Democrats proving Again That Compromise is Not an Option on Healthcare

In this report we get a nice one-two punch. Not only are we seeing Democrats once again refusing even a tiny compromise with Republicans on Obama's takeover of nearly 20% of our economy with his healthcare plans, but we also get to see another example of why Huffington Post is not journalism. I like a nice one-two punch for a Wednesday.

---

For one thing, the HuffPo article hilariously calls Democrat pitbull Rahm Emanuel a “conservative Democrat.” But let's start with the more important political point and deal with the HuffPo chicanery second. In a HuffPo "report" by Sam Stein, we see leftists, and extreme activists getting their shorts in a wad over the proposition from Republicans that the so-called public option only be set off by a "trigger," one that would usher in that public option if insurance companies "fail to deliver" the affordable coverage that Obama is demanding. This trigger idea would exclude the public option at the outset only to have it come in later if needed. To the lefties, though, this putting off of the public option is unacceptable. Even though the public option would come later anyway because the unreal expectations and government meddling of Obamacare would set the table for the trigger to be pulled regardless of initial claims. They know this, of course, but left-wingers want a socialistic healthcare plan and they don't want to wait for any inevitable trigger mechanism to be pulled later. They want it now and that is that. It's their way or the highway. Consequently, Maine Republican Olympia Snowe has become the focus of left-wing ire because she is one senator floating the trigger idea. Absurdly, Snowe seems to be under the delusion that there is going to be some sort of "bi-partisan" bill coming from the Senate.

"It is important to get it to be a bipartisan initiative, given the dimensions of health care reform and the implications to all Americans," she said. "Every American will be affected one way or the other under this."

Senator Snowe, I hate to tell you, but they don't want to compromise with you. Democrats want you to shut up and do what they tell you to do-- like you usually do. After all, in the very same AP story, Senator Chuck Schumer admitted openly that he had no interest in Snowe's thoughts on a trigger saying that the public option must be "available to all Americans from the first day." Left-wingers like HuffPo's Sam Stein are also upset at White House pitbull Rahm Emanuel for his comments in the Wall Street Journal on July 7. Emanuel told the WSJ that the White House is open to the trigger idea if it achieves passage of the "reform" they are seeking. As far as Emanuel was concerned the initial offering of the public option could be put off for later.

"The goal is to have a means and a mechanism to keep the private insurers honest," he said in an interview. "The goal is non-negotiable; the path is" negotiable.

But even as Emanuel made like the White House would consider this particular compromise with Republicans like Snowe, a few hours later the president reiterated that he is strongly for the public option to be in full force at the outset. So, while Emanuel was floating the possibility of compromise, Obama was putting on airs as if he'd cut compromise off and Schumer was directly stating such proving that compromise is not something that Democrats are interested in. So, to that half of the electorate that vote GOP, the Democrats have a message: you can go pound sand as far as Obama and his Democrat cohorts are concerned. They want it now and that is that. Now, to the amusing attempt at HuffPo's Sam Stein pretending at journalism. Stein essentially said what I just reported but he took many more paragraphs do do so and without as many links to show the original statements. Why? Well, because he padded his story with a ton of that "strategists say" and "a source said" nonsense we are so used to seeing from hack writers. Then he used these unnamed "sources" to buttress his own ideological assumption that Snowe is off-base and Obama and Schumer are right on the issues. Another hilarious addition to Stein's "report" is where his "source" called Rahm Emanuel a "conservative Democrat."

"Rahm's problem with this is he is on the more conservative end of the Democratic Party and he is a very political guy," the source added. "He is working for a way out without a bloody fight. The problem is he doesn't mind taking that fight to the left. And what I worry could happen is the left will just quit."

This is a risible claim. Any look at Emanuel's political record reveals a perfectly left-wing history. Emanuel's is in no way a conservative record. Stein only added the Emanuel is "conservative" hilarity because Emanuel seemed to disagree with Stein's feelings that a socialist healthcare plan is the right course. Further, if Emanuel is seen as "conservative" then his left-wing, "progressive" buddies on healthcare can find it easier to excoriate the White House Chief of Staff and rally to the president's healthcare cause. But here is the fact of the matter that Stein conveniently forgot to mention. Rahm Emanuel is not some rogue operative moving on his own agenda. In fact, he has no power of his own at all on the actual terms of the debate in Congress. Emanuel is carrying out the president's orders. No more, no less. Emanuel spoke to the WSJ with Obama's full knowledge to make it seem as if they were open to compromise. Then, in his inimitable way, Obama went out tell the American people that he was "strongly for" the public option. Hence, both messages are sent by a president that specializes in talking out of both side of his-- mouth. Only the truth is, Obama's White House, while touting the public option all along, has also said that they'd listen to all sides. "We are open to all ideas to talk about health reform," has been a common mantra. (Including, I remind you, a tax on your healthcare benefits from work, something Obama ridiculed McCain for during the late campaign.) So, Obama is playing the I'm-a-reasonable-guy game. Pretending on one hand that everything is on the table and he'll listen to everyone to get a good plan, yet on the other insisting that everything isn't on the table because he insists that a government takeover of healthcare be implemented. But did Sammy Stein note any of this in his report? No. And why? Only because he could set Emanuel up as a fall guy and make Obama look like the good guy on the white horse riding in to save the day for socialist healthcare. And to support the president, Stein used a passel full of sources saids to make it seem as if "experts" were lining up behind Obama and not that dumb, evil, "conservative" Emanuel. Stein's blather is pure advocacy, not journalism.

---