Lieberman Repeats Claim That Public Option Not Part Of 2008 Presidential Campaign

And when you're done playing comment section stalker,

If that's your name for calling out the repeated falsehoods our own resident Joe Lieberman sockpuppet spews forth in these threads, then fine, I happily plead guilty. At one point one could believe that FreepRider was simply sadly and tragically misinformed. That the Freeper continues to spew such shit in the face of copious contrary evidence leads to only two possible conclusions: Freeper's complete divorce from reality or a campaign of deliberate lying reminiscent of the best of the Bush-Cheney cabal.

As for you, your agenda has been quite transparent to anyone who has read your posts for any length of times: to defend the Emanuel ("Raaaaaaahm!") administration (and by extension the DLC corporate wing of the Democratic Party) from any criticism from people who actually understand and care about what ordinary people, rather than banksters and corporate CEOs, are going through; to undermine any Democrat, in or out of office, who seeks to move the party leftward (leftward to, let's say, the policies of Richard Nixon), and to vent your considerable spleen on the "netroots" whom you hold in such obvious contempt. And so you shill for the DLC/corporate wing of the party -- the wing that brought us such lovely gifts as NAFTA, WTO, outsourcing/exporting of jobs, media dereg and ensuing predictable consolidation of media power in the hands of a few giant megacorporations; financial deregulation and the repeal of Glass-Steagall, and assorted other time bombs that continue to go off in the midst of the American populace. Heckuva job, Brownie.

FYI, I fully support the public option.

What you claim to support is not the point. The point is that your claims about Obama, the 08 campaign, and whether or not he campaigned on the public option are substantially identical to Lying Joe's -- and they are just as false as Lying Joe's.

I have said that the words "public option" never escaped Obama's lips during two years of campaigning. Yes, it was mentioned ONCE in ONE paper but that does not count as *campaigning* on the public option.

Um, no. What you said was: "They're claiming he's breaking a campaign promise by not getting a public option. Obama NEVER campaigned on a public option."

You then proceeded to redefine "campaign" to mean "talk about it in campaign speeches", thus moving the goalposts to suit your agenda of making excuses for the Emanuel administration.

This redefinition is a cute bit of rhetoric, and suits your goals, but it's a red herring.

First the specific term "public option" may or may not have even been coined during the campaign, so it's very cute of you to try to send people chasing after specific words in campagn speeches, even though the policy plank clearly existed.

Second, and more important, you know damn well that Obama wasn't big on specifics in his campaign speeches. Obama received frequent criticism for the lack of specifics in those campaign speeches.... and when he did, the (correct) response from supporters (myself included) was quite consistent: It's all there on the campaign website. And, indeed, it was. Which is why you can't now come back and change the rules and say "just having it on the website doesn't count as campaigning." You can create your own reality all you want, as Ron Suskind famously reported about the way the Bush White House conducted itself, but the rest of us who remain in the reality-based community will know it's bunk.

Oh, so what was there on that website? This:

(1) OBAMA’S PLAN TO COVER THE UNINSURED. Obama will make available a new national health plan which will give individuals the choice to buy affordable health coverage that is similar to the plan available to federal employees. The new public plan will be open to individuals without access to group coverage through their workplace or current public programs. It will also be available to people who are self-employed and small businesses that want to offer insurance to their employees. The plan will have the following features:

* Guaranteed eligibility. No American will be turned away because of illness or pre-existing conditions.

* Comprehensive benefits. The benefit package will be similar to that offered through the Federal Employees Health Benefits Program (FEHBP), the program through which Members of Congress get their own health care. The new public plan will include coverage of all essential medical services, including preventive, maternity and mental health care. Coverage will include disease management programs, self management training and care coordination for appropriate individuals.

* Affordable premiums, co-pays and deductibles Participants will be charged fair premiums and minimal co-pays for deductibles for preventive services.

* Subsidies. Individuals and families who do not qualify for Medicaid or SCHIP but still need assistance will receive income-related federal subsidies to keep health insurance premiums affordable. They can use the subsidy to buy into the new public plan or purchase a private health care plan.

