Network News

X My Profile
View More Activity

Obama to convene bipartisan health care meeting on Feb. 25

1. The big news out of President Obama's pre-Superbowl interview with CBS News's Katie Couric is that the White House will convene a health care meeting with congressional leaders of both parties on Feb. 25. One notable element of the half-day gathering is that it will be televised in its entirety -- much like the now-famous tété-a-tété between the president and House Republicans in the immediate aftermath of the president's state of the union address. "What the president will not do is let this moment slip away," said an administration official. "He hopes to have Republican support in doing so -- but he is going to move forward on health reform." Of course, Obama did not -- and has not -- laid out specific ways in which the impasse currently gripping the health care debate on the Hill can be broken. "The president has a decision to make: show some leadership and get health care done or allow it to slowly die," said one senior Democratic congressional aide. "Sending mixed messages and sticking to a vague outline doesn't get it done." Here are the other highlights from the Obama-Couric interview: 1) The president refused to castigate people like Sens. Mary Landrieu (D-La.) and Ben Nelson (D-Neb.) for the special deals they negotiated for their states in the health care bill: "Each legislator, they think they're doing what's best for their state or for their district," he said. "And what we have to do is just make sure that it is a much more clear and transparent process." 2) On the economy: "We are seeing the corner turn on the economy growing again." 3) Obama seemed resigned to the fact that the planned trial of Khalid Sheik Mohammed would not, in fact, take place in New York City: "If you've got a city that is saying no, and a police department that's saying no, and a mayor that's saying no, that makes it difficult," he acknowledged. 4) The president was on the winning side in last night's Superbowl, noting that he had a "soft spot in my heart for New Orleans." Who dat!

2. Former Alaska governor Sarah Palin was everywhere over the weekend -- keynoting the national tea party convention, stumping for Texas Gov. Rick Perry and sitting with Fox News Channel for an interview. And, everywhere she went, talk of whether Palin will run for president in 2012 followed her. At the tea party convention, the mention of "President Palin" during the question and answer portion of her speech set off a "Run Sarah Run" chant in the crowd. Asked directly about her 2012 intentions in the FNC interview, Palin said: "I would be willing to if I believe that it's right for the country. . . . Today I see many, many other men and women across our country who are in as strong or stronger position than I am to take on the White House." She added that it would be "absurd" to rule out a run. Palin's busy weekend will do little to quiet the buzz in conservative circles about her potential bid in 2012 although it remains to be seen whether the 2008 vice presidential candidate is genuinely interested in running for national office or simply using the publicity about such a bid to sell books and up her profile. As the Associated Press' Liz Sidoti writes: "Republican observers say she's seemingly done more lately to establish herself as a political celebrity focused on publicity rather than a political candidate focused on policy." ALSO CLICK: The debate over what was written on Palin's palm -- and why -- rages on.

3. Rumors are rampant that New York Gov. David Paterson may resign his office in advance of a supposed New York Times story detailing unsavory elements of his personal life that are "far worse than his acknowledged extramarital affair with a former state employee," according to the irreplaceable Liz Benjamin of the Daily News. Our sources insist that the Times story will not run tomorrow and that Paterson has no plans to resign tomorrow either. Paterson's office has denied the reports of his resignation as well. While the Paterson speculation is an entertaining parlor game, the simple fact is that he cannot get reelected this fall under any circumstances. State Attorney General Andrew Cuomo is widely expected to make a run for the Democratic nomination and polls show him walloping the incumbent. If Paterson somehow made it to the general election -- and the only way that could happen is if Cuomo didn't run for some reason -- he would be a major underdog against likely Republican nominee Rick Lazio.

4. A poll conducted for the National Republican Senatorial Committee shows that the Indiana Sen. Evan Bayh may be vulnerable to a challenge -- presumably from former senator Dan Coats (R-Ind.) -- largely because of voter dissatisfaction with the Democratic health-care legislation and the flight of independents from the Democratic Party. The survey, which was conducted by GOP pollster Kellyanne Conway, showed that six in 10 Indiana voters oppose the health-care plan while 32 percent support it. And the opposition to the legislation is passionate -- 48 percent said they strongly opposed the measure passed by the Senate. Independents, who voted heavily for Obama and helped him shock the political world by carrying the Hoosier State in 2008, have swung in the opposite direction in the Conway poll; 40 percent said they would vote for an unnamed Republican candidate for office, while just 19 percent chose an unnamed Democrat. Like all polls commissioned by a political party, this one should be taken with a grain of salt. And not all the numbers in it are bad for Bayh. Fifty-two percent of Indiana voters feel favorably toward him, while just 32 percent feel unfavorably -- solid numbers for any incumbent in a year like this one. ALSO CLICK: A great find by Senate Democrats' opposition research team; Coats telling a Republican audience in 2008 that he was planning to move to North Carolina.

5. Republican state Sen. Don Benton is the seventh GOPer to announce his plans to challenge Sen. Patty Murray (D- Wash.) this fall but the two big names for state Republicans -- Rep. Dave Reichert and former state senator Dino Rossi -- remain undecided on the race. Benton, who has served in the state legislature for more than a decade, told the Seattle Times that Sen. Scott Brown's (R) victory in Massachusetts inspired him to make the race. Benton last sough federal office in 1998 when he lost an open seat race to Brian Baird (D) in the 3rd district. (Baird is not running for a sixth term this fall.) While Benton is the strongest of a weak field, he would almost certainly be eclipsed if either Reichert or Rossi run. Reichert, who represents the Seattle-area 8th district is considered the longest of long shots to run while Rossi -- who lost to Gov. Christine Gregoire by 129 votes in 2004, and then again by a wider margin in 2008 -- is seen as a possible but far from certain candidate. The state's filing deadline isn't until June 11 so expect speculation to continue right up to that date.

6. Less than a week after he came from nowhere to win the Democratic nomination for lieutenant governor in Illinois, Scott Lee Cohen stepped aside amid a series of revelations regarding his personal life. "It's my hope, and I pray with all my heart, that I didn't hurt the people that I love so much," Cohen said. "All I ever wanted to do . . . was to run for office and to help the people, not to cause chaos." His departure -- much like his nomination -- will cause a level of chaos, however, as the state's Democratic central committee will be charged with selecting a replacement nominee. That committee is effectively controlled by state House Speaker Michael Madigan and, several sources told the Fix late Sunday night, that the pick will be Madigan's. State Rep. Art Turner placed second to Cohen in the primary and has strong ties to the Chicago Democratic machine. Expect some Democrats in the state to urge the selection of state Comptroller Dan Hynes, who narrowly lost a bitter primary challenge to Gov. Pat Quinn, as the replacement candidate although it's not clear whether either man would want to go down that road.

By Chris Cillizza  |  February 8, 2010; 5:29 AM ET
Categories:  Morning Fix  
Save & Share:  Send E-mail   Facebook   Twitter   Digg   Yahoo Buzz   Del.icio.us   StumbleUpon   Technorati   Google Buzz   Previous: Palin speaks at tea party convention
Next: White House moves to make the filibuster a campaign issue

Comments

tebrom50:

Some would argue, from the left and the right, that the Senate bill is NOT better than what we have now. Regardless, Pelosi has stated that she doesn't have the votes to pass the Senate bill. What part of that don't you understand?

