The Problem with Obama's Speech

That was a great speech, as usual. It left people energized. It sounded like he's going to take the fight to the other guys. Obama knocks it out of the park again.

So, why do I have to be bah humbug about this again? Because the speech went almost exactly as predicted. Great rhetorical flourishes, but did anyone hear him say that he was definitely going to fight for the public option? No.

I said before the speech that he would say very good things about the public option. That was never the question. He is savvy enough to know that he can't say something negative about it when he has promised it over and over in the past and that his base is obviously very animated about it. In fact, I think he means what he says - he really does believe in the public option. But again, that's not the question. The question is whether he would draw the line on it. Tonight he did the opposite.

He said it was a rigidly ideological position of the left to insist it must be in the bill. Here are the exact words he had for progressives on the public option:

"It is only one part of my plan, and should not be used as a handy excuse for the usual Washington ideological battles. To my progressive friends, I would remind you that for decades, the driving idea behind reform has been to end insurance company abuses and make coverage affordable for those without it. The public option is only a means to that end - and we should remain open to other ideas that accomplish our ultimate goal."

He went on to say the public option would only apply to five percent of the population anyway, a clear attempt to diminish its importance. He mentioned co-ops as a good alternative. And he said vaguely that he will insist on some sort of "choice" for the consumer ("But I will not back down on the basic principle that if Americans can't find affordable coverage, we will provide you with a choice."). He didn't say what choice that would be. That's a long way away from insisting on the public option. In fact, an excellent case could be made that he is signaling a willingness to negotiate something less than the public option.

But he covered up those facts with so much praise for the public option that a lot of people left feeling like he was really in favor of it. Being in favor of it and insisting on it are two different things.

Look, I hate to do it to you. And I am positive a lot of people will be really pissed at me for being pessimistic after that lovely speech. They already are. We covered the speech live on our show and we were flooded with comments afterward saying that Obama proved me wrong by showing that he would fight for the public option. I still have hope, and his position might harden in favor of that option as we move forward, but that is not what he said tonight.

I don't want people to get me wrong. It was a great speech. I loved the way he finally went after the Republicans in a forceful way. He made clear and convincing arguments for nearly every provision in his proposal, including the public option. He did a great job of pointing out the other important parts of the bill - getting rid of the practices of denying coverage because of pre-existing conditions and rescission.

The reason I bring up my criticism here is because we can't afford to let up (also, simply because it is true). If you think it's enough for Obama to say he wants the public option, you're not right. He has to go to battle for it - and in the end, there is no way around it - he has to insist it's in the bill when the Republicans, the lobbyists and health care industry fight him tooth and nail on it.

Unfortunately, we do not have nearly enough evidence that he will do that. We must continue to push him in that direction. If we don't, then it will be just as much our fault as his for not getting it done. The other side never lets up. They never stop pushing. If we do, then we still haven't learned the political realities of Washington. So, it's more important than ever not to get seduced by just appealing words. We must demand action.

Watch The Young Turks on You Tube

Follow Cenk Uygur on Twitter: www.twitter.com/TheYoungTurks

Comments

[itmaybetoolate]

Cenk, you've been reading my mind again - or I'm reading yours. You (don't) lie!

[lordjin]

far from attacking your 'pessimism,' I have fanned you.

[bbbear]

Had Obama or any other democrat made the point that all nations in the industrialized world long ago made it illegal to make a profit selling health care insurance I'd believed democrats are sincere about adopting health care reform.. In the meantime odious republican's not so secret motto seems to be, "If you can't afford health care insurance then hurry up and die!" But, even though the US sheeple will never hear or read this in the US Corporate Media, both dems and repubs are standing behind what the rest of the world considered to be a criminal enterprise, i.e, "the US Health Extortion Racket. After all, without exception, industrialized nations in the world, except for good old Corporate USA., have made it illegal to operate for profit health insurance. To be perfectly clear, only non profit health insurance company's are legal in the civilized world.

[Alice Powell]

I agree with Cenk Uygur completely and applaud his independent thinking. I'm going to give myself a pat on the back because before reading his column I had already written True Majority and Move On saying that I would not sign a petition supporting Obama because he had a very luke warm mention of public option and actually diminished its importance. He said only 5% of people would be involved, as though to reassure the insurance companies that they need not fear.
I'm disgusted while acknowledgin his oratory skill. Why disgusted? Because his oratory skills smack of slick public relations skills.

[bbbear]

Good on You!

[bebopman21]

If I may repeat some of my comment on another HP blog ...

I don't think "public option" is dead. But that may hinge on what each of us think a "public option" is. I got the impression that Obama essentially said that if they get rid of the public option, it must be replaced by something that does the same thing. (In fact, I think Obama says just that in the section of the speech highlighted by Mr. Uygur.) The president doesn't want to get trapped with one specific idea being the do-or-die "public option".
.... Now, since the Republicans have not come up with any idea that will do what the public option does, -- and most likely, they won't in the future -- in the end, the bill will end up with a "public option." It may be different than what many of us would like it to be, but it will be a definite improvement from what we have now.
...... In other words, Obama doesn't have too specific an idea of what the "public option" must be, but he does have a strong belief in what impact it must have. As long as the goal is achieved, I don't care what it's called.

