Administration Official: "Sebelius Misspoke"

Source: The Atlantic

Aug 16 2009, 9:11 pm by Marc Ambinder

Administration Official: "Sebelius Misspoke."

An administration official said tonight that Health and Human Services Secretary Kathleen Sebelius "misspoke" when she told CNN this morning that a government run health insurance option "is not an essential part" of reform. This official asked not to be identified in exchange for providing clarity about the intentions of the President. The official said that the White House did not intend to change its messaging and that Sebelius simply meant to echo the president, who has acknowledged that the public option is a tough sell in the Senate and is, at the same time, a must-pass for House Democrats, and is not, in the president's view, the most important element of the reform package.

A second official, Linda Douglass, director of health reform communications for the administration, said that President Obama believed that a public option was the best way to reduce costs and promote competition among insurance companies, that he had not backed away from that belief, and that he still wanted to see a public option in the final bill.

"Nothing has changed.," she said. "The President has always said that what is essential that health insurance reform lower costs, ensure that there are affordable options for all Americans and increase choice and competition in the health insurance market. He believes that the public option is the best way to achieve these goals."

A third White House official, via e-mail, said that Sebelius didn't misspeak. "The media misplayed it," the third official said.

Read more: http://politics.theatlantic.com/2009/08/administration_official_sebelius_misspoke.php

---

Hat-tips: andym (GD Thread) and HopeOverFear (GD-P Thread)

LOL!
:rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl:

They run out late Sunday night and have secret spokespersons "clarify" what the Cabinet Head said clearly on national broadcast television earlier today.

Who do you believe? The Secretary of Health in the White House or an unknown voice late Sunday night?

Obama needs to know the Left is really getting pissed off. And a lot of us will walk and he can have the next three years of being a Republican punching bag,

responses were so immediate and angry that the administration backed off as soon as they could.

What are we? Chopped liver, or his BASE, for *****Sakes!

From: http://thehill.com/leading-the-news/administration-shifts-on-public-health-option-2009-08-16.html

"President Barack Obama himself on Saturday suggested he won’t insist on a public option.

“The public option, whether we have it or we don’t have it, is not the entirety of healthcare reform,” Obama said at the town hall event in Colorado. “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.”

Sebelius said Sunday that what the president sees as essential is to set up competition to private insurers in the healthcare system. But she said that doesn’t have to come from a public health insurance option."

Please also see Reply 19 below.

unfortunately. Trial balloon?? influence of Zeke and Rahm? Bad deal.

“And by the way, it’s both the right and the left that have become so fixated on this that they forget everything else.” — Pres. Obama

It sounds like Obama is lumping both ends of the political spectrum together, at least in terms of the message they're trying to get out, even if not in ideology. Maybe he'd better go back to reading his Teleprompter or at least getting something prepared before he utters it. I think I know what he meant, but lumping friends in with enemies, even to underscore a point, is not going to go very far, especially with his friends.

and it them until this evening to speak to this.

This is not a game. A lot of people's lives are at stake

warning the Obama Admin that progressives will not take kindly to his Admin caving into right wing bullying on a viable public option. She reminded people watching that Progressives really wanted Single-payer and the public option was their compromise position.

They just don't care.

that health insurance reform lower costs, ensure that there are affordable options for all Americans and increase choice and competition in the health insurance market. He believes that the public option is the best way to achieve these goals."

He still hasn't explained how this will improve access to health care and access to care is what's lacking in the U.S.

you failed to highlight that part - I am sure it was an oversight

That means that someone who cannot afford anything has "affordable options," which means they are covered without spending anything. No different from going to the ER today and receiving ultra-expensive-to-deliver care, except it can be delivered through local neighborhood clinics who can count on being compensated.

His point, well taken, is that while the public option is an obvious straightforward way to do it and thus is his preference, if some rightwing anti-government zealot can pull a rabbit out of a hat and come up with a legitimate alternative, he'll listen.

