Wednesday, September 30, 2009

Why is George Stephanopoulos such a jerk? ...

He's always seemed rather weaselly to me. Along with the majority of the corporate controlled media he has spent his career meeting out unequal investigation and/or observation to Dems and Repubs.

Digby documents his latest:
Hissy Fit Of The Day

by digby

So, let me get this straight: the same party that's been saying the Democrats are planning to pull the plug on Grandma for months is having an epic fit of the vapors because Alan Grayson said that the Republican Health Care plan is "Don't get sick and if you do get sick, die quickly?" Really? How do they live with this much gall?

Apparently, they are going to introduce a privileged resolution to sanction Grayson today. And Stephanopopulos says they deserve an apology. Seriously.
Follow this link for video examples.

Just imagine what the reaction would have been ...

... if some had suggested that it would be right for the US military to stage a coup during the Bush years!
Newsmax: Military Coup Would Take Care Of "Obama Problem"
And the press just rolls on with their decades old path of amplifying all things crazy and obscuring all things rational.

All hail the unified corporate press!

Tuesday, September 29, 2009

Today's quote ...

The point isn't that Obama is as bad as Bush, overall. It's that he's not much better on some seriously important issues. Being better than Bush, or better than McCain would have been, are extremely low thresholds. Obama himself set very high ones for himself. Given the nature of the beast that is politics, no one should have expected Obama to clear those very high thresholds of his loftiest rhetoric; but there's no excuse for his not clearing those extremely low thresholds by a much greater margin.

-- Standards by Turkana, The Left Coaster

Monday, September 28, 2009

What will Obama do? ...

digby writes:
Howard Rich is well known to anyone who follows right wing politics, (but completely unknown to the public at large) and the fact that he supports this allegedly "grassroots" activist with a four million dollar a year endowment is the actual story. And once again, just as they did in the 90s, they are refusing to report it.

And just as they did in the 90s they blame Clinton for being a target. O'Donnell made the point in her commentary that the real difference is that the Clintons insisted on "engaging" these people whereas Obama refuses to. (I say, wait until he's got special prosecutors crawling all over him 24/7 and is being impeached and then see if he feels the need to fight back...)


Just as the financial sector learned nothing from their actions of the past two decades, neither has the press. They know they are failing but it never occurs to them that it's because they refuse to tell the real stories.
A strategy of non-engagement seems futile. Some response is required whether direct or indirect. The Clintons' gained a lot of respect through their obvious courage while being bombarded from all sides; by Republicans and a mostly one-sided prejudiced Press and all with the help of many craven Democrats. Obama's approach of following the Republican dictates and apparently ignoring the maelstrom swirling around him and at the same time kicking at various groups of supporters does not bode well for his long term popularity. Even if he implements every Republican dream they will still attempt to destroy him. As he shows no interest in delivering on any promises why should we make any effort to counter the crud that going to fly around him?

What happens to Obama's popularity if he allows health care legislation that is no more than an obvious gift to the death-panels called insurance companies to pass?

Except for those who prefer that people die when they can't afford to go to a doctor or fill a prescription, it feels like the entire country is holding their breath to see what Obama is going to do. Is he going to cater to the insurance companies or is he going to show the courage and determination needed to pass real health care legislation.

I know what I think he's going to do (or rather not do) but not everyone has lost confidence in him.

Sunday, September 27, 2009

Today's quote ...

When we are transfixed by something like the bailout, we should bear in mind that since it is actually a form of blackmail, we must resist the populist temptation to act out our anger and thus wound ourselves. Instead of such impotent acting-out, we should control our fury and transform it into an icy determination to think—to think things through in a really radical way, and to ask what kind of a society renders such blackmail possible.

-- quote of a quote from The Normal Violence of Capitalism by masaccio,

From his cushy air conditioned chair, Killer Kyl enjoyed destroying Iraq so very much he wants to do the same to Iran ...

A very blood thirsty man is Killer Kyl.
What we're trying to do here eventually is to get a regime change with a group of people in there that are more representative of the Iranian people -- who we really can talk with in a way that might end up with a good result. I think it's very difficult to do that with the current leadership, and especially with the elected President.
Regime change. Seem to remember hearing that term before. One of the many euphemisms for murder isn't it? Kyl wants to select a group of people to represent the Iranians. Throw in a little verbiage about women's rights, democracy, freedom and Kyl's on his way ...

Giving Obama the benefit of the doubt? ...

