Was the "no public option" bruhaha a calculated move?

I doubt it, but I think it works out quite well.

Libs/Dems have generally been quiet about the whole healthcare. They've been more interested in exposing the RW nuts for their hypocrisy and lunacy, than they have been on healthcare itself.

This might be the spark that the people and the progressive House Reps and Senators needed to get passionately involved again.

Whether it was intentional or not, the message has come across. There's a large and vocal portion of this country that will make their voices heard when it comes to the public option.

Our elected reps (House, Senate, President) have been given a clear warning - you mess with the public option, you face the consequences. Our $$$ and votes will count in primary season!

Congress (and Obama) screwed us by not having a bill ready before the Aug recess that we could debate/defend.

Actually it was the pseudo-moderates, conservadems, and blue dogs that totally screwed us by stalling again and again to try to kill any bills that popped up.

Well that and the stupid strategy to take single payer of the table and destroy out bargaining clout. I cannot count the number of people here that stated that we had to remove it because it was great strategy and that Obama was a chessmaster. I suppose they figured they were going to castle the kings rook and somehow universal healthcare was going to fall out.

And they've been doing it for decades.

Same shit, different election cycle.

The White House has clearly indicated that single payer is not the way to go.

If the public option can't gather enough support in Congress, single payer has no chance.

Perhaps it was. Perhaps it was a way to show the corporate dems that Obama is willing to stake his Presidential career on health care. Perhaps Obama was willing to allow corporate dems to pull their support, then face the voters in their next election.

I don't think it was helpful. I mean, stand and deliver.

And also brought some facts around the public option i.e. it's not single payer, it's not govt-takeover, etc.

The massive reaction from the left has sent a clear message to Congress and the White House. This clear message was not there before.

For those that are "new" to politics (hadn't had their hearts broken by Carter or Clinton) might have gotten their first taste of heartbreak (realizing that Obama is also gonna eventually break our hearts is a sad truth).

The left is all lined up and ready for its uber minority role.
The corporatist are all lined up with 60 votes to block shit.
The right has a clear message.

The left is all like "whatever Obama calls for"(co-ops?) or "universal health care" or "single payer or bust". I mean we want victory, coverage for the poor, and reduction of out of pocket health care for the working class. I don't see a clear message.

a mistaken statement by an Obama administration official.

... last night's shows.

It was Sebelius's comment that triggered the shitstorm. The media wrongly assumed that she was speaking for the administration, when she was really just speaking out of turn.

no matter to some he never walked back from it.

which may have backfired.

but the rate of incumbency runs about 98%. No matter how frustrated by "Congress" people are, they rarely blame their congressmen.

Which is why they feel free to continue fucking up. It's a gravy train.

We'll have to wait and see how proactive other Dems are... but I'm hopeful.

And I favor adopting a longer-term plan based on NRA-like strategy. Make examples out of a few of these people. Make it known why. The key is to understand that it's long-term.

These days I'm feeling like throwing all of them out. But that's not achievable.

The reps will feel the heat when the $$$ and efforts don't come in.

It's not like Dems are going to vote Repugs. But you will have Dems not voting/volunteering/donating.

I know it's horrible to stand by while a repug wins (steals?) a close election. But hypocrisy is worse, and the Dems will realize that.

Instead of playing the "defend against ridiculous accusations' game, we need to be touting succinct merits of a public bill:

*Portability between jobs
*less control by corporations
*competition in the market place
*no surprise coverage denials!

The lies have been debunked, and before more lies form, we need to fill the airwaves with the truth.

and others in the DLC are fantasizing they're still in the catbird seat and are trying to cut the whole thing off at the knees.

That's what conservatives do, after all.

That it's not working and the fury at what's seen as weakness and waffling from Congressional Democrats is building must come as a deep shock to those old boys.

Our job is to keep the pressure up through letters, emails, phone calls and faxes.

Part of it may be floating the trial balloon to see how the public reacts to the idea of health care legislation without a public option.

Part of it may be waving the red cape in front of his base to piss them off (and he should succeed in that endeavor.)

Part of it may be soft-shoeing to try to get Blue Cross Baucus and the Gang Of Six to crap their bill out of the Finance Committee so we can bring the process forward and move into conference committee.

But my gut of truthiness says that Obama's doing this as part of a strategy, not because he's bailing on the public option.

confusion and lack of a coordinated media campaign.

I do not believe that this was in anyway a strategy.

(told them as much already)

So strategy, I agree with you, this is a class act fuck up

"Labor Warns Dems: We'll Sit Out Election If You Oppose Public Plan":

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/08/18/labor-warns-dems-well-sit_n_262232.html

IMO, this "no public option" debate has really woken up the left.