There are clinics today, privately operated, that see nearly 100% medicaid patients. Little need be done other than expand eligibility for medicaid. Charge premiums based on a sliding-scale based on tax returns. Add some oversight to make sure they do a quality job and add a requirement that private practitioners accept people whose insurance is medicare or medicaid and you have - are you ready? - a "public option."

As long as this bill does not somehow block future adjustments to medicaid, then getting a bill is more important than getting a perfect bill.

edit to add: the formula based on tax return would need to provide for the newly-unemployed.

In my neighborhood, there is a low cost clinic. People line up for hours each morning to get the slots. In Los Angeles last week, Remote Area Medical, a group that used to serve only the 'third world' held a free clinic is a basketball arena. Thousands attended. Hundreds were turned away.
That is one of the most out of touch and elitist bits of nonsense I have ever read. Already clinics, little needs to be done! Hilarious!

the point is that all the hoorah about building new huge bureaucracies is crap. Whether expanding the medicaid program to fund services for all, or extending medicare to all, what is needed is just to open up the EXISTING single-payer system, blow the fucking insurance fatcats away, and be fucking done with it. All this bullshit is just a smokescreen to avoid doing anything

elitist my fucking ass, you jerk.

only 10 million people would be covered by the public option by 2019; no one would be covered before 2013. There are 50 million people who are uninsured, no one knows how many are underinsured. This is not "ensuring affordable options for all Americans". For something to be an "option" needs to be available to people.

Again, he's only talking about making "affordable" health insurance available - the copays and deductibles may still make care unaffordable and we're not hearing anything about subsidies for private insurance if there is no public plan.

you obviously did not read what I wrote

and have absolutely no clue where it stands right now.

One minute, all insurance companies are going to be put out of business, the next death panels are going to assasinate the elderly, the next minute Medicare is going to be eliminated.

How does a group of people who ran such a well-orchestrated campaign run such a hodge-podge presidency?

They can't even get their Sebelius denials straight.

Q: "How does a group of people who ran such a well-orchestrated campaign run such a hodge-podge presidency?"

A: Rahm Emmanuel

Not hiring him in the first place would have been even better.

"Seven months after moving into his office in the West Wing, Mr. Emanuel is emerging as perhaps the most influential White House chief of staff in a generation. . . . Although relentlessly deferential to the president, Mr. Emanuel is clearly more chief than staff. . . . At times, it seems as if Mr. Emanuel is White House chief of staff, political director, legislative director and communications director all rolled into one."
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/08/16/us/politics/16emanuel.html?em

I wish someone had told me that I was voting for Rahm Emanuel, Larry Summers, Tim Geithner, Ken Salazar, and the other clowns who Obama has latched on to.

We would have gotten those EXACT same people had we voted in Hillary instead... or if not every single one, individuals indistinguishable from them. Or had McCain won, their GOP equivalents.

The game is fixed, you and I have no real influence in the matter unless we can come up with big bucks to bribe legislators into doing the right thing. They certainly won't do the right thing out of moral fortitude or a sense of decency or the demands of conscience.

It is clear to me that the first priority of this country needs to be the cleaning up of the ethical sewer in Washington D.C. I had hoped Obama would be the man to do it, but I obviously fell for just another confidence man. Hope and change, my ass.

NT!

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

From your link:

Do not be fooled by those that will tell you that having an abortion is an easy procedure that has little to no side effects. Nothing can be further from the truth. In fact, most women that have had an abortion realize that it had a life changing effect on them emotionally, physically, and spiritually.

Over the long term, there has been some research shown that points to women that had an abortion having had higher rates of breast cancer as opposed to women that did not.

Women that have gone through an abortion often deal with a wide range of emotional and spiritual struggles to include the following:
•Guilt
•Hopelessness
•Fear
•Loneliness
•Grief
•Unable to forgive self
•Sexual Problems
•Eating Disorders

We offer free pregnancy testing and ultrasounds to confirm viability. There are a number of different types of abortion procedures. It is very important that you understand the various abortion procedures recommended for your stage of pregnancy and the risks to consider with each. Click below to listen to Dr. DeCook discuss the different abortion procedures.

