home

"F--king Stupid": Obama Controlled Organization Goes After Dem Senators Supporting PO

Remember when?

[Rahm] Emanuel really teed off on the Dem-versus-Dem attacks, calling them “f–king stupid.” This was a direct attack on some of the attendees in the room, who are running ads against Dems right now.

That was then, this is now:

The Democratic National Committee’s Organizing for America campaign is putting pressure on some of its own members to accept the health care reform measure being debated in the Senate Finance Committee, even if it’s not all they had hoped for – and U.S. Sen. Debbie Stabenow is among them. The group was sending an e-mail to its Michigan mailing list today urging people to call Stabenow’s office in Washington, D.C. . . . Stabenow, a Democrat, is a staunch believer in health care reform and a supporter of the bill. But she has said she doesn’t believe it goes far enough. On Tuesday, she said the legislation proposed by committee Chairman Max Baucus still needs work, and she would prefer that it include a so-called public option to provide competition to private insurers and hold down costs.

President Barack Obama, too, supports a public option. But the White House has suggested it doesn’t want a public option to derail the bill. . . . In the e-mail, Organizing for America praised Stabenow for working toward health care reform. But it warned her against letting her desire for a public option get in the way of passage, saying, “The bill currently under consideration isn’t perfect. But two weeks ago, in his address to Congress, President Obama reminded us all that while there are many details still unresolved, for the millions of Americans without insurance and the millions more who could lose their coverage at any time, failure is not an option.”

Obama'a organization is also pressuring Sen. Marie Cantwell in Washington state. Meet the new boss. Same as the old boss.

Speaking for me only

< Welcome President Snowe: Obama Administration Showing Its Wimpy Colors? | Eviction Notice Posted At Zazi Family Apartment >
  • The Online Magazine with Liberal coverage of crime-related political and injustice news

  • Contribute To TalkLeft


  • Display: Sort:
    Maria Cantwell (5.00 / 1) (#1)
    by Spamlet on Wed Sep 23, 2009 at 08:11:53 PM EST
    The miracle is that she's even in a position to cave. And she will, I predict.

    We'll see. (none / 0) (#14)
    by oldpro on Wed Sep 23, 2009 at 11:22:49 PM EST
    If she doesn't (none / 0) (#17)
    by Spamlet on Wed Sep 23, 2009 at 11:51:01 PM EST
    I will be pleasantly surprised.

    Parent
    Well, send her a supportive email. (none / 0) (#20)
    by oldpro on Thu Sep 24, 2009 at 12:15:03 AM EST
    I did.

    My still-connected Dem Party pals tell me nothing has come thru yet urging them to contact Maria as the Party is doing with Debbie.  We're sending out innoculation emails anyhow, telling her to hang in there with Senator Rockefeller for a strong public option.

    Parent

    Thanks, will do the same (none / 0) (#22)
    by Spamlet on Thu Sep 24, 2009 at 12:41:17 AM EST
    I've spoken to her office staff (none / 0) (#24)
    by shoephone on Thu Sep 24, 2009 at 01:29:03 AM EST
    three times in the past two weeks. As usual, the response is: "she is still looking over the legislation and hasn't made a public statement yet, blah, blah, blah...". The same crap as usual from her.

    It boggles my mind why you have any faith in her, but you are welcome to it. After her aides aggressively threatened to have me arrested for silently protesting outside a 2006 event she held with Obama at Garfield High, I feel nothing but disgust for the woman.

    Parent

    It's not about faith. I'm not (5.00 / 1) (#35)
    by oldpro on Thu Sep 24, 2009 at 11:48:11 AM EST
    a believer person.  No faith.

    Perhaps because I have been a staffer, I avoid picking fights with them about their employer...or about anything else.  And when I talk to Maria, or any elected official, I avoid picking fights with them as well.  That doesn't mean I have any problem effectively communicating my position on any issue.

