As criticisms go, that's pretty vapid. No "we can serve the people just as well through policy A or B."

So now the public option is not important. What is? Do you guys have any bottom line?

This person is also a coward.

WITHOUT PROGRESSIVE/LIBERAL VALUES, OBAMA IS JUST ANOTHER AMBITIOUS PANDERING POLITICIAN

If Democrats don't stand for positive growth and beneficial change, if they don't represent hope for effective and reliable government, if they don't embody what it means to be a virtuous, compassionate and responsible member of a great society, then what's the point of being a Democrat? We can all just be Republicans and try to force one another to eat s**t and die. If Obama fails progressives/liberals, he is failing what it means to be a Democrat.

You know what? I've decided not to read any stories that credit some "anonymous official" with a comment. If they can't take credit for their opinion, then for all I know the NYT could have been talking to Bo the Dog.

C'mon, this is a paper that publishes Ross Douhat's columns...

Power is all Rahm understands.

We have power.

Never trust Rahm.

I clearly remember that a significant number of Crackers didn't exactly warm to the notion of Civil Rights reform, either.

First they abandoned Single Payer. Remember how many times he promised to vigorously go after Single Payer? And all these hearings were promised to be available on CSPAN. After being elected on the very planks they now apparently consider "the left of the left," the Obama administration shouts "unfair."

I'm not feeling sorry for them. It sucks being held to campaign promises.

"left of the left"

No, that might describe single-payer advocates. Public option is more like in the center, or perhaps slightly left of center.

That describes in a nutshell the mistake of taking single-payer off the table, because rather than encouraging the other side to move toward the middle all it did was shift the parameters of the debate to the right.

Public option is a fair -- or at least somewhat reasonable -- compromise between those who support single-payer and those who want a private sector dominated system. But using public option as a bargaining chip only produces legislation that gives a lot more to the right (without getting the votes in return) and leaves the left -- which after all WON the last two elections -- with crumbs.

This "anonymous white house official" is bound to be Rahm Emanuel. I swear the guy ought to begin every statement he makes with "First, let me apologize for being a Democrat..." and then go from there. Howard Dean was a MUCH better DNC head and I have no doubt he would also eclipse Emanuel as chief of staff. His appointment was Obama's first major mistake.

Seems like that courageously anonymous admin official has been way off in his calculation of where the center -- of the Dems and of the entire electorate -- lies.  It sounds like something that'd come from someone who had a blind spot re the value of Howard Dean's (and Obama's, too) fifty-state strategy.

Could also be psyops to poison the waters between Obama and the left.

Why compromise on "public option," if there is no compromise on the other side. Let's go back and push for "single payer."

------------------------------------

If only Obama campaigned as hard for health care as he did for himself as president.

In December Obama said change starts from the bottom up, not top down. That's the last time he has made a progressive statement. All his substantive acts have been against progressive causes.

(Yes, I know he signed stem cell executive orders, and what not, that were progressive, but while substantively in the lives of people these are important, politically these were not consequential.)

It seems to me that the Obama administration is, at best, an absentee landlord to progressive ideas.

I'm at the point where it no longer matters what the Obama administration does.

Obama, in my mind, stands for absolutely nothing.

He's in fact, worse than George W. Bush who pursued the wrecking of the country, but at least that is what Bush stood for. Obama has continued Bush policies while pretending to be the opposite.

I'm not sure what is stronger: Saddam's links to 9/11 or Obama's links to progressive causes (where it counts, in the legislature where money is allocated).

We needed FDR and got a watered down Jimmy Carter.

From the beginning, public option was a watered down compromise. Maybe public option will be rescued from the fire, and that will rescue the Obama administration term of office, but I won't back Obama anymore.

As far as I am concerned he's turned on the progressives the way Sen. Grassey turned on him.

He cannot be trusted as stewart of Progressive causes.

I can only wonder if many others feel the same as me. I hope I have the option in political primaries to vote for someone other than him in 2012. Really, anyone will due - provided they have some spine.

You all realize, I hope, that this leak is part of a coordinated strategy that allows Obama and the leadership of the Senate and House to pass a better bill. "Look what we have to deal with on the left!! This is the most we can do for you!" They would be playing this game whether or not they actually agree with the "left of the left" - a description that's intended to emphasize to the Blue Dogs and their fellow-travelers in the Senate that the people insisting on a public option are "too radical" to be bought off. This is good, because it shows that the White House, willingly or not, is moving the final form of the healthcare reform bill to the left.

We shouldn't be pissed at Obama or his anonymous aide for executing part of a political strategy to get what we want. This kind of game-playing goes on all the time, and it's a mistake to assume that leaked comments (particularly the anonymous ones) actually represent the view of Obama, or Emanuel, or anyone else. It's a pressure tactic.

Also, as time goes on, Obama is going to use progressives in general as a boogeyman in just this way to get "centrist" Democrats to move left. He's done it before. Get used to it.

The WH needs to remember who the base is. They also need to get their message together. Seems to change daily. The White House has been very patient with the stream of distortions and lies by Republicans. Time to move on and get it done and get as many Dems on board as possible. There is a related post at http://iamsoannoyed.com/?page_id=588

This "anonymous senior White House adviser" (give me a break!) answers his own question.

The reason why mainstream progressives of all stripes must keep the pressure on for a strong public option is that otherwise the industry-financed opposition via bought-and-paid-for politicians (Blue Dogs, Repubs) and astroturf opposition, plus the Right's career radio and TV haters will push real reform out of the picture.

The White House and the Congressional Democratic majority need to feel the pressure from their supporters so that they keep their balance and don't find themselves tailoring their policies to please those who will never give them a single vote, or a single dollar in support.

My apologies, Mr./Ms. Anonymous Senior White House Adviser. When President Obama said recently, "...but I will tell you, as I've been very clear about before, I continue to believe that a robust public option would be the best way to go", I didn't realize that he was just being silly, and that you would label me as one of those Leftiest of the Leftiest moonbats who are ka-RAZY enough to take the President at his word. By the way, the knife you stuck in my back doesn't hurt as much as I thought it would, so I'll gladly canvass for Democrats again in 2010. Thanks for the pep talk!

You can hear the President conveying his secret coded message on healthcare financing here:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-BRqOchLIug&eurl=http%3A%2F%2Fvideo.google.com%2Fvideosearch%3Fhl%3Den%26q%3DI%2Bsupport%2Ba%2Bpublic%2Boption%2BObama%26um%3D1%26ie%3DUTF-8%26ei%3DCzmMSuyFH96ntgf_uoTlBg%26sa%3DX%26oi%3Dvide&feature=player_embedded#t=73

HYPE HYPE HYPE

Some anonymous coward -- janitor?? -- made some snide remarks to the Washington Post, which loves anonymous comments so much, in violation of their own policies, as pointed out by their ombudsman this past Sunday.

We have better things to talk abotu then anonymosu trash talk.

Public option loses it's volatility without bipartisanship? Nothing is more volatile than democrat against democrat. That's what sinks us every time and that scares me. Blue Dogs will do their best to piss on this.

At least Republicans stick together.

Regarding all the Waterloo references: everyone presumes, probably correctly that Demented meant to equate President Obama with Napoleon; however, the Republicans' have a known ability to get everything completely back-ssword, so the Senator was obviously referring to the OTHER general at that battle: the Duke of Wellington. You know, the guy who WON? And, by the way, Wellington's tactics were not dissimilar to what the Administration has been doing: hold on and let the enemy break its' forces on your troops and then move out and rout them.
Good advice still.