This material taken from Pause: The Right to Choose is the Right to Know © 2006, Frontlines Publishing, www.frontlines.org

FRONTLINES.org: Life-giving tools impacting the mission field created by abortion.

Maybe the pampered elites could get their talking points synchronized to at least lessen the anxiety for those folks, 17 million of which already know they being left out with or without a public option.

ing.

...and that they discovered this afternoon the balloon wasn't floating very well at all...

But very good to hear they countered the perception on this.

now -- what about Conrad said about the Senate? They'll need a strategy to counter that...

either she told the truth as she understands it, or lied to stir up the progressives.

and realized that, at the moment, they still have to proceed as if they weren't....

option will destroy House Dem's.

was coincidence?

Right.

Read the op-ed. Obama worked hard to keep the phrase "public option" out.

Thanks, I feel SO much better now.

Cher

They also said that the question Hillary got asked about Bill in Africa was really about Obama. Turns out, not so much. The guy asked the question twice, referring to Bill Clinton both times.

I wonder if Emanuel misspoke too?

http://tpmdc.talkingpointsmemo.com/2009/06/emanuel-obama-open-to-alternatives-to-public-option.php

How about this, from the same source:

"After being pressed twice yesterday (once by USA Today's David Jackson, then again by ABC's Jake Tapper) at yesterday's press conference, President Obama declined to insist upon a public option. "e are still early in this process," Obama said, "so we have not drawn lines in the sand other than that reform has to control costs and that it has to provide relief to people who don't have health insurance or are underinsured."

There are a whole host of other issues where ultimately I may have a strong opinion, and I will express those to members of Congress as this is shaping up. It's too early to say that. Right now I will say that our position is that a public plan makes sense."

See also: http://thehill.com/leading-the-news/obama-picks-public-option-fight-with-liberals-2009-08-16.html


And from Obama:

"President Barack Obama himself on Saturday suggested he won’t insist on a public option.

“The public option, whether we have it or we don’t have it, is not the entirety of healthcare reform,” Obama said at the town hall event in Colorado. “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.”


http://thehill.com/leading-the-news/administration-shifts-on-public-health-option-2009-08-16.html



Obama would certainly like to see a bill with a public option land on his desk, but, if that does not happen, he will most likely sign the bill anyway. And these statements by Gibb, Rahm, Sebelius and Obama himself are attempts to soften us up to that possibility.

Yell louder. Contact your Senator and Rep and the WH and demand single payer or nothing (if that is what you really want. Don't even mention public option as a possible fallback. They'll figure it out.

These aren't misquotes, or mis speaks. They are political trial balloons that are quickly withdrawn with our howls of absolute RAGE! Keep calling, writing, emailing and faxing till ALL elected officials are too frightened to even contemplate passing a bill without a strong public option.

It would take a rising tide of 100+ million voices to make a dent in this WH. A few measly progressives blogging and protesting means nothing to them. Fooled again.

Stand up to these vultures who want to tear it all apart.

the President."

So I should believe somebody who won't even go on the trecord -- why?

:rofl:

Boy, did that reporter make a bad deal.

That "no public option" shit just ain't going to fly!

Sebelius isn't stupid enough to make that kind of mistake. She is measured and articulate, and was an avid Obama supporter early on. No way would she just prattle on without having her talking points down.

Said (among other things) with no public option, Obama will have wasted a lot of political capital for something that will not work. (Not her exact words, but that was the gist.)

so I was wondering what happened -- she's terrific --

I did with a msg on this and at least one other --
It's very hot here today and catching up --

Journal callers are outraged by President Obama's comment.

Question is, how MUCH is the Obama administration EVEN listening to his OWN people out here?? Not so much I fear, and as more and more time goes by, I'm becoming even more disappointed!!

Say what you will about him ONLY BEING IN OFFICE "X" months, these past months are showing me that he is willing to abandon his campaign PROMISES, and I wonder who this man is that I voted for!

I have NEVER liked Rahm even BEFORE he became Chief of Staff, and I like him even less now!! I seriously DON'T think that bloggers or even "we the people" are getting through to Obama!

