President Obama On Conservative Michael Smerconish's Radio Show - 08/20/09

Run time: 03:01 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9rt8GFUUA-k   Posted on YouTube: August 20, 2009 By YouTube Member: Views on YouTube: 0   Posted on DU: August 21, 2009 By DU Member: democracy1st Views on DU: 1033

 
President "Guarantees" Health Reform - Still Open To GOP

President Obama Asked: Is His "Knees Are Buckling" On Health Care Reform On Conservative Michael Smerconish's Radio Show - 08/20/09 Guarantees

You don't need Republican cooperation to do anything. Why are you still putting up with this crap? (Unless it's something to do with those health industry lobbyists)

You know what the Republicans would be doing in your position? They'd be steamrolling all kinds of crap through. The EPA would be abolished by now, along with just about every environmental program which cuts into corporate profits (that would be all of them) They'd be drilling in Alaska, doing exploration in the national parks, and preparing to drill offshore, Social Security would most likely be privatized, all kinds of union-restricting, anti-labor laws would be going through, they'd be discussing a constitutional amendment banning abortion... The list goes on, and all the while they'd be crowing about their 'mandate'.

The worst part is that when you don't do this sort of thing, and even try to make nice with them, they see it as a sign of weakness.



Just sayin'....

Do you mean "core" as in "core constituency"? Do you mean "corpse" as in a dead body? Do you mean "corps" as in "Marine Corps"?

corps=corporation(s). I get it now. Thanks.

from glenngreenwald@salon.com

Give me a break. The president got led by the nose to delay healthcare by a sitting dem senator named Baucus...riiiiight.

"...The attempt to attract GOP support was the pretext which Democrats used to compromise continuously and water down the bill.  But -- given the impossibility of achieving that goal -- isn't it fairly obvious that a desire for GOP support wasn't really the reason the Democrats were constantly watering down their own bill?  Given the White House's central role in negotiating a secret deal with the pharmaceutical industry, its betrayal of Obama's clear promise to conduct negotiations out in the open (on C-SPAN no less), Rahm's protection of Blue Dogs and accompanying attacks on progressives, and the complete lack of any pressure exerted on allegedly obstructionists "centrists," it seems rather clear that the bill has been watered down, and the "public option" jettisoned, because that's the bill they want -- this was the plan all along.  

The Obama White House isn't sitting impotently by while Democratic Senators shove a bad bill down its throat.  This is the bill because this is the bill which Democratic leaders are happy to have.  It's the bill they believe in.  As important, by giving the insurance and pharmaceutical industries most everything they want, it ensures that the GOP doesn't become the repository for the largesse of those industries (and, converesly, that the Democratic Party retains that status).
This is how things always work.  The industry interests which own and control our government always get their way.  When is the last time they didn't?  The "public option" was something that was designed to excite and placate progressives (who gave up from the start on a single-payer approach) -- and the vast, vast majority of progressives (all but the most loyal Obama supporters) who are invested in this issue have been emphatic about how central a public option is to their support for health care reform.  But it seems clear that the White House and key Democrats were always planning on negotiating it away in exchange for industry support.  Isn't that how it always works in Washington?  No matter how many Democrats are elected, no matter which party controls the levers of government, the same set of narrow monied interests and right-wing values dictate outcomes, even if it means running roughshod over the interests of ordinary citizens (securing lower costs and expanding coverage) and/or what large majorities want...."
* * * * *
Go read what he says is being done about it and what we can do to help.

down to one's life experiences on how much one can take or how we see things