Fri, 06/12/2009 - 6:17am — vastleft
Once you accept the "public option" frame, it's "goodnight, nurse!" for real health-insurance reform.
It's only happening about everywhere in the liberal blogosphere.
OTOH, maybe a compromise with the Blue Dogs, Republicans, and death-by-spreadsheet crowd will work out just fine. It would be irresponsible not to equivocate.
Bookmark/Search this post with:
»
- vastleft's blog
- Login or register to post comments
- 1+[CSE]+#b94+
Front page
Comments
what is
Howard Dean's role in all of this? I know he's on a tour right now to sell a book. Is that all this is about? Or is he out there on behalf of any faction of the Dem party?
"Just trying to sell books" has a sordid history
I've heard it used -- unfairly -- against Al Gore, Richard Clarke, et al., so it's not my choice for first conclusion to jump to.
Easier and probably safer jumps are to conclude that either:
* He's a company man, after all
* He being "pragmatic," trying to push toward the better edge of the sell-out option
Neither inspires me, when so much is on the line and there's so much public readiness for real change.
The more
things change, the more they stay the same. I guess, we should emphasize the change not the same of it.
KoshemBos
Those who only "fight" for what they know will win are cowards -
and they hide it behind a snickering sense of superiority toward those little single payer advocates who don't know how to play the game of politics.
Everybody loves the heroes who fight for lost causes in the movies, but in real life nobody wants to be, or even know, those losers.
But it will take more than ridicule or marginalization to make us go away. The need is too desperate.
We will push and push and push until some larger force makes us stop.
Don't forget to add " Centrist Democrats " to the list
of those trying to save private insurance companies.
via (yes I know ) Politico
On my phone calls to Congress...
... I always make sure to add "This is not going to end"... Meaning that we'll take this fucked up compromise down too, until the right system is in place.
First they ignore you, then they ridicule you, then they fight you, then you win. -- Mahatma Gandhi
don't you mean "progressive blogosphere" instead of liberal?
I don't want to be associated with the folks who trivialized racism, claimed assassination attempts, cheered fundamentally undemocratic "ruleZ", and engaged in daily two hour hates full of sexism and misogynist imagery. Also, actively running against "liberal" is very telling, as you mentioned before.
Only tyrants rig elections.
Liberals, too, if we buy into that hard and fast distinction
The two bloggers I linked to (Chris and Susie) are good guys/gals in the blogosphere, and they're no dummies, either.
But, as I see it, they've bought the premise that power wants them to, that the liberal's job is to fight for a "strong public option," which to me is a ticket marked "this way to the egress."
The case for a real public option
A public option that beat out the private companies would be a fatal blow to conservativism for a long long time. Seeing it happen in real time would be an unforgettable lesson. It would also have wide reaching implications for other liberal policy ideas. It could smoothe the transition for skeptics but could be worked to immediately get everyone covered. Etc. Etc.
That said, I don't trust this crooked bunch to provide a real public option. Just as I'm a proponent of e-medical records but don't trust it in this congress's hands, so too with any public option. When a "public option" is just a way to bail out insurance cos, its not really a plan so much as a subsidy.
Only tyrants rig elections.