Based on his choices of people to carry out his vision I wonder that anyone can assume that Obama ever cared about providing health care for all Americans. Certainly Rahm Emmanuel has subverted real changes for health care at every turn. Is Obama so isolated that he doesn't know this? I don't think he is. Is Obama so dense that he fails to understand the art of negotiating from strength? I find that hard to believe. Yet he gave the show away even before he started.
MOORE: And that may not. Well, of course not, because any time you don't fight for the thing you want, any time that you start off compromising, you're never going to get what you want. He started off with a compromise position -- let the private insurance companies still sit at the table, have a public option. He should have started with what he truly believes in, what he believed in, what he said in 2003, a single payer, national health care system, like all other Western countries have. We should have the same thing. [emphasis added]
Now Obama desires that we support him in giving away more of our hard earned cash to another corporate entity; this time the Robber Baron Insurance Industry [even as the Robber Baron Bankers are still rewarding their own incompetence with what Obama so willingly handed over to them]. Really, how could there be so little enthusiasm in supporting Obama's efforts to increase the profits of the murderers in the insurance industry?

Friday, September 25, 2009

Killer Kyl strikes again ...

Maternity isn't covered in Kyl's health 'care' amendment because the Killer himself doesn't need it.
Kyl: 'I Don't Need Maternity Care.' Stabenow: 'Your Mom Probably Did'
Kyl admits that his mom may have needed health care but that was over 60 years ago so women's maternity care is no longer of moment to Kyl.

Would one describe Jon Kyl as self-centered or egocentric, egotistic, egotistical, egomaniacal, self-absorbed, self-obsessed, self-seeking, self-interested, self-serving, narcissistic, vain, inconsiderate, thoughtless --or all of the above.

Today's quote ...

Over time Americans will learn that in order to maintain their liberty, they must instantly comply with everything those in authority tell them to do. The police will follow the edicts of their civilian leaders, who sanction torture on many different levels "to keep the people safe." The population will learn eventually that they will automatically be shocked with electricity if they fail to comply and over time they will be conditioned to fall in line regardless of their constitutional right to speak or resist unwarranted intrusion. And then we will truly be free.

-- Following Orders by digby, Hullabaloo

Thursday, September 24, 2009

Today's quote ...

The idea that these alleged Democrats would actually insist that uninsured people be forced by law to write huge checks to to the loathed insurance companies is mind-boggling. They seem intent upon taking what should be an historic progressive achievement and turning it into a hated, regressive tax on their own constituents, which is so politically obtuse I don't know how to process it.

... The problem seems to be that political considerations and consequences are irrelevant to the political system. What do we do about that?

-- Politics Without Politics by digby, Hullabaloo

Tuesday, September 22, 2009

Monkey, monkey, who's got the monkey ...

In the recent past I have referred to George W. Bush as a monkey because not only did I end up disliking him but I held him in contempt. What the poor monkey did to deserve this abuse I do not know. I suppose the use of monkey to denigrate a human could in some sense show that we view the monkey as being 'a poor cousin' to a human. Perhaps, even by those who wax pale at the thought of Darwin.

While I cannot gather up any image in my mind where I would place the epithet of monkey upon Obama --I have other animals I use for Obama, and Rahm-baby also-- I do not consider the use of monkey as a racist slur. Which does not mean that all of those picking on the poor monkey, as I have done in the past, are not racists. But it also does not prove they are.

As for my animal picks for some of the current administration:
  • For Obama I alternate between coyote and weasel depending upon whether I'm feeling inclined to approve or disapprove of something he's done. The coyote is an animal that appeals to me. It is intelligent. It is clever. It learns. It is a survivor. If you leave it alone it will probably leave you, the human, alone but will, if you are not very, very careful, get your chickens, your cat, your small dog. It will also get your large dog if that dog is stupid enough to be lured far enough away from the yard. For me the weasel represents just sneaky without any redeaming value.
  • As for Rahm, I view him as a disgusting carrion-eating hyena. Which is probably insulting the hyena.
So instead of person-ifying the animal, am I animal-ifying the person?

Yesterdays' quotes ...

Today's QUOTES:

Ultimately, we will put the banks back in their regulatory box or they will bankrupt us all. -- Obama And Brandeis by Simon Johnson, The Baseline Scenario

... by a vote of 345-75, the Democratic-led House just joined the Senate in voting to cut off all funds to ACORN; I'm sure the courageous Congress will be doing that to Blackwater, KBR, Citibank, lawbreaking telecoms and many other corrupt corporations who own them any moment now ... -- The distracting benefits of ACORN hysteria by Glenn Greenwald,

Did Obama intend to make himself a lackey of the Banker Robber Barons, almost a court jester whose considerable power can be safely ignored until they need him to hand them some more taxpayer funds?
... this presumably uncoordinated failure to show up speaks volumes about current attitudes on Wall Street. The CEOs of our biggest banks have weighed the man and done the trade. They have no more use for this President, no fear for what he can do to them, and see no reason to show support. They have moved on – presumably back to whatever they were doing before the events of September 2008 so rudely interrupted. And their obvious presumption, contrary to the words and body language of the President on Monday, is that next time – when they need it – the representative of the taxpayer will be there for them again, with generous bailout packages and extraordinary kindness. -- Why Didn’t The Major Bank CEOs Show Up On Monday? by Simon Johnson, The Baseline Scenario

Friday, September 18, 2009

Does Michelle Obama really believe her husband is working for us rather than the insurance companies? ...

