I know, you're shocked. Ian Welsh:

The last couple weeks have been very revealing as to what various people, including politicians, ["]progressive["] bloggers and activists, are really willing to fight for, and what their bottom line really is.

I would suggest that if progressives ever want their threats to be taken seriously by anyone again they go into opposition against this bill until such a time as it both has a robust public option and the Stupak amendment is out. Failure to do so will show that their threats were always hollow, that they are willing to sell out child-bearing age women, and that they prioritize the interests of older people over younger and poorer people.*

In negotiation against a good negotiator, you get the minimum you are willing to settle for. Progressives have shown that their minimum is not a robust public option. It may not even be practical abortion access. They will not get a robust public option if they will not oppose the bill over it, and if they won’t oppose the final bill over the Stupak amendment, that too will most likely remain.

Obama and the Democratic leadership’s bottom line is they must pass some bill called “health care reform”. Unless you threaten to take away their bottom line, they will take away anything that isn’t progressives bottom line - and that includes practical abortion access, and a robust public option.

NOTE * This is horrible, and I don't want it to happen (though I'm not sure what the net's going to be when Obama finishes fucking us all with "entitlement reform"). I would also note that I'm an older single payer advocate, and at least from the photographs, most single payer activists are of the group that Welsh claims would disproportionately benefit. So, once again, our GENIUS Dems have handed right wing populists another weapon: Inter-generational discord a la Andy Sullivan.

UPDATE The roll of dishonor.