Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

AP distorts Axelrod's comments, Axelrod fires back

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU
 
ProSense Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Sep-06-09 11:27 AM
Original message
AP distorts Axelrod's comments, Axelrod fires back

Axelrod: Firm on public option

Mike Allen Mike Allen

White House senior adviser David Axelrod tells POLITICO that the administration is not dialing back its support for a public health-insurance option as part of a reform bill, and that a comment he made on NBC’s “Meet the Press” was misinterpreted.

Axelrod told NBC’s David Gregory that President Barack Obama “certainly agrees that we have to have competition and choice, to hold the insurance companies honest. … He believes the public option is a good tool. Now, it shouldn’t define the whole health-care debate, however.”

The Associated Press, which often sets the agenda for how other news organizations cover Sunday shows, popped up a headline saying: “White House shifts on public health care option". The story's lead: "WASHINGTON (AP) - President Barack Obama's top political adviser is backing away from having a government health care plan compete against private carriers.”

Axelrod disputed that interpretation in an e-mail.

“In no way did I back off our position,” he wrote. “I must have said half a dozen times that he thinks the public option is an important tool to bring about competition and choice that will help consumers. To say that it is not the whole of health insurance reform, in a country where 160 million people have employer-sponsored health insurance and would not even be affected by this, does not mean I am backing off!”

Indeed, Axelrod also told Gregory: “He said there must be an exchange where people can get insurance at a competitive price. He believes in competition and choice. The public option is an important tool to help provoke that where there is no competition. He still believes that. ... So we want to create a pool in which people who don't have insurance, and small businesses, can go and get insurance at a competitive price. And a public option would be a valuable tool within that group, that package of plans that would be offered, private and public.”

more



Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
zbdent Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Sep-06-09 11:28 AM
Response to Original message
1. AP sends the lie across the world ...
as Axelrod is scolded for putting on his boots ...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Jennicut Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Sep-06-09 11:29 AM
Response to Original message
2. The AP is a right wing tool owned by RWers. Not surprising they twist words around.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
freddie mertz Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Sep-06-09 11:34 AM
Response to Original message
3. Rhetorically and grammatically, "p.o. would be a valuable tool" is very WEAK.
"Would be" is a future conditional construction, which leaves open the possibility of accepting a no=public-option plan.

"Valuable" as a modifier of 'tool" is equally WEAK, it does not by any means translate into "essential. "fundamental," or "critical."

Anyone with a remotely objective ear can tell that this was a weak endorsement, at best.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
tridim Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Sep-06-09 11:38 AM
Response to Reply #3
4. Your hyper-parsing is very WEAK.
Just like the hyper-parsing the RW has been using to try to destroy the PO from day one.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Laelth Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Sep-06-09 01:41 PM
Response to Reply #4
33. I think the reading skills demonstrated by the poster above are quite good.
Being blinded by partisan fervor can hamper critical thinking skills.

:dem:

-Laelth
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ProSense Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Sep-06-09 11:38 AM
Response to Reply #3
5. "Rhetorically and grammatically"? You're not objective, you're pissing in the wind. Axelrod:
Edited on Sun Sep-06-09 11:39 AM by ProSense
“In no way did I back off our position,”

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
freddie mertz Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Sep-06-09 11:49 AM
Response to Reply #5
8. Your optimism, if such it is, is not merited by the facts in this case.
Anyone reading the texts you cite can tell that there is no real force behind the administration's statements.

Ben Nelson is not scared. Neither are Kent Conrad, Blanche Lincoln, or any other of the DL:C-DINOs you probably support.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ProSense Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Sep-06-09 11:52 AM
Response to Reply #8
9. "Optimism"? A fact could slap you in the face and you'd pretend it didn't exist. n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
freddie mertz Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Sep-06-09 04:00 PM
Response to Reply #9
48. And yet, you continue to deny against any and all evidence
That the administration has been anything but pathetically weak and transparently ready to cave on public option in this matter.

Why is that exactly?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
girl gone mad Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Sep-06-09 09:04 PM
Response to Reply #9
57. Will we get a strong public option or not?
In the end, that's the only thing that counts. The supportive speeches and positive talk show statements are as relevant as a last minute field goal when your team is two touchdowns behind.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
depakid Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Sep-06-09 11:52 AM
Response to Reply #3
10. Exactly
These fools just can't come out and say what they mean in no uncertain terms.

