Slog
News & ArtsThursday, January 21, 2010
Politics Our Values
Posted by Charles Mudede on Thu, Jan 21, 2010 at 8:33 AM
The Dems could push health care reform through before Brown arrives, but that will not be the case...
Obama insisted today that the Senate wait for Brown to be seated before they make any changes to its version of the health care reform legislation.In a similar situation, a GOP-controlled Senate would have, of course, jammed a bill through, and had no sense of shame about it. But those kinds of values, which are at root unfair, uncouth, and generally nasty, are not the values of those on the left. Obama is right to wait for Brown. That is the left (not right) thing to do—be fair, play fair. As much as we want Dems to be aggressive and even stubborn, the party can only go so far in that hard direction. It can never go as far as Republicans without completely losing the meaning of what being on the left is all about. We are just not mean-spirited people; we are by definition humanists. I do not think this is a flaw, indeed, this is our strength—even if it is abused by those who refuse to play by the rules."Here's one thing I know and I just want to make sure that this is off the table: The Senate certainly shouldn't try to jam anything through until Scott Brown is seated," the president said. "People in Massachusetts spoke. He's got to be part of that process."
1
I completely disagree with you Charles. If we Dems want to get anything accomplished, we need to start being every bit as ruthless and uncompromising in our efforts as Republicans, if not more so. Playing nice may be a moral good, but it is completely impractical, and I would say in this case dangerous, way of doing business when the other side will exploit that tendency and make you pay for it. Clearly, being assholes hasn't hurt the Republican image in the slightest. Maybe we should give it a try.
2
Smart move by Obama.
He is on the edge of a precipice and it will take careful stepping to get off without falling in.
This is a great first step.
(Charles, your assumption about what a GOP-controlled Senate would have done is unkind and beneath you. I forgive you.)
He is on the edge of a precipice and it will take careful stepping to get off without falling in.
This is a great first step.
(Charles, your assumption about what a GOP-controlled Senate would have done is unkind and beneath you. I forgive you.)
3
Obama, in sad point of fact, plans to launch more unilateral preemptive attacks on health care reform.
http://www.philly.com/philly/wires/ap/bu…
This is linked on the White House health care reform blog.
http://www.philly.com/philly/wires/ap/bu…
This is linked on the White House health care reform blog.
4
Wrong. Brown is going to thank Obama for waiting for him, and then kick America in the teeth by obstructing healthcare in every way possible. We're going to end up pushing it through anyway, thus playing like good boys and girls for the next week or two is pointless, and only serves to waste time. This kind of thinking plays into the GOP's hand and is quite possibly a large part of why we're in this clusterfuck in the first place.
5
Utter bullshit, Charles. That's the kind of thinking that allows the unscrupulous to run roughshod over the rights of others. These people cannot be dealt with in any honorable way, they can only be fought with their own weapons.
6
4
Democrats are in this clusterfuck in the first place because the proposed bill is shitty and gets shittier by the day.
Take a breath,
listen to the voters,
go back to the drawing board and come up with some actual 'reform'...
Democrats are in this clusterfuck in the first place because the proposed bill is shitty and gets shittier by the day.
Take a breath,
listen to the voters,
go back to the drawing board and come up with some actual 'reform'...
7
5 but you pussies are soooo bad at it and all you manage to do is get your balls cut off and shoved down your throats. try playing nice and see if that works any better...
8
I actually agree with part of what charles said. yes, democrats are polite, and as nice as that is, it just isn't going to get us what we need. we didn't elect them to be nice! we elected them to make reforms! repubs understand that.
11
They would jam it through if the public supported it. Seems like the system is actually working correctly this time. The people made themselves heard and the politicians reacted. Silly to describe this as a failure due to some moral superiority of Democrats.
12
How come you guys at SLOG dont talk much about Al Franken.
He was kind of the Scott Brown of the Democrats since he established the 60 vote bloc.
But for all his bluster he sems to hve made a fool of himself and insulted other senators.
How come you guys at SLOG dont talk much about Al Franken.
He was kind of the Scott Brown of the Democrats since he established the 60 vote bloc.
But for all his bluster he sems to hve made a fool of himself and insulted other senators.
13
Anytime Charles comments on the realities of American life, he sounds like a child. Stick to the abstract statements about the meaning of life, etc.
The real reason the GOP wants to reset the HCR debate, and many Dems are agreeing, is they want another cash call from the lobbyists. We saw how many millions were poured into campaign coffers, and there were probably much more flowing to other pockets, during the 2009 round of HCR. Congress doesn't give up a revenue stream easily - they milk it dry. The health care & insurance lobbyists will have no choice but to pony up another couple hundred million to get their bill passed, and incumbents will have huge campaign coffers they can use to fight off challengers.
