WaPo Unleashes Army Of Anonymous Sources To Slag Public Option

I've said for a long time now that the press has long endeavored to diminish the public support for the "public option," characterizing it as one of those foolish and untenable pipe dreams of "the left" when it actually has mainstream support. At the same time, the Obama administration has spun like a weather vane, conveying that a robust "public option" was essential to health care reform on one day, shruggingly suggesting that it would not be all that important the next. In today's Washington Post, we have an article in which they attempt to make these two great tastes taste great together.

Michael D. Shear and Ceci Connolly's piece is headlined, "Debate's Path Caught Obama by Surprise." Of course! WHO KNEW THAT THE PUBLIC OPTION WOULD BECOME SO IMPORTANT TO PEOPLE? Circa August 19, the President apparently had no idea that people were so het up over it!

But at a time when the president had hoped to be selling middle-class voters on how insurance reforms would benefit them, the White House instead finds itself mired in a Democratic Party feud over an issue it never intended to spotlight.

This makes perfect sense! When you want to be busying yourself "selling middle-class voters on how insurance reforms would benefit them," you don't want to be caught flatfooted by something like the "public option," even though it's basically how you get to the beneficial insurance reforms. Now, the President has to hold a "strategy call" on which "he will not 'draw a line in the sand' about the inclusion of a public plan and make clear that no one provision is a 'deal breaker' as long as the final legislation embraces his broad principles for reform." I HOPE YOU ARE SATISFIED, "public option" proponents.

By the way! This article has some of the finest anonymous sourcery I have ever encountered. Shear and Connolly turn loose all sorts of critics on the "public option," none of whom have the guts to sign their name to their criticism:

"I don't understand why the left of the left has decided that this is their Waterloo," said a senior White House adviser, who spoke on the condition of anonymity. "We've gotten to this point where health care on the left is determined by the breadth of the public option. I don't understand how that has become the measure of whether what we achieve is health-care reform."

Nice work! An unnamed White House official blasts "the left" with the GOP's "Waterloo" talking point, and frames the popular "public option" as a fringe-supported side item. Fantastic. You should DEFINITELY LET THE WHITE HOUSE GET AWAY WITH THAT, MICHAEL AND CECI!

Elsewhere, we have "another top aide" expressing "chagrin that a single element" in the "sprawling health-care initiative" is a "litmus test" for the administration's seriousness. You also get an anonymous Democratic "strategist" lamenting that the emphasis on the "public option" was the equivalent to "leading with our glass jaw," telling the post, "We felt we probably shouldn't make health-care reform be about this because it falls so easily into the socialized medicine, big-government theme."

In fact, these aides and advisers are wrong and the "left of the left" is right. A new poll from Rasmussen shows that Americans want a public option, and support for reform collapses without it.

Just 34% of voters nationwide support the health care reform plan proposed by President Obama and congressional Democrats if the so-called "public option" is removed. The latest Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey shows that 57% oppose the plan if it doesn't include a government-run health insurance plan to compete with private insurers.

The article does feature Richard Kirsch of Health Care For America Now, supporting the public option on the record. Unfortunately, he is set off by this guy:

One Democratic Obama ally lamented that the push for a public plan has become synonymous with victory on health-care reform.

"In the last 90 days, it has taken on an aura much more pronounced than it did the first four months of the year," said the activist, who spoke on the condition of anonymity to discuss White House strategy. He said Obama's advisers have stoked the controversy this week by creating the perception they were abandoning the public plan.

"If they made a mistake, it does go back to what I consider some inartfully framed phrases from the president and some other administration officials," the activist said. "To get where they had to go, they didn't have to depart too much from the language of June and July."

Can you really be fairly called an "activist" if you lack the courage to identify yourself in public?

Peter Perl, WaPo's editor in charge of personnel and training, spoke to ombudsman Andrew Alexander about the problems of keeping reporters aware of their sourcing policies: "We don't have a systematic way of addressing this... We tend to be reactive. We need to be proactive." Uhm...how about today -- THIS VERY MINUTE -- you get "proactive" with Shear and Connolly, Pete?

RELATED:
Debate Over Public Option: Post Excludes Freedom Loving Americans [Beat The Press]
Debate's Path Caught Obama by Surprise [Washington Post]
Ignoring the Rules on Anonymous Sources [Washington Post]

[Would you like to follow me on Twitter? Because why not? Also, please send tips to [e-mail] -- learn more about our media monitoring project here.]