Posted by: JakeD2 | February 9, 2010 8:52 AM | Report abuse

re: Obama-GOP "bipartisan" meeting...Sadly, it appears that the President (or his staff which influences his decisions) is more interested in Process than Results. So we the public will have the opportunity to read about more time-wasting exercises in futility much like the Senate Finance Committee's "bipartisan" thumb-twiddling last Spring through Fall which garnered zero GOP support. If stalling was a tactic, it was a brilliant tactic and mission accomplished. Obama apparently hasn't figured that out yet. If the powers that be were seriously interested in results, they would pass the Senate version of health insurance reform and fix whatever shortcomings in the LAW (it would be law after approval right?) rather than starting from scratch with nothing to show for the time and effort spent during 2009. Half a loaf is better than none. The Senate bill would be better than what exists now.

Posted by: tebrom50 | February 8, 2010 6:30 PM | Report abuse

JakeD3 -- a whole D better than JakeD2!

Posted by: margaretmeyers | February 8, 2010 5:55 PM | Report abuse

Young Ezra Klein remnds us that the Democrats HAVE been making a bipartisan effort. The hard part is that the GOP really just doesn't want reform.

"At this point, I don't think it's well understood how many of the GOP's central health-care policy ideas have already been included as compromises in the health-care bill. But one good way is to look at the GOP's "Solutions for America" homepage, which lays out its health-care plan in some detail. It has four planks. All of them -- yes, you read that right -- are in the Senate health-care bill."

http://voices.washingtonpost.com/ezra-klein/2010/02/five_compronises_in_health_car.html

Posted by: margaretmeyers | February 8, 2010 5:52 PM | Report abuse

Obama is up to 47% disapproval in a new Marist poll - another 3% and he is TOAST - the point of no-return.

.

Posted by: 37thand0street | February 8, 2010 5:44 PM | Report abuse

I've been banned once. What's your point?

Posted by: JakeD3 | February 8, 2010 4:09 PM | Report abuse

Unlike the jock-sniffers, normal people watching the president's tete-a-tete with the Republicans only wondered why Obama always responds to imaginary arguments no one made, rather than the questions actually being asked.
That is Obama's signature move: Invent "people" who are "saying" ridiculous things and then encourage the audience to laugh at these made-up buffoons.
Since Obama's reformulations of Republican arguments are always absurd, no further response from him is necessary -- and none is ever forthcoming.
Thus, for example, Obama's description of Republican criticism of his plan to nationalize health care was that "this thing was some Bolshevik plot."
No. No one said it was a "plot," Bolshevik or otherwise.
Republicans' objection to national health care could be more accurately portrayed as follows: Obama's plan to nationalize health care was a terrible idea because it would turn over one-sixth of the American economy to Washington bureaucrats, who would run the system as competently as the federal government runs everything else, from airport security to the post office to FEMA.
How about responding to that argument? (And as long as Obama brought it up, can he explain which part of national health care the Bolsheviks would have objected to most strongly?)
This isn't how adults conduct serious political debates; it's how children argue with their parents. Don't have a cow! Liberals hide conservative arguments from the public like teenagers hide contraband from mother under the bed.

Posted by: leapin | February 8, 2010 3:22 PM | Report abuse

Noacoler


You have been banned three times.

.

Posted by: 37thand0street | February 8, 2010 3:03 PM | Report abuse

37th, you're a moron. Shut up and go away.

The teabaggers wear teabags over their ears. That teabagging refers to some bizarre sex act is all but unknown, it's no more a sexual slur than strawberry shortcake, another obscure practice, so shut up.

And the teabaggers have no "views," no agenda, no policies, no programs. They're merely angry, and that isn't a
movement.

Posted by: Noacoler | February 8, 2010 2:40 PM | Report abuse

WHAT IS AMAZING ABOUT THE OBAMA PEOPLE


The Obama people seem really uptight because they do not understand the tea-party movement - they are saying all these things that are incomprehensible.

The hilarious thing about this is the Obama people DO NOT understand their own democratic party -

So how are they going to understand the Republican party?

The past two weeks have shown just how hopeless the democrats are.

The democrats are frozen in a far-left scenario which HAD no grounding in reality - and they still have no idea what to say or do.

.

Posted by: 37thand0street | February 8, 2010 2:26 PM | Report abuse

Palin is a brilliant and articulate and, above all, a patriotic American, in great contrast with the anti-American Obama and comrades, who are ready to help terrorists and hurt Americans, while stealing from our children and grandchildren.

==

0/10

your troll fails in the first sentence.

Posted by: Noacoler | February 8, 2010 2:25 PM | Report abuse

broadwayjoe

You are an icon in the hate community - you hate the tea-partiers -


You are intolerant of their views.

You use sexual slurs to describe them.

You vent your hate all the time.

You are motivated by hate -


.

Posted by: 37thand0street | February 8, 2010 2:19 PM | Report abuse

If Obama thinks he is going to turn this health care meeting into a "Blame the Republicans" event - Obama is sadly mistaken.


Obama has got to be kidding.

The Republicans are not going to sit there and be props for Obama to repeat his deceptive campaign themes - when Obama has been a FRAUD to his own campaign for the whole year.

AND Obama thinks that ONE DAY is going to get him off the hook for his transparency commitment as well ???


One Day is not going to do much - bipartisanship is an ONGOING COMMITMENT --

Obama can not be expecting that he is going to pretend to be bipartisan for one day - and in fact use the forum to bash Republicans - then walk away and the next day say the Republicans are the ones not being bipartisan.

Obama's bashing of the Republicans over the past few weeks has been extremely bad politics - and a serious, serious mistake for Obama if he actually wants cooperation in getting something done.

Obama is about 6 months behind the country on all of this. Talk about a slow learner.

Everyone knows what has been going on in Washington - just because Obama thought he was going to overcome all that with expensive deal-making - that doesn't mean that Obama NOW has the chance to "expose the Republicans."

Slimy Obama slimed his way around the valid criticism of the Republicans in Baltimore -


Instead of learning the lessons from the valid points, Obama appears to just want to grandstand and have another opportunity to bash the Republicans.

THAT is NOT being bipartisan - Obama will not be able to get away with that.

.

Posted by: 37thand0street | February 8, 2010 2:12 PM | Report abuse

Regarding the last 5 polls, four were taken in January 2010 and the fifth in December 2009.

Posted by: 12BarBlues | February 8, 2010 2:11 PM | Report abuse

What is the source of this alleged groundswell of support for Mrs. Palin?

The 5 latest polls on Mrs. Palin's approval are:

CNN..........43% approve/46% disapprove,
PPP .........42% approve/51% disapprove,
CBS .........26% approve/41% disapprove,
AP-GfK.......45% approve/50% disapprove
USA/Gallup ..44% approve/47% disapprove

Posted by: 12BarBlues | February 8, 2010 2:05 PM | Report abuse

You know, I am getting rather tired of Obama on TV.....and very often, the man has nothing to add to the national conversation. Yeah, he's a nice guy...he's got a nice family....the dog is nice, but lots of us out here, believe me, would like to get him off our backs so often. Good grief, Mr. POTUS.................

Posted by: connyankee1 | February 8, 2010 2:01 PM | Report abuse

Indiana Republican pollsters found that 46% oppose the health plan "passed by the Senate." There I go sleeping through the news again.

