In this report we get a nice one-two punch. Not only are we seeing Democrats once again refusing even a tiny compromise with Republicans on Obama's takeover of nearly 20% of our economy with his healthcare plans, but we also get to see another example of why Huffington Post is not journalism. I like a nice one-two punch for a Wednesday.
For one thing, the HuffPo article hilariously calls Democrat pitbull Rahm Emanuel a “conservative Democrat.” But let's start with the more important political point and deal with the HuffPo chicanery second.
In a HuffPo "report" by Sam Stein, we see leftists, and extreme activists getting their shorts in a wad over the proposition from Republicans that the so-called public option only be set off by a "trigger," one that would usher in that public option if insurance companies "fail to deliver" the affordable coverage that Obama is demanding. This trigger idea would exclude the public option at the outset only to have it come in later if needed.
To the lefties, though, this putting off of the public option is unacceptable. Even though the public option would come later anyway because the unreal expectations and government meddling of Obamacare would set the table for the trigger to be pulled regardless of initial claims. They know this, of course, but left-wingers want a socialistic healthcare plan and they don't want to wait for any inevitable trigger mechanism to be pulled later. They want it now and that is that. It's their way or the highway.
Consequently, Maine Republican Olympia Snowe has become the focus of left-wing ire because she is one senator floating the trigger idea. Absurdly, Snowe seems to be under the delusion that there is going to be some sort of "bi-partisan" bill coming from the Senate.
"It is important to get it to be a bipartisan initiative, given the dimensions of health care reform and the implications to all Americans," she said. "Every American will be affected one way or the other under this."
Senator Snowe, I hate to tell you, but they don't want to compromise with you. Democrats want you to shut up and do what they tell you to do... like you usually do. After all, in the very same AP story, Senator Chuck Schumer admitted openly that he had no interest in Snowe's thoughts on a trigger saying that the public option must be "available to all Americans from the first day."
Left-wingers like HuffPo's Sam Stein are also upset at White House pitbull Rahm Emanuel for his comments in the Wall Street Journal on July 7. Emanuel told the WSJ that the White House is open to the trigger idea if it achieves passage of the "reform" they are seeking. As far as Emanuel was concerned the initial offering of the public option could be put off for later.
"The goal is to have a means and a mechanism to keep the private insurers honest," he said in an interview. "The goal is non-negotiable; the path is" negotiable.
But even as Emanuel made like the White House would consider this particular compromise with Republicans like Snowe, a few hours later the president reiterated that he is strongly for the public option to be in full force at the outset.
So, while Emanuel was floating the possibility of compromise, Obama was putting on airs as if he'd cut compromise off and Schumer was directly stating such proving that compromise is not something that Democrats are interested in. So, to that half of the electorate that vote GOP, the Democrats have a message: you can go pound sand as far as Obama and his Democrat cohorts are concerned. They want it now and that is that.
Now, to the amusing attempt at HuffPo's Sam Stein pretending at journalism.
Stein essentially said what I just reported but he took many more paragraphs do do so and without as many links to show the original statements. Why? Well, because he padded his story with a ton of that "strategists say" and "a source said" nonsense we are so used to seeing from hack writers. Then he used these unnamed "sources" to buttress his own ideological assumption that Snowe is off-base and Obama and Schumer are right on the issues.
Another hilarious addition to Stein's "report" is where his "source" called Rahm Emanuel a "conservative Democrat."
"Rahm's problem with this is he is on the more conservative end of the Democratic Party and he is a very political guy," the source added. "He is working for a way out without a bloody fight. The problem is he doesn't mind taking that fight to the left. And what I worry could happen is the left will just quit."
This is a risible claim. Any look at Emanuel's political record reveals a perfectly left-wing history. Emanuel's is in no way a conservative record. Stein only added the Emanuel is "conservative" hilarity because Emanuel seemed to disagree with Stein's feelings that a socialist healthcare plan is the right course. Further, if Emanuel is seen as "conservative" then his left-wing, "progressive" buddies on healthcare can find it easier to excoriate the White House Chief of Staff and rally to the president's healthcare cause.
