The Health Care Dealmaking: Will We See It On C-SPAN?

It is nice to see one media outlet with enough integrity to call out Obama and the Demos on another one of their lies to the American public.

I am sure Time and others stand at the ready to defend the closed door decision.

Well, good luck with that request, Lamb. Doesn’t appear that it’ll suddenly clear up like those glasses that change color from sunlight to inside.

The implication that Republicans would be truthful in a similar situation is a prima facie lie.

KT, thanks for staying on this. If c-span fails, will you and your swamp colleagues get the inside story thru other means? I’d guess those involve leaks, Clouseau-esque disguises (fake intern, pizza delivery), Deep Throat-like informant (and moving flower pots), etc. Does the Capitol have ceiling plenums you and Amy can crawl thru to listen in? (take a benadryl; it gets dusty up there) But seriously, when there are closed / secret meetings like these, without giving away too many trade secrets, how do you get the scoop for us? Thx for your insights.

i’m thinking of putting on a red sari and seeing if I can get past security that way…

This is one of many BO promises that have gone by the wayside.
.
One promise that, interestingly enough, has gotten very little press notice (surprise surprise) is this one:

“Improve Airline Security: Barack Obama believes we must redouble our efforts to determine if the measures implemented since 9/11 are adequately addressing the threats our nation continues to face from airplane-based terrorism. Airline passengers are still not screened against a comprehensive terrorist watch list. Such a list must be developed and used in a way that safeguards passengers’ privacy while ensuring the safety of air travel.”
http://www.barackobama.com/issues/homeland_security/index_campaign.php

From a more detailed plan: http://www.barackobama.com/pdf/issues/HomelandSecurityFactSheet.pdf

Improve Airline Security: Between October 2005 and January 2006, Government Accountability Office investigators were able to smuggle bomb components past federal screeners at all 21 airports they targeted. As a member of the Senate Homeland Security and Government Affairs Committee, Barack Obama believes we must redouble our efforts to determine if the measures implemented after 9/11 are adequately addressing the threats our nation continues to face from airplane-based terrorism. Even though a law has been passed to screen 100 percent of airborne cargo for explosives by 2010, we must ensure that the Transportation Security Administration has the technology and manpower to conduct such screenings effectively. The airlines must be partners in this effort, but the TSA must be responsible for the screening. Obama and Biden have supported increased numbers of federal airport screeners and improved funding for aviation security. Airline passengers are still not screened against a comprehensive terrorist watch list. Such a list must be developed way that safeguards passengers’ privacy while ensuring the safety of air travel.”

What really ought to happen is that Gibbs, Rahm, Obama and any other administration guy, when interviewed or asked questions, should be confronted with this. They should be forced to admit that yes, a campaign promise was broken.

Not surprised to see the only defense that the left can muster is name calling.

Ha! Good one, KT.

The time for open discussion of the legislation was last year. That was the time for meaningful hearings. And for a serious analysis of ALL possible solutions.

Remember? Back when your key source, Max Baucus, was having single-payer proponents arrested for asking for a seat at the table? Remember that?

Link: http://www.thenation.com/blogs/thebeat/435159

Remember when the Obama WH was cutting deals behind closed doors for industry support? Remember that?

I hate this bill and I would vote against it in a heartbeat if I had a vote, but now is not the time to whine about negotiating behind closed doors. When a final bill is 98% crafted and you have to hammer out the final details, now is exactly the time to go behind closed doors to avoid too many cooks spoiling the pot.

Don’t get me wrong. I’d love it if C-SPAN broadcast the negotiations, but let’s not get all righteousness about transparency at the 11th hour.

…KT, go for the sari. You’d look great in it and it’s a proven winner for gaining access to events.

“I’d love it if C-SPAN broadcast the negotiations, but let’s not get all righteousness about transparency at the 11th hour.”
.
Translation, I don’t care that my president’s word is crap.

It;s either make the negotiations in private and on a fast timetable or the bill doesn’t get passed, TV or no TV. Public dealmaking would be a golden opportunity for the GOP.

http://www.political-buzz.com/

Yes, square. In fact, I wrote about all of those things. Just like I’m writing about this now.

For f-ck’s sake!
.
Can’t you focus on this particular shattered campaign promise?
.
Or is it not Drudge-y enough?

To refresh your memory, here are a few links:
.
http://swampland.blogs.time.com/2009/05/12/why-god-invented-c-span-9/
.
http://www.time.com/time/politics/article/0,8599,1931595,00.html
.
http://swampland.blogs.time.com/2009/08/06/obamas-secret-deal-with-the-drugmakers/
.

So right you are freeinpa:
.

“(APPLAUSE)

That’s what I did in Illinois, to provide insurance for people who did not have it. That’s what I will do in bringing all parties together, not negotiating behind closed doors, but bringing all parties together, and broadcasting those negotiations on C-SPAN so that the American people can see what the choices are.

(APPLAUSE)”

.
“APPLAUSE” indeed!!
.
This is perhaps the most egregious of all of Obama’s promises he has not kept to date from his campaign.
.
Of course we also have the campaign ad that no one here at TIME.com has made a comment on either where he vilified John McCain for proposing a “tax on health care benefits”. Remember that as well, Karen?

[...] = location.href; addthis_title = document.title; addthis_pub = 'timecom'; RSS C-SPAN CEO revives Obama transparency pledge. tiiQuigoWriteAd(755778, 1290697, 600, 240, [...]

Thanks for highlighting this important “Change We Can Believe In” campaign promise, KT.
.
I believed that there was a higher likelihood of HCR transparency because candidate Obama campaigned in such explicit detail on the issue. I thought “He’s making such a big deal out of it, and getting such a positive response, surely he won’t be in a position to ignore these promises later…“, but I was wrong, apparently.
.
Was I stupid for thinking that these promises might be acted upon?

sz, why should I? Obama’s campaign promises are more worthless than most candidates’.
.
Funny how Obama’s campaign promise on airline security have gotten zero press attention. Why am I not surprised?

“i’m thinking of putting on a red sari and seeing if I can get past security that way…”

.
Hey!!! You made me spit out my coffee!!
.
Just one other question, will your tummy show?? Or, will you use one of those “burka-like” saris?
.
Just don’t have the White House, what’s her name, Social Director I think give you the name of her dress designer. She doesn’t have a clue. I could make one out of burlap for you if you want Karen!!

The triumph of “Hope [and Change] over experience.”
.
Guys, Barack Obama is not a very good person. He doesn’t believe that his word matters. This was obvious from the campaign. That you guys thought that he was shows your naivete.

So KT, what is Gibbs saying about Obama’s promise?

“Was I stupid for thinking that these promises might be acted upon?”

.
I am spitting out coffee right and left here today. UGH!
.
Stuart:
.
Stupid? Never for you. However, naive! Absolutely!

[...] the original post: The Health Care Dealmaking: Will We See It On C-SPAN? – Swampland … JustOneMinute: The Health Care Bill – So Many DealsTennessee Guerilla Women: Obama's [...]

CEO Brian Lamb sent this letter to the House and Senate leaders…
.
Is it within Obama’s authority to dictate to the members of Congress how they should conduct their meetings?