    Parent

    Well, I've tried the encouragement method (none / 0) (#37)
    by shoephone on Thu Sep 24, 2009 at 01:23:37 PM EST
    with her and it seems to make no difference. She does what she wants.

    It's possible you have some pull with her people precisely because you were a staffer. As opposed to someone like myself, who is seen as nothing more than an irritating constituent.

    Parent

    It's possible that you've (none / 0) (#40)
    by oldpro on Thu Sep 24, 2009 at 03:58:21 PM EST
    'poisoned the well' by living up to your description of yourself as an "irritating constituent."  Heavy on the 'irritating,' I take it!

    I doubt any of Maria's staff know me as a former staffer or for whom I worked...Maria might, although I doubt it.

    I'd be surprised if you have never agreed with her on ANY vote she has taken.  Of course, she's no Jim (congressman-for-life) McDermott, but then she's not Scoop Jackson or Slade Gorton, either...thank Gawd.

    Parent

    I know what you mean (none / 0) (#25)
    by Spamlet on Thu Sep 24, 2009 at 01:36:40 AM EST
    Her record is mixed--not uniformly great, but sometimes very good, and certainly not all terrible.

    Parent
    I used to get (5.00 / 4) (#2)
    by Zorba on Wed Sep 23, 2009 at 08:14:06 PM EST
    the Organizing for America e-mails, but I unsubscribed to their list some time ago because Obama was doing nothing to try to get Congress to repeal DOMA and DADT (and I told them why I was unsubscribing).  I feel like I should re-subscribe, just so I can unsubscribe again over this stupidity.

    So, I guess all that stuff about (5.00 / 10) (#3)
    by Anne on Wed Sep 23, 2009 at 08:16:11 PM EST
    Obama wanting the people to make him do what they wanted was just, what?  A sort of collective hallucination?

    I guess we shouldn't let our desire for getting and doing the right thing get in the way of settling for some weak, poorly-conceived, giveaway to the insurance companies, huh? I mean, why set your sights on the best when you can convince yourself that something, anything is better than nothing?

    Oh, pardon me  - what was I thinking?  I forgot to check and see if my strand of pearls is centered and my white gloves are clean before I started to express what I would prefer...

    "Obama wanting the people to make him" (5.00 / 2) (#18)
    by talesoftwokitties on Thu Sep 24, 2009 at 12:01:50 AM EST
    Guess it depended on who those "people" were.  Certainly not me.

    Parent
    If they'd gone for single payer in the beginning (5.00 / 8) (#4)
    by lambert on Wed Sep 23, 2009 at 08:27:39 PM EST
    instead of the p*ssant public option, they'd be taking the same amount of cr*p from Rahm, but at least they'd be doing it for a policy that can be shown, by evidence, to actually save lives and money. So much for "compromise" and excrementalism...

    if obama had ever indicated to (5.00 / 4) (#5)
    by sancho on Wed Sep 23, 2009 at 08:51:32 PM EST
    any of his corporate boosters that as president he was going to fight to get a single payer passed, then we would have heard much more this past election cycle about what a great man and leader john mccain is. in ther words, obama would not have been elected--or received the media support that allowed him to be elected. meet the new boss, same as the old boss. all one needs to know or say, truly.

    Parent
    Don't think it would have made (5.00 / 3) (#7)
    by MO Blue on Wed Sep 23, 2009 at 09:34:21 PM EST
    any difference. IMO Obama wanted a weak, watered down, insurance friendly bill and that is what we will get. Got to keep those corporate funds flowing into the Dem coffers and out of the hands of the Republicans.

    Parent
    Everyone needs to be prepared to (5.00 / 2) (#9)
    by cawaltz on Wed Sep 23, 2009 at 10:05:10 PM EST
    barrage the WH with letters letting him know that if he does that he will be out on his backside in 2012 and then they better get used to the idea of preparing to act on it. The WH can utilize the money they collect from insurance companies to fund pretty commercials to get him reelected but they can't make a single person vote or work for him to get votes in 2012.