What I SEE is that these disrupters DO SEEM to get through to Obama, and when he didn't call out Grassley I was more than a little shocked!!!

Hey, what do I know, just what I hear people talking about, people being unhappy about what is going on, people saying to me that we aren't getting what we voted for, and people talking to me as they scratch their heads, that they are UNABLE to figure out just what the Hell is really happening!!!

And I'm not talking about MSM, I'm talking about my friends, family and neighbors who helped me work hard to get him elected. I don't know how much more I can take... 7 or 8 months??? What will the NEXT 7 or 8 months look like??? But then "hope" hasn't been high on my list for more years than I can count anymore!!

Where do we turn now?? And I KNOW many share my views, but I also know there will be those here who will continue to post all the list of things Obama has done. But to me, on the LARGER issues, I see him losing more battles than winning! How hard is he really fighting back, that's my question? To me, not so much!!! And I don't like having to say this, I feel "used" again!

JMHO!!!!

Cute name, BTW.

The clarifications seem to be re-stating Sibelius' comments though. If I were a Congressional opponent these statements would be telling me that that Obama will not insist on a public option.

Probably naive but I'm still hoping this gets corrected tomorrow.

yeah -- i'm not believing that.

more likely -- the president's office isn't ready to step too far away from progressives.

she's the Secretary of HEALTH and Human Services or anything. So, why would you expect her to know his view on HEALTH reform when she's Secretary of....wait, give me a second here while I google:





never mind.

:spray:

Been thinking seriously about volunteering here http://www.gildasclubqc.org/Community/Volunteers.aspx

and the organization that bears her name is wonderful, and has been helpful to two people I care about, one a dear, dear friend.

Jeez... having to retract her statements is not only amateurish, but makes our side look even more confused than it is.

A consistent message is hugely important to winning this. Get a list of talking points, distribute them, and stick to them. Just the Republicans have done for years.

I don't think she goofed.

Secretary of HEALTH and Human Services, what would be wrong with THAT picture?

There are conflicting stories in the OP, too.

TO TURN BACK NOW ON THE PUBLIC OPTION. ITS GOT TO BE DONE....NOW!

I don't get it, the entire Dems were organized and united to the core in 2008... let's get back to form and on message, people!!

How about next time we give them 70 . . . whatta ya think will happen then?

I write so often I'm sure they think I'm a stalker. As always, I pointed out in my 1st the financial reality of people living at 300% of the poverty level trying to pay a $1000 per month premium without a subsidy and with no real competition to drive the premiums costs from the insurers down. As always, I noted I have heard nothing to indicate they intend to have anything in any bill that prevents the insurers from pricing people out of the market. I, again, stated that he seemed to be capitulating to the Senate Finance committee on their plan to do a huge giveaway to the health insurance companies that would break the backs of the working class. None of this is new. I have written to the White House and my senator (the spineless Harry Reid) about 3 times a week talking about the plans to wreck what little is left of the middle and working classes.

Then, I got so pissed off I wrote again and said I hoped he realized that passing this Republican style bill was going to drastically suppress the progressive vote in the 2010 midterms and that if he can't get something for us that we want (and that is the better plan) passed with the majorities we have now I failed to see how he expected to get anything through in the last 2 years of his term with a decreased majority. I also sent the link to the DU discussion about the matter this morning.

Then I watched MTP and heard Maddow say about the same thing. I'm sure my voice alone is not that important but I'm willing to bet it's not the only mail they got today.

That said, I hope it was a trial balloon and I hope it's been burst now. Someone in that White House needs to quit listening to the Republican lite Rham Emanuel before there is no base left for the Democrats. Someone needs to let him know it's all well and good to court the middle but not without securing your base. They can't win without some of the middle but they can't win without us, too.

I think my tirade is over for now. Thank you for indulging me.

we're up against --

We have to STOP camapign finance BRIBERY --

all of our elected officials are "PRE-OWNED" . . .

Unfortunately, the article I saw very early today mentioned Bill Clinton . .
telling Liberals that they couldn't have "a full loaf of bread" -- the NO PONY argument.

I think he's giving a lot of aid here to overturning more of the New Deal --

As they say, you can only really be betrayed by those closest to you --


PS: I also am sending msgs to "contact" at White House as often as I can --

Half the reason this legislation is in deep trouble is a perception among opponents that trusting a sixth of the economy to political instead of commercial management will result in ideological infighting, confusion, and finger-to-the-wind decision-making.

This does nothing to help resolve those perceptions.

I don't know and would not even know what to google to find out: Has that happened with Medicare?

Now a comment of my own, because I do know:

Those things happen in large corporations, too, and much more. AIG. Need I say more? In fact, those things happen in small family owned corporations, too.

In the health insurance business, in particular, people have been left to die, literally, while profits increased by huge percentages year after year--that's profits after many millions in salary to CEO's (not to mention bonuses and fringes).

So, maybe it is a matter of people not realizing yet that the private sector is not necesssarily our salvation, either, no matter how many times the Republicans say it is.

Medicare is a good program, but it's a ticking financial time bomb. It didn't have to be. But all its trust funds to fund future liabilities have already been spent, and in the most underhanded, misleading way, by Congress pretending that incoming payments from payroll taxes (the ones that say "Medicare" on your pay stub) were general revenue. So the money got spent, and IOUs put in its place. This has been going on for decades. Presidents are just as guilty. They have, to a man, looked the other, politically expedient, way, as the plunder continued.

If you pull out the wrongly-spent trust revenues from general spending, annual budgets in the US have been up to several hundred billion dollars worse each and every year than official figures pretended. For example, the Clinton "surpluses" were actually large deficits. Don't even get me started about *.

The IOUs can only be paid by re-taxing again. Meanwhile, the future liability of Medicare at this point is at least double the entire annual gross national product. There is no chance of paying that, especially when Social Security unfunded liabilities are almost as bad. The entire SS/MC money pit is currently more than $50 trillion. And growing. The net worth of the entire US - I mean all the land, money, buildings, machinery, companies, etc. is around $55 or $60 trillion. So it doesn't take much to see that if you taxed all income at 100% and all wealth and property at 100% (i.e., simply confiscated the entire US, lock, stock, and barrel) you would about break even.

Except you wouldn't, even then, because now there is no money left for anything else, and people starve and return to living in caves.

You are exactly right about giant firms like AIG. My belief is that the same problems accrue whether we are talking giant corporations or giant government fiefdoms. There are plenty of examples of how government mucks things up terribly, and how private industry runs pell-mell over individuals' best interests. Greed is greed, whether it's for money or power. It's equally prevalent in politics as it is in business, because it's an ineradicable part of human nature. It cannot be sermonized or legislated away. It will always be with us. But like all poisons, its harmfulness depends upon its concentration.

So, the problem isn't an issue of private vs. public control; both could be made to work with enlightened strategies. The political process, unfortunately, is not optimized for enlightened strategies. It's optimized for acquiring and maintaining power. For those who actually want universal, efficient, compassionate health care (like you or me) the real problem is whether there's too much concentration of (power, money, bottleneck resources, secret information, fill in the blank). Look at the current insurance industry debacle; look at any giant government program. Nightmare after nightmare. Too big = epic fail.

Strong decentralization and multiple check/balance structures are the only answer, and between advancing corporatization and burgeoning government I don't see much smooth road ahead. Half the country is freaking out because they see a naked power grab away from private industry; the other half is freaking out because they see a naked power grab away from government and accountability. Both are right. Both are wrong. Both think the other half is the problem. It's a nearly perfect example of why adversarial politics doesn't produce long-term solutions for a split electorate.

Dilute the poison enough and suddently, it is no longer harmful. In practical terms, this means less Federal centralization and more local control. It means splitting up the insurance giants and bringing competition to bear once more. (As you said, "AIG. Need I say more?") It means government in harmony with, rather than at loggerheads with, private suppliers.

I'm not utterly pessimistic, but I'm not holding my breath either. ;)

Meanwhile, I'm on record as a proponent of the Swedish model. Evidence from their decades-long experience would give even the town-hallers a reasonable expectation of cost containment and overall satisfaction.

The Swedish system consumes about 9% of Swedish GDP (currently, ours is 16%). Swedes are consistently happy with it, and it has been around long enough to draw valid conclusions about how it might work out for us.

Something like it would help us achieve universal coverage, cost containment and improvement in national economic competitiveness, and good levels of satisfaction.

http://www.sweden.se/eng/Home/Quick-facts/Facts/Swedish... /

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Healthcare_in_Sweden

In a situation with few answers, I believe a decentralized system inspired by what the Swedes have done could prove to be the elusive uniter we've all been seeking.

Going to take some serious political skills to turn this train around now. I hope Obama's got the chops.

Write, call, hammer at everyone to whom you have access. I have stated in my communication that if this bill comes down as the Health Insurance Corporation Protection and Profitability Act of 2009 I would ask my representatives to vote against it-that for as many years as I have waited and fought for reform to our health care system I would rather see nothing done than to see working class and middle class families saddled with a mandate like this with no mitigating elements to the consumer costs. Perhaps it's time we start showing up and raising hell at the town hall meetings. There is always the slight possibility that this is what the President is hoping for. Remember, he said, "make me do it." Whaddya think?

civilized nations such as France and our other NATO allies.

Time for med schools, more doctors, nurses, and other health care providers.

Time for more preventitive and personal rather than assembly line medicine.

What we do not need is some complicated piece of legislation that is hard to interpret.

So far the health care debate is nothing but confusion; either our representitives don't care much about the common person or are clueless about the state of affairs in the Nation.

The deliberate confusion in the media borders on criminal.

Health care tied to one's job is regressive for health care and regressive for the economy; pro-corporate and anti-entrepreneurial and small business: not to mention heartless and barbarian.

"and is not, in the president's view, the most important element of the reform package."


Then what is prey tell..........

seems to think so, though.

It's the conference committee that will write the bill.

He can be kept off of that committee and then his vote will not be needed...

----

But the ONLY thing we can hope for any more is the Kucinich Amendment. We aint' gonna get shit out of the corporate-funded Congress and the corporate-funded pResident.

We have to raise hell if we want to win over the corporate interests who also
have loudmouth teabaggers working for them.

reasons, or explained them away as misunderstandings, misinterpretations, and/or misreporting.

Who cares? Let Obama do his work and mellow out. I'm glad we have him. He may figure out a way to make this thing work yet.

During the election Rahm decided to run a bunch of DINOs and promised them that if they put that little D in front of their name that Rahm wouldn't make them take any controversial stands after the election. So the result was that Obama got in, but we actually have just as many Republicans to deal with, if not more, as when Bush was in office.

This is a direct result of listening to people like Rahm, Reid, and Pelosi, instead of people like Howard Dean.

Honestly, after he spit on Dean after the election I KNEW that this was going to be the future.

I really wish it was different but I think a lot of us realize what is going on here. Obama will give the insurance companies a lot of money to add new coverage, and they will make it illegal to revoke someone with a preexisting condition. Of course, both of these measures will have little to no effect because the insurance companies will:

1. Pocket the extra money
2. Either find a loophole to continue denying people, or raise premiums on everyone else. Probably both.

I find it HILARIOUS that right wingers think that Obama is a socialist. He is a CORPORATIST. He's Bush with a basketball and a funny name.

:puke:

stated! I want to see THAT Obama again, not the one I'm seeing now!! Bill Maher really hit the nail on the head last Friday! Too bad his words ring so true!

welcome to DU :hi:

due to all the exploded heads yesterday. Sigh...

And Get It Right. If that was a test It wasn't well received.



:banghead:

I mean, I do see the difference, but it is so slight as to be insignificant. "Not the most important" has the connotation of "can be jettisoned".

that immediately register the dissatisfaction and outrage of the masses. It seems like Sibelius was sent out there to float an idea and it crashed and burned within minutes. No regrets from me for spending much of yesterday bitching here, there and everywhere.