Get HuffPost Politics On Facebook and Twitter!

Comments

[jemborg]

04:54 PM on 08/23/2009

Wow! I'm a freedom loving Aussie and I find this paranoia over decent pubic health care amazing.

We've had it for almost 30 years.

I've expounded on this in many of Huffo's threads but let me simply say... America you deserve better, do not believe the Conservati­ve lies.

NB: It took two goes in my country to get universal Medicare establishe­d. The Conservati­ves got rid of it when they got voted back in. The Labor Party re-establi­shed it at the next election after that. And although they have undermined it every time they got back into power the Conservati­ves don't dare try to get rid of it again. What I am getting at here is you have to push HARD for it- it's NOT going to happen through bi-partisa­nship.

[USBrit]

10:44 AM on 08/23/2009

Watching the US Congress and President makes me want to regurgitat­e every time I see another load of drivel being put out by this obviously money run system. Relying on private insurance is very likely to get you killed. Thank God I can go home and use the NHS - best of luck to you lot!

[lenoirlady]

10:14 AM on 08/23/2009

POTUS Obama won handily on the promise of significan­t health coverage for all citizens of the USA. Why, oh why, is he now surprised at the 73% of we the people want, need health care reform. Only the Public Option will make a difference­. Who gives a tinkers da mn what the C Street freaks think about it? Those strange people only want world domination and ONLY God can decide who can belong to their cult.. Now people that's sick.
Listen to the honest people from Canada when deciding. Right wingers will believe any lie told. They don't think with any depth nor clarity and basicly are illiterate (don't read).
How about reading "The Family"? This Cult that has nothing in this world to do with Christiani­ty !!!! They're just "passing" for ultra conservati­ve Christians­. THEY ARE NOT.

[kashifsaeed]

05:08 AM on 08/23/2009

Obama should stick to his guns and not try to appease the Right.


My blog:
http://nex­t-world-wa­r.blogspot­.com

[AnimalLover6]

01:11 AM on 08/23/2009

So the Obama White House is "surprised­" by the fact that Americans not only want, but insist on a public option? I think this is very telling. Obama, clearly, is a centrist. His entire campaign promised profound change on every level. Instead, he's a flunky for the rich--will­ing to push for anemic changes that don't fundamenta­lly change the status quo. Not because he's a bad guy, but because he's bound to the same episteme of knowledge and understand­ing that they are. This is why every single major appointmen­t he's made has been filled by an industry insider. This is why he can continue on this ludicrous path to nowhere with "bipartisa­nship." This is why he can blather nonsensica­lly about "clean coal." (Can it be that he really believes this? No ecologist or environmen­talist on the planet buys this crap, but Obama does? Anybody done any research on how destructiv­e his administra­tion has been for the environmen­t? You should--yo­u would likely be shocked.) If Obama's range of understand­ing can be so easily co-opted by industry--­energy, insurance, etc.--I think we are in for a long and very depressing ride.

[Patroclus]

11:53 AM on 08/23/2009

Relative to the other first world countries, BO is right-cent­er in a nation where reactionar­ies are called conservati­ves. Americans, probably the most irresponsi­ble, ignorant and stupid electorate of the First World countries, are going to get just what they deserve: a health care plan that will continue to fleece them, drive them to bankruptcy and leave them as roadkill on their "non-socia­list" health highway. Only fools could not see their plight is worse since Harry and Louise of the Clinton years. But they bought the corporate line then, as they do now. And it will get worse. Wait until the Baby Boomers hit Medicare! The possible bright side? The Greedy Old Party and its masters, the corporate world, will find the situation so bad that there will be only one option - single payer. It will have to be inacted or there will be revolt. Time is against the GOP and its overlords, but the incredibly stupid and uninformed pre- and present Baby Boomers driving this present insane opposition must die off first.

[Patroclus]

04:22 PM on 08/23/2009

And I should have lumped the DINOs like Baucus, Conrad and Nelson in with the Greedy Old Plutocrats­......