    At this point it really has to be in the hands of those of you who voted and worked for him the first go round to change his mind. Otherwise, you are right and we WILL be looking at an insurance giveaway bill.

    He keeps walking it back and forth on the public option portion of the bill which suggests to me that he recognizes passing something without that public option is a real gamble.

    Parent

    In an unguarded moment Sen. Durbin (5.00 / 2) (#10)
    by MO Blue on Wed Sep 23, 2009 at 10:19:55 PM EST
    was quoted as saying: The banks own this place.

    Well IMO they only own part of the real estate. Wall St, K St., and the Insurance Industry share ownership.

    Do you really think that letters are going to do any good? IMO their response will be much like it was in 2008. Remember: You have no where else to go.

    And you know what, they will probably be right in their assessment. Because Dem voters will respond in the same way they did then. The response will be: He is better than a Republican.

    Parent

    Mother knew best (5.00 / 2) (#26)
    by mmc9431 on Thu Sep 24, 2009 at 06:27:01 AM EST
    My mother used to lecture me in my youth that "you get what you pay for". Looking at the legislation that has passed over the last twenty years I've got to hand it to her! I never realized she was so smart.

    Bankruptcy reform
    Energy Bill
    Telecommunication
    Deregulation gone wild
    HCR?

    And the list goes on and on. What was the last impact bill that was designed for the benefit of the working class? We've lost all representation in government. Politicians pay token lip service every election cylce and then beat a path to DC to do their real paymaster's bidding.


    Parent

    That's why I don't put all my eggs in the Democrat (none / 0) (#12)
    by cawaltz on Wed Sep 23, 2009 at 10:37:40 PM EST
    -ic basket. I do and will and have gone elsewhere. It wasn't the easiest choice to make but it is absolutely essential that it be made clear that what you do is just as important as what you say.

    If I didn't think that the writing would make a difference I wouldn't suggest it. If he thought he had a slam dunk on health care reform I don't believe he would keep walking this back and forth. I believe he is testing the waters to see if he could get away with placating the heavy hitting donors and selling it as reform. It will be up to those who voted for him the first go around to CONVINCE HIM they WILL go elsewhere if he passes something that doesn't benefit them and instead benefits insurance companies.

    As BTD says if the public option goes, then so does the mandate. Which leaves them right back at the drawing board. This NEEDS to be the rallying cry until he gets it.

    Parent

    Well I didn't vote for him the first go around (5.00 / 4) (#13)
    by MO Blue on Wed Sep 23, 2009 at 10:50:31 PM EST
    because I though he could pass legislation that the Republicans had not been able to pass for years. After looking at some of the give-a-ways in the Baucus bill, I am sorry to say that might be exactly what will happen.

    I don't agree that if the public option goes, the mandate will go. The insurance industry very much want the mandates and from all appearances they are who Obama wants to please. Every decent thing could be stripped from the legislation and the mandates would remain.  

    Parent

    I didn't vote for him either (5.00 / 1) (#23)
    by cawaltz on Thu Sep 24, 2009 at 01:21:35 AM EST
    I didn't think he staked out strong positions on things during the primary and I disliked his scary zealot supporters who insisted the way to win was to slander anyone who disagreed with you. Blech. It was just a little too much like the GOP strategy during Iraq for my taste.

    If the Democrats pass a mandate without a public option they'll be hard pressed to get me to vote for any of them, let alone Barack Obama.


    Parent

    They'll pass a 2% less p*ssant public option (none / 0) (#41)
    by lambert on Thu Sep 24, 2009 at 04:14:53 PM EST
    (or "plan"), never fear. Just enough to get them past 2010, and just enough to let Obama stagger over the finish line in 2012 before the plan is actually implemented.

    Of course, "progressives" have greatly aided them in doing this, since the "public option" -- whether "robust" or whatever -- has been nothing but a marketing slogan and a set of bullet points from the beginning. So the Dems can say it is whatever it is. And "progressives" can declare victory whatever it is.