[bbbear]

I sincerely hope you're right. If so, I'll delightedly eat crow!

[bebopman21]

If you'll forgive me for repeating comments I've posted elsewhere ...
... I don't think the "public option" is dead. But I guess it comes down to what each of us think "public option" means and what the president thinks it means. I got the impression that Obama essentially said that if they get rid of the public option, it must be replaced by something that does the same thing. (In fact, i think he says that in the part of the speech that Mr. Uygur highlights­.) The president doesn't want to get trapped with one specific idea being the do-or-die "public option".
.... Now since the Republicans have not come up with any idea that will do what the public option does, -- and most likely, they won't in the future -- in the end, the bill will end up with .... a public option, although it may look different than what many of us expect.
...... In other words, Obama doesn't have a specific idea of what the "public option" must be, but he does have a strong belief in what impact it must have. If the same thing can by done through a process that doesn't have the label "public option," then fine.
.... This is far from over and Obama gains nothing by being too specific and drawing lines in the sand now. Any line he draws his foes will immediately cross and dig in.

[bbbear]

How did you manage to post the same thing twice? Ah well, again, if you're right and the new "whatever" plan doesn't effectively drive more sheeple into the holding pens of the health insurance racket, I'll switch from Gentleman Jack to Old Crow. But only for that one crow eating event!

[BryanTheRegOps]

I noticed that too. When Obama minimized the PO i felt squimish. How else are cost going to be lowered. Competition. In his speech he gave a perfect example why the PO is a most. One company owns 90% of the Health Insurance in Alabama. Hello!!!! Thats why the PO is a MUST.

[PaxEterna]

Obama's moral premise is wrong.

It is the insurance companies that have to go . . .and morph into not for profits, or the trigger will be pulled.

The American people deserve health care on the back of their hard earned tax dollars. It's that simple.

Not Wall St first, auto companies first, insurance companies first and the people last.

He makes a good case for reform, but what he proposes 1) will not solve the problem and 2) will take the country down.

Mandating insurance to 46 million people without it, and plenty more who are underinsured is like telling poor people to go open a bank account. It is simply illogical, and ridiculous. The only goal is to preserve the insurance industry, not provide health CARE to all Americans.

POTUS hoped we wouldn't notice this, among many other screwy details in his thinking.

[bbbear]

Yep. The entire Industrialized Western world, and then some, has long ago made it against the law to sell for profit health insurance. It's illegal nearly every where but good old Corporate USA! After all, for profit insurance is a bloody criminal enterprise that kills thousands each year merely to turn a profit! Still, I strongly suspect it'll be a cold day in hell when our bought and paid for politicians enact such a sane law. However, I'm reluctantly for mandating insurance to those 46 million who need it. But only if such a mandate automatically enrolls the working poor into free medicaid. If so, then that will take care of most of that 46 million uninsured and may be the first step toward Universal Single Payer Health Care and an end to the odious US for profit Health Care Racket.

[phlashba]

I agree with you completely. I am amazed at how many delusional people we have on both sides of the political spectrum. Everybody seems to want to believe whatever they want to believe. We're in OZ.

[DMHendrix]

Sure thing Dorothy. It must be awful to sit around and watch the sand going through the hourglass and flying monkeys, witches & tin men, etc.

Being reasonable is not delusional. Expecting miracles in 8 months and a 65 year old problem to be solved with a wink & a nod and ideological starchy people getting 100% of their way..THAT is delusional.

Hopefully you can catch that last balloon before it leaves OZ.

[bbbear]

True, Corporate USA has been fighting a few honest politicians and the notion of Universal Single Payer Health care for over 65 years. But, IMHO, thanks to the Corporate Media, most of the people in the USA continue to remain in Plato's cave of strange light, where humankind can only see shadows. The few who have found there way out of the cave and into a truer light may rightly believe those left behind are delusional. And maybe, just maybe, Obama may be the first with enough courage to return to the cave in an effort to urge the bulk of the USA to follow him out and into the light of a truer world. If so the USA may one day join the ranks of those such as Europe, Canada and now, even China who have made laws against selling for profit so-called, "health insurance.­" And hey, thanks to Obama, maybe US citizens will one day realized their innate right to health care. But I'll believe it when I see it.

[bbbear]

"Being reasonable is not delusional. Expecting miracles in 8 months and a 65 year old problem to be solved with a wink & a nod and ideological starchy people getting 100% of their way..THAT is delusional­."

True. Yet it seems for that 65 years the majority of the US has delusionally believed the USA has the best health care in the world. Many still believe that. If that's so, then if that ain't delusional, then what is? And until Obama and other politicians enact the same laws as the rest of the Civilized world making for profit health care against the law, then maybe he and all the rest of us are indeed delusional.

[jayraye]

The Individual Mandate turns American citizens into Serfs of Big Insurance. Big Insurance must be licking its chops right about now. They are about to have the American people handed over to them on a big golden platter.