* Simplifying paperwork and reining in health costs. The plan will simplify paperwork for providers and will increase savings to the system overall.

* Easy enrollment. The new public plan will be simple to enroll in and provide ready access to coverage.

* Portability and choice. Participants in the new public plan and the National Health Insurance Exchange (see below) will be able to move from job to job without changing or jeopardizing their health care coverage.

* Quality and efficiency. Participating hospitals and providers that participate in the new public plan will be required to collect and report data to ensure that standards for health care quality, health information technology and administration are being met.

(2) NATIONAL HEALTH INSURANCE EXCHANGE. To provide Americans with additional options, the Obama plan will make available a National Health Insurance Exchange to help individuals who wish to purchase a private insurance plan. The Exchange will act as a watchdog and help reform the private insurance market by creating rules and standards for participating insurance plans to ensure fairness and to make individual coverage more affordable and accessible. Through the Exchange, any American will have the opportunity to enroll in the new public plan or purchase an approved private plan, and income-based sliding scale subsidies will be provided for people and families who need it. Insurers would have to issue every applicant a policy, and charge fair and stable premiums that will not depend upon health status. The Exchange will require that all the plans offered are at least as generous as the new public plan and meet the same standards for quality and efficiency. Insurers would be required to justify an above-average premium increase to the Exchange. The Exchange would evaluate plans and make the differences among the plans, including cost of services, transparent.

Pretty detailed for something he wasn't really campaigning on, I'd say. Who knew that a Presidential campaign would include so much detail on something they ... y'know... don't intend to make a part of the, y'know, campaign, in documents on the, y'know, campaign website?

" [M]entioned ONCE in ONE paper", my ass.

And if he wasn't campaigning on it, he sure fooled the press at the time (h/t Media Matters):

Morning Joe quoted Lieberman's claim that "you can't find a mention of public option" during presidential campaign ...

In fact, Obama campaigned on public option throughout 2007, 2008

Politico: "[T]he 2008 Democratic Party Platform referred to the need for a 'public plan.' " On November 20, Politico stated of Lieberman's claim, "In fact, the 2008 Democratic Party Platform referred to the need for a 'public plan,' and candidate Barack Obama referred more than once to the idea of providing people who can't get private insurance with government-backed insurance similar to that which members of Congress get."

NY Times, May 2007: "Obama would create a public plan for individuals who cannot obtain group coverage." The New York Times reported on May 30, 2007, that in a major health care speech, "Mr. Obama would create a public plan for individuals who cannot obtain group coverage through their employers or the existing government programs, like Medicaid or the State Children's Health Insurance Program. Children would be required to have health insurance. Subsidies would be available for those who need help with the cost of coverage."

Wash. Post, February 2008: Both Obama and Clinton propose "option to buy into a public plan." The Washington Post reported on February 24, 2008, "There is a growing political consensus among Democrats that universal health care can be achieved by subsidizing coverage for low-income people, establishing new purchasing pools to help others buy affordable insurance, and requiring most businesses to offer health plans to their workers or pay a fee. Both the Obama and Clinton proposals contain these elements, as well as the option to buy into a public plan. Their most striking difference is on whether to require everyone to get a policy."

Chicago Tribune, October 2008: Obama's proposal "[c]reates a new public plan as another option." In an article on Obama's and Sen. John McCain's health care proposals, the Chicago Tribune stated that Obama's proposal "[w]ould require private insurers to accept all applicants. Creates a new public plan as another option. Gives subsidies to low-income citizens who buy insurance. Requires businesses to cover employees or pay into a fund; small businesses get refundable tax credit. Estimated 10-year cost: $1.6 trillion."

Links to stories in original.

Keep on creating your own reality, FreepRider. And welcome to the Lieberman club.

Long-winded way of saying "I can't find a single instance where Obama ever uttered the words 'public option' so I'll write a book about some irrelevant bullshit. YAWN.

Ooopd --

This was intended for NOOC of the poor self-image.