Thank you, Scott Brown! (Gratitude from a Progressive)

So I’m sure the Pubs think they’ve really achieved something here, and some Dems are actually asking for the healthcare bill to be ping-ponged from the House to the Pres’s desk.

Well, as a fervent progressive, let me just say, “Thank you, Scott Brown!” You’ve finally made Obama realize how wrongheaded he was. Mainstream Dems, long since bought by the corporations and banksters (and now getting more contributions from them than the Pubs!), would never enact real reform–unless their seats were being threatened.

And now that Mr. Brown has trounced Coakley:

As William Greider recently pointed out, going populist and waging war against Wall Street is the only way for Obama to channel the nationwide rage into higher polling numbers. So, even though he wouldn’t be doing it out of sheer principle, Obama’s acumen and self-interest may well get him to where we need him to be.

Otherwise, it’s no big loss, because the healthcare bill was just another corporate giveaway to begin with.

(Oh, thanks as well to Anthony Weiner for saying what needs to be said about Obama’s responsibility for all this.)

None of them are doing are doing anything on principle. The GOP and the teabaggers are just interested in destroying Obama’s chance of re-election and have been quite successful at it so far. They have hijacked the discussion with hot air and misdirection mostly and managed to inflame a lot of people.

Obama needs to take the discussion back from them and direct anger at people who only seem to be nay saying and not actually giving any constructive alternatives to his plans. That’s hard to do because policy is boring whereas shouting is interesting to a lot of people.

Hopefully he can start playing a bit of hardball and bring his eloquence to the matter of firing up the base and independents like he did during the campaign. He has a mountain to climb because the opposition are very emboldened at the moment and totally in control of the message but he can do it IMO.

All of the other 3,242 Scott Brown threads weren’t to your liking?

The most frustrating thing to me is that, by and large, Obama’s presidency, and the health care bill, are exercises in political compromise. But, as we’ve learned in this political world of extremes and rabid partisanship, compromise doesn’t work. The left is pissed at Obama, the right is pissed at Obama, and compromised solutions to major problems don’t garner enough support.

So the thing I take away from Brown’s victory is “FUCK COMPROMISE”. The right has firmly taken the position that they are a party defined by opposing everything the other party does. And the left has proven themselves the weak-willed corporate shills we were all hoping they weren’t.

Not a good way to run a country.

Well, yeah, the righties are even less principled, but why compare Obama to them? That’s setting the bar low, as Jon Stewart eloquently illustrated.

I don’t know if it’s really *that *difficult. If he steers strongly toward the left while explaining how conservative policies favor corporations and then putting it in a historical context…all the lefties will be out in full force, and even the white proles will back him. But he does have a lot of mistakes to make up for.

Heh. I don’t think there are any like this, though.

Booyah.

Excuse me? Where in any of the health care debate so far have the Democrats shown any willingness to compromise? By having a 60 vote majority they were able to steamroll their bill through the Senate without regard to any dissent whatsoever.

Now that the “super-majority” is gone, there may actually have to be some give and take between the two sides of the aisle in order to get a workable bill that can be agreed on.

You’re absolutely right. That explains why we are currently waiting out the Republican filibuster that occured when the Demoncrats insisted on including single payer.

How, exactly, does one compromise with “NO! NO! NO!”?

Maybe?

So what happened to the government option? How did the mandate get watered down? Why were subsidies reduced? Compare the Senate and House bills. The House Bill is what the majority of Democrats would prefer, but the Senate bill is based on a bunch of compromises made to both the Republicans and the more conservative Democrats.
It seems to me that in the current Republican lexicon “compromise” means do it exactly how they want it done or not at all. Reminds of how a two year old treats the word share to mean “give it to me now.”

Jonathan

That is a steaming pile of bullshit. They delayed the health care bill for MONTHS trying to get Olympia Snowe, Susan Collins, or Charles Grassley on board (as far as I know, the only Republicans who would even agree to negotiation). But they didn’t budge (Snowe voted for it in committee, only to later vote against it on the floor for some mysterious reason). If they wanted to ram it through, they could have done it this summer. But they didn’t.

“You’re fired.”

You guys forgot the Medicare buy-in.

Look, FatBaldGuy, if we liberals are going to steamroll something through Congress you had better believe it won’t be some boring shit like enhancing health care.

Something more like mandatory gay weddings and/or intravenous drug use, probably. Maybe even at the same time.

So how would that work? Would members of the death panels be sent into your bedroom to make sure you and your same sex partner are really buttfucking each other and not just faking it?

You have to do it in a public place of course.

I’m assuming you don’t mean a simultaneous mutual buggering? Which isn’t possible. Right? That isn’t possible, right?

Haven’t you always wondered what the attraction of male cheerleading was? Turns out it’s got nothing to do with holding girls by the snatch.

Well, it will be under this administration.

Yes we can!

“Unless you have an objection, Messrs. McConnell and Boehner.”