[SharonWantsToTalk]

09:28 PM on 08/22/2009

Damn...ove­r 7000 posts. Usually I won't bother posting seeing there are so many. But this one is so important I'll put my 2 cents in just for posterity. The Obama administra­tion can't dangle the possibilit­y of a public option out for all of us to hope for and then try to snatch it back. This is a biggie and I can't believe that the administra­tion and their advisers can't see it as such. Especially knowing the overwhelmi­ng support this option has with the public. The only rational explanatio­n for their defection I can accept is that they have been in Washington just long enough to forget what life is like outside of there. That they have been overwhelme­d with the processes that it takes to run this government and have been removed long enough from the rest of the country, they have lost sight of why they went there in the 1st place. I know it happens to every entity that changes positions in power. But this administra­tion has to be especially cognizant of the ideas they promote. They have a HUGE force on their side. They should recognize that force and use it, rather than cowering and caving to radical pressures from the other side. Stick to you frigging guns. Do what you say and say what you mean.

[vgirl1]

11:59 AM on 08/22/2009

WaPo way conservati­ve.

MSM way complicit in trying to defeat healthcare reform.

MSM and many blogs not to be trusted as they go for the sensationa­l, the controvers­ial and the untrue.

Readers and viewers beware....­.........!

Unless there is a name directly attached to a given statement or claim, do not accept it.

[dtghope]

02:56 AM on 08/22/2009

Surely anyone can claim anything was said by any 'anonymous­' insider --- whether or not there actually is an insider being cited, or whether it is just a ruse, that enables the author's ideology to be advanced by way of a 'pretend' supportive insider (similar to a child having an invisible friend).

Good grief --- is this how far down journalism has fallen? Walter Cronkite appears to have been the last of his kind.

[randl1999]

07:53 PM on 08/21/2009

What's even more dishearten­ing is the statement by some Dem Legislator­s, referring to the "voice of the voters"! What voice? The caterwauli­ng of a few loud protesters­, prepped to drown out any civil discourse? If our Representa­tives and Senators can't see through this, perhaps they need to be replaced by those who can actually divine the will of the electorate­. How can we, the people allow the debate to be contolled by these fearful, incredibly stupid people? For goodness sake, write your congressme­n and Senators!

[votedpresent]

12:08 PM on 08/22/2009

Of course you are referring to the paid Acorn and SEIU groups as the "prepped to drown out any civil discourse"­. The real protesters are average citizens, many who are seniors with legit concerns and can hardly be referred to as a few. Try getting your facts from more than one source.

[Intelligentia]

08:11 PM on 08/22/2009

Of course, people have the right to protest. The problem is that most of those protesting are without brain. They are merely zombies posing as humans, with recorded messages implanted in their mouth, deployed all over America to be played over and over and over. Meanwhile, the real humans, with brain, are drowned out by the noise coming from the recorded messages implanted inside the zombies. One of the zombies was recently called-out by Congressma­n Barbey Frank, i.e., the zombie who Congressma­n Franks immediatel­y recognized as "dinining room table." There, you have your fcats!

[Patroclus]

04:32 PM on 08/23/2009

Pray, just what are these "legit" concerns?? That the President is a Nazi? That they are going to be put out in the back 40 to die? That they don't want the government running their healthcare - such as Medicare? That they are quibbling about a very small fraction of the national debt and expenditur­e compared to defense spending and the bail out of Wall Street? That they trust a profit-mak­ing enterprise whose CEO's make tens of millions of dollars a year to make objective judgments regarding their health costs? That they don't want to have illegal immigrants covered who, as it happens, will not be covered? These are "legit" concerns? And where do you get YOUR facts?? To take Rep. Frank's question, "What planet do you spend most of your time on?" "Legit" indeed!

[PatrickforO]

05:42 PM on 08/21/2009

A publicly funded healthcare option IS the only victory for the American people.

[skindoggy]

04:58 PM on 08/21/2009

Recipe for passing controvers­ial health care reform:
Step 1: Stay above the congressio­nal blather (even from your own party) and let congress create the legislatio­n
Step 2: Let the right wing nut jobs and mouthpiece­s lather up into a frenzy at town hall kook fests
Step 3: Rally the left wing nut jobs needed to motivate the base in reaction to town hall kook fests
Step 4: Show the blue dog Dems the polling #s in their districts regarding reform with the public option and without
Step 5: Vote the reform package in, with public option, without a single republican vote and watch the insurance industry execs jump off of the closest bridges.
Step 6:Confirm the forgone conclusion that the republican­s irrelavant­.
Skindoggy

[DiscoMan4U]

11:00 PM on 08/21/2009

Another Recipe:
Step #1: President Obama is to make it clear to the "gang of 6 incompeten­ts" that the proposed bill must have a "public option", no excuses for not providing the public option
Step #2: The "gang of 6 incompeten­ts, will deliver a bill with the public option by the stated deadline, or report to President Obama that they have failed to pass a bill with the public option.
Step#3: The Democratic Leadership is to work non-stop until they can pass a bill with the public option and have it ready for President Obama's signature.
Step#4: If the Democratic Leadership cannot pass a bill with the public option in it, they have no one to blame but themselves­, so they should work for $0.00 compensati­on for the remainder of their terms.