We will still get a shitty bill, designed to enrich the insurance & BigPharm industry, but at least our "representatives" will have made a fortune in doing so.
Sorry, Charlie. Americans really don't believe in fair play: we believe in money.
The real reason the GOP wants to reset the HCR debate, and many Dems are agreeing, is they want another cash call from the lobbyists. We saw how many millions were poured into campaign coffers, and there were probably much more flowing to other pockets, during the 2009 round of HCR. Congress doesn't give up a revenue stream easily - they milk it dry. The health care & insurance lobbyists will have no choice but to pony up another couple hundred million to get their bill passed, and incumbents will have huge campaign coffers they can use to fight off challengers.
We will still get a shitty bill, designed to enrich the insurance & BigPharm industry, but at least our "representatives" will have made a fortune in doing so.
Sorry, Charlie. Americans really don't believe in fair play: we believe in money.
14
Obama asking Congress to wait until Brown is seated before voting on health care isn't just him being "nice" or "polite." Nor is it "dangerous"...what's dangerous is the supposition that the will of the people (and like it or not, Brown's election IS the will of the people) should be subverted in a partisan way, for the sake of passing one bill. The left is better than that. We actually believe in things. We have principles. Why would you fight the right with their own weapons? Do you want to become that which you despise?
15
American politics rewards the unfair, the uncouth, the nasty and the mean-spirited. In the realm of political success, there is no room for well-meaning humanists who play by the rules (those people may participate, but they will never be successful).
I don't disagree with your point about the meaning of being on the left, but I don't see an inexorable link between leftism and the Democratic Party. True leftists are free to be polite and fair-minded, but if the Democratic Party is ever going to achieve success, it will need to play dirty.
I don't disagree with your point about the meaning of being on the left, but I don't see an inexorable link between leftism and the Democratic Party. True leftists are free to be polite and fair-minded, but if the Democratic Party is ever going to achieve success, it will need to play dirty.
16
This is a line of thought much on my mind lately. Why does it seem our only choice as activists, as politicos, (and, frankly, as men) is to be either assholes or pussies? That's it? These are my options? If I have to be either a pussy or an asshole, give me pussy every time! At the end of the day I'd rather respect myself. Impossible to do as an asshole. And why orifices?
17
@16
There is a third choice. Be a prick and stick it to both the assholes and the pussies. That's my choice.
There is a third choice. Be a prick and stick it to both the assholes and the pussies. That's my choice.
18
I completely agree with Charles on this; the main reason I grew to despise the republicans is there lack of civility, open-mindedness, and tact. Their rule in the last decade was too close to absolute for me to stomach.
19
Even if you don't believe in the Democrating core principles, the republicans have done nothing but openly declaring themselves obstructionists! Then they have the further audacity to contribute NOTHING to the table.
I'm all for minority rights, but this is getting ridiculous! The American people have selected, it's a very slim minority from Massachussets with a fractured party.
I really really do appreciate Obama for taking the moral high ground ... any maybe that's the only way we'll trust anyone in Washington.
Still, this failure stings ...
I'm all for minority rights, but this is getting ridiculous! The American people have selected, it's a very slim minority from Massachussets with a fractured party.
I really really do appreciate Obama for taking the moral high ground ... any maybe that's the only way we'll trust anyone in Washington.
Still, this failure stings ...
20
Franken hasn't made a fool of himself. He's openly called bullshit where he's seen it. He makes his case clearly and sharply when discussing issues with voters, and actually listens to their opinions with that condescending and dismissive smirk every shiny-cheeked Republican makes within 5 words of an opposing viewpoint being spoken.
Seriously - what is it with that "shine" and Republicans? Yeah, folks like Biden and Pelosi get the same twitchy smirk, but their cheeks don't look like polished apples when they do it.
diggum
Seriously - what is it with that "shine" and Republicans? Yeah, folks like Biden and Pelosi get the same twitchy smirk, but their cheeks don't look like polished apples when they do it.
diggum
21
And, it's why we can't get anything accomplished...look, we don't have to be slimey hypocritical, murdering, lying, cheating, stealing scuzzballs but frequently (actually, usually) you have to be a hard-nosed, tough ass mean bastard to get shit done. LBJ, JFK, Truman, FDR got shit done because they weren't afraid to be bastards and play the political game. The Democrat presidents after LBJ; Carter, Clinton, and Obama were/are centrists who want to play "fair" and "honorable" and be "popular" and none of them really got much shit done. (and, it didn't help that Carter and Clinton were outsiders, governors with no national experience or knowledge and Obama is basically a political neophyte).