Posted by: fulrich | February 8, 2010 1:55 PM | Report abuse

Off-topic: the Quentin Tarantino WW II movie on on-demand cable is UNWATCHABLE.

The only good part is when they play the song "Green Leaves of Summer" from John Wayne's "The Alamo" during opening credits. It goes downhill from there. Horrible acting, production values, silly plot, over-long...a waste of $4.99 on a snowed-in day. Fast forwarding through the slow, tedious parts didn't help because it was ALL bad.

Posted by: broadwayjoe | February 8, 2010 1:42 PM | Report abuse

Easy. We TP'ers have short memories.

Posted by: JakeD3 | February 8, 2010 1:37 PM | Report abuse

As for the Tea Party--it are not a serious, legitimate movement because it is grounded in emotion rather than any logical, intellectual underpinnings. They wheeze interminably about the Constitution which, it becomes clear if you engage them, they have absolutely no historical understanding of. And the "platform", if you can call it that, is little more than a restatement of the principles embedded in the Declaration of Independence which, abeit a noble document, is far to airy and generalized to ground a specific policy platform on.

Posted by: jaxas70 | February 8, 2010 10:19 AM

__________

Look at the bright side: if they are at the convention, they aren't throwing rocks off highway overpasses or keying new cars in the Wal-mart parking lot.

Posted by: broadwayjoe | February 8, 2010 1:34 PM | Report abuse

Q: How does any legitimate journalist write about the tea bag convention without mentioning the convention's opening speaker is an icon in the organized hate community, and his speech seemed to call for a return to Jim Crow era literacy tests to disenfranchise minority voters?

Posted by: broadwayjoe | February 8, 2010 1:30 PM | Report abuse

dribbl's brain feed for the day from Kos and Firedog didn't line up with cilizza's topics.

Carpet post anyway loon.

Posted by: drivl | February 8, 2010 1:20 PM | Report abuse


'Speaking to a small group of conference attendees and ThinkProgress during lunch on Saturday, Bachmann outlined how the Republican Party and its 2012 nominee must address the national debt. Bachmann referenced Glenn Beck, who falsely warned about a $107 trillion in supposed “unfunded liabilities” from Social Security and Medicare:

But basically what we have to do is wean everybody off Medicare and Social Security. So basically, whoever our nominee is, is going to have to have a Glenn Beck chalkboard and explain to everybody this is the way it is.

Bachmann is echoing a growing chorus in the GOP caucus. Recently, Rep. Paul Ryan (R-WI) introduced an alternative budget plan which would privatize both Medicare and Social Security. As the Wonk Room’s Pat Garofalo has noted, the type of private Social Security accounts Ryan proposes would have cost seniors tens of thousands of dollars in the 2008-2009 market plunge. But Bachmann takes Ryan’s effort a step farther and seems to be suggesting a full repeal of the retirement safety net.'

go for it.

Posted by: drindl | February 8, 2010 1:15 PM | Report abuse

A Democratic leadership source told TPMDC they are considering options for putting the Ryan plan on the floor, forcing Republicans to vote for or against a plan they don't want to talk about. This appears to be the Ryan bill, with seven GOP co-sponsors.

While conservative groups love the plan - which cuts Social Security and Medicare benefits before effectively privatizing the entitlement programs - and Ryan says he's willing to lose his job over presenting new policy ideas, GOP leaders are backing away.

We told you Friday the Democrats plan to force a vote on a resolution that "expresses the will of House Democrats to preserve Social Security and reaffirms our commitment to working in a bipartisan way to make common sense adjustments to strengthen the program for generations to come."

Posted by: drindl | February 8, 2010 1:11 PM | Report abuse

Note the questions the leftist media tosses and that Obimbo has to search for answers - who do you like for the Superbowl;

Answer : I think the colts will win but I also like the Saints. typical obama decision - both and neither.

can you imagine Obimbo having to do a real interview with O'Reilly for example. He would melt on the spot.

Posted by: drivl | February 8, 2010 1:03 PM | Report abuse

As we can see from the comments here, the only people who continue to support Obama and his Marxist scams are his comrades and operatives, and those who have been brainwashed (dumbed down) by a substandard and politicized education and a complicit media, as per the warnings of Soviet defector Yuri Bezmenov.

In 1985, Bezmenov warned us that our enemies were working hard at brainwashing us and would succeed if we did not defend our principles: http://www.dailymotion.com/video/k6KUDv1wzraWhwlBt1

The dumbed down are obviously unable to understand that Obama's scams, including Obamacare and cap and trade, have as their main objective “the American descent into Marxism,” which “is happening with breath taking speed, against the back drop of a passive, hapless sheeple…” http://english.pravda.ru/opinion/columnists/107459-american_capitalism-0

Fortunately, as we can see now, most Americans have waken up and wised up! Most Americans are NOT sheeple! Most Americans are ready to defend their FREEDOM and the freedom of their children and grandchildren from the abomination of Obama's scams, which lead only to socialism/Marxism and the slavery, poverty, corruption and despair that socialism/Marxism entails.

Posted by: AntonioSosa | February 8, 2010 1:03 PM | Report abuse

The first thing the Republicans should do is insist on a neutral location - perhaps on Capitol Hill - not at the White House where Obama has a built-in advantage.


The second thing is the Republicans should not allow a format in which Obama is the moderator - able to smack-down every good point the Republicans make.

So - lets see - the Republicans are going to have to choose some representatives - the Republicans do not want to have 20 people there while everyone is focused on Obama and maybe 2 or 3 democrats - the Republicans need a face on this.

Maybe - I have to think about this - maybe McCain might be the best for the Republicans to lead the team because he is a familar face and he has a history of bipartisanship which people genuinely respect.


The Republicans want to avoid a situation in which Obama accuses the Republicans of doing precisely what Obama is doing - for instance Obama cant accuse the Republicans of grandstanding in front of the cameras - when in fact the reality is Obama is grandstanding in front of the cameras.

Obama can not accuse the Republicans of not being bipartisan either.

The ground rules to this conference are key.

.

Posted by: 37thand0street | February 8, 2010 1:03 PM | Report abuse

drindl, thank you for your insults against Palin!

Yes, Palin is a brilliant and articulate and, above all, a patriotic American, in great contrast with the anti-American Obama and comrades.

As expected, you will continue to vilify and demonize Palin. Fortunately, the more Obama's lemmings vilify Palin, the more Palin is admired and respected. So, go ahead and do your job as a good lemming!

Posted by: AntonioSosa | February 8, 2010 1:00 PM | Report abuse

I was grossed out. What the hell was Obama doing on the tube in the middle of the Super Bowl pre-game show? I wonder how that went over at the Super Bowl parties or in the sports bars?

I turned the television off.

Is there no depth of narcissism to which this joker won't stoop?

I think most people are just about sick of his whining, spin, lies and empty promises. Go back on vacation berry, you haven't done anything anyway. You will not be missed.

Posted by: drivl | February 8, 2010 12:58 PM | Report abuse

Palin is stupid and tongue-tied, appealing to so-called Christians who -- like her -- have acted nothing like Christians throughout their whole lives.

She is nothing but talk; no bold or innovative actions or programs to be found in her history. The morons to whom Palin appeals either have the hots for her or are ignorant mules who believe any of the garbage she spews that strokes their small minds.