It's gotten to the point where it's bloody incompetent.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ProSense Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Sep-06-09 11:55 AM
Response to Reply #10
11. Obama is not responsible for people with AP-level comprehension. n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
depakid Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Sep-06-09 12:27 PM
Response to Reply #11
18. The administration is responsble for their rhetoric
and at this point- they have every reason to know how they're going to be spun and misrepresented.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ProSense Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Sep-06-09 12:38 PM
Response to Reply #18
19. "they have every reason to know how they're going to be spun and misrepresented." So
you know it's spin, but you're defending the AP's right to spin? That's what you're doing. If you knew what Axelrod meant, and it's pretty damn clear, why do you feel the need to defend the spin?

The problem isn't that the administration is weak, it's that some Democrats can't understand that encouraging media spin is working to help spread distortion.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
KittyWampus Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Sep-06-09 12:42 PM
Response to Reply #18
21. you apparently aren't responsible for your own reactions. The Mediawhores lie and you prefer
to just lap up that crap like it's tasty syrup.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
depakid Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Sep-06-09 01:51 PM
Response to Reply #21
34. Look- the corporate media is a given
Either the administration displays the competence to deal with it as it is (or God forbid- divests the dysfunctional conglomerates and re-regulates) -or they don't.

Right now, I give them failing marks in communication. Failing marks that are well deserved.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ProSense Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Sep-06-09 01:57 PM
Response to Reply #34
35. "Either the administration displays the competence to deal with it as it is" So dealing with it
is saying something they will not spin?

Utterly idiotic.

Maybe you need to learn that the media will spin anything: Obama tilts his head and it's a snub, scratches his face and he flipped the bird. In fact, the media will lie to make a point.

You get a big FAIL for trying to pass off your nonsensical insistence on grading the administration's communications strength based on media spin.

A big FAIL.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
depakid Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Sep-06-09 02:31 PM
Response to Reply #35
37. You may not want to accept it- but the administration's been incompetent
in its communication and advocacy. They've not only lost control of the debate- but thus far, they've refuse to learn from their mistakes- or take advice from folks who study how to do it right.

That's just a fact- regardless of your feeble attempts at snark.

You can stamp your feet and complain about the lying corporate media- you can call Americans stupid -each of which is true, but that's not going to improve the chances of getting responsible health care legislation- or anything else along those lines passed.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ProSense Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Sep-06-09 02:40 PM
Response to Reply #37
39. "They've not only lost control of the debate" is that why the media spin
that the public option is dead didn't work?

You can continue to believe your own nonsense.

You can stamp your feet and complain about the lying corporate media- you can call Americans stupid -each of which is true, but that's not going to improve the chances of getting responsible health care legislation- or anything else along those lines passed.


OMG, you're still trying to claim health care reform is dead.

Stop listening to yourself and rejoin reality.



Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
freddie mertz Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Sep-06-09 04:03 PM
Response to Reply #39
49. The Obama admin MUST know how this stuff is going to be "spun"
And yet, administration spokespeople keep serving up weak rhetoric with every appearance.

They are either incompetent or ineffective or both.

I'm frankly astonished by their performance in recent weeks.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ProSense Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Sep-06-09 08:17 PM
Response to Reply #49
56. Dumb.
Edited on Sun Sep-06-09 08:17 PM by ProSense
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
debbierlus Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Sep-06-09 01:18 PM
Response to Reply #3
27. Exactly. They will make a case for it, but it will be negotiable - that says it all

It is pathetic. The Obama adminstration = corporate frontman.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
freddie mertz Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Sep-06-09 04:05 PM
Response to Reply #27
50. And yet, a few loud voices continue to hold their hands to their ears
And yell at the top of their lungs that everyone ELSE is getting it wrong.

I can't for the life of me understand WHY.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
RUMMYisFROSTED Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Sep-06-09 11:41 AM
Response to Original message
6. Ron Fournier. nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
emulatorloo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Sep-06-09 11:48 AM
Response to Original message
7. GOOD! n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Enrique Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Sep-06-09 11:58 AM
Response to Original message
12. I think Obama already backed off
so the AP is correct to say Obama has backed off from full support of the public option, but it's not correct imo to say this is a "shift" because he did it a week or two ago.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ProSense Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Sep-06-09 12:00 PM
Response to Reply #12
13. Wait because you think it, AP is correct?
This is entering a Twilight Zone only the far RW would enter.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Enrique Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Sep-06-09 12:08 PM
Response to Reply #13
14. no, AP is incorrect
I don't see Axelrod "shifting" in that interview.