‘And part of the reason, I think, that they have failed is we have not been able to bring Democrats, Republicans together to get it done.’
.
Much to the frustration of many dems, Obama continued to strive for bipartisanship long after it was clear that the republicans were unwilling to negotiate honestly. Remember Bachus’s HCR working group? The republicans received 1/2 of the seats, even though they only represented 2/5′s of the senate. Remember how that worked out? Grassley, a member of the negotiating group, went before the cameras to spread lies about what the group was producing. When the other side keeps punching you in the face, eventually you have to stop turning the other cheek and move on.
.
Was Obama’s promise empty campaign rhetoric or was it a naive misreading of how the republicans would behave? After the lying and obstruction the gop has used in response to efforts at bipartisanship, I don’t really care anymore. I am willing to skip the TV show to get a (watered down) HCR bill. It’s very clear now that turning on the CSpan cameras isn’t going to make bipartisanship happen. And it’s bipartisanship — not TV — that Obama was offering.

Was it in his authority to promise he could back when he was campaigning? I think in both instances, it comes down to the President’s bully pulpit–something he promised to use, and hasn’t in this case.

I’m going to guess that you hypocritical @ssholes voted for George (“humble foreign policy”) Bush after he broke a dozen campaign statements and lied us all into the disastrous Iraq debacle. Also, that you’d lie about it now.
.
Why don’t you just STFU and let the honest grownups discuss Obama’s latest backslide.

Nice sly little attempt at a defense . . . .
.
So are you trying to insinuate that Obama gets a pass if his promise was somehow beyond his power.
.
He could also say he’s gonna veto it too . . . .
.
So grape, what’s your defense of Obama’s airline security promise??

Here’s what Gibbs had to say in a response to Jake Tapper about Obama’s campaign promise:
.
“Well, Jake, first of all, let’s take a step back and understand that this is a process legislatively that has played out over the course of nine months. There have been a countless number of public hearings. The Senate did a lot of their voting at 1:00 and 2:00 in the morning on C-SPAN. A lot of this debate — I think what the president promised and pledged was so that you could see who was fighting for their constituents and who was fighting for drug and insurance companies…”

“Well, but the bill gets put together on the floor of the Senate,” Gibbs said. “That’s where the bill got augmented. And I think if you watched that debate — I don’t know — I wasn’t up at 1:00 or 2:00 in the morning for a lot of those votes, but I think if the American public had watched — has watched the committee process play out in both the House and the Senate, watched the process play out on both the floor and the — the floor of the House and the floor of the Senate, you’d have seen quite a bit of public hearing and public airing, and I think quite frankly, people have a pretty good sense of who is battling on behalf of thousands of lobbyists that are trying to protect drugs profits and insurance profits, and who’s fighting on behalf of middle-class Americans hoping once and for all to have access to affordable insurance and removing insurance company restrictions like discriminating against people that are sick.

“If c-span fails, will you and your swamp colleagues get the inside story thru other means?”

Yes it will be interesting to see how they will blame Republicans for this miserable when it will be conducted without any Republicans.

Being experienced “journalists” I am sure they will find a way.

Karen, I agree with Square1.
I would like for them to come out with the best of both bills for us and not the health industry. If it is possible to change the rules in both house and Senate to require only a majority vote.
.
I do not hold out much hope for this.

I hate to throw a wrench into the self righteousness of so many but did it ever occur to anyone including KT that while Obama has provided more transparency than any previous administration, only 100% transparency will satisfy the self-serving press or the the administration’s opponents salivating over the possibility of using any additional exposure as a campaign ploy rather than an opportunity to conduct the people’s business.
.
Perhaps if Republicans had negotiated on anything in good faith or the media was willing to report the truth rather than play megaphone for right wing propaganda and stenographers for the wingnut message operation. KT, of course you are not a media critic so I don’t expect you to be capable of taking responsibility for the role the media plays in making additional transparency on this issue a non-starter. But personally, how many of your stories honestly explored the antics being pursued by the other side? Why should the administration give you additional material if you only twist the facts around their necks until it has no relation to the truth and serves only to derail their legislation and give the GOP a psychological win at the expense of another nail in the nation’s future.

“Why don’t you just STFU and let the honest grownups discuss Obama’s latest backslide.”

By honest grown-ups do you mean the delusional bunch who believe only they have the truth?

It has been clear the only lies the left has countenance for are the lies to themselves and from every leftist politician.When called into account they name call and tell people to STFU. Grown ups INDEED!

Gibbs is right on one thing, I watched and I saw who was fighting for constituents and who was pushing for the Lobbies. I hope a lot more constituents watched.

With apologies to Bill S.: Dee “[writes] and infinite deal of nothing, more than [any commenter in Swampland]; [her] reasons are as two bits of wheat in two bushels of chaff; you shall seek all day ere you find them, and when you have them, they are not worth the search.”

“I hate to throw a wrench into the self righteousness of so many but did it ever occur to anyone including KT that while Obama has provided more transparency than any previous administration”

More like a paper clip than a wrench. The transparency has been non-existent with this administration. But a question you should think about, as I posed to KT above: When this nightmare of a bill comes to light (and it will) and the public becomes even more incensed than it already is over the meddling left into HC, how will you blame Republicans for it when they will be locked out?

KT:
.
Well, I don’t think that a “Why God Invented C-SPAN” post adequately addressed the significance of arresting the proponents of single-payer. But my larger point remains: There was a time to discuss policy and debate possible solutions. Ideally that process should have been wide open to the public. Our legislators should have been seeking input from experts and stakeholders, rather than approaching with preconceptions based upon whichever lobbyist had their ear.
.
But that time has passed. Now Congress has to combine the bills and vote. As long as everyone has the time to review the product of Reid’s and Pelosi’s efforts, I don’t see what the complaint is.
.
I’m not saying that because I want the legislation to pass. I don’t. I want it to fail.

Was it in his authority to promise he could back when he was campaigning?
.
In retrospect, it sounds more like wishful thinking than promise. Would you consider the part about “bringing all parties together” a broken Obama campaign promise because the Senate and House leadership aren’t opening the reconciliation session to other members of Congress?
.
Not to mention that the opposition party has little interest in anything else but knee-jerk opposition?
.
..the President’s bully pulpit–something he promised to use, and hasn’t in this case.
.
Funny how Lamb’s letter names Obama as one of the people who have “talked about the value of transparent discussions” around health care reform, then. Sounds a lot like the pulpit has already been bullied.

“Public dealmaking would be a golden opportunity for the GOP.”

A golden opportunity to have an open discussion about the real intent of the left and their attempt to destroy over 10% of the US economy?

Or an opportunity to have a democratically elected Congress perform their sworn duties.

It is another example of why th eleft has to do it in the dark bowels of thier own offices. Th emore disinfectant poured on a festering sore of this bill the less the American public like it. But then the left despite their protestations have little concern fo rthe American public.

[...] the original post: The Health Care Dealmaking: Will We See It On C-SPAN? – Swampland … Posted in Health Tags: actually-get, barack, barack-obama, during-the-presidential, plan, [...]

With all due respect, this isn’t about anyone’s wild expectations or Republican partisanship, this is about Barack Obama’s campaign rhetoric. Either he didn’t care much about the truth of any number of things he was saying about civil liberties, special interest control of Washington and transparency, or he was lying outright. I’m still willing to consider the possibility that the things he promised were much more difficult that he imagined, when he promised them. If that’s the case then he should explain to his supporters why that is, not send Gibbs out to insult us with more lies.

The only name-calling, guys, relates to human nature (at least political nature anyway). You honestly think for a nanosecond that Repubs in a similar situation of power would do the right thing and make last-minute negoations open to the public? Be for real.

sw, i agree with you. By the way, from an ideological perspective, I’d support single payer over this thing. I dont think it’s proper for the government to coerce millions of Americans to fork over cash to insurance companies. I also don’t think it’s constitutional. The Constitution states that the government can “regulate” interstate commerce. This is a wee bit more than simple regulation.