[Yermammy]

Mark my words. NO public option. MANDATED coverage (to the laughing insurance companies) and one term for this maudlin and weak president. The corporations are about to get more power after the Supreme Courts rule and the war criminals will never see a day of prison. Here shortly, you are about to see Barack's plans for Indefinite Detention.
How we doing so far? Having fun yet?

[Eris23]

The sad thing is that I'm really inclined to agree with you. With very little exception, President Obama has he either broken his promise and done the exact opposite of what he said he'd do on the campaign trail, or merely walked away from addressing some of those points. His most significant actions so far have gone against why I voted for him. This preventive detention program will all but have sealed his political fate as a one term President, as he would have to work on undoing policies he put into place in order to get my vote back. Has there ever been a President to undo policies they backed and set into law in the same term? There may not be a lot of others out there like me. But, there will be enough who, when they either lose the motivation to bother voting again at all in the next election, or who end up supporting a third party candidate, will eat into Obama's numbers.

Sadly, Obama stands to be the ultimate lesson for Democrats. Given the general lack of significant noise from the left during Clinton's terms, Gore and the Democratic Party could possibly say they never truly saw how many people felt alienated. After 8 years of Bush, with liberals being very vocal about what they wanted to see, to who Obama pandered in his election bid, nobody be able to say they didn't see a mass exodus of previous supporters from their camp coming.

[ouroborous]

Sadly, you're right.

I'm inclined to believe that -- given their dismal performance so far (war still going on, no accountability, no rule of law, no real health reform, no Wall Street reform, bailouts all going to Wall St. not Main St., no significant housing reform or "cramdowns," FISA, EFCA... the list goes on) -- we're going to see the Democrats (including quite possibly Obama) be swept out in 2010 & 2012 on a tide as large or larger than the tide of 2008.

The people do not like being taken for a ride, and they have long memories. Sadly, electing Republicans in 2010 & 2012 will only make things worse.

And the fat cat lobbyist types keep laughing, all the way to the bank...

[nancytheragingliberal]

Cenk, I'm such a fan of yours, so, when you talk or write, I pay attention. I will be getting the FAX machine ready to crank out constant messages to all of those bought and paid for members of Congress and anyone else not in favor of assisting the sick and dying. The health care industrial complex has been out of control for years and it is time to put a halt to their greed. Americans are bent over financially from supporting and paying top CEO thieves millions of dollars and all they have to do is pay pinheads to figure out how to scr** sick and dying Americans. Now is the time to push back and keep pushing until the job is done to my/our satisfaction. Thanks for your usual great post.

[jmpurser]

There is NOTHING for the progressives in the "public option". Progressives want single payer. So he's saying the least he could do for the center is too much to expect.

So this will the the corporate welfare bill it looked like from the day Obama stabbed single payer in the back.

It's time to find/build a 3rd party folks. The Democrats are dead.

[Yermammy]

Seconded.

[Dogger]

Why? How many Greens have been elected to Congress? Have they gotten anyone elected to federal office other than George W. Bush? How did that work out for them?

If the crybabies who vote Green joined the Democrats (as a distinct coalition) and fought for progressives in the primaries, their numbers would matter, and their voices would be heard. They would be a bigger voice in a smaller pool of voters. The Democrats would field better candidates if a strong progressive block kept Blue Dog appeasers off the ballot.

But winning an election takes 50% plus 1. Greens and Democrats compete for the same voters while the right wing remains united. When a Green divides the Left (as in Divide and Conquer), the Democrat is forced to seek more votes from his right to replace the narcissistic crybabies. Green challenges in the general election drives Congress to more conservative membership.

[Eris23]

I'm seriously tired of hearing about this. Here it is for you, in a nutshell. I'm a Democrat who has voted Green. If Democrats are tired of losing or only maintaining narrow margins of victory, they need to stop throwing people like me under the bus. If this President puts "preventive detention" into the works, not only will I never vote for him again, but I'll likely never give a dime to any other Democrat who didn't have the spine to stand up against it. People don't being lied to. People don't like feeling used. You're worried about the crybaby Greens? Well, it will be even more interesting to see how your ilk will rationalize an even lower voter turnout. Will that be the Green's fault too?

[JerryLevy]

I would have liked him to agree that he will fight for 1) Tort reform and 2) Competition across state lines. That will go a long way towards making reform work.

[Yermammy]

Yeah, you would. Hey, why are you not over at Redstate getting the latest talking points?

[ihavenobias]

Study: Medical Malpractice Claims Have Marginal Impact On Healthcare Costs

http://www.thepoptort.com/2009/07/new-study-by-air.html

[bbbear]

Yep. It's just another odious neo republican straw man for we the sheeple to gnaw on.

[Joe The Nerd Ferraro - Huffpost Blogger]

Cenk - nice post. I did one with a basketball theme... http://www.huffingtonpost.com/joe-the-nerd-ferraro/who-will-be-the-killer-ds_b_281848.html
I think we are on the same page.