I'm also suspicious of a part of another AP story, where they make a claim I'm not sure is supported by polls.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090906/ap_on_go_pr_wh/us_health_care_overhaul;_ylt=Au5YRPL3ak9Tsf6y3no_AhSs0NUE;_ylu=X3oDMTM1b2FqcHVvBGFzc2V0A2FwLzIwMDkwOTA2L3VzX2hlYWx0aF9jYXJlX292ZXJoYXVsBGNwb3MDMwRwb3MDOQRwdANob21lX2Nva2UEc2VjA3luX3RvcF9zdG9yeQRzbGsDd2hpd

Their appearances came ahead of Congress' return this week from a summer break that saw eroding public support for an overhaul and contentious town hall meetings in lawmakers' districts.



I'm also not a big fan of Mike Allen or Politico, but this story you posted from them seems to be ok. Though if I wanted to play the "media criticism" game I guess I could find something wrong with it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
debbierlus Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Sep-06-09 01:19 PM
Response to Reply #12
28. Calling the public option a sliver of reform and putting out 'whether we get it or don't get it'

Those aren't the words of a man fighting for the public option. Those are the words of a man backstepping.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
freddie mertz Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Sep-06-09 04:07 PM
Response to Reply #28
51. They are words of concession.
Seems to me that they threw the public option over the side weeks ago now.

If they did not mean to do this, then they are making very funny noises indeed.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
HughMoran Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Sep-06-09 12:08 PM
Response to Original message
15. I have to agree with those who say this is weasel-wordy
Why the FUCK can't they simply state that it must be part of a final bill? No, it's "an important tool" - um, yeah.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ProSense Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Sep-06-09 12:17 PM
Response to Reply #15
16. Axelrod was clear. It's not his job to preempt Obama's speech.
Edited on Sun Sep-06-09 12:18 PM by ProSense
Yesterday everyone was certain Obama was going to dump the public option, now comes a strong indication that isn't a fact, and word parsing takes over.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
HughMoran Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Sep-06-09 12:20 PM
Response to Reply #16
17. Oh, I appreciate that he's saying Obama supports a public option
I just wish all the "out words" weren't part of the rhetoric - it makes it seem like they will be OK without it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
KittyWampus Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Sep-06-09 12:43 PM
Response to Reply #15
22. Because they, unlike YOU, are in the position of actually having to accomplish something.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
HughMoran Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Sep-06-09 01:10 PM
Response to Reply #22
24. Hey, nobody supports them accomplishing something more than me
But if you actually read the O/P and thought about the words he used, you'd be wondering why he's being so careful with his words. Surely just "reacting" to my post is fine if that's what you want to do, but reading the words does tug at your sensibilities. Try reading what he said and come back and tell me that it doesn't give you just a bit of pause.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
high density Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Sep-06-09 12:41 PM
Response to Original message
20. AP: White House: public health care plan is negotiable
As Obama prepares for a Wednesday night speech to Congress in a risky bid to salvage his top domestic priority, political adviser David Axelrod said a public plan is not the core issue in the health care debate. White House spokesman Robert Gibbs danced around a question about whether Obama would veto a bill without the public option.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090906/ap_on_go_pr_wh/us_health_care_overhaul



AP no likey public option
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Connie_Corleone Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Sep-06-09 01:14 PM
Response to Reply #20
25. Did you read the OP? Axelrod fired back at the AP for their distortions in that article.
Edited on Sun Sep-06-09 01:14 PM by Connie_Corleone
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
high density Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Sep-06-09 02:36 PM
Response to Reply #25
38. umm yeah, this is just another example.
:shrug:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Cha Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Sep-06-09 12:47 PM
Response to Original message
23. Yeah, and we have duers spreading
these corporatemediaWHORE lies around this board.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
SunsetDreams Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Sep-06-09 01:15 PM
Response to Original message
26. K&R
I am so sick of people misinterpreting or flat out lying about what someone says to further their agenda.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
leftofthedial Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Sep-06-09 01:21 PM
Response to Original message
29. Axelrod himself refused to commit to support for a public option
on Press The Meat today.