For those who said I was name-calling (see start of thread) in a perfect world I would love to see sausage being made here, but no one will allow it. So don’t come to me implying that the GOP would do anything different. If nothing else they might do worse. Or did we suddenly do the Rip Van Winkle from 2001 – 2009?

The implication I got from your snarky “your key source” reference was that somehow you thought I had been ignoring these other issues, and also that I had been pulling punches to curry favor with sources. I think that is a completely unfair charge. In fact, not only did I post something on the single payer folks getting ejected, but I have repeatedly asked Baucus (and others) about the issue. In fact, I raised this specific issue with Baucus in the one shot I got at asking him a question at this breakfast with reporters:
.
http://swampland.blogs.time.com/2009/05/21/baucus-predicts-gop-votes-for-health-care-reform/
.
And for the record, I have LOTS of sources, none of whom is “key.”

One no one implied any such thing. However, the Demos promised to “drain the swamp” and “most open administration” etc. I don’t recall the Republicans writing a bill while the Demos were locked out of the room and then tried to pass using measures not ever used fo rthis type of bill.

The moral justification of “they do it too” is pathetic and untrue!

“I don’t recall the Republicans writing a bill while the Demos were locked out of the room and then tried to pass using measures not ever used fo rthis type of bill.”
.
There’s never been any need to lock Democrats out of anything because, unlike Republicans, they’re not lying, partisan, obstructionist, corporatist whores who have no interest in governing the country responsibly.

I really can’t believe the ridiculous whining about this process.

As an aside, let me say that Obama already violated his pledge when he cut a deal with PhRMA, so I’m not here to defend him on that score. But, for God’s sake, people, get a grip.

People have forgotten what “transparency” is about. It is about knowing what input third-parties have into the legislative process. It is also about letting people know what is in proposed legislation before it gets voted on.

“Transparency” does not mean you have the right to pry into private discussions between legislators.

You know what is in the House bill. You know what is in the Senate bill. As long as the health care lobbyists aren’t secretly invited into the reconciliation process, and as long as the final bill is released to the public, WTF is the problem? There are no secrets here.

This speak to the principle problem with Democrats. You sit in awe of Republicans and ask why Democrats can’t get things done like they do and then as usual want to hamstring Democrats by not allowing them to adapt to changes on the ground.
.
Everything is relative. Obama promised to prohibit lobbyist from his administration. He’s done more than any previous administration but that’s not enough. Because in cases that were paramount, he issued a handful of waivers. Never mind that the former lobbyist in question would not be working on the same issues and who they lobbied for (i.e. orphans and children over greedy corporate interests) would also be taken into account. Then the press decides that either you are 100% lobbyist free or you lied.
.
Likewise with transparency. the previous administration didn’t give you squat, but despite the constant irritations of false reporting of visitors with similar names to controversial figures he gives you white house visitors. This administration is more forth coming with information that any previous administration but unless its 100% transparency on everything he lied.
.
Please give me a break, what hypocrisy! And fellow lefties you ought to be weary of bipartisanship in tearing down this administration. As for the industry deals and I suppose you are talking about pharma, I believe that was on c-span, just as most of the committee debates which is the reason the public was so turned off to the health care legislation because they got turned off by the unprecedented look at the sausage making, but God forbid he has any private meetings because than that means he lied. You people are ridiculous. The GOP only wants to use this issue in hopes of forcing Democrats to reinstitute conference so they can have another opportunity to stall and derail the legislation. This administration has kept more campaign promises in the first years than any previous administration, but oh yeah he was doing too much.

Agreed. Whether some dog-and-pony show is broadcast on CSPAN is the least of it.

With all due respect, this isn’t about anyone’s wild expectations or Republican partisanship, this is about Barack Obama’s campaign rhetoric.
.
…And what people who voted for him (myself included) should demand in good faith from Obama’s Administration.
.
We voted for these things, we deserved to see these actions take place, period.
.
More importantly, the substance of those pledges were going to be good for the country, for our democracy. The country deserved to have those promises kept.
.
Even if one somehow contends that we, the voters, aren’t that important in the scheme of things,our nation is certainly worse off for Obama’s missed opportunities and broken transparency promises.

“There’s never been any need to lock Democrats out of anything because, unlike Republicans, they’re not lying, partisan, obstructionist, corporatist whores who have no interest in governing the country responsibly”

“For those who said I was name-calling”

Your reasoning is a cartoon skit

Can we all agree that Barack Obama should not have made that promise since it was impractical and would never have led to any chance of healthcare reform? Was it the worst mistake he has made? No. Does it make him a terrible and untrustworthy person? No.

Can we also agree that people didn’t pull the lever for Barack Obama because he promised that healtcare negotiations would be held on C-Span. How much of an audience does CSpan even get? I note that in the CEO’s letter he refers to “literally hundreds of hours” of tape of committee hearings and healthcare debates. How many of the people here complaining about the lack of transparency have seen more than 10 hours of that footage? Or, I’ll be even more generous, how many have watched more than half an hour of any of this footage (save for the voting at the end)?

Much as I disagree with a lot of what Square 1 says, I agree completely with his latest post? Is there anything about this bill and what’s in it that people don’t know about? I mean it’s only been the most widely discussed, dissected pulled apart piece of legislation I can ever remember.

Obama’s mistake was to promise something that was not ever going to be practical to do. Shame on him! No politician has ever done that, ever. He has betrayed me and my people and I’ll never support him again…

but on the other side of that, his administration is one of the most (if not the most) transparent in history. I’ll ask the group a further question – how many people have taken any time to review the latest release of the white house visitor logs? I know that the first lot got a lot of people doing that exercise but after that lot, interest seemed to have meaningfully reduced (apart from some spurious discussions about whether or not someone from ACORN was in the WH).

Will you only be satisfied if there is a 24 hour ovalofficecam?

I’m sorry KT – what a self-serving crap and by the way it’s one of the many reasons so many have no respect for your profession. Obama was elected President not KIng and absolute ruler. Granted, you are clearly so taken with Cheney’s authoritarian interpretation of the all powerful presidency but in the real world or at least Constitutionally, the Congress is a co-equal branch of government and Obama has treated them as such since he campaigned on the wrongness of the Bush administrations assault on constitutional checks and balances.

Unlike the left believes, truth is not relative.

And
“but despite the constant irritations of false reporting of visitors with similar names to controversial figures he gives you white house visitors. This administration is more forth coming with information that any previous administration but unless its 100% transparency on everything he lied.”

Irritation of false reporting? That’s fraud and deception Dee not an irritation. Your sanctimonious ramblings are an irritation. Having Federal documents falsified is a crime. That’s not relative either.

[...] Continue reading here: The Health Care Dealmaking: Will We See It On C-SPAN? – Swampland … [...]

[...] here to see the original: The Health Care Dealmaking: Will We See It On C-SPAN? – Swampland …   « National Journal Online — Health Care Experts — U.S. Health [...]

“More importantly, the substance of those pledges were going to be good for the country, for our democracy. The country deserved to have those promises kept.”
.
That’s right, Dee. Those of us for whom the policy is paramount think that Obama and the Democrats are made stronger against the political opposition by living up to those important policy commitments. Policy outcomes will determine whether the people think they are doing a good job, not whether liberals criticize them (nobody cares about that).

The implication I got from your snarky “your key source” reference was that somehow you thought I had been ignoring these other issues, and also that I had been pulling punches to curry favor with sources.
.
Here’s how I see it. I thought — and still think — that you were far too quick to adopt the perspective of Baucus as far as what was politically feasible.
.
I don’t think that you are always guilty of this. In particular, you deserve credit for challenging the leadership’s spin about filibusters and asking whether it would be more effective to force actual filibusters to occur.
.
However, you were too quick to accept that, of all the Congressional committees addressing HCR, the Senate Finance Committee’s views were of paramount importance. You were too quick to accept that single-payer was a non-starter. And you were too quick to accept Baucus’ view that it was absolutely necessary to comply with PAYGO or achieve a good CBO deficit score. E.g. I pay my health insurance premiums, not the federal government. Why do I care if the bill is deficit neutral or better? How does that lower my premiums? Answer: it doesn’t.
.
I used the phrase “your key source” because it appeared from your posts that, in researching your stories, you talked to talked to Baucus and his staff first and last and filled in with other sources around the edges. Don’t shoot the messenger. I’m just telling you what your reporting looked like.

Just as long as you acknowledge that the meeting was held on c-span and the deal was announced on c-span and despite months later being regurgitated in the new york times because someone suspected that they were going to get screwed on the deal and every body in the press and this blog got amnesia and acted like they had never heard of this so-called secret deal even though it was announced on national freaking TV with AARP present and everything — so much for transparency. And since when promising to do something means that you can never do something else? Did he ever promise that he would never have a private meeting about health care? No, only that he would put committee meetings on c-span and he did and they were. I would refer you again to the hundreds of hours of footage available for review. Unfortunately this president can never win with the left or the right. He committed the unpardonable sin of striving to be better, and as punishment he is held to a standard of perfection that no human being can possibly reach — oh yeah he is the messiah right so he’s not human , in fact Maureen Dowd says he’s an alien like Mr. Spock. Whatever he deserves it — how dare he attempt to be better than what we’re used too, I say either be perfect or STFU. I don’t need you to outline a vision of change to make this a more perfect union, either you should be perfect personally or admit you lied.

Dee — exactly!

“When called into account they name call and tell people to STFU. Grown ups INDEED!”

Yup, that’s what grownups do with spoiled, ignorant little children who don’t know when you shut their silly yaps. Now go to your room young man.

I see…
.
When we point out that the country would have been better served if Obama had kept his word, we should remember bad ol’ Bush, and think about other things that Obama did, otherwise we’re spoiled little babies demanding the impossible from him.
.
It can’t simply be that we should hold leaders –whoever they are– accountable for what they promise and do, that’s apparently not in the best interests of the nation. Instead, we should ruminate on just how bad it would be if the other guy were in office, and try to focus on the times when Obama was honest.

‘Will you only be satisfied if there is a 24 hour ovalofficecam?’
.
Nope! After any major event (such as the undie bomber attack) he must make a public statement immediately. If he decides to aim before firing we’ll criticize him for it. And, of course, he mustn’t forget to use the word ‘terrorism’ in every third sentence that crosses his lips.

Shepherdwong — Perhaps you live in an alternate universe from me but if what you say were actually true Bush would have never gotten his second term. In fact, Democrats have led Republicans substantially on every meaningful policy prescription for more than thirty years but that didn’t get them elected. The media shapes public opinion of any issue and as you can see from the loss of public support in health care reform and maintaining support for the public option is the direct result of media being cynical about the health care legislation except the public option although they doubt it would pass they never questioned whether it would work. On the other hand they constantly questioned whether the larger legislation would do any good. How do I know this, because they are only interested in politics and all they covered was the GOP talking points which were always negative about the substance. Now how is it you have a straight face and say that politics takes a back seat to policy in a nation that was consumed by death panels for months give me a break.

I understand your frustration, but remember: the promise was based upon the (false) belief that the republicans would bargain in good faith. Go back and look at the quote. True, it was about transparency, but it was primarily about bipartisanship. He was going to bring ‘…all parties together’. That’s clearly not going to happen without jeopardizing a more important promise — to deliver health insurance reform legislation.
.
From Stephen Colbert: ‘He believes the same thing Wednesday that he believed on Monday, no matter what happened Tuesday’.
.
Circumstances have to be taken into account. It’s fair to criticize the loss of transparency, but it’s not fair to ignore the reasons why.

You don’t have the slightest clue who I talk to, as your comment proves. Single payer WAS a non-starter–as even advocates such as Henry Waxman and John Dingell conceded from the outset. You seem to have preferred that I pretend otherwise.
.
Deficit-neutrality was a key requirement of the President, who insisted as well that any bill Congress give him be scored at $900 billion or less over 10 years. Apparently, you would have preferred that I ignore this, or pretend this wasn’t the case, because it didn’t matter to you.
.
It seems that your main complaint is that my reporting has been in the “reality-based community.” I could have been spending my time writing about things that WEREN’T happening, or I could choose to write about things that were, and shine a light on that. I think the latter is a more valuable use of my and my readers’ time.
.

Related to “transparency,” DeMint put a hold on the TSA director nom because he’s afraid the guy will authorize unionizing (word?) so we let the chain of authority go to heck until something bad happens again. Is this what Dick wants — a self-fufilling prophecy?

speaking of single payer, here is another post where none other than bernie sanders calls it a non-starter. I have frequently tried to give space here to alternative viewpoints, even though you do not seem to have noticed that:
.
http://swampland.blogs.time.com/2009/06/09/why-god-invented-c-span-15/

“…the promise was based upon the (false) belief that the republicans would bargain in good faith.”
.
Oh, Obama was a naïve rube who just fell off the turnip truck (after more than two years in the US Senate) and thought Republicans were going to help him pass the serious regulation of industry that is the Republicans (and some Democrats) sole mission to prevent. That’s better.

“Yup, that’s what grownups do with spoiled, ignorant little children who don’t know when you shut their silly yaps. Now go to your room young man.”

I can almost hear you stamping your feet little a little girl.

Still mentally exhausted and morally bankrupt. Shut up and sit down won’t work on HC or Crap and Trade and it certainly won’t work on me.

You like Obambi are in over your head

No stuart, but if you are going to intellectually honest than your response demands a more nuanced view. You don’t get to ignore all of the strides he’s made in transparency because you decide that his promise to be more open and have meetings on c-span which he kept by the way, actually meant or at least should have meant and apparently in your imagination meant to you, that he would have no private meetings on health care outside of the meetings he holds on c-span. And that his encouragement for Congress to hold committee hearings and debate on c-span means that they can never conduct any part of the process outside of c-span. Now you show me the link where he says that and I’ll concede the point, but until you do stop throwing out the baby with the bath water simply because its an inconvenient truth I’m going to have to lump you in with the rest of the folks who make up their own set of facts.

So after finally taking 9 months to get out of a Democratically controlled Committee, it is responsibility of one Republican Senator that the entire TSA is not up to the job.

We can see how well having our education system has work out by having it unionized. Incompetent teachers receive yearly raises and short of murder cannot be fired. It will do wonders for our security.

Oh by the way, I believe it would only add to the list of felons in the Obama adminstration since he filed false documents with Congress which I believe is perjury. And Democrats knew it before they voted him out of Committee without disclosing it.

Once again morally bankrupt leftists!

By the way Stuart, how did you come to the conclusion that the public would be better off by seeing even more of the process when the only people who are actually watching are those who are pretty much informed and have already picked their sides. When you call someone else dishonest and claim that the proof of their dishonesty is your own, you’ve got a real credibility issue.

When we point out that the country would have been better served if Obama had kept his word…
.
In this instance – Obama somehow ‘breaking a campaign promise’ because the Congressional leadership chose to do the reconciliation behind closed doors – what could Obama have done differently? Karen’s already given her faulty ‘bully pulpit’ argument above…Can anyone give me some explanation as to how this is under Obama’s control?
.
Now, I am disappointed by other decisions Obama has made that go against what was said in his campaign, but until there’s a solid explanation as to how Obama could control this specific set of meetings, most of y’all are just being overly dramatic.

First of all most of us do not have the time to view it. We work, raise families, etc.
.
Second if we had a reliable news media we wouldn’t need it.
.
Third all we would see anyway is some clip taken out of context or delivered the way the media wants us to see it.

Huh? C-SPAN covers things start to finish with no editing. The fact that people may not want to see it should not be blamed on the media. And it is impossible for any reporter to get a full and complete account of things that happen behind closed doors.

Well let’s hope the HC bill passes out paranoia medication

I am loving every minute of this thread, immensely. Oh how the tables have been turned.
.
(APPLAUSE)
.
Let’s see who wins the daily prize…shall we?
.

“The time for open discussion of the legislation was last year. That was the time for meaningful hearings. And for a serious analysis of ALL possible solutions.”

.

“But seriously, when there are closed / secret meetings like these, without giving away too many trade secrets, how do you get the scoop for us? Thx for your insights.”

(I personally love this one. I love how the heading for this thread is “transparency”, and someone comments on “closed/secret meetings”. AHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
.
But, moving on…
.

“There was a time to discuss policy and debate possible solutions. Ideally that process should have been wide open to the public. Our legislators should have been seeking input from experts and stakeholders, rather than approaching with preconceptions based upon whichever lobbyist had their ear.”

.
Yes, there we have it, “ideally”…. and, then it gets better.
.

“I hate this bill and I would vote against it in a heartbeat if I had a vote, but now is not the time to whine about negotiating behind closed doors. When a final bill is 98% crafted and you have to hammer out the final details, now is exactly the time to go behind closed doors to avoid too many cooks spoiling the pot.”

.
But, the winner is………………..
.

“No stuart, but if you are going to intellectually honest than your response demands a more nuanced view. You don’t get to ignore all of the strides he’s made in transparency because you decide that his promise to be more open and have meetings on c-span which he kept by the way, actually meant or at least should have meant and apparently in your imagination meant to you, that he would have no private meetings on health care outside of the meetings he holds on c-span.”

There are great drugs, which had the Dorgan Amendment passed, you could help with this little problem called FLIGHT OF IDEAS. Or, is it word salad? Hmmmmm
.
Honorable mention:
.

“i’m thinking of putting on a red sari and seeing if I can get past security that way…”

“C-SPAN covers things start to finish with no editing. The fact that people may not want to see it should not be blamed on the media. And it is impossible for any reporter to get a full and complete account of things that happen behind closed doors.”

.
Amen, amen, amen!!
.
Isn’t the real problem that with C-Span, the record would be there in video for everyone to see. For future campaigns to use, and to keep these bums honest. There is already enough “back-room” deals being done with lobbyists, let alone for specific legislative debates on any bill to be conducted in secret. Why are we a democracy in the first place if we have to hide it all behind closed doors?
.
Thank you thank you thank you, KT for exposing this, and I hope it remains out front so more people can see through this circus we call “our government”>

But Dee, it is true that Obama, as head of the executive branch, cannot dictate to Congress, a co-equal branch under the Constitution, how it conducts its business. And it is also true that he can nevertheless put some heat on them if he doesn’t like what they’re doing. (Harry Truman’s 1948 victory rested in large measure on his attacks on the “do-nothing Congress.”) KT is right about both points. I think she gives us enough credit to figure out what it all means. I wonder if we deserve that credit.
.
Given that the comments on this blog display widely divergent views on what is real and what is not, it seems unfair to criticize KT for trying to tell us what’s actually going on as she finds and reports it. If she’s selective in what she reports, that’s hard to avoid when so much is going on. One of the reasons we still read journalists and bloggers — and watch the talking heads on TV — is that we have at least some faith that they will find relevant truths and pass them on to us. Of course, some of us discount most or all of what some of those writers and talkers deliver to us: I wouldn’t trust Glenn Beck to report the score of the Super Bowl accurately. But if you can’t allow even the likes of KT — whom I find informative, responsive, and ordinarily quite good-humored — a bit of slack. you might as well stop reading, unplug your TV and computer, and move to a cave.
.
Blogging differs from straight reporting, of course, in allowing expression of the blogger’s personal views. KT has taken far less advantage of this freedom than, say, Joe Klein, but it’s not hard to determine where her sympathies lie. If you don’t share them, you are free to discount or even ignore everything she says. I happen to agree with most of her opinions, and I don’t think she’s tailoring the facts to fit. With the possible exception of SZ, I think she’s got a tighter grasp on reality than any commenter. And I’m not just saying this because I’m another member of the San Antonio underground (TJHS 1957).
.
There are bad guys in all this, even if there is disagreement about who they are. But Karen Tumulty is not one of them.
.

He is auditioning for Dancing with the Stars

[...] the rest here: The Health Care Dealmaking: Will We See It On C-SPAN? – Swampland … Ford shifts retiree health liability to UAW trust (AP via Yahoo! News)JustOneMinute: The Health [...]

And it is impossible for any reporter to get a full and complete account of things that happen behind closed doors.
.
And that, ladies and gentlemen, is why media types have their knickers in a twist over this. While they’re not always great at accurately relating what they are being shown, they sure as h3ll don’t like being frozen out of observing what’s going on…

Dee:
.
Speaking of intellectual honesty ( link to Obama’s inspiring speech ):

What’s truly offensive about these scandals is that they don’t just lead to morally offensive conduct on the part of politicians; they lead to morally offensive legislation that hurts hardworking Americans.
.
Because when big oil companies are invited into the White House for secret energy meetings, it’s no wonder they end up with billions in tax breaks while Americans still struggle to fill up their gas tanks and heat their homes.
.
When a Committee Chairman negotiates a Medicare bill at the same time he’s negotiating for a job as the drug industry’s lobbyist, it’s hardly a surprise when that industry gets taxpayer-funded giveaways in the same bill that forbids seniors from bargaining for better drug prices.
.
This is the bigger story here, and this is why the recent scandals have shaken the American people’s faith in a government that will look out for their interests and uphold their values.
.
Real reform means making sure that Members of Congress and the Administration tell us when they’re negotiating for jobs with industries they’re responsible for regulating. That way we don’t have people writing a drug bill during the day and meeting with pharmaceutical companies about their future salary at night.
.
Real reform means giving the public access to now-secret conference committee meetings and posting all bills on the Internet 24 hours before they’re voted on, so the public can scrutinize what’s in them.
.
Senator Barack Obama, January 26, 2006,
.
Lobbying Reform Summit Lobbying Reform Summit
.
National Press Club Washington, DC

I’m making up my own set of facts, is that it?
.
Barack Obama told the nation that
.
“Real reform means giving the public access to now-secret conference committee meetings”
.
Have fun tying yourself up in pretzel knots “contextualizing” and “nuancing” that one, Dee. I’m sure you’ll mention again that we should all just forget about that high-minded talk, and focus on what wasn’t dishonest.
.
There’s plenty more where that came from, the man’s nothing if not an inspiring speaker…

yes, grape, that is true. “observing what’s going on” is also known as “doing my job.”

rusty:

“Our legislators should have been seeking input from experts and stakeholders, rather than approaching with preconceptions based upon whichever lobbyist had their ear.”

Those stakeholders were derisively called teabaggers and the Demos went screaming from the room when they did give input. Now you have the real reason why everything is behind closed doors. They ideas stink and the Demos have taken let the public be dammed attitude.

“Shepherdwong — Perhaps you live in an alternate universe from me but if what you say were actually true Bush would have never gotten his second term. In fact, Democrats have led Republicans substantially on every meaningful policy prescription for more than thirty years but that didn’t get them elected.”
.
In my unfortunately-all-too-real (and probably much older) universe, Democrats have been getting elected for generations now without changing the policy-making from corporatist “conservative” light (Bill Clinton) to out-and-out right-wing-authoritarian, fascist-type corporatism (George W. Bush). I realize as well as anyone how much the media is responsible for that, I simply think that a president is going to have to really govern as an anti-corporate-interest, citizen-centered populist to beat that unholy alliance, just as Obama campaigned that he would. And how, exactly, in your universe does Obama’s backtracking on specific policy commitments, making him look more dishonest and more like part of the Beltway corporatist oligarchy that’s gotten us where we are over the past thirty years under both Republican and Democratic governance, help him or the Democrats keep power, even if it puts him in good standing with the Village?
.
And if so, and we end up with a bit milder version of the corporatist “conservative” policy-making that’s gotten us into the ditch, what’s the difference? A bit more time before the next awful, pointless war or economic meltdown? A kinder, gentler face on unconstitutional domestic government spying programs and holding people in prison without charge indefinitely? Thousands more Americans dying because they can’t afford to access our ridiculously over-priced corporate-run health care system?

Is it Thursday yet…?

“‘observing what’s going on’” is also known as “‘doing my job.’”
.
And we do appreciate it. Seriously.
.
Obviously, some of us think the bigger story idea might be: “Is Obama living up to his anti-corporate-special-interests campaign rhetoric?” but also understand that’s a story not to be told from inside the Beltway.

“observing what’s going on” is also known as “doing my job.”
.
So is this post a serious examination of whether or not – in this instance – Obama broke a campaign pledge or is it an expression in frustration at not being able to see the sausage-making like you’ve been able to up to this point?
.
Both, maybe?
.
I mean, I understand the frustration; this is an issue that has hit you personally and your coverage of the reform legislation (along with Kate P.) has been good, enjoyable…it’s just that “Obama could have done more to encourage Congress to open the reconciliation session to the public” is not necessarily equal to “broken campaign promise”, especially in light of the amount of access that has been available.
.
Or, if it is, could someone explain how? Also (again), what could have Obama done differently?

You mean more worthless that this one: “I’m a uniter!”???
..
Serious short term memory loss on your part.

“…but until there’s a solid explanation as to how Obama could control this specific set of meetings, most of y’all are just being overly dramatic.”
.
Most of us all, not counting the ever-aggrieved, pants-wetting, lunatics on the right, aren’t bothered much at all by whether something gets broadcast on CSPAN, regardless of what Obama said (some campaign statements are too general or silly to take seriously). We also know that any agreements that shape the final legislation will have already been made in secret. That, as well the the agreements themselves, are the point.

shep — I am absolutely certain that Obama didn’t campaign to be anti-corporatist or whatever you said. In fact I was in grant park when he promised to be everyone’s president and I listened to many campaign speeches, town halls, debate etc and I never once heard him say that so you know what this is you projecting what you want him to be instead of listening to who he is. In fact, what I think is really going here is that a lot of people on the far left, and when I say that I don’t mean extremists just that left of mode rate’s where most Democrats reside, they just saw a black guy, who put community over making the wall street profits the most ivy leaguers do and just assumed that he was a Noam Chomsky disciple. Because no way could they have been listening to this guy or read any of his books and come away with the impression that he would advocate to do away with our capitalist system.

The only “festering sore” around here is you. Always full of vitriol and negativity, always something nasty to say.
..
The Repubs had all last summer and fall to have input in the crafting of health care legislation and they spent almost all of that time obstructing the legislative process, not adding to it.
..
“A golden opportunity to have an open discussion about the real intent of the left and their attempt to destroy over 10% of the US economy?”
..
Only someone as delusional as yourself could possibly contend that providing health care coverage to more Americans is an attempt to destroy over 10% of the U.S . economy.
..
Though you are entirely consistent and predictable, you are completely devoid of rational thought.

Nope!

freeinpa,

With all due respect, Obama ran for the Presidency and I don’t see where HE broke a campaign promise. Granted Pelosi and mostly Harry Reid were working behind the scenes, but they were not running for president and Congress has its own perogatives.

If you remember, Obama tried to bring the Republicans in on the process, but most of them balked. Other than the two women senators from Maine, can you name one Republicans who tried to contribute to the health care?

Wow you are really intuitive today freeinpa. Exactly what I was attempting to ge across in my “snarky” responses above.
.
It is just amazing to me that the liberals on this site cannot see through their own comments. And when we as conservatives make or lay similiar claims we are given retorts like “TROLL!!!”.
.
I am amazed everyday I am on this site. Today was a great exception in that it has all been thrown right into their face.
.
I am hopeful we shall see more posts from Karen, et al in the future. If anything it provides for more comments than most posts when they do, not to mention in the least it does bring about more fair and balanced reporting to hold this administration accountable as was done with the previous administration by the liberal media. But, I dream, and I shall be sorely dissapointed tomorrow.

Yes Stuart but you refuse to admit your dishonesty. The truth is that the meeting with pharma didn’t not take place in secret, They were invited with a whole host of other stakeholders to the white house and it was on c-span, as well as msnbc and the white house streamed the meetings on their website. The announcement of the deal to close the doughnut hole was announced on national TV with the AARP in attendance. Moreover, unlike the previous administration, every week or month whatever it is the visitors log is released so you know exactly who he is talking to. The Congressional committee meetings were on c-span for hundreds of hours. And they are not having a conference committee this time around because the GOP would take the opportunity to bog down progress through legislative maneuvers, but that’s a-okay with you because you and I both know you have some secret dream that if people just keep dying from no health insurance long enough some day we will get a single payer system which is really the only thing you find credible even though on the campaign he told you that he was never going to fight for that. So all that crap you cut and paste like it makes your point is a waste of your time because I never denied that he said these things, I denied your assertion that he didn’t live up to these things. I know plenty of people who can’t get a job in the Obama white house because they did too much lobbying for the wrong people over the last eight years. And I know plenty of people who are going to be going into teaching or into think tank life because they gave up any ability to lobby when their time is up in this white house. but that’s right you are so literal that in your world if Obama doesn’t succeed to get rid of every single lobbyist and have every single meeting that ever happens anywhere in Washington public he lied.

I love it how Conservatives on this blog are blaming Obama because Pelosi and Reid went behind closed doors. If I remember, Obama initially invited top Republicans to get involved with the process, but the only ones who became seriously involved were the two women senators from Maine.

Obama is the President, and not the Speaker of the House, nor the Majority Leader of the Senate. If anything, Obama has given Congress too much leeway on the Health Care Bill and overlearned the mistakes of the Clinton administration.

Yes, Obama promised more than he could deliver once in office. Once in the White House, he learned he could not change the political climate as much as he would have liked. Was it hubris? Yes. But his hubris was certainly less damaging for the country than that of Bill Clinton (no one will know I am getting a blowjob) or George Bush (Iraq will be an easy war).

Good: you’re a right-wing paranoid loon with delusions of grandeur that make you proudly prove your insanity to the rest of the world on an hourly basis.

We also know that any agreements that shape the final legislation will have already been made in secret.
.
Hate to tweak you, but if all these agreements are secret, how do you know that they’ve been made?
.
More seriously, if those ‘agreements’ were done in secret, they would have been done outside of the conference committee sessions, which were televised, yes? How much liability does Obama have for actions that are largely beyond his control (but not influence) made by those who don’t intend on acting in a forthright manner? I know expectations are high, but…
.
Also, what could have Obama done differently in order to negate the claim that these Congressional reconciliation sessions amounted to a broken campaign promise? Odd that there’s been no answer to that yet.

“I love it how Conservatives on this blog are blaming Obama because Pelosi and Reid went behind closed doors.”
.
Screw the conservatives their words can be easily dismissed as business as usual. The problem I have is how KT deliberately set liberals on edge against Obama to fulfil her own personal agenda and like sheep many of them fell for it hook line and sinker. but that’s not the first time KT has played this card and it’s the reason that I am so often on her case. She did the exact same thing a few months back when the NY Times first brought up the deal with pharma even though it wasn’t news, wasn’t done in secret, was on c-span and the deal they struck was announced on TV with the AARP. We talk a lot about how the public falls for this crap that the village puts out. But I’m here to tell you it’s not just the public out there. There are plenty of commenters who buy what ever crap she sells as if she’s somehow so much better than the reset of her brethren. Not even close. she might pay you attention because she answers back but she doesn’t have any more integrity than the rest of the village.

Dee:

Yes Stuart but you refuse to admit your dishonesty. The truth is that the meeting with pharma didn’t not take place in secret, They were invited with a whole host of other stakeholders to the white house and it was on c-span, as well as msnbc and the white house streamed the meetings on their website.

Right…( link to HuffPo piece entitled: “Internal Memo Confirms Big Giveaways In White House Deal With Big Pharma” )

A memo obtained by the Huffington Post confirms that the White House and the pharmaceutical lobby secretly agreed to precisely the sort of wide-ranging deal that both parties have been denying over the past week.
.
The memo, which according to a knowledgeable health care lobbyist was prepared by a person directly involved in the negotiations, lists exactly what the White House gave up, and what it got in return.
.
It says the White House agreed to oppose any congressional efforts to use the government’s leverage to bargain for lower drug prices or import drugs from Canada — and also agreed not to pursue Medicare rebates or shift some drugs from Medicare Part B to Medicare Part D, which would cost Big Pharma billions in reduced reimbursements.
.
In exchange, the Pharmaceutical Researchers and Manufacturers Association (PhRMA) agreed to cut $80 billion in projected costs to taxpayers and senior citizens over ten years. Or, as the memo says: “Commitment of up to $80 billion, but not more than $80 billion.”

Now, you’re not going to try to twist yourself up in knots defending the idea that the backroom deal wasn’t secret, even though there were public meetings with “stakeholders”, are you, Dee?
.
Is that what you’re hanging your credibility hat on? Really?
.
Seriously, it’s not dishonest to point out that the White House had secret, backroom deals with big industry, in which de facto price controls were dealt away for promises of mild discounts.
.
Likewise, it’s not dishonest to point out that Barack Obama ran a campaign specifically denouncing that very practice, and that he has failed in keeping those commitments to voters, and that his administration has been dishonest about those failures with respect to “health care reform”.
.
These are the facts, Dee, make of them what you will.
.
I make of them that I think America deserves better than this.
.
If you’d like to argue about Obama’s full record, then perhaps this will help your problem with coherence:
.
link to Columbia Journalism Review’s “Transparency Report Card” for the Obama Administration
.
Good luck with that.

“The problem I have is how KT deliberately set liberals on edge against Obama to fulfil her own personal agenda and like sheep many of them fell for it hook line and sinker.”
.
You’re sounding a little paranoid and loony yourself, these days.

Obama is the President, and not the Speaker of the House, nor the Majority Leader of the Senate. If anything, Obama has given Congress too much leeway on the Health Care Bill and overlearned the mistakes of the Clinton administration.
.
Finally, someone gets it.

‘There are plenty of commenters who buy what ever crap she sells as if she’s somehow so much better than the reset of her brethren.’
.
Dee, on this thread I’ve agreed with much of what you’ve written (and said so). On this one I have to disagree with you. KT bashing is undeserved. There are better (worse) targets here that you could point your complaints at.
.
I ‘buy’ a lot of what KT says because I believe she really IS better than most of her ‘brethren’. I learn things from her articles and posts, and she usually deserves credit for writing that goes deeper than mere political horse race reporting or the latest inconsequential gotcha (this thread excepted!).

Oh my god Dee! you made my day by checking this site. Your posts can’t be for real..they must just be a goof on some imbecile trying to seem intelligent..Please tell me your posts aren’t serious..please LOL..

29.1″I love it how Conservatives on this blog are blaming Obama because Pelosi and Reid went behind closed doors.”
.
Screw the conservatives their words can be easily dismissed as business as usual. The problem I have is how KT deliberately set liberals on edge against Obama to fulfil her own personal agenda and like sheep many of them fell for it hook line and sinker. but that’s not the first time KT has played this card and it’s the reason that I am so often on her case. She did the exact same thing a few months back when the NY Times first brought up the deal with pharma even though it wasn’t news, wasn’t done in secret, was on c-span and the deal they struck was announced on TV with the AARP. We talk a lot about how the public falls for this crap that the village puts out. But I’m here to tell you it’s not just the public out there. There are plenty of commenters who buy what ever crap she sells as if she’s somehow so much better than the reset of her brethren. Not even close. she might pay you attention because she answers back but she doesn’t have any more integrity than the rest of the village.

Read more: http://swampland.blogs.time.com/2010/01/05/the-health-care-dealmaking-will-we-see-it-on-c-span/comment-page-2/#comments#ixzz0bmHNceMG

“sausage making” is also known as “formulation of public policy that affects the lives of all americans.” and, yes, i think the public should know about it.
.

“observing what’s going on” is also known as “doing my job.”

It’s shameful that something this obvious has to be said.

You don’t have the slightest clue who I talk to, as your comment proves.
.
You’re right. All I can tell you is the impression that I get from what I read. And the sense of this fairly-regular reader was that your blogging, particularly in the first half of last year, disproportionately consisted of non-critical reports of the views of Max Baucus.
.
Single payer WAS a non-starter [...] Deficit-neutrality was a key requirement of the President, who insisted as well that any bill Congress give him be scored at $900 billion or less over 10 years. Apparently, you would have preferred that I ignore this, or pretend this wasn’t the case, because it didn’t matter to you.
.
Actually, what I would prefer is that you also ask more broad questions about our political system: WHY is single-payer off the table? WHY was the public option fought tooth and nail? WHY was the President insisting on a secondary metric (i.e. deficit-neutrality) rather than asking the question that SZ has been asking for a year: How do we reduce our aggregate health care costs per capita?
.
Mainly what I ask is that you don’t take the explanations that are given to you at face value…particularly when they are ridiculous on their face (e.g. self-professed deficit hawks fighting every cost (and deficit) containment provision in the bills).

diecash1

“You may resume wetting yourself in fear of terrorists in 3…2…1…….uh oh, time for a new Depends!”