Posted by: MikeK3 | February 8, 2010 12:55 PM | Report abuse

'Tea Party leaders had worked hard to keep the public face of the movement focused tightly on a small government, anti-tax message, largely steering clear of social issues, and appeals based explicitly on race. But this weekend, from the podium at Nashville's Gaylord Opryland Hotel, convention speakers espoused birtherism, anti-immigrant nativism, homophobia, Christian fundamentalism, and an apparent nostalgia for racially discriminatory barriers to voting.

Here's a quick recap:

• Joseph Farah, the publisher of the right-wing website WorldNetDaily.com, drew cheers from the crowd by questioning whether President Obama was born in the U.S. "The media, the politicians ... all say, no, it's all been settled," said Farah. "I say, if it's been settled show us the birth certificate. Simple."

• Tom Tancredo, the former Colorado Republican congressman, declared that the president was elected because "we do not have a civics, literacy test before people can vote." Such tests, of course, were used in the Jim Crow south to block African-Americans from voting. Tancredo, who ran for president in 2008 as a rabid foe of illegal immigration, referred to the president using his middle name, and added: "People who could not even spell the word 'vote' or say it in English put a committed socialist ideologue in the White House."

• Roy Moore, the former Chief Justice of the Alabama Supreme Court charged that by proclaiming a gay pride month, Obama "has elevated immorality to a new level." Moore, who became a conservative darling after refusing to remove a monument of the Ten Commandments from the state courthouse, added: "An appeal to the God of hosts is all that is left."

• And Pastor Rick Scarborough -- a self-proclaimed "Christocrat" -- "went after homosexuals several times to choruses of amens," according to Time.'

Posted by: drindl | February 8, 2010 12:53 PM | Report abuse

berry is a wind-up doll, a soulless socialist duping the simple-minded liberals into liningcahnting so he can pick their pockets. one thing he knows how to do is give a good speech

as usual dribbl consults the mirror and sees Obimbo

Posted by: drivl | February 8, 2010 12:50 PM | Report abuse

Chris

That is some spin you put on Obama and the SuperBowl - the report I read was that Obama called the Colts to win- but said he had a soft spot for New Orleans.


so Obama was on the losing side.


.

Posted by: 37thand0street | February 8, 2010 12:48 PM | Report abuse

Format is going to be key for the bipartisan sit-down -


Obama can not expect the Republicans to sit there while he controls the story-line.


The negotiations for the sit-down are a little like the negotiations for a Presidential election debate - both sides should balance out their advantages.

Obama can not expect the Republicans to just sit there while Obama is the moderator and can smack-down everything they say without response.

It is tricky - but it is tricky for both sides. Maybe the Republicans have more challenges on the procedure side - and Obama has more challenges on the substance side. If this thing happens, it's going to be crazy.

.

Posted by: 37thand0street | February 8, 2010 12:45 PM | Report abuse

'Palin is a brilliant and articulate and, above all, a patriotic American'

ROFLOL. I mean, stop it.. too funny.

palin is a wind-up doll, a soulless profiteer duping the simple-minded into lining up so she can pick their pockets. one thing she knows how to do is roll the rubes.

Posted by: drindl | February 8, 2010 12:37 PM | Report abuse

I'm going to post my thoughts on this as we go.

---

Again and again and again and again...

Posted by: JakeD3 | February 8, 2010 12:31 PM | Report abuse

This proposed sit-down that Obama wants to have with the Republicans poses real challenges and land-mines for both sides. It is really unbelievable.

Obama can not expect to have it play out the way it did in Baltimore - in which the Republicans really did not think about the format ahead of time - and Obama was able to respond to everything - with the Republicans pretty much off camera.

The story line that Obama wants - to blame the Republicans - is simply not going to work - no one around the country is buying it - AND Obama looks really bad trying to say that.

Obama campaigned on bipartisanship - real bipartisanship - not smoke and mirrors.

To people- to voters - there is one thing politicians do when they make a campaign promise - and there is another thing when a commitment is made over and over again - and it is a major theme in a Presidential campaign.


In other words, it is Obama who is stuck with this theme.

The Republicans never made the commitment - and for Obama to try to blame the Republicans after the democrats basically abandoned bipartisanship last year is just not going to work.

I'm going to post my thoughts on this as we go.


.


Posted by: 37thand0street | February 8, 2010 12:29 PM | Report abuse

Palin is a brilliant and articulate and, above all, a patriotic American, in great contrast with the anti-American Obama and comrades, who are ready to help terrorists and hurt Americans, while stealing from our children and grandchildren.

As expected, the brainwashed lemmings will continue to vilify and demonize Palin. At this point, however, the more Obama and his lemmings vilify and demonize someone, the more that someone is admired and respected. So, go ahead and do your job, dear lemmings!

Posted by: AntonioSosa | February 8, 2010 12:27 PM | Report abuse

Jake and I are the product of an experiment conducted many years ago to produce a perfect human being. Unfortunately there was a problem. The zygote split unevenly leaving two children - one with strength, brains, personality and love and the other with what was left over. We were raised separately from one another, but have found one another on the Fix.

Posted by: JakeD3 | February 8, 2010 12:15 PM | Report abuse

drindl, how are we less free?!! Let me count the ways:

-- Millions of us have lost businesses or jobs because of Obama's socialist agenda. By losing businesses and jobs, we have lost the FREEDOM and dignity that businesses and jobs bring.

-- By multiplying our deficit, Obama is endangering our freedoms and the freedom our children and grandchildren.

-- The Obamacare scam will take away our FREEDOM to deal directly with doctors and will give the state (Obama and his comrades) the power to decide who lives and who dies.

-- The cap and trade scam will help Obama further enrich his corrupt billionaire friends (including George Soros) at our expense and at the expense of our children and grandchildren. We will lose the FREEDOM to start REAL businesses because only "green" (ACORN-type) government businesses will be allowed.

If Obama and his comrades get their way, the U.S. will be radically transformed... into a failed, enslaved socialist/Marxist country.

Posted by: AntonioSosa | February 8, 2010 12:09 PM | Report abuse

Chris has a good quote on Obama's stances - and that is plural - on health care during the past few weeks.


"Obama should not stick to mixed messages and a vague outline."

My first comment is that I would imagine that Obama's team drew up a list of "lessons" to be learned from Hillary's health care experience - and they have been following those self-created rules fairly closely.


While this may appear to be a better approach, it apparently has hurt Obama's program dramatically.

The circumstances this past year are different from 1993 - and Clinton's errors were different - and this whole episode shows a lack of judgement on Obama's part - and a lack of leadership skills - also a cluelessness as to knowing where he is and what he should do.


.

Posted by: 37thand0street | February 8, 2010 12:09 PM | Report abuse

As Ezra Klein points out:

> "At this point, I don't think it's well understood how many of the GOP's
> central health-care policy ideas have already been included as compromises
> in the health-care bill. But one good way is to look at the GOP's "Solutions
> for America " homepage, which lays
> out its health-care plan in some detail. It has four planks. All of them --
> yes, you read that right -- are in the Senate health-care bill."
>
> http://voices.washingtonpost.com/ezra-klein/2010/02/five_compronises_...

Posted by: drindl | February 8, 2010 12:06 PM | Report abuse

NOW Obama wants to televise a sit-down negotiation with the Republicans.


Obama can not expect the Republicans to hand him a victory - not after all the attitude Obama had over the past year.


It's going to be tricky - for both sides. Certainly, Obama's "politics of blame" over the past few weeks has NOT set the right atmosphere for productive sessions, but let us see.


Obama can't think that he is going to slam the Republicans - and blame them the whole way through - and try to make them the bad guys.

Obama is on the verge of looking like a spoiled brat - "If you don't give me what I want, I'm going to cry and make you look bad." That is not going to work.


Well.


Obama can not expect a full forum in which he is the only one able to give a smack-down - and respond to every point.


If Obama is not being bipartisan or centrist, the Republicans are going to smack him down - call Obama out for his lack of bipartisanship - and lack of centrist policies.


See once Obama starts with the calling out - and the trouble making - then he sets the tone for the Republicans to do the same thing back at him.


Obama really shouldn't be thinking that he is going to be able to get away with what he did in Baltimore.


Obama is really becoming slimy - he will try to get away with as much as he can - can then complain if he gets it back - life isn't that way - and Obama can not expect to be treated like a child.

.

Posted by: 37thand0street | February 8, 2010 11:58 AM | Report abuse

drindl, learn about Robert Creamer, the CONVICTED FELON and Obama’s ACORN associate, who outlined the guidelines for the Obamacare SCAM in his 2007 book, “Stand Up Straight: How Progressives Can Win.”

Creamer wrote in his 2007 book:

* “We must create a national consensus that health care is a right, not a commodity; and that government must guarantee that right.”
* “We must create a national consensus that the health care system is in crisis.”
* “Our messaging program over the next two years should focus heavily on reducing the credibility of the health insurance industry...”
* “We need not agree in advance on the components of a plan, but we must foster a process that can ultimately yield consensus.”

Sound familiar? Creamer wrote this in 2007, preparing the ground for Obama's nationalizing our health care industry! (Just like Hugo Chavez and the rest of the Marxist thugs who are destroying Latin America.)

As per those guidelines, Obama and his comrades will agree to ANYTHING to get their scam approved.
http://the-classic-liberal.com/progressive-agenda-for-structural-change-stand-up-straight/

Posted by: AntonioSosa | February 8, 2010 11:52 AM | Report abuse

JakeD2

In response to your comment - the reactions to Sarah Palin are blantant sexism.


If she was a liberal, they would be fawning over her.


See, the women's groups believe that because they are women, they are ENTITLED to the support of all women - and then it follows that all women will support their liberal agenda.

However, those same women who go to those meetings and who are members of those groups know perfectly well that is not true - they know from the people in their own personal life.


So they are afraid of someone like Sarah Palin - someone who might take the "women" label and apply it to a conservative values agenda.


So the conflict is partially rooted in that these people are lying to themselves.


So, the women's groups feel threatened by Sarah Palin.


The attacks on Sarah Palin are ridiculous - it is interesting to see these attacks go no further than the liberal base - they are talking to themselves basically.


The attacks have done nothing to change the opinions of independents or Republicans - who will form their own opinions separate from the attacks.


.

Posted by: 37thand0street | February 8, 2010 11:51 AM | Report abuse

"No thinking American can support Obama's efforts to destroy our freedoms and our country."

Name one 'freedom' Obama is destroying. How are you less free?


Posted by: drindl | February 8, 2010 11:48 AM | Report abuse

As all thinking Americans understand, "There's NO right way to do the wrong thing." No thinking American can support Obama's efforts to destroy our freedoms and our country.

Republicans must refuse to cave in and continue defending us from Obama's job-killing, economy-killing, freedom-killing, prosperity-killing scams -- including the Obamacare and the cap and trade scams.

Posted by: AntonioSosa | February 8, 2010 11:44 AM | Report abuse

"They created the health care crisis to enslave us!"

I mean, jesus, people are actually stupid enough to beleive this idiocy... that tells you all you need to know.

Posted by: drindl | February 8, 2010 11:43 AM | Report abuse

jaxas -- just look at the ACORN comment and realize that America's era of greatness is over, because we have too many people too willing to beleive even the most moronic and paranoid propaganda.

Posted by: drindl | February 8, 2010 11:41 AM | Report abuse

But I do know that the likes of Sarah Palin and Glenn Beck and Rush Limbaugh and of the Tea Party movement, have absolutely none of the markings of the great leaders of history I have mentioned.

The fact that the media does not see this is troublesome.

Posted by: jaxas70 | February 8, 2010 11:21 AM
________

Palin, et al. are more reminiscent of "Pitchfork" Ben Tillman and Orville Faubus but the media's not talking about it.

Posted by: broadwayjoe | February 8, 2010 11:40 AM | Report abuse

By continuing to threaten us with the Obamacare scam (and the socialism/Marxism it would bring), Obama continues to destroy businesses, jobs, the economy, our freedoms and our future.

Robert Creamer, a CONVICTED FELON and Obama’s ACORN associate, outlined the guidelines for the Obamacare SCAM in his 2007 book, “Stand Up Straight: How Progressives Can Win.”

As per Creamer’s book, the main objective of Obamacare is only to increase the power of "progressives" (Marxists) through the “democratization of wealth” (socialism/Marxim) as per the teachings of Saul Alinsky. They created the health care crisis to enslave us!

Creamer wrote in his 2007 book:

“We need not agree in advance on the components of a plan, but we must foster a process that can ultimately yield consensus.”

As Creamer indicates, Obama and his comrades don't care about the "components of the plan." All they want is CONTROL over our health care, our money, and our lives.

Posted by: AntonioSosa | February 8, 2010 11:38 AM | Report abuse

jaxas70


You would be better off comparing Obama to Jimmy Carter -


.

Posted by: 37thand0street | February 8, 2010 11:37 AM | Report abuse

To date, Mrs. Palin has not given direct answers to the questions Dr. Rachel Maddow raised last Fall regarding organized hate groups:

"MS. MADDOW: I, I do think that there's a little bit of reckoning that needs to happen on the right for Sarah Palin's success. I mean, she was the vice presidential nominee, she is going to sell a kazillion books and she is the biggest brand name in Republican politics still right now. And she's chose--the person who's writing her book, her last--the last person who she co-authored a book with was called "Donkey Cons" and it was co-authored with a guy who's widely believed to be and I believe him to be a white supremacist. So she's chosen Lynn Vincent, who's written a book with a white supremacist, to write her book, and she's the biggest name in Republican politics.

MR. MURPHY: Oh, but, Rachel...

MS. MADDOW: And you can dismiss her and say she's not going to be the nominee, but I do think the right needs to sort of answer for what's happened to conservatism.

MR. MURPHY: But let me just say, I am a well-documented nonfan of Sarah Palin, at least as a national politician. I don't know her personally. But that's guilt by association stuff. That's the cable stuff. That's the problem.

MS. MADDOW: But why would you--you can pick anybody to be your ghostwriter.

MR. MURPHY: Sarah Palin's a lot of things, but she's not a white supremacist. And...

MS. MADDOW: You could--no, I don't think she is. But when you can pick anybody, why would she pick somebody who's associated with the League of the South, who said that Americans are revolted by the idea of having a black sister-in-law. I mean, she--this is who she picked to write her book.

MR. MURPHY: Yeah, but there's...

MS. MADDOW: Why do you do that?

MR. MURPHY: That's sort of guilt by association stuff, which I don't know and it can--I--check it out.