Look up "weasel" in the dictionary; there's probably already a link there to video of him squirming in David Gregory's guest chair.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Hieronymus Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Sep-06-09 01:32 PM
Response to Reply #29
30. I agree, anyone who saw that interview must have gotten that he was weaseling.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ProSense Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Sep-06-09 01:33 PM
Response to Reply #30
32. Not anyone, you. n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
leftofthedial Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Sep-06-09 01:58 PM
Response to Reply #32
36. take your fingers out of your ears, stop chanting la la la la,
and watch the fucking interview.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ProSense Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Sep-06-09 02:44 PM
Response to Reply #36
40. You do know that Axelrod's comment in the OP came after the interview, don't you?
Stuck on stupid.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Cha Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Sep-06-09 03:01 PM
Response to Reply #40
44. What do they care..they would put a major crick in their
whineathon.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
freddie mertz Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Sep-06-09 04:34 PM
Response to Reply #40
53. It seems you are just trying to shut all discussion and criticism down.
Did you ever stop to consider the likelihood that YOU WERE NEVER among the ones who hoped to be convinced or reassured by the statements we heard today?

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ProSense Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Sep-06-09 01:32 PM
Response to Reply #29
31. You know how to use a dictionary? n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
IndianaGreen Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Sep-06-09 03:47 PM
Response to Reply #31
47. You a just a megaphone!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
WyoHiker Donating Member (204 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Sep-06-09 08:09 PM
Response to Reply #29
54. OP, did you watch the MTP interview before posting this nonsense?


http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/21134540/vp/32714046#32714046



Mr. Axelrod was about as firm as an overcooked wet noodle.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
WyoHiker Donating Member (204 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Sep-06-09 11:32 PM
Response to Reply #54
58. I see that you did and I stand, somewhat, corrected.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ruggerson Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Sep-06-09 02:46 PM
Response to Original message
41. lol - today Politico is gospel
yeterday, not so much.

Gotta love this place.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ProSense Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Sep-06-09 02:56 PM
Response to Reply #41
43. LOL,
Politico is not gospel. A statement from Axelrod is a statement from Axelrod. You have a problem with that?

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ipaint Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Sep-06-09 02:54 PM
Response to Original message
42. The public option is non negotiable.
Edited on Sun Sep-06-09 02:55 PM by ipaint
What is so hard about saying that?

He could add-
Without a real public option the exchange has no power to control costs.

That's firm. Truthful. Definite. Committed.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
NYC Democrat Donating Member (234 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Sep-06-09 03:10 PM
Response to Reply #42
45. because veto threats are a really bad move when you are trying to push a plan just ask Bill Clinton.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ipaint Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Sep-06-09 03:40 PM
Response to Reply #45
46. And the result of not telling the truth
Is an uninvolved, increasingly distrustful public that has no clue what is really being offered nor do they have the details and knowledge they need to effectively join and fight for change.

How about we stop treating people like they are 3 years old waiting for daddy to tell them whether he will allow them to have ice cream after dinner.

Imagine, involved educated citizens fighting for... oh wait, that means single payer would be on the table. Can't have that.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
IndianaGreen Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Sep-06-09 04:09 PM
Response to Original message
52. You are now using POLITICO as a source to counter AP article?
This from the same people that constantly remind us not to trust POLITICO!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ProSense Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Sep-06-09 08:12 PM
Response to Reply #52
55. Axelrod's statement is Politico's? How about
using this?

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
jeanpalmer Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Sep-07-09 12:26 AM
Response to Original message
59. Here's what I take from Axelrod's statements
Edited on Mon Sep-07-09 12:27 AM by jeanpalmer
What is essential to healthcare reform is competition and choice. The way to get competition and choice is to have an insurance exchange where private insurance companies can list their policies at competitive prices, and where "people who don't have insurance, and small businesses, can go and get insurance at a competitive price." A public option "is an important tool to help provoke that (competition) where there is no competition." "There must be an exchange."

Based on these comments, the outline of their thinking is clear. They want to create an insurance exchange where people can buy insurance from private insurance companies at competitive prices. If the administration believes, as Axelrod states, that an exchange will provide competitive prices, then what need is there for a public option which is just "an important tool to help provoke (competition) where there is no competition." There isn't any. So a public option would be activated, or triggered, only if the exchange did not create competition.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Wed Apr 24th 2024, 08:16 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC