TPMDC Saturday Roundup
Obama Address: I'm Bringing People Together On Health Care And Energy
In this weekend's Presidential YouTube address, President Obama said he is bringing together different groups such as businesses and labor to deal with the issues of health care costs and clean energy:
"I have always believed that it is better to talk than not to talk; that it is far more productive to reach over a divide than to shake your fist across it," said Obama. "This has been an alien notion in Washington for far too long, but we are seeing that the ways of Washington are beginning to change."
GOP Address: Republicans Can Work With Obama On Health Care -- But No Public Option
In this weekend's RNC YouTube, Rep. Charles Boustany (R-LA) said Republicans can agree with President Obama on a lot of things regarding health care, and are prepared to work with him -- but he warned strongly against any pursuit of a public option:
"A government takeover of health care will put bureaucrats in charge of health care decisions that should be made by families and doctors," said Boustany. "It will limit treatment options and lead to rationed care. And to pay for government health care, your taxes will be raised."
Obama Attends Daughters' Soccer Games; No Public Events
President Obama attended his daughters' soccer games this morning in Washington. Obama does not have any public events scheduled for today, nor does Vice President Biden, who is spending the day in Wilmington, Delaware.
Obama Picks GOP Gov. Huntsman For Ambassador To China
President Obama announced this morning that he is nominating Gov. Jon Huntsman (R-UT) to be Ambassador to China. Huntsman remarked that he did not expect, as a former campaign co-chair for John McCain, to be called to serve by the man who defeated McCain. "But I grew up understanding that the most basic responsibility one has is service to country," said Huntsman. "When the President of the United States asks you to step up and serve in a capacity like this, that, to me, is the end of the conversation and the beginning of the obligation to rise to the challenge."
Huntsman Pick Brings Big Political Implications
The Politico points out that the nomination of Huntsman is filled with political intrigue, due to Huntsman's prior status as a potential Republican candidate for president: "Viewed purely through the lens of 2012 politics, the move looks like political genius by the White House: It's like John Edwards or John Kerry joining the Bush administration in 2001."
NYT: Obama "Leading By Second Thought"
The New York Times says that President Obama's recent decisions on revising military tribunals and not releasing torture photos show a change in style from the broad liberal promises of the 2008 campaign: "Faced with the choice of signaling an unambiguous break with the policies of the Bush era, or maintaining some continuity with its practices, the president has begun to come down on the side of taking fewer risks with security, even though he is clearly angering the liberal elements of his political base."
Sessions Lays Down Standards For SCOTUS Nominee
In an interview with the Wall Street Journal, Sen. Jeff Sessions (R-AL) discussed the upcoming Supreme Court nomination process. "I do not have to approve of the nominee's politics or morality or religion," he said. "We can even disagree on certain key holdings. But I will not support a nominee that I don't believe is committed to the faithful following of the law and the Constitution according to a fair construction of them."
Ensign: GOP Will Try To Block Gitmo Closure
Sen. John Ensign (R-NV) said yesterday that Senate Republicans will offer amendments to block the Obama Administration's planned closure of the prison at Guantanamo Bay. "We might have a chance at winning some of these amendments," said Ensign, because Democratic Senators would not want to vote to allow detainees into the United STates.
Josh
Matt
Eric
Brian
Huntsman move is political genius. Obama is really brilliant. One of the biggest possible threats to reelection from the republican party and he sends him to freaking china. Amazing.
Now you won't see the right wing loons, like palin getting an ambassadorship anywhere. She is staying right where she is. Because she will get slaughtered.
Obama is truly a brilliant politician.
May 16, 2009 1:12 PM | Reply | Permalink
Plus the guy might even be qualified for the job. Speaks fluent Mandarin.
May 16, 2009 1:26 PM | Reply | Permalink
I know. It's amazing. The stars are really aligned for this guy. Huntsman clearly is qualified for the job and probably will be an excellent ambassador. Still very smart political move on obama's part, like bringing the clintons into the administration. I was opposed, but it clearly was a brilliant political move.
May 16, 2009 1:31 PM | Reply | Permalink
The most important challenge facing this planet is controlling climate change. This requires co-operation from China which has already made the greatest contribution to this end by its one child policy. Now, just how thrilled are they going to be with an ambassador who is Right to Life, has 5 biological children, and who learned Mandarin as a missionary in Taiwan?
If Sen. Ben Nelson can attempt to penalize Dawn Johansen for her work for Naral, it is high time that some pro-choice Democratic Senator dug his or her heels in and said that this is the wrong guy for the job however delightful the effects on Obama's political future -- which should not have been a consideration in this choice.
May 16, 2009 9:34 PM | Reply | Permalink
I don't understand what you're saying. You think Huntsman is a bad choice for Ambassador to China? Because he might be anti-abortion? Or because it would take him out of the field for 2012 -- I don't think Huntsman would have run in 2012; he's too smart for that.
May 17, 2009 1:20 PM | Reply | Permalink
Huntsman seems to have an actual brain, so he doesn't really belong in the Republican Party. It's a nice way to slice off another little layer of Republican moderation (I know he's not switching but the impact is similar). Plus, he really didn't have a realistic chance of being the Republican nominee. Republican grassroots organization hated him and he'd have to fight Mittens for the Mormon vote.
May 16, 2009 1:41 PM | Reply | Permalink
This is a win for Huntsman too. His support for Civil Unions was unlikely to fly with a Utah electorate in his 2010 reelection (he already had a primary challenger announce this week if I recall). This post will help keep him visible, gives him bipartisan credentials, saves him from an assault from the right (thereby preserving his status as a consensus-building moderate), and gives him shelter from the GOP in general until it has been able to moderate itself. This is a big win for both Obama and Huntsman, and they both know it- that's why the post was offered, and more importantly, accepted.
May 16, 2009 1:56 PM | Reply | Permalink
The downside is that Obama may have just picked his successor. :(
May 16, 2009 2:26 PM | Reply | Permalink
But, damn, are there any Mormon politicians who don't look like retired superheros? Is there not, somewhere in Utah, one guy who looks like Waxman or McConnell holding public office?
May 16, 2009 8:15 PM | Reply | Permalink
The Obama Administration and the Health Reform lobby has to smack down the tired GOP mantra that currently "Doctors and Families make medical decisions and that the Government would be making the decisions under a public option". They need to highlight that currently it's the insurance industry that is making most of the decisions and the insurance industry is a for-profit industry and that they only see people as a number on their ledger. The government wants to keep folks healthy and working, the insurance industry treats insurance holders as liabilities on their balance sheet.
Huntsman as Ambassador to China is a win-win for each side looking at it from a purely political perspective. Gov. Huntsman wasn't going to run in 2012, that's Mitt's year and the wingnuts are still controlling the party. However come 2016 Huntsman could be an early GOP favorite if they've hit rock bottom in 2012 and starting their rebuild. He's have bi-partisan cred in that he worked for the Obama Administration, and the Ambassador to China is more important than all but a handful of Cabinet posts. The Obama Administration on the other hand adds to it's bi-partisan claims, and in looking five steps ahead, if the wingnuts in the GOP reject Mitt Romney in 2012, it might enrage a lot of Mormons who will see it as a huge slight, seeing that it is probably Mitt's time. And with Obama's outreach to the Mormons with this move, some of the voting block might come to the Democratic Party.
Politics aside Jon Huntsman seems eminently qualified for the post, speaking fluent Mandarin Chinese, former Ambassador to Singapore and former missionary in Taiwan. Not to mention a billionaire businessman with international holdings, and a savvy politician.
May 16, 2009 1:13 PM | Reply | Permalink
There are some other points on the healthcare issue that consistently get ignored and distorted by the right wing media:
1. If you throw in the payments to the insurance conglomerates in the calculations, which is never done, the obama plan will save american taxpayers billions. It won't cost billions, it will save billions and billions.
2. Single payer is the way to go and is the long term goal and that's why you need a government option for insurance. It will be cheaper and everyone will go with it. That's why republicans don't want the competition from the government. It's really pathetic. Dems want competition and the republicans don't.
3. People really don't understand that even if they have "insurance," they really don't for catastrophic illnesses. The industry caps out the coverage, so over a certain point in most policies you are on your own. People just don't get it and would be shocked to know that they really don't have insurance, even if they think they do. That was the point in that Moore film, which nobody pays attention to.
4. The government is already paying for most of the healthcare through medicare now anyway. The age groups with the most need for healthcare is the elderly and the government covers them already. It would be a piece of cake to just make medicare for all and shut down the insurance industry con artists.
May 16, 2009 1:42 PM | Reply | Permalink
5. Yes, if we had single payer, we'd have to pay for it, but, Jesus, do they really think we're all so fucking dumb that we think private health insurance is free?
May 16, 2009 8:20 PM | Reply | Permalink
6. If we compromise and have a public plan along side the for-profits, the private insurers will dump the truly sick and dying into the public plan, keeping only the young and healthy for profit. All pre-existing conditions will wind up in the public option. The public plan will therefore pay more in medical expenses as more care will be needed, and the GNOP will use it as an example of why public healthcare is so much more expensive than private.
They did it with Medicare Advantage and they'll do it again. In a heartbeat.
PEACE
May 16, 2009 8:39 PM | Reply | Permalink
Anyone (like me) who has worked for an HMO and wants to be honest knows who currently make the decisons on a person's healthcare and it sure "ain't" the patient and doctor. When I left Healthnet's (California) employ 17 years ago, it took me two years to get over the abuse I saw but could not change. A bunch of crooks at the top got rich. You want bureaucracy? I'll show you bureaucracy. So thanks, Walter for a very intelligent assessment of these bloodsuckers.
May 17, 2009 12:19 AM | Reply | Permalink
I just send a reply to a e-mail from Obama on the health care issue. I simply stated since Congress hasn't any problem finding public money to bail out Wall Street - even though they fought and won many tax write offs and deregulation of their markets, find spare pocket change for two wars to include funds for rebuild both counties, it shouldn't be hard to find more taxpayer monies to fully support universal health care. So unless he and his team get on the bandwagon for us, the taxpayer, adios!
May 16, 2009 1:39 PM | Reply | Permalink
I've gotten 2 emails asking me to "stand up with Obama for health care." I responded that only when he starts listening to Single-Payer advocates instead of having them arrested, will I stand up for him on this issue.
I got 2 auto-responses asking me for a donation.
May 17, 2009 1:25 PM | Reply | Permalink
Why in heaven's name does the GOP still have currency with the slogan about "[putting] bureaucrats in charge of health care decisions that should be made by families and doctors"?
What happened to the Obama propaganda machine of the presidential race? It was so good at debunking the GOP's cute slogans and half-truths.
May 16, 2009 2:02 PM | Reply | Permalink
Why in heaven's name does the GOP still have currency with the slogan about "[putting] bureaucrats in charge of health care decisions that should be made by families and doctors"?
What happened to the Obama propaganda machine of the presidential race? It was so good at debunking the GOP's cute slogans and half-truths.
May 16, 2009 2:04 PM | Reply | Permalink
Taking Huntsman out - a real coup
Meanwhile McClatchy reports that a major revolt is blossoming against Crist!
Now if only those Idiots will back a Truth Commission..
Too much to hope for?
May 16, 2009 2:34 PM | Reply | Permalink
Good news about the revolt against Crist! He's just a tax-and-spend liberal; much better to nominate some obscurantist Talibangelical.
May 16, 2009 8:13 PM | Reply | Permalink
Of course he is sending Huntsman out of the country.
Hunstman supports gay unions.
He is still kowtowing to the homobigot policies of his
surrogate father REV. Jer Wright.
May 16, 2009 3:01 PM | Reply | Permalink
Wow, what an idiotic comment. That type of comments are useless here.
May 16, 2009 3:33 PM | Reply | Permalink
Actually Rev. Wright is pro-gay rights. He believes that gays are God's children.
May 16, 2009 6:17 PM | Reply | Permalink
Is "homobigotry" a bias for heterogeneity?
May 17, 2009 10:12 AM | Reply | Permalink
"A government takeover of health care will put bureaucrats in charge of health care decisions that should be made by families and doctors," said Boustany.
The good Congressman should look up the definition of "bureaucrat". The government does not have a monopoly on bureaucracy. Many large corporations (such as insurance companies) are infested with bureaucrats--also known as bean counters--whose sole walk in life is to make money for their bosses.
May 16, 2009 3:16 PM | Reply | Permalink
Yeah, the congressman's description sounds a lot like the health care most private citizens have now. The socialized health care that congressmen get must give them a distorted perception of what private health care is like.
May 16, 2009 4:49 PM | Reply | Permalink
Listen for the recurring phrase, "government take-over" of insurance. It is a talking point that was generated last week, and since then every who-flung-dung in the reprobate party has been using it.
Isn't it part of their party's platform to stand between a woman and her gynecologist and prevent a procedure that they mutually have decided to do? Aren't they the ones who want a pharmacist to be able to refuse to fill a prescription ordered by a woman's doctor if they disagree with it? Their hypocrisy knows no bounds!
May 17, 2009 1:30 PM | Reply | Permalink
"As a first step in the process of working with President Obama on healthcare, we will distort the nature and extent of his proposals and attempt to score political points by striking fear in the hears of middle-class americans."
I see they're off to a good start on the the GOP version of bipartisanship.
May 16, 2009 8:16 PM | Reply | Permalink
Sessions Lays Down Standards For SCOTUS Nominee
===============================================
Who cares what a right-wing bigot like Sessions thinks. He's a hypocrite, through and through.
~
May 16, 2009 10:21 PM | Reply | Permalink
I agree, Mr. Republican governing person.
I much prefer the total lack of insurance I enjoyed for years in the US to the full coverage I suffer from now in Japan.
I hate it that previous health conditions don't effect my ability to be covered where I live now, and I dispise that, even though I have national coverage, the Japanese government somehow fails to decide what doctor I may go to for me and my family. And, worst of all, the fact that I usually never have any wait to see a specialist is the real clincher that the national health plan in Japan sucks compared to the US.
Citizens who live in communist countries like Canada, all of Europe, Japan, and Israel have no idea what they are missing, though.
May 17, 2009 5:20 AM | Reply | Permalink
Regarding the Republican response: "A government takeover of health care will put bureaucrats in charge of health care decisions that should be made by families and doctors,". This ignores that insurance company bureaucrats are already in charge of health care decisions that should be made by families and doctors. How many of us have had our claims for necessary care, recommended by our doctors, rejected? I say opening up the approval process to more competition will be a good thing!
May 17, 2009 9:06 AM | Reply | Permalink
Quick poll: is anyone in favour of nominating a Supreme Court Justice who is not "committed to the faithful following of the law and the Constitution according to a fair construction of them."
I am guessing no?
May 17, 2009 10:08 AM | Reply | Permalink
Quick poll: is anyone in favour of nominating a Supreme Court Justice who is not "committed to the faithful following of the law and the Constitution according to a fair construction of them."
====================================================
The only recent examples I can think of who were both nominated and confirmed are the right-wing Federalist Society types.
~
May 17, 2009 11:51 AM | Reply | Permalink