MS. MADDOW: It's guilt by choice. It's guilt by choice."

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2009/10/4/789642/-Maddow-goes-after-Palins-affinity-for-White-Supremacists-on-MTP

Posted by: broadwayjoe | February 8, 2010 11:37 AM | Report abuse

LOL!!! Reagan was going to declare war against the Soviet Union as well. The sky is not falling.

Posted by: JakeD2 | February 8, 2010 11:31 AM | Report abuse

I find myself more and more going back to my history. I think of past political campaigns and of the lofty, inspiring rhetoric of great men from the past from Lincoln to Martin Luther King. I think of the night Bobby Kennedy spoke just after Doctor King had been assassinated. How he used his own great compassion to try and heal this desperate wound that black Americans had suffered.

I think of JFK'S stirring word about how we all share this little bit of rock and dust, how we all breathe the same air, we cherish the lives of our children and we are all mortal. And I think Of Ronald Reagan giving inspiration to the cold war weary citizens of Eastern Europe when he demanded that Gorbachev "Tear down this wall!" I think of Ike warning us about the Military Industrial Complex. Of Lincoln's Gettysburg address. And of FDR's calming admonition that the only thing we have to fear is fear itself.

And I think about President Obama as he tries so hard to somehow bring us back together. His was an historic election at an historic moment in time. I just hate to see our people wallowing in the muck of Sarah Palin's childish mockery. She made that history, that America that I have so loved seem distant and unreachable. Her message was one of personal animus, lacking even the barest scintilla of rational discourse.

I do not know if we can ever get back to that America of Lincoln, and the Kennedys, of Ike and FDR, of serious leaders who put aside partisan burnings when the nation's future was at stake. But I do know that the likes of Sarah Palin and Glenn Beck and Rush Limbaugh and of the Tea Party movement, have absolutely none of the markings of the great leaders of history I have mentioned.

The fact that the media does not see this is troublesome.

Posted by: jaxas70 | February 8, 2010 11:21 AM | Report abuse

Mark @956, I watched the highlights of her speech the other night and it was all platitudes on the feel-good issues for her constituency, and pat dismissal of the many boogey men they see. There were no policy proposals, no solutions, certainly no details.

It was the perfect key note speech for a group that has no central tenants, a lot of complaints and no outlook. They are still sitting on the pot.

Posted by: margaretmeyers | February 8, 2010 10:57 AM | Report abuse

@d: what unhinged, idiotic madness...

Posted by: broadwayjoe | February 8, 2010 10:46 AM | Report abuse

joe -- you hear about the 'war card' Sarah would play?

This morning on Fox News Sunday, Chris Wallace conducted a 25-minute interview with Sarah Palin, a paid contributor to Fox News. Palin told Wallace that she doesn’t think President Obama will win reelection in 2012 if he “continues on the path he has America on.” However, Palin indicated that his chances of winning would dramatically change if Obama simply declared war on Iran:

WALLACE: How hard do you think President Obama would be to defeat in 2012?

PALIN: It depends on a few things, say he played — I got this from Buchanan — say he played the war card. Say he decided to declare war on Iran or decide to really come out and do whatever he could to support Israel–which I would like him to do. That changes the dynamics of what we can assume will happen between now and three years. Because I think if the election were today, Obama would not be elected.

WALLACE: You’re not suggesting that Obama would cynically play the war card?

PALIN: I’m not suggesting that, I’m saying if he did, things would dramatically change."

Cynical enough for ya? She'd declare war just to win an election.

Posted by: drindl | February 8, 2010 10:40 AM | Report abuse

JakeD2, I hear there's a JakeD3 lurking around. Any relation?

Posted by: broadwayjoe | February 8, 2010 10:34 AM | Report abuse

jaxas, there is no point. zouk and jake and 37, when he finally wakes up and picks up his shift for the next 16 hours, are nothing but programs. They cannot learn, they cannot hear, they cannot change. They cannot accept or understand facts or reason. All they are designed to do is spew a limited number of illogical phrases, infantilized predigested pablum for the most simple minds.

Posted by: drindl | February 8, 2010 10:29 AM | Report abuse

zouk is moonbat again today? what happened to 'drvl' -- did they change your meds AGAIN?

Posted by: drindl | February 8, 2010 10:23 AM | Report abuse

zouk is moonbat again today? what happened to 'drvl' -- did they change your meds AGAIN?

Posted by: drindl | February 8, 2010 10:22 AM | Report abuse

Jaked, I'm not a "lib". I don't even know what that word means. If you mean liberal, liberal is a legitimate political philosophy that has a venerable tradition in the West. In their day, the Founding Fathers were considered liberal because they were offering dramatic change from the old Monarchies of Europe.

Look. Both conservatism and liberalism are legitimate political philosophies that have contended with one another since the beginning of time. I suppose that in the days of ancient Rome, Spartacus was a liberal because he was fighting for the audacious notion that human slavery was wrong. At that time in the Senate of Rome, passionate and fiery debates not unlike the ones we have today were common.

The point is that today owing to their propaganda apparatus and to a lazy, uninformed electorate that is easily manipulated by conservative appeals to oversimplified easy solutions, liberalism has been demonized into some sort of totalitarianism--which it isn't. It is simply an argument for a more activist government than conservatives are willing to settle for.

As for the Tea Party--it are not a serious, legitimate movement because it is grounded in emotion rather than any logical, intellectual underpinnings. They wheeze interminably about the Constitution which, it becomes clear if you engage them, they have absolutely no historical understanding of. And the "platform", if you can call it that, is little more than a restatement of the principles embedded in the Declaration of Independence which, abeit a noble document, is far to airy and generalized to ground a specific policy platform on.

Posted by: jaxas70 | February 8, 2010 10:19 AM | Report abuse

vapid, romantic overgeneralizations that tell us nothing about what specific policy goals she has.

Sounds like the SOTU lecture. Yet the goal of that speech was different. I noticed no complaints.

Posted by: Moonbat | February 8, 2010 10:08 AM | Report abuse

My last post today: I do know what the D version of the "free lunch" looks like and I hear it in many of their speeches.

"President" should be capitalized in #1, as I was taught when describing a particular POTUS, as opposed to using the word to describe an executive position.

Posted by: mark_in_austin | February 8, 2010 10:04 AM | Report abuse

mark:

But but I thought there was NO POLICY in the speech?! God forbid the libs actually read her book for her substantive positions on issues too! You guys are in for quite a shock in 2012.

Posted by: JakeD2 | February 8, 2010 10:03 AM | Report abuse

Can you imagine what the mainstream media would be doing if it were Hillary, or Nancy or even Obama?

In fact berry hasn't had a press conference since July. He won't go on Fox news, only the softball butt licking liberal outlets. He doesn't answer any questions posed, instead returning to chanting points.

Now liberals are offended someone dared answer questions and make obimbo look foolish. Not a high bar.

Berry took three days to answer questions on undie bomber, only by reading from the prompter.

Posted by: Moonbat | February 8, 2010 10:01 AM | Report abuse

Look. I have a great deal of respect for authentic, serious minded conservatives. I voted for Reagan twice. I didn't always agree with him but I felt he was a far more serious man and leader that liberals gave him credit for. And he proved me right when he intelligently moved to the center.