Note: JFK played the nice game too, at least publicly, but he had Bobby around to be the bastard.
Note: JFK played the nice game too, at least publicly, but he had Bobby around to be the bastard.
23
Sometimes the smart thing to do is not the right thing to do. Obama's efforts to look patrician are just making him look weak. Does he think voters are going to remember he played by the rules when they go to the booth to vote? Of course not. Voters are only gong to think about what he has done for them, and so far, he hasn't done shit.
24
Good Morning Charles,
I part with you partner. That conceit that people of the Left are necessarily humanist and those of the Right not is mistaken. The Right and the Left have their monsters (Hitler and StaIin respectively are the worst manifestations of that). I am a man of the right and most certainly humanistic and civil. You've read some of my posts. The American system with it's "separation of powers" ensures that to the degree it can our elected representatives play by the rules fairly. But rules change (many want the filibuster rule removed). As several Sloggers just noted many from the left side of the political spectrum, politics is essentially nasty. Being "nice" might not get you anywhere. One side, however malleable that is wants change and wants an agenda passed. The other not so much. Pres. Obama knew this when he was inaugurated a year ago. His agenda was ambitious. But, he knew he'd have contention. It's the nature of the beast.
Yes, I support universal health care but it isn't necessarily anti-humanist not to support the current bill which doesn't have the public option anyway. Something like this should have been passed in the 1930s. However, the AMA and others lobbied against it.
In America, politics is a myriad of opinions and interests. To get a tectonic policy change through Congress is a challenge. Pres. Obama didn't have much experience in the US Senate. Remember he had essentially 3 years. He spent his 4th year campaigning vs. McCain's 22 years in the Senate. He is learning getting his agenda through is NOT easy.
I part with you partner. That conceit that people of the Left are necessarily humanist and those of the Right not is mistaken. The Right and the Left have their monsters (Hitler and StaIin respectively are the worst manifestations of that). I am a man of the right and most certainly humanistic and civil. You've read some of my posts. The American system with it's "separation of powers" ensures that to the degree it can our elected representatives play by the rules fairly. But rules change (many want the filibuster rule removed). As several Sloggers just noted many from the left side of the political spectrum, politics is essentially nasty. Being "nice" might not get you anywhere. One side, however malleable that is wants change and wants an agenda passed. The other not so much. Pres. Obama knew this when he was inaugurated a year ago. His agenda was ambitious. But, he knew he'd have contention. It's the nature of the beast.
Yes, I support universal health care but it isn't necessarily anti-humanist not to support the current bill which doesn't have the public option anyway. Something like this should have been passed in the 1930s. However, the AMA and others lobbied against it.
In America, politics is a myriad of opinions and interests. To get a tectonic policy change through Congress is a challenge. Pres. Obama didn't have much experience in the US Senate. Remember he had essentially 3 years. He spent his 4th year campaigning vs. McCain's 22 years in the Senate. He is learning getting his agenda through is NOT easy.
25
Hahaha you're not serious. You're just poking Slog for your twisted amusement.
The Repubes are vandals. You can't work with them. It's been proven. Decide what's right, fight like fuck for it and let the chips fall where they may.
The Repubes are vandals. You can't work with them. It's been proven. Decide what's right, fight like fuck for it and let the chips fall where they may.
Advertisement
Most Commented on Slog
-
Hating People Doesn't Make Them Thinner by Jen Graves
-
Los Angeles Gay Bar Bans Bachelorette Parties Until Marriage Equality Is Attained by David Schmader
-
Fill in the Blank by Grant Brissey
-
This Reminds Me of the Great Calculator Scare of the Late '70s/Early '80s by David Schmader
-
Idiot Tries to Defend Bigoted Anti-Gay-Marriage Preacher on Anderson Cooper by Paul Constant
-
Six Moms with Too Much Time on Their Hands and a Shitty Website Decide to Fight Gay Superheroes by Paul Constant
-
Why Mayor McGinn's Wife Canceled Her Family's Seattle Times Subscription by Eli Sanders
-
What the Hell Is Wrong With Seattle's Pride Parade? by Dominic Holden
-
The Saturday Morning News by Unpaid Intern
-
NYC Man Ticketed for Not Riding in the Bike Lane by Jonathan Golob
RSS
Facebook
Twitter
Comments (25) RSS