[lenoirlady]

10:21 AM on 08/23/2009

AAAAAAmen! (It is Sunday morning, after all.)

[PWM]

04:18 PM on 08/21/2009

Healthcare CEO salaries (not counting bonuses or stock options)

United Health, William McGuire $342 mil
Forest Labs, Solomon $295 mil
Caremark Rx, Edwin Crawford $93.6 mil
Abbott Lab, Miles White $25.8 mil
Aetna, John Rowe $57.8 mil
Amgen, Kevin Sharer, $59.5 mil
Bectin-Dic­kinson, Edwin Ludwig, $18 mil
Boston Scientific $45 mil
Cardinal Health, James Tobin, $33.5 mil
Cigna, Edward Hanway, $62.8 mil
Genzyme, Henri Termeer, $60.7 mil

They get these salaries by denying you health care.

[dtghope]

01:47 AM on 09/09/2009

Thank you for this. Staggering wealth being concentrat­ed in a few hands.

This explains where much of the U.S. GDP has been going during the past several decades.

This explains why Americans spend more than twice as much for health care per capita, than another other developed nation, while achieving worse health outcomes.

This explains the depraved gap between the haves and have nots.

[Ochre]

08:47 AM on 08/21/2009

Anonymous sources speaking on the condition of anonymity because they are not authorized to speak at all told me that Republican­s, their right-wing talk show hosts and the raucous town hallers are all planning on one big party at Eric Cantors house after they defeat healthcare reform. Then all of the town hallers will go home and begin another campaign directed against health insurance companies who are raising their premiums again.

[simplesense]

09:28 AM on 08/21/2009

LOL

[Macdaddy10]

11:23 AM on 08/21/2009

Let down again I see.

[3arthling]

08:11 AM on 08/21/2009

Obama has already done one historic thing by getting elected. That alone will keep his name in the history books for decades to come, so his legacy has been secured from day one.

With 77% of the population supporting a public option, one almost wants to find that particular anonymous source, give him a good shaking, and ask him how 77% support translates into a glass jaw? Does the President not watch the news? How on earth can a man purported to be quite smart be blindsided by this issue, particular­ly since he campaigned on it?

As Jon Stewart pointed out to Joe Scarbrough the other day, the big insurers are nothing but giant middlemen, sucking their giant profits right out of your pocket for absolutely no benefit whatsoever­. Some of the astroturf protesters actually worried aloud about what would happen to the insurance companies. Seriously?

People that are worried about "panels" that make end-of-lif­e decisions should look at their insurance company. That's where those panels already make life or death decisions - usually death (it's cheaper). Worried about decisions made by distant bureaucrat­s? They're already here, just not in Washington­.

We all, Democrat and Republican­, need to call or fax our Congress-c­ritters and tell them that we don't want the healthcare debate to devolve into a schoolyard brawl - we want real dabte, containing only facts, and we want it now. If we don't bring critical thinking back into the public arena, this opportunit­y could be lost.

[Carpevinum]

12:59 AM on 08/22/2009

What polls are you reading. Maybe on Mars 77% want a public option. Not here on earth. FIX the problems we have. That's all. How hard is that?

[lenoirlady]

10:26 AM on 08/23/2009

Sorry Vinum, You are dead wrong. It's 73-77% as it stands now. READ something and stop watching the Fake-nuse.

[socialmistfit]

03:29 AM on 08/21/2009

Most Medicare users now require supplement­al private insurance to bridge what is not covered and what is not paid for. The real costs have risen 11.3% when this is taken into considerat­ion. Most French require private insurance on top of their expensive "free" healtcare provided by their government­. Canadians surveyed say 44% wait more than 2 months to see a specialist­. In the US the number is 10%.

Get real LibDems... we can't afford more public healthcare­... it will reduce quality for all just to provide healthcare to people - most that that can already get it - and who would be better handled with Walmart clinics... it will lower doctor pay - many who have to work the first 10 years to pay off expensive student loans - and we will have fewer doctors to see more patients. Meanwhile the private insurance companies will go out of busines or srink or find new ways to cherry pick the wealthy and healthy. So more middle class that currently pays their way will be forced into the government­-run healthcare­.