“While I realize that in the land of the flat-earthers”

“It’s exactly this time of commentary that demonstrates your complete lack of moral fiber and utter stupidity”

“You are the one that is utterly clueless”
++++

I can see how you disdain other posts when it is unlike your high minded rhetoric like posted above.

A sad note for you is that while you are entitled to your opinion it is by no means fact or true– just hot air. It seems only those that agree with your positions are rational and sane. I suggest with an ego that size you rent out your oversized head out as the Goodyear blimp. It would be a better use than you currently make of it.

rusty:

Yes I love the liberal “do as I say not as I do” attitude. Their positions lack thought, they immediately state fact as opinion an dif you have the temerity to question it, the name calling flies. And heaven forbid if you respond in kind. Then the righteous indignation begins.You can almost hear them stamping their feet and getting ready to hold their breath.

They make fun of Palin Bush and Cheney but they make the 3 Stooges look like Nobel laureates.

“How much liability does Obama have for actions that are largely beyond his control (but not influence) made by those who don’t intend on acting in a forthright manner?”
.
If you assume that he is catching a raft of sh*t for what he has little control over (a congressional negotiation to be broadcast on CSPAN, not to mention lunatics trying to set their underwear on fire on airplanes) then it appears he’s liable for everything that happens under his watch. Obviously, liberals are holding him responsible only for what he does or doesn’t do.

“The problem I have is how KT deliberately set liberals on edge against Obama to fulfil her own personal agenda and like sheep many of them fell for it hook line and sinker.”
.
OMG, what egregious crap! Let me get this straight, those of us disenchanted with the president’s record thus far have been deluded by a journalist (one about as straight as they come) with an ax to grind? KT’s mission in life is democratic party discord and the downfall of the president? And we’re sheep!? Dee, come down from that rhetorical ledge, I implore you. We disagree, that much is clear, but try to salvage what remains of your reason.
.
Not to mention the irony (hopefully intended) in that magic quote above. As it’s a paraphrase of what many progressives feel about the Obamabots, that like the children of Hamelin, you fall on his every musical word. If we can give you the benefit of the doubt and admit that you come to your positions with integrity/intelligence, perhaps you could do us the same honor?

Somebody has a job blow-drying Clinton’s hair?

Wow…..out of context quotes and less-than-righteous indignation from the swamp’s resident bile-spewer…..
..
A little bit of advice since you appear to be clueless: Don’t cry when your tactics are used against you.

…wow, when I left this thread for early lunch there was still some sweetness and light, or was that just from me? No love for Karen today? What the hell happened?

Look folks if you don’t want to believe that KT is capable of duping you into getting riled up so that you help become another shiny object for the media to chase then so be it. I can’t make you pay attention to the tactics. What I can say and prove if you choose to a search of KT’s posts, is that she has been consistently negative about the Democrats attempts to do health care reform. she even admitted that her chicken little approach to coverage is not based on the facts but rather on her personal cynicism from what happened in 93 with Clinton and her sense of how Washington operates. Now if any other villager said that her narrative was based on her assumptions and not the facts on the ground you would hand her hat.
.
Aside from being personally negative. She has not scrutinized any of the GOP’s tactics of obstruction. In fact, even after promising us that she would look into the corporate astroturfing, she failed to do so and claimed it was because she was going to hand it off to a colleague who geographically better situated to do the work. Of course, no such article ever materialized and she has yet to answer a single subsequent question regarding that issue, even though the headquarters of these astroturf groups are located here in Washington DC.
.
Every time she gets called out for her antics, she claims she’s not a media critic, that its not what her sources told her, that she’d look into it or she simply changes the subject and does the Dc two step which is provide a credible answer to some other question. And instead of everyone looking at the facts, so many of you immediately come to her defense because she’s so good. Please she uses this site for comic relief. And manipulates the commenters here whenever she feels like it. In fact, the first day on this site it was the first thing I notices and when I called her out someone said give her a break and I’ve been hearing that line ever since. I don’t think I’m the one with the problem I just call it like I see it and I see her shoveling us crap or a regular basis — but that’s okay because she laughs at our jokes and talks to the high sheriffs on our behalf when too many of us end up in moderation.

“I have frequently tried to give space here to alternative viewpoints, even though you do not seem to have noticed that…”
.
I, for one, have. You’ve been a fair and impartial observer of this process, Karen, and more informative than most (and I say that as someone who has picked more than one nit in some of what you’ve covered, mostly the politics of the public option). Thank you.

You’re being ridiculous, Dee.

Yes, Stuart is right. Lots of people covered this story today. Is Josh Marshall “duping [us] into getting riled up so that you help become another shiny object for the media to chase then so be it…”?
.
Frankly, you lost me when you claimed to have listened to every thing Obama has said and that he’s never used any anti-corporate-special-interest rhetoric, long after Stuart had posted some of it on this very thread. Thank you for introducing me to left-wing Obama Derangement Syndrome, I won’t waste my time arguing about him with you again.

DEE – as they say in the movie ” HANGOVER” you are a RITARD! yea..I’m sure KT really trying to sabotage Dems..She is one of the most liberally biased reporters i’ve seen. Mostly all negatives about conservatives and ignores Dem scandals…but I bet you think her ..Katie Couric Brian Williams and the rest of the in the take media for Obama voted for McCain..as I said before..I think your posts are just a goof and not serious

She is one of the most liberally biased reporters i’ve seen…
.
This is also patently ridiculous.

I seem to have missed this post and thread. I can see that it was no loss to me. I will go take a shower now.

126 comments? On this?

Those who are very disappointed in BHO remain very disappointed. Those who are not suggest that this is no big deal.

I suppose I’ll be the doomed bat in the Aesop’s fable and not choose a side.

fhmadvocat

It has been one broken promise after another. Obama declared that he would revamp HC, he would be transparent and stated publicly HC discussions woukd be broadcast on C-Span. He has held meetings that were not only closed door but were Demos-only.

He stated no federal funds would be used for abortion, from all indications they will be. He also stated there would be no changes to people who are happy with thier insurance and doctors. The way current bills are written that would be an out and out falsehood. The list goes on, including the not raising taxes and budget nuetral nonsense.

Yes he could argue that it is Nan and Harry but he needs to man up as the President and head of his party.

Paul, my 1st thought was Groundhog Day–the same faces as Joe’s nihilism thread the other day.
.
IYO, which Vikes’ team is going to show up in the POs BTW?

diecash

No the resident bile spewers would be you and 53. For you to be merely clueless would actually overstate you capabilties.

Nothing I quoted was out of context, just your typically name calling passing for an argument.

Beats me -I’ll say Les Steckel’s.
.
I’m the wrong guy to ask. I have had a running bet for years now with a cow-worker. I have the Vikings having more arrests than wins.

yes, i think the public should know about it.
.
Agreed. I’m just not seeing how this is directed at Obama. Reed and Pelosi, maybe…especially since Lamb’s letter was addressed to Congress, not the White House.
.
I guess it’s just easier to aim all this ire at Obama.

…as they say in the movie ” HANGOVER” you are a RITARD!
.
Thank You, Goddess of Irony. I needed a chuckle.

Go back and read my post KT! I said that most of us have other jobs. We do not have 8 hours a day to view this.
.
Great C-span captures it all, but I do not have time to view it all, So we get clips edited by the media. Period that is it.
.

What didn’t you get? You get paid to do this, I do not.
.
Put them on TV and you get politicians grandstanding. Think it will improve their performance? I seriously doubt it.