Reagan was smart enough to know that most of the fish were swimming in the mainstream. He still retained his conservative persona. But he was astute enough to know that in government leadership is knowing your limitations and working within the system to get things done.

All I see with Palin and the silly movement she represents are nothing but a bunch of dumbed down nihilists who think that somehow all of our intractable, complex problems can be reduced down to these vapid, romantic overgeneralizations that tell us nothing about what specific policy goals she has. I have no idea what "limited government" even means. And when I hear teabagging morons wheeze into their brown paper bags about freedom, it all comes off to a simple dodging of their own responsiblities as citizens who eagerly and willingly use every service and benefit government has to offer but, just don't want to have to pay for it.

Posted by: jaxas70 | February 8, 2010 10:00 AM | Report abuse

AIN'T NOTHIN' LIKE A CATCH-PHRASE...

How IS that "hopey-changey thing" working out for Obama's dispirited base?

Not to give them free advertising, but I see that "Zazzle.com" already has "Hopey-Changey Thing" T-shirts and bumper stickers for sale.

Ya gotta give some props to Sarah's peeps for this.

I hear that Molly Cyrus' dad Billy Ray is about to release a long-awaited follow-up to his "Achey-Breaky Heart" one-hit country wonder, to be entitled.... well, you know the rest of the tune.

***

MEMO TO POTUS: Fastest route to restoration of your political mojo -- Give us some REAL "hopey-changey" --

Restore the rule of law in America by taking down the exrajudicial Bush-Cheney Gestapo that Bush-Cheney bureaucrat leave-behinds are continuing on YOUR watch:

http://nowpublic.com/world/u-s-silently-tortures-americans-cell-tower-microwaves OR
http://www.poynter.org/subject.asp?id=2 (see articles list)

Posted by: scrivener50 | February 8, 2010 9:57 AM | Report abuse

jaxas, one of the reasons I read transcripts whenever possible is to avoid being affected in any direction by the personality of the pol while a I try to find the substance, if any, in the speech. When I am predisposed to like or dislike a pol it is the only way I can limit my bias.

I often read here the inference drawn from style or speaking quirk as the basis for a shorthand opinion about the speech, or even the speaker. Examples: BHO = teleprompter; HRC "cackles", SHP squeaks; GWB = nukular. Actors do it better, if that is what we are talking about.

I have yet to read the SHP speech but I watched it on U-tube. Still, I tried to think of it as a transcript. In that light:

it struck me as preaching to the choir. She wants smaller government, bigger military, more fossil fuel subsidies. She denies, inferentially, the value of FBI investigative work in dealing with AQ. Thus we hear more of the GOP litany with no offered choices of slashed government. Not Medicaid, certainly not the military, not Ag, not NASA, not the State of Alabama, not the highway system, certainly not energy give-aways. More "free lunch", R version: Keep the stuff we like, damn the cost, cut taxes.

Posted by: mark_in_austin | February 8, 2010 9:56 AM | Report abuse

Yes, she's more qualified than Obama to be President. I'm not "nitpicking"; I'm telling the truth. It's funny to see you libs dismiss her out of hand. Even Nate Silver knows she could get the GOP nomination. Sarah Palin is also NOT like a five year old with a loaded pistol. She knows exactly where to aim at liberals.

Posted by: JakeD2 | February 8, 2010 9:55 AM | Report abuse

Liberal guide to problem solving:

A. Give speech
B. Hold summit
C. Form commission
D. Offer bribes
E. Apologize
F. Spend more
G. Don't decide
H. Blame bush
I. Repeat as necessary

Posted by: Moonbat | February 8, 2010 9:54 AM | Report abuse

So loony liberals don't care for palin. They will say any slur. Anyone suprised? Anyone notice most of the comments apply equally to berry?

Is anyone swayed by the ranting?

Berry is no less a failure and inadequate for the job.

Posted by: Moonbat | February 8, 2010 9:50 AM | Report abuse

You're "embarrassed" by falsehoods?! What did you feel about Larry Sinclair's whoppers re: drugs and gay sex with Obama?

Posted by: JakeD2 | February 8, 2010 9:49 AM | Report abuse

Oh come on jaked! Are you seriously trying to convince us that she didn't have the same notes on her hand for all of the interviews?

Look. If you want to pick nits out of my argument, go right ahead. But the salient point remains. Sarah Palin is like a five year old with a loaded pistol.

You tell me truthfully and honestly--do you actually believe that this knothead should be anywhere close to the office of President of the United States?

Posted by: jaxas70 | February 8, 2010 9:49 AM | Report abuse

Moonbat:

Will this be a "beer" summit?

Posted by: JakeD2 | February 8, 2010 9:46 AM | Report abuse

Well come on Chris! Why in you commentary on Sarah Palin did you not mention that the blogs were on fire over her writing crib notes on her hand in her interview with Chris Wallace? Can you imagine what the mainstream media would be doing if it were Hillary, or Nancy or even Obama?

Look. It is just this sort of childishness which precludes any serious minded adult from seeing Sarah Palin as President of the United States. But, this country is filled to the brim with unserious minded adults.

I find myself really, really embarrassed for my country.

Posted by: jaxas70 | February 8, 2010 9:44 AM | Report abuse

jaxas:

Did you even watch the Fox interview? Maybe your talking points were supposed to refer to the question and answer period after her TEA Party speech? That was by Breitbart, not Wallace.

Posted by: JakeD2 | February 8, 2010 9:43 AM | Report abuse

I guess you missed the part where berry said the saints wouldn't win but that he liked them anyway. Another botched pick with wushu washy equivocation.

Berry decides to host a summit to resolve his problems. What a surprise. I guess a speech or a commission was out.

The present ident is spiraling further into lies and spin to disguise his endless failures.

Posted by: Moonbat | February 8, 2010 9:39 AM | Report abuse

The executive/legislative televised health care debate sit down is a great idea . . . that's about nine months too late. The reason why even the Dems are against "the plan" is because nobody understands what "the plan" is -- last I checked, the House and Senate have markedly different ideas of what the new health care legislation should be, and the Repubs are interested in just seeing the whole thing fall apart like what happened to Clinton.

So it would have been nice to see some televised debate along the way to help educate the public about the issue and who's really working on it.

Re: Senator Murray, she is very well liked here in WA--the two time failed Repub gov candidate doesn't have a shot; Reichert might make a decent showing though.

Posted by: jrosco3 | February 8, 2010 9:37 AM | Report abuse

I have to think that there are a fair number of serious conservatives who winced with embarrassment when Sarah Palin in her best fake "good ol' gal" accent taunted the President with her "hopey-changey" comment. Add to that her writing up crib notes on her hand for an interview on Fox News--For God's sake Sarah! Its Fox News! You don't have to worry about screwing up on Fox News. They have your back.

At any rate, this childish performance was an embarrassment for those of us capable of being embarrassed. Of course the crowd she was addressing is blissfully ignorant of just how utterly foolish she looked and sounded.

Posted by: jaxas70 | February 8, 2010 9:34 AM | Report abuse

Based on this journalist's account of Palin's Tea Party speech, it was foolish, mocking, substance-free, disrespectful of the President, and generally idiotic.

Excerpt from Dave Weigel's excellent article on Mrs. Palin's rant:

"Nodding at the much-discussed question of whether this speech would make Palin the “leader” of the Tea Party movement, she said that the activists did not have a “king or queen.” At the same time, she called for “contested primaries,” calling them a strength of democracy — nodding at her fairly controversial endorsements of Hoffman and Rand Paul.

