From Cleveland.com:
With Republicans threatening to win the late Ted Kennedy's Massachusetts Senate seat and deny Democrats a filibuster-proof majority, White House officials and Democratic congressional leaders are contemplating a major strategy shift to finish health care overhaul without further Senate action.
Under this strategy, House Democrats, who passed a health care bill in November, would be called on to approve the version that cleared the Senate just before Christmas, rather than continue to negotiate compromises over provisions on which the two houses differ.
Now we know that Democrat Martha Coakley lost the Senate seat to Republican Scott Brown in Massachusetts. No more seeking the magic 60 votes in the Senate. They're gone. Were they ever there without huge compromises in legislation to capture the votes of the DINOs? There's blame to go around. A good many folks say that Coakley took too much for granted, that she took three crucial weeks off in December, that she generally ran a bad campaign.
The White House didn't get seriously involved in campaigning for Coakley until the last days of the campaign. I want Obama to fire Rahm Emanuel, the cautious centrist, the man who points the finger at everyone else rather than acknowledge his own failures. The buck stops with Obama for appointing him in the first place, but he can rectify the mistake by getting Emanuel out of the White House now.
How to turn this loss around? Howard Dean said it best, with "toughness, boldness, and leadership", and neither Rahm Emanuel nor Barack Obama have shown evidence of the qualities needed. The White House, represented by Emanuel, wasted months pushing a hopeless bi-partisan agenda to pass a health care bill, which was never going to happen. Then, they spent more months trying to appease the DINOs, which perhaps had to be done to get any bill at all out of the Senate.
Will the Democrats in the House get it together, accept the Senate bill, vote on it and pass the bill on to Obama to sign? Too many in the Congress show no signs of toughness, boldness, or leadership. The progressives in the House are threatening to bolt, because they don't like the Senate bill, and centrist and conservatives in the House are backing away from the bill that they voted for, because they see Coakley's loss as a repudiation of the progressive agenda and of health care reform. If no health care bill is passed, the Democrats will have virtually nothing to offer to the voters at election time this year.
Obama delayed fixing "don't ask, don't tell", presumably to get passage of a health care bill out of the way first. Now, we're still stuck with DADT, and we may not have a health care reform bill.
How did Bush push so much of his agenda through the Democratic Congress during the last years of his term? With the cooperation of lackey Democrats, who are besotted with bi-partisanship.
We voted for change, and we're not getting change.
It is just depressing. However, hopefully, our anger will fuel real changes.
ReplyDeleteAmen. Last two paragraphs really get at it. No more kid gloves for the second year, more rough & tumble from the Obama admin. Please.
ReplyDeleteScrew bipartisanship, dump Rahm, take names, and kick ass.
ReplyDeleteAnd can we finally admit that we never had 60 votes?
Does anyone see the change happening, though?
ReplyDeleteNext election, if it doesn't come, if Obama doesn't grow a pair, we'll have an unelectable incumbent, and the Republicans will win, even if they run the theocrat Huckabee.
If that happens, we need to look at getting out of this country. I'm afraid.
The problem is that the Senate bill is a bad one. Are we really going to pass a bill that bribes an entire State? The House bill has its flaws but it is much better. I doubt the Dems have the votes to pass the Senate mess in the House.
ReplyDeleteWhat Mr. Obama should have done is sent up a draft bill and then fought for it. Now he does not have much.
Rahm Emmanuel does at the end of the day what the president wants. That is the way the system works. Those of us in Illinois who have had the opportunity to watch him know he is not a font of new ideas. I said when Mr. Obama picked him that this will be a one term presidency unless the Republicans do something outstandingly stupid like nominating Huckabee.
But it wont be Rahm Emmanuel's fault. He is not the guy calling the tune.
FWIW
jimB
The pundits this morning are saying Obama will move more toward the middle. I don't know how that is possible. The dems didn't take advantage of their majority and are paying for it. I was really sad when I went to bed last night.
ReplyDeleteI remember the last Republican senator from Mass, Edward Brooke. He was at least a middle of the road Republican, and concerned about the housing the poor and other decent social policies. Maine has the only Rep. moderates left. I do hope Brown will be a one-termer.
Towards the middle? Where the hell has he been? He has justabout become a republican. But I blam e the Dems in Congress, especially the Senate. They are craven cowards with no discipline.
ReplyDeleteIn fact NO ONE in the Senate gives a damn about what is good for the country. They care about politics as a game and their cushy jobs.
Our anger makes NO DIFFERENCE. We have no power. They don't give a crap about us, any of us. I drove home last night through potholes, passed people sleeping on the street. Shining city on a hill? Our cities aren't much better than those in the 3rd world. We have no infrastructure, no values, no decency, and increasingly, no future.
Catherine, I wish I could be hopeful. I can't today.
ReplyDeleteErik, I knew that Obama was a centrist, but look where the centrist views have him and us now. He needs a Howard Dean type to look him in the eye and urge him forward in a progressive agenda.
If the Dems go down, let them go down fighting to bring the country back from eight years of trashing by Cheney/Bush administration, for crying out loud.
Yes, Paul!
Mark, I don't have much hope about change happening. If the Dems stay on the same course or move further to the right, I see big losses in the next election.
I'm too old to look for another country.
Jim, I agree that Obama should have presented a bill to the Congress and fought for it. The bill should have included the public option. How easily the president backed away from that without even a fight.
As I said, the buck stops with Obama, however, I believe that Emanuel is a pernicious influence, and I want to see him out. Besides Rahm has a history, parts of which are quite worrisome to me, and he refuses to take responsibility for his own mistakes.
