]

46. Don't lower your standards

to "better than nothing". Have our expectations been reduced to that level? I hope not. Stand and fight. This is too important for us to cave and settle for "better than nothing"!

[LWolf]

47. The best his leadership can get is to

mandate private health insurance and erode women's health care.

:thumbsdown:

That's not the leadership I'm looking for.