    Parent

    single-payer would have drawn the same flak (5.00 / 1) (#8)
    by noholib on Wed Sep 23, 2009 at 09:42:00 PM EST
    And I can't imagine that the Republicans and the right-wing talk show hosts and all their followers would have attacked Obama more if he had gone for single-payer.  Anything promoting the public good rather than private profit smacks of socialism and treason to them anyway. Did this incrementalism gain him so many Republican votes in the Congressional committees?  It sure doesn't look like it. He'

    Parent
    OFA (5.00 / 1) (#6)
    by mikeel on Wed Sep 23, 2009 at 09:03:05 PM EST
    Isn't it Obama for America?

    So when the House passes a bill 218-216, with the public option, is it dead on arrival?

    There won't be a public option in the final bill, but it shouldn't be given away so easily.

    Wow, I'm Shocked! (5.00 / 2) (#11)
    by BDB on Wed Sep 23, 2009 at 10:30:02 PM EST
    Obama is preparing to throw the progressives under the bus to make a Republican happy?  But that's so unlike him!  He has a spine made of steel when it comes to standing up to the GOP.  Just ask Van Jones.

    Don't do as I do...do as I say! (5.00 / 1) (#15)
    by oldpro on Wed Sep 23, 2009 at 11:28:40 PM EST
    Thanks, Rahm.

    Stabenow has to already be getting (5.00 / 1) (#16)
    by oculus on Wed Sep 23, 2009 at 11:41:02 PM EST
    plenty of mail, e mails, and telephone calls from uninsured former auto industry employees.

    Presidents are bad (5.00 / 1) (#19)
    by NealB on Thu Sep 24, 2009 at 12:03:56 AM EST
    Good for us, I suppose. Our presidents all suck. In my lifetime, from Dwight ("these are not the times in which we live") Eisenhower through Barack ("we are the purple states of America") Obama, they've all sucked. They've been terrible. Every one of them. Whatever else he might have done, Kennedy went to Texas (really he should have known better) and got shot. LBJ idiotically escalated Viet Nam. Nixon (oddly otherwise the most liberal president) broke the law to get reelected in 1968. Ford (idiotically) pardoned Nixon. Carter was out of his depth. And then the cluster-f_ck of the Reagan era began. Oy.

    Reagan, product of the sixties, the first spokes-model president controlled by corporations. Bush (the second most liberal president of my lifetime) was a robot. Clinton got caught getting his dick sucked by a female intern. Bush II couldn't read the memo that told him terrorists were going to take out the world trade center. And now Obama; lazy, stupid, a tool, whatever he really is he doesn't even give good speeches any more.

    In my lifetime, it's bad presidents all along. My mother tried to tell me this when I was a teenager.

    What a rant. And BTW I don't think (none / 0) (#21)
    by oculus on Thu Sep 24, 2009 at 12:30:07 AM EST
    of Obama as lazy or stupid.  The man's a whirlwind of activity.  

    Parent
    yup (5.00 / 3) (#28)
    by TeresaInPa on Thu Sep 24, 2009 at 06:35:23 AM EST
    reading TOTUS and campaigning for his next election.

    Parent
    Ha. That' a new one! (none / 0) (#34)
    by oculus on Thu Sep 24, 2009 at 10:57:39 AM EST
    Oh, Obama works hard. (5.00 / 1) (#42)
    by lambert on Thu Sep 24, 2009 at 04:16:02 PM EST
    It's just a question of who for.

    Parent
    I guess the DNC is determined to never (5.00 / 1) (#30)
    by Militarytracy on Thu Sep 24, 2009 at 08:29:00 AM EST
    stop sucking.