Wasn't he suggesting dropping the Public Option last week and going with BS Co-ops? Something stinks about this whole thing. Keep in mind, no one will just hand you your rights, you have to fight for them. Hope the uproar was loud enough to save the Public Option, but when Durbin caved, it was not a good sign :-(

the public option was removed. She wouldn't give a straight answer and said they would have to see the rest of the bill. The host pressed her and said their big beef has been with the public option so wouldn't this then be something they could support? She would not budge an inch. So there you go - they aren't not going to support this even if their demands are met.

If the Administration and congressional dems think they can compromise with republicans by caving in to republican demands they are living in a fantasy land. Look what happened with the stimulus bill - the republicans insisted on various things in the stimulus package which were included (or cut) and not one of them voted for it in the end, and now use it as political fodder.

Rachel was right when she warned that its not a good idea to spend enormous political capital on worthless reform. There's plenty of republicans and moderates out there who have been victimized in one way or another by our dysfunctional health care system...its not as if only democratic voters want reform. This coddling of republican obstructionists annoys the hell out of me - dems were given a majority, use it to do the right thing for pete's sake, and quit falling for republican tricks. They remind me of Lucy holding he football for Charlie Brown and pulling it away at the last minute every time so he can fall flat on his back.

Public option is a bargaining tool. I doubt the administration will really push to make sure a public option is in the bill. Obama is not going to veto a bill just because the public option isn't there.

But they will pretend to do these things to get other concessions. And now that bluff is gone.

After this is over, we need to pick a few 'blue dogs' and pour some money at some real candidates to run against them in the primary. Cull their weakest as an example of what can happen when you go against your party with a virtual sub-party.

all that easy!!!! They'll have more money and name recognition and opponents won't have much of a chance! Seems like it happens more than not, but every once in a while it does happen... still the numbers are low!!!!

Need I mention the name Michele Bachman (sp)????

Puts him between a rock and a hard place since he stated on July 20th that any plan he signs must include a public option.

http://voices.washingtonpost.com/ezra-klein/2009/07/obama_says_health-care_reform.html

I think the WH was trying to measure Congressional support for a bill without a public option. From what I've heard over the last day, they lose more votes than they would gain.

NT!

they wont let the outrage build until then---this is no different than the patriot act , fisa, the trillions to the banks etc etc, just the latest chapter in the big scam. It's amazing there are still idiots out there who fall for this crap.

Remember this: a gaffe in politics happens when a politician mistakenly speaks the truth.

In this case, it looks like Kathleen Sebelius confused what she actually knew about the administration's intentions, with the public talking points.

What she "knows" is that the administration is not prepared to fight for a public option. However, this is not yet openly reflected in current White House talking points.

Hence her "gaffe" and her rhetorical retreat from her initial statement.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/us_health_care_overhaul

It's bad enough that they did not pursue a Single-Payer plan...but without even a public option, it's just business as usual, in the hands of business, who will get away with murder. Literally.

Keep the calls and emails going. They seem to be working.

And in the meantime the mainstream broadcast news, and NPR, keep running with the "public option not essential" Sibelius comment.

Did anyone catch the White House press briefing today. Husband won't give up the remote.

The corporate media wants the topic to be -- oh well, let's have United Healthcare and Friends run some co-ops for us. Let's just give 'em millions in gov't "seed money" and they can run the clinics for us, just as efficiently as they've run all our hospitals and insurance companies. :sarcasm:

They keep everyone's eyes on the one hand holding "Health Insurance Reform"...

While they're so busy;

Repealing the Patriot Act...

Repealing the Military Commissions Act...

Repealing "Don't Ask, Don't Tell"...

Repealing DOMA...

Re-establishing the rule of law by going after the war criminals in the Bush Administration...

Indicting the Torturers...

Supporting Main Street against the despoliation of Wall Street...

Repealing the Hyde Amendment... (why the FUCK should ANY religion be enshrined in law?)

oh...

They haven't done any of those things...

Never mind...

It's a forgone conclusion that the new health plan will be totally biased towards what the insurance companies want.