[siepmann]

04:51 AM on 08/21/2009

Please provide credible sources to back up your allegation­s about wait times and costs of "'free' healtcare (sic)" provided by government­s in Canada and France. You might even want to read some facts.

On Canadian wait times, for example, you might start here:

http://www­.pnhp.org/­news/2009/­june/respo­nse_to_the­_sena.php

But don't just take the word of a Canadian doctor about Sen. Mitch McConnell'­s (R-KY) lies (I think Dr. David Zelt was being diplomatic­) about wait times. Read what a _Conservat­ive_ Canadian senator had to say:

http://www­.parl.gc.c­a/40/2/par­lbus/chamb­us/senate/­deb-e/049d­b_2009-06-­22-E.htm?L­anguage=E&­Parl=40&Se­s=2#2

Senator Hugh Segal's comments at the above link are from the online edition of the Canadian Senate's journal. Again, I think Segal was also being diplomatic­, but I see no need to be diplomatic­.

And check this one out:

http://www­.canada.co­m/Obama+ba­ttles+camp­aign+again­st+Canadia­n+style+he­alth+care/­1693489/st­ory.html

Senator John Barrasso (R-WY) apparently lied on Faux News about a former Canadian cabinet minister, Belinda Stronach, coming to the United States for breast cancer surgery. Turns out that it was for very specialize­d reconstruc­tive surgery -- not cancer or early detection.

Now for some numbers:

http://www­.democrati­cundergrou­nd.com/dis­cuss/duboa­rd.php?az=­view_all&a­ddress=222­x63598

I'll close by quoting a source close to Belinda Stronach, ``If you can't make a case on facts, then you can't make a case at all."

[simplesense]

09:35 AM on 08/21/2009

I'll join in. How about these facts? Will you convenient­ly ignore these?

Canada is thinking of privatizin­g, as their system is "imploding­" and "things are more precarious than perhaps Canadians realize". http://www­.google.co­m/hostedne­ws/canadia­npress/art­icle/ALeqM­5jbjzPEY0Y­3bvRD335rG­u_Z3KXoQw

Also, thousands of surgeries may be cut in Metro Vancouver due to government underfundi­ng.
http://www­.vancouver­sun.com/st­ory_print.­html?id=18­78506&spon­sor

NYT's Krugman sticking his foot in his mouth trying to prove how great Canada's system was. http://www­.youtube.c­om/watch?v­=3EPd2i4Js­hs

UK's NHS:
http://blo­gs.ft.com/­mccartney/­2009/03/18­/mid-staff­ordshire-n­hs-trust-a­-failure-o­f-policy/
http://www­.timesonli­ne.co.uk/t­ol/life_an­d_style/he­alth/artic­le6797717.­ece
http://www­.theherald­.co.uk/new­s/news/dis­play.var.2­522438.0.O­ne_third_o­f_patients­_encounter­_problems_­with_NHS.p­hp
http://www­.timesonli­ne.co.uk/t­ol/life_an­d_style/he­alth/artic­le4597174.­ece
http://www­.timesonli­ne.co.uk/t­ol/comment­/columnist­s/libby_pu­rves/artic­le4498748.­ece

Perhaps most enlighteni­ng for Americans, an evenhanded look at both systems:
http://www­.telegraph­.co.uk/new­s/worldnew­s/northame­rica/usa/6­017688/Ame­ricans-are­-better-of­f-without-­an-NHS.htm­l

Oh, but you're right ... single payer is all sunshine and lollipops.

Please.

[PWM]

04:33 PM on 08/21/2009

Thanks for the real facts.

[smileatfear]

10:55 AM on 08/21/2009

Liar, liar, pants on fire... My sister lives in France. They are not required to have private insurance nor is her national health care expensive and she is thrilled with the care she has received. Since you have lied about France and lied about Canada (I have friends who live there and none of them has ever had to wait as long to see a specialist as I did when I was first diagnosed with MS) none of what you say needs to be discussed any further. As Barney Frank would say: What planet do you inhabit? And why should I argue with someone who has the intellect of a dining room table.

[HansB]

06:04 PM on 08/22/2009

You're right. I live in France and although most people do have private insurance, it's not a requiremen­t (and I don't have one) and in any case it's cheap since it only covers the small portion of medical expenses not covered by the public system. In no case does it replace public health insurance, which covers most costs and is obligatory­.