But here is the fact of the matter that Stein conveniently forgot to mention. Rahm Emanuel is not some rogue operative moving on his own agenda. In fact, he has no power of his own at all on the actual terms of the debate in Congress. Emanuel is carrying out the president's orders. No more, no less. Emanuel spoke to the WSJ with Obama's full knowledge to make it seem as if they were open to compromise. Then, in his inimitable way, Obama went out tell the American people that he was "strongly for" the public option. Hence, both messages are sent by a president that specializes in talking out of both side of his... mouth.
Only the truth is, Obama's White House, while touting the public option all along, has also said that they'd listen to all sides. "We are open to all ideas to talk about health reform," has been a common mantra. (Including, I remind you, a tax on your healthcare benefits from work, something Obama ridiculed McCain for during the late campaign.)
So, Obama is playing the I'm-a-reasonable-guy game. Pretending on one hand that everything is on the table and he'll listen to everyone to get a good plan, yet on the other insisting that everything isn't on the table because he insists that a government takeover of healthcare be implemented.
But did Sammy Stein note any of this in his report? No. And why? Only because he could set Emanuel up as a fall guy and make Obama look like the good guy on the white horse riding in to save the day for socialist healthcare. And to support the president, Stein used a passel full of sources saids to make it seem as if "experts" were lining up behind Obama and not that dumb, evil, "conservative" Emanuel.
Stein's blather is pure advocacy, not journalism.



















Editor at Large
Comments Policy
Republicans Compromise - Democrats Conquer
July 8, 2009 - 06:33 ET by allanf"Compromise" is a word that applies to Republicans - not Democrats. The Republican Party has plenty of John McCains who will compromise.
reality check
July 8, 2009 - 07:33 ET by AJBRepublicans don't compromise... they roll over.
"Open to all ideas" doesn't
July 8, 2009 - 06:33 ET by motherbelt"Open to all ideas" doesn't mean squat.
Obama's "we'll listen to all sides" is like those local town council meetings where they allow everyone to get up and say their piece, and then put the strip mall down the street from your house, just like they planned to all along.
The notion of Emanual pushing a different agenda from the President's, requires "the willing suspension of disbelief" to quote someone we all know.
And calling Emanuel a "conservative" is positively snort-worthy.
But then again, isn't everything this administration does, at least centrist? By the time they are done, they will have convinced themselves that national socialized medicine, indeed socialism itself, is a "moderate" system.
I didn't think it was physically possible, but this both sucks and blows. -Bart Simpson
Warner: Excellent analysis!!
July 8, 2009 - 06:38 ET by sbourgIt is truly amazing to analyze (as you have) the Obama administration's attempt to socialize 1/5th of our economy. And it's remarkable that the MSM ignores the "sausage-making"......in this case, making socialist policies at a time when our economy needs more freedoms and less federal govt intrusion.
Front Door Hanger
July 8, 2009 - 07:00 ET by Nortofound when I came home, problem was it was on the inside door, which was actually in the house-brazen bunch. "Prescription For Change." Full of distortions, like, This is not like England or Canada's system. No, it is likely even worse and more intrusive.
How about this for a trigger
July 8, 2009 - 07:17 ET by spmcintyre(this is the serious part) The public plan would be replaced with a private plan anytime the PATIENT decides that the PATIENT is not getting the proper care from the public plan.
(this is the silly part)Additionally, the private plan would then be paid for directly from the pocket of the President and all the members of the Legislature that voted for Obamacare.
there is no spoon...
Silly
July 8, 2009 - 07:30 ET by allanfNaturally, onerous fees that would apply.
A Democrat compromise?