    I'm still trying to figure that out (none / 0) (#44)
    by Militarytracy on Thu Sep 24, 2009 at 07:04:05 PM EST
    Truly, I don't know what any of this tells me outside of the world Obama or Rahm lives in isn't the same one that I do. And their village needs to dump this we are the village B.S. ....or not.  I'm fine when they suffer the damages for refusing to get real for real people, because at this point in our economic reality there is little else sane left to do.

    Parent
    The hurry is... (5.00 / 1) (#36)
    by DancingOpossum on Thu Sep 24, 2009 at 11:54:37 AM EST
    The hurry is to quickly put something, anything, up on Obama's scoreboard: We passed healthcare reform!! Better yet, it's bipartisan! (And we all remember what bathtub-drowner Grover Norquist had to say about bipartisanship.)

    And since its horrific effects on the American public--which Obama is completely aware of, I'm certain--won't be felt until well after he's safely ensconced in his second term, well, that's the beauty part. Obama doesn't care that this disaster of a bill might mean some Democrats losing their seats, or even a wholesale wipeout of the party--he doesn't give a damn about the party, or really anything beyond his own personal ambitions.

    This is a win all around for him. He can say "We did it!!", he can make Baucus and the insurance industry happy, and he can neatly avoid all accountability for the horrific fallout of it when it hits, as it surely will. Meanwhile, he'll be parlaying his ex-prez status into millions of dollars and a book deal or two. Hmmm. I need a job like that...

    It's too early to assume (none / 0) (#38)
    by shoephone on Thu Sep 24, 2009 at 01:27:26 PM EST
    that Obama will get to enjoy a second term. The way he's made such a debacle of health care reform, look out. The natives are restless, and it's only 2009...

    Parent
    Some natives are restless here on the web (none / 0) (#39)
    by MO Blue on Thu Sep 24, 2009 at 03:18:05 PM EST
    Other Democratic voters are trilled, I say trilled, that Obama is going to finally do something great for health care. They are completely clueless on what is in the bills. All they hear is the good stuff like it will end preexisting conditions and allow for annual check ups. They are reluctant to believe that what may happen could be worse than even the status quo.

    Even the Susan B. Komen Foundation, advocates for breast cancer, requested their members contact their members of Congress to support Obama's health care plan. This without even knowing what will be in the final plan other than coverage for preexisting conditions.

    So I do think that because the effects of the bill will not be realized until after the 2012, Obama will skate on this. Once the sh!t hits the fan, the party will suffer but not Obama.

    Parent

    hurry hurry hurry (none / 0) (#27)
    by TeresaInPa on Thu Sep 24, 2009 at 06:33:40 AM EST
    "people don't have health care..you have to help them"

    this crap doesn't even take effect until 2013, so what is the hurry?

    Don't rush now (5.00 / 2) (#29)
    by mmc9431 on Thu Sep 24, 2009 at 06:48:08 AM EST
    As pathetic as this bill is sounding, I'm hoping they stall it for five years instead of four. Then I can slide into whatever's left of Medicare!

    Parent
    I go on Medicare Jan. 1 - (5.00 / 1) (#31)
    by sallywally on Thu Sep 24, 2009 at 09:24:04 AM EST
    or even Dec. 1, and I am pretty grateful for this timing. There's something to be said for becoming 65! (In fact, quite a lot to be said - freedom!)

    I will make all the noise I can about how great my new gubmint-run health plan is - now and later. My sister's been on it for years (disability retirement) and as far as I can see it's great.

    Parent

    I go on Medicare Oct. 1. (5.00 / 1) (#32)
    by MO Blue on Thu Sep 24, 2009 at 09:40:08 AM EST
    Hopefully it will still be great after people like Baucus get done reforming it. If it is anything like how he is reforming health care, I am not hopeful.

    Parent
    Bingo (none / 0) (#43)
    by lambert on Thu Sep 24, 2009 at 04:17:56 PM EST
    Personally, I think inflicting pain on the Dems in 2010 is preferable to most any alternative. It's the only way to get them to pay attention.

    Parent