Amelia, if Obama moves more toward the "middle", he'll fall off the right side of the platform.
IT, thank you. Well said sistah!
Obama has gotten more things done in one year than any other president in history. He still has 59 votes (out of 100) - a bigger majority than any other president. Get on your senators - getting things done takes more than voting once every four years -- activism year round is better than trying to find another country. It has only been one year- I am disappointed that things have not moved more quickly -- I think Massachusetts made a mistake that they will regret -- nude poster boy with a truck does not offer much. But the Dem candidate did not even know who Curt Schilling is - nor would she get off her butt to meet people -- watch The Daily Show from the night before the election.
ReplyDeleteAs for Huckabee, I am not too worried about him. His political career pretty much became toast when Maurice Clemmons gunned down those four police officers in the Tacoma coffee shop and it was learned that he commuted his 108 year sentence for armed robbery, among other charges. That is bound to come up in any political campaign he will ever enter until the end of time.
ReplyDeleteAnn, my most satisfying fight is right here on my blog, and I know it doesn't count for much. Contacting David Vitter is a total waste of time, but I still call and email. My congressman, Charlie Melancon is running against Vitter for the Senate, and he's 18 points behind the man who patronizes prostitutes. Is Charlie likely to move toward the progressive side? No, but I still call and email.
ReplyDeleteThen there's the other DINO, Mary Landrieu, who will face a tough fight against a Republican in my conservative state in two years. Is she likely to lean progressive after the Massachusetts loss? No, but I still call and email. My conscience will not allow me to support Melancon and Landrieu with donations, because both voted against the anti-torture bill.
I give Obama credit for the anti-torture bill. He's better than Bush, but not the fighter that I want to see in these perilous times.
What good does it do if the folks in Massachusetts regret their choice? They're stuck with Brown for 4 years.
Boocat, I'm not sure about Huckabee. The conservative religious right in my state forgave Vitter his trysts with prostitutes quickly and easily.
While some criticism should be directed at Democratic politicians, I think the underlying problem we face is that power in our political system (with each state, regardless of population, represented by two Senators) is drastically skewed towards conservative, smaller states. California has almost 70 times the population of Wyoming, yet has the same number of senators. This, in the end, is why right-wingers, who don't reflect the will of the people at large, can hold the legislative process hostage and gain an ever-increasing grip on the Supreme Court. The entire game is rigged against progressives, and indeed against the political center. This has to be recognized. Otherwise whenever Democrats and progressives suffer a setback, we blame ourselves to an undue extent. Yes, Mass. Dems made a bad mistake in nominating Coakley, who turned out to be a poor candidate and was deservedly defeated. Let's not take that as an occasion to fall into utter despair over Obama's performance and that of Democratic congressional leaders or to declare them hopeless.
ReplyDeleteThat said, I would like to see the President and the Dems get tougher and more assertive in the months ahead.
Brown has to run again in the next election. This one only lasts until then. I know how discouraging the fight is - look at the Senators and Rep (Cynthia Gloomis we call her)Lummis in Wyoming - lock step knee jerks
ReplyDeleteMary Clara, everything you say is true, and yet, I am not consoled.
ReplyDeleteIn addition, with the common use of the filibuster, and the Republicans holding together to defeat anything that the Democrats propose, the Democratic Senate is pretty much unable to move forward with legislation.
In these times, we need Democrats who are fighters, and I see far too many who look like craven cowards. The national politicians seem to care more about their own next election than they care about the citizens whom they represent.
Brown has to run again in the next election.
Ann, you're right. I got the date for Brown's next election wrong. I am beside myself today. I probably shouldn't even blog.
Our fighting radio commentator in New Orleans, Garland Robinette, has renamed the political parties the Reoublican'ts and the Demidon'ts.
ReplyDeleteAnn: "Obama has gotten more things done in one year than any president in history." To paraphrase Barney Frank, "What planet have you been living on?"
ReplyDeleteGrandmère, for what little it's worth I think Howard Dean is the key. Obama might be correct, but I tend to think he won - and we got both houses of Congress big time - because of Dean's 50 State strategy. People can smell BS, somebody like Dean, who actually believes what he says, is therefore more effective than the bully Rahmbo and his ilk.
ReplyDeleteMotheramelia, I heard Susie Red Dress today yammering about her opposition to Health Care Reform, seems she doesn't think we can afford it because it will raise the deficit (Not true). She's only a moderate on abortion rights. Anything else she toes the Republican line.
And for what it's worth I can't see where Conservatism has anything to do with the Republicans of the 21st Century. They're more Orwellian than Burkean.
Steven -- look at the statistics -- Rachel Maddow had them on her show last week. Don't listen to the FAUX reports
ReplyDeleteOrmonde, Garland is good.
ReplyDeleteSteven, did you hear Barney Frank's statement last night? What planet is he on?
"I feel strongly that the Democratic majority in congress must respect the process and make no effort to bypass the electoral results. If Martha Coakley had won, I believe we could have worked out a reasonable compromise between the House and Senate health care bills. But since Scott Brown has won and the Republicans now have 41 votes in the senate, that approach is no longer appropriate."
The Republicans would be using every trick and maneuver in the book to pass health care legislation before the new senator was seated.
Wade, Dean tells the truth. I'd like to see him in Rahm's place, but those who have said that Obama sets the policy are right. Obama would not pay attention to Dean.
I wonder when the Dems lose big in the next election, if they will read the results as, "We didn't lean far enough right".
Wait! This is getting ridiculous. Barney Frank had second thoughts. See TPM.
ReplyDelete