July 8, 2009 - 07:37 ET by Scuba DudeA Democrat compromise? This is not the Democrats of old that were open to give and take. Democrats now a days are concerned with only one thing and it is not you. They want power. Power to destroy this country, power to control every aspect of your life.
The citizens of this country need to wake up and see the road these people are taking us, the road with the cliff at the end of it.
The Obama Administration: THE most fiscally irresponsible Administration EVER
Maybe it's time to e-mail
July 8, 2009 - 09:59 ET by tazzMaybe it's time to e-mail and letter bomb all the rinos and tell them if they vote yes on any of these ridiculous bills, we will support any conservative running against them in the primaries. McCain especially.
Party of No
July 8, 2009 - 10:15 ET by slickwillie2001Republicans need to get around the 'party of no' clever attack lines. If the question is socialization of the medical care industry, our answer should be a proud no, no and hell no. They need to say it. Drop the crap about working together and looking for solutions. NO to socialized medicine.
There are problems with our systems of health care but none that warrant a government takeover.
Rahmbo is a 'conservative
July 8, 2009 - 10:47 ET by eaglewingz08Rahmbo is a 'conservative democrap', but all that means is that the main focus of the democrap party is to advance an agenda to the left of Stalin.
Or to put it another way, a conservative democrap would still be too liberal to be called a liberal republican.
Of course the MsM won't report it
July 8, 2009 - 11:47 ET by BlondeAnd naturally Obama is doing what comes naturally...nothing. "His" health care bill will be a retread of Porkulus....he'll allow Pelosi and the rest of the lunatics to act as proxies for him in this his "fight"....then when it turns into the inevitable fiasco, he can claim he didn't do it. The media will cover for him, as always, by not reporting the dirty little details.
Here's an example....Jan Shakowsky, who was Obama's national co-chair and was a huge proponent of a single-payer (only) system. The video of her whole shameful statement has been removed, but here's the money quote:
Now that a single payer plan seems to have gone down in flames, she's moderating her position somewhat. This video runs about ten minutes, (and the interviewer is obviously for government run health care, so she really gets into it), however she discusses the political strategies the dems are going to use to shove this down our throats...by October!
"Public" plan
Ramped up regulation of private insurance
Mandated "benefits" of private plans
Mandated coverage a la Massachusetts
Using reconciliation to get this through the Senate
Further, she states that the public is for this reform, and that republicans will oppose it "at their peril".
This is how we are going to destroy the best health care in the world, and become a slum worse than Mumbai.
I hope he fails, too.
Huff and Puff
July 8, 2009 - 12:53 ET by sevenTypical of them to deliberately mis state what is going on.
Hypocrites, all
July 8, 2009 - 13:53 ET by CobraManI find it rather amusing that the very people who bemoan the government's command and control over the "Military-Industrial Complex" all support the government's command and control over the heath care industry, what I shall now refer to as the "Physicality-Industrial Complex." What's the difference between the government controlling the manufacture and disposition of steel bombs or bullets and the government controlling the manufacture and disposition of plaster casts or flu virus inoculations? Both lead directly to government control of human health and well-being. Can any "one-payer" supporter care to explain this obvious hypocrisy to me?
The Citizens of each State shall be entitled to all Privileges and Immunities of Citizens in the several States.
The US Constitution
Unless you're a fetus.
The US Supreme Court
No Better Place To Get Leftie Insights Than HuffPo
July 8, 2009 - 14:31 ET by rammingspeedI always suspect these capers when one administration guy says one thing and another guy says another thing. Then Obama says which way he's "leaning." Smacks of a set up, a trial balloon kind of thing, to see what kind of public support they've got. Maybe not in this case, but it's a ploy that's been used over and over by people on both sides.
The hysterical Sam Stein's agenda is to lather his readers up (doesn't take much effort with HuffPo readers) to his reach his own tantrum level. Stein is worse than a hack, he's a hater and a fomenter and, I believe, quite possibly at least fantasizes about killing those who oppose him. Fantasy only. He's a Bolshevik without the balls.