Obama Is Indecisive and Unsure
Even when Obama was running, I had the disquieting feeling that his desire for a rational, honest debate of the issues, was not going to be met by the other side. They simply don't think that way - it's not just that they disagree, it's that they just don't process facts the same way, their brains work differently, whether through training or genetics, it doesn't matter. Jonathan Hari, writing in the Huffington Post yesterday, made the point it may start with religion, leading to a faith-based everything view of the world. I wouldn't disagree with that, though some of my best friends are religionists.
Obama STILL thinks he can reconcile with the opposition if they'd only see the logic of arguments. He's got to stop believing this, and soon, or he will go down as a failed president, maybe equal to Bush, who didn't even get what he wanted. Obama has to fight down and dirty, like LBJ getting Medicare and the Great Society programs through by arm-twisting, shouting, making back-room deals while keeping the principles intact, like FDR threatening to pack the Supreme Court with sympathetic justices (there is no constitutional limit to the number of justices on the court.) if he didn't get his way.
In the modern age, he's got to name names, go public with them and accuse them of conspiring to kill 18,000 people a year by maintaining a system of health non-care that kills that many a year. Go to the edge of the lie. Put the Republicans on the defensive - for a change - reframe the debate. At the same time, draw a line in the sand with what he will accept and what he will VETO. Blame the Republicans and the DINOs (Democrats In Name Only) if no bill is passed. Take the damn gloves off, Mr. President, or you will find yourself without a base, out there on your own.
Here are some examples of this fight-back philosophy for the Health Care debate:
1. The opposition has no plan so they must support the status-quo.
a. The status-quo kills 18,000 people a year who can't afford health care. Republicans are for that.
The status quo means 7 million people will lose
coverage between the beginning of 2008 and the end of 2010. Half of these will be children (is it
less than that? Does it matter in
this liar's debate?). Some will get sick and die.
The opposition is anti-competitive and anti-business. By continuing to tie health care to
employment, they encourage job lock and the failure of small businesses who can't
afford to insure their workers. They insure that our companies can't compete against companies that are in countries where health care is covered, like G.M. which would not have had to seek bankruptcy if it didn't have some of the highest health care costs in the world (don't believe that? Prove it).