Palin swung quickly and heavily to foreign policy, with a litany of attacks on Obama — from his “personality”-based diplomacy to giving “Constitutional rights” to “homicide bombers,” using a term that’s rarely heard outside of Fox News, where she is a contributor.

When she moved back to domestic policy, Palin delved again and again into stories that are familiar to political junkies and Tea Party activists. “How’s that hopey-changey thing working out for ya?” said Palin, paraphrasing a slogan made popular on Tea Party t-shirts.” She mocked the stimulus package — the speech was heavy on mockery — by leaning slightly down and saying “nobody messes with Joe,” quoting a comment President Obama made that has been more or less forgotten outside of Tea Party circles."

http://washingtonindependent.com/75992/palin-speaks

Posted by: broadwayjoe | February 8, 2010 9:29 AM | Report abuse

thanks mark, #4 bugged me too. I'm sick of media driven stories supported by media driven polls. Or "stories" where every source is either another media person/blogger/pundit/ or stupid polls. the powers that be at wapo had better put a stronger line between real news and opeds/blogs. you can't tell them apart anymore. So there's a Dem in the WH, the Dems have both houses, and yet WaPo has a "why are liberals so condescinending?" chat? Could you be anymore partisan????

Posted by: katem1 | February 8, 2010 9:24 AM | Report abuse

Coumo was always going to enter the race, but now he gets to come in and look like a savior to the party. And Lazio will get smoked by Coumo (who I think will be on the short list for the Democratic nomination in 2016). He is a populist and has tremendous connections due to his father's service as governor. Plus he has taken on the big banks which will go a long way in places like Iowa and New Hampshire. If he is elected governor he should spend some time trying to beaf up his foregn policy credentials.

Posted by: AndyR3 | February 8, 2010 9:20 AM | Report abuse

This was kinda left out of the Paterson story:

"Specifically, [Police Superintendent]Corbitt rejected a recent Page Six report that a trooper on [disabled NY Governor]Paterson's security detail discovered the governor in a utility closet [unfounded smear omitted] and that this incident spurred Paterson to change protocols and bar troopers from the residence altogether."

Bottom line: smear "rejected."

Posted by: broadwayjoe | February 8, 2010 9:07 AM | Report abuse

Cosign, MM.

Disappointed BHO is wasting more time chasing after bipartisanship on health care. When the opposition denies you even a single vote on any of your initiatives because...(well, we know the reason from Tea Party President Dale Robertson), that's a kinda clear signal bipartisanship is a dead end. BHO would have gotten a bill by now if he hadn't wasted months running after the votes of two Maine senators, who voted against him anyway in the end.

We'll take Let-Obama-be-Obama over triangulation and futile "bipartisanship" efforts anytime. But BHO has chosen the old Clintonian triangle. Oh well.
____________

Only three checks today:

Palin in 2012. Check.
Slam of disabled NY Governor. Check.
Free ad for Coats supported by cherrypicked partisan poll. Check.

Posted by: broadwayjoe | February 8, 2010 8:54 AM | Report abuse

Mark, I think you may see that but I think what you will also see is Obama use tort reform as an olive branch to the GOP as a way to 'lower costs'. I think if the GOP was smart they should go in with four or five things that they would need to have to make the bill palpable (tort reform, lower penalties for small buisness, increases in medicare age eligibility, no sweetheart deals). And tell Obama and the democrats that they can't support something that doesn't have three of those four, and let them pick thier poison.

Posted by: AndyR3 | February 8, 2010 8:49 AM | Report abuse

I hate to be that annoying reader to point out small errors, but my high school French teacher would kill me if I didn't say that it's "tête-à-tête" and not "tété-a-tété." Good effort, though.

Posted by: rscottwoods | February 8, 2010 8:41 AM | Report abuse

"If you've got a city that is saying no, and a police department that's saying no, and a mayor that's saying no, that makes it difficult," he acknowledged

This sounds alot like his PUSHING healthcare "reform" "well, a clear majority of americans don't want it,
don't want to pay for it, and don't believe it will help the economy,
so We are going to shove it down their throats, they will learn to enjoy it."

spin baby spin!
no change is real change!
we are the change we've been waiting for!

it would help if obama would complete thoughts that are not Zen Koans.

Posted by: simonsays1 | February 8, 2010 8:40 AM | Report abuse

Is Katie one of us middle class americans obama is fighting for? I read she makes $60,000/Hour... as in every hour of the day.

fight fight fight.
obama is just one of us,
trying to feed his kids,
and pay his bills,
a real common man.

Posted by: simonsays1 | February 8, 2010 8:37 AM | Report abuse

What good is health care reform when U.S. government commits silent microwave torture on unconstitutionally "targeted" citizens -- and top Obama officials know about it and either can't or won't stop it?

HOMELAND-RUN CELL TOWER MICROWAVE WEAPON SYSTEM SILENTLY ASSAULTS, IMPAIRS THOUSANDS OF AMERICANS NATIONWIDE, SAYS VETERAN JOURNALIST

• Precision-targeted microwave frequencies torture, injure, induce fatigue, mood changes, debilitating physiological and neurological effects -- electromagnetic enslavement of citizens deemed to be "dissidents" or undesirables.

• Obama security team aware of secretive Bush-legacy "multi-agency coordinated action" involving microwave assaults and local community watch persecution -- what are Bush-Cheney leave-behinds telling Obama?

System capable of disabling sophisticated electronics as well as assaulting human beings.

http://nowpublic.com/world/u-s-silently-tortures-americans-cell-tower-microwaves OR
www.poynter.org/subject.asp?id=2 (see articles list)

NOW IT'S OBAMA'S GESTAPO USA. WHEN WILL TEAM OBAMA ACT?

• Bucks County, PA MAGLOCLEN/RissNet Mid-Atlantic "fusion center" -- "Ground Zero for Mid-Atlantic Homeland Domestic Torture and Community Watch Domestic Terrorism"

http://nowpublic.com/world/gestapo-usa-govt-funded-vigilante-network-terrorizes-america
OR NowPublic.com/scrivener (see "stories" list)

Posted by: scrivener50 | February 8, 2010 8:34 AM | Report abuse

Re: #1.

The Ds are going to push the repeal of the antitrust exemption for the insurance industry. This could be a good thing, if coupled with interstate competition, which the state insurance commissions are scrambling to understand. But it would have an unintended bad consequence if the carriers are not forced to share actuarial information. The exemption was conditioned on little carriers having access to big carriers' data.

Perfect competition depends on perfect information.
I hope these devils in the details about the insurance industry are recognized at the conference.

Posted by: mark_in_austin | February 8, 2010 7:42 AM | Report abuse

Why wasn't this part of the health care blueprint last year? Engage the Republicans, express outrage at their certain refusal to either meet with Obama or offer any bipartisan ideas, then sell your own bill to the public.

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

Posted by: parkerfl1 | February 8, 2010 7:34 AM | Report abuse

Wow! The Saints won big. Maybe the pResident IS magic.

Posted by: margaretmeyers | February 8, 2010 6:18 AM | Report abuse

The comments to this entry are closed.

 
 
RSS Feed
Subscribe to The Post

© 2010 The Washington Post Company