Michelle Obama Joins Push For Health Care Reform: 'It's Very Much A Women's Issue'

Trust gone, trust betrayed ...

Dog Day Afternoon: The Militarization Of American Police
Yesterday, as I drove by I saw a policeman handcuffing a woman who was standing by her car which I assume she had pulled off the road onto a side road as part of a traffic stop. It looked quite peaceful, no apparent Tasers or force.

The difference is in me. Even 10 years ago I would have assumed that the policeman was doing his job in a responsible manner. Now I wonder if he was handcuffing her for no reason. Was the stop legitimate? Did it warrant an arrest? Was he bullying her. Did she have to cringe to keep him from Tasing her?

This is Tucson --not Los Angeles which has had an occupying army of cops for decades-- and though I have not had an unpleasant interaction with the police force, I am very aware that it can and will happen to an increasing number of us over time. I was always aware that there are individuals who will abuse their power but I trusted that most police officers were professional and human. Now I know that the majority are no long professional and that as a group they behave more like a gang than protectors of the community.

This trend started before Bush, but the downward spiral from community service to gang behavior accelerated during his disastrous reign.

So, is Pelosi working for the people or playing a game?...

Nancy Pelosi says House Bill will have the Public Option: Snatching Victory from the jaws of defeat
Pelosi was for a strong public option before she was wishy-washy on it.

Now she's sure the House bill will have 'a' public option, but what kind of public option does she foresee and what else will the bill have, like guaranteed income for corporate Robber Barons.

And does she plan that any good provision in the House bill survives in conference or will that be someone else's fault as usual ...

Almost all of the Dems are participating in lies just like the Republicans and it is almost impossible to tell if any of them are not doing so. One would have to look at every speech and every contorted series of self serving votes to figure it out. Very, very few will pass muster. Certainly Reid, Pelosi and Obama will not pass.

This is a very stupid way to run a country or even a Presidency. Really, even though Obama was definitely not my first choice, given the criticalness of health care I expected him to do much, much better on health care at least. The spectacle we are witnessing must mean that he never intended to go all out for health care. But there's also the chance that he's just incompetent. Bush, incompetent as he was, managed to get most of his worst desires passed by throwing tantrums. Obama, most likely, if he garners the energy to throw a tantrum will aim it at his own supporters. Smart man, what.

Wednesday, September 16, 2009

It would be funny if we weren't living it ...

Study of Bush's psyche touches a nerve

A study funded by the US government has concluded that conservatism can be explained psychologically as a set of neuroses rooted in "fear and aggression, dogmatism and the intolerance of ambiguity". ...
Link via The Existentialist Cowboy: It's the Hypocrisy, the Financial Collapse, the War Crimes.

Max Baucus, leading the Senate Dems in stooopid politics ...

It's amazing how these Dems will prostrate themselves for Corporate money:
... The difference is that in the House bill, the money comes from taxes on the very rich; in the Baucus bill, it comes out of their own pockets. Put another way, the Baucus bill is the House bill, plus a $140 billion tax on people making around $40-80,000 per year. That’ s not only stupid policy; it’s stupid politics.
They have the majority in both Houses, they have the Presidency, they have the power and they have the excuses. No matter what the issue just enough renege on their promises (and apparently their principles unless they are ALWAYS lying) to make sure NO progressive promises are met. Isn't it interesting that Obama only does arm-twisting AGAINST human and Constitutional causes. Is there something Obama hasn't reneged on so far?

Since day one the Dems have been playing games in order to obscure their lack --and Obama's lack-- of commitment to the promises that got them elected. It's impossible to trust any of them. They only pass what their corporate bosses let them. I wonder if being reincarnated as a lobbyist after they loose their seat is a step up or down in the grand scheme of things. And I also wonder how far a lobbyist or a corporate hack Congressman is from a cockroach, reincarnation wise, that is.

Tuesday, September 15, 2009

Yesterdays' quotes ...

Today's QUOTES:

... After all, the president has large majorities and a huge amount of power. It's hard to believe that if he wanted to get real health care reform passed that he couldn't do it. It's not 1994 and the Republicans aren't in ascendance and dominating the discourse. It's not outrageous to make the obvious assumption that he's not doing it for the simple reason that he doesn't want to. ... -- Flank Stake by digby, Hullabaloo

Bad Max Baucus' health care plan is, best as I can tell, an attempt to turn the middle class into serfs to the health care industry. -- The Bad Max Tax by emptywheel,

Wouldn't it be loverly ...

... if Obama would stand up to the Thugs instead of continuing these wishy-washy Dem behaviors that are so destructive and stupid:
Dismissing these things when Republican congressmen do them and capitulating when the shoe is on the other foot is one of the things that makes people mistrust the Democrats and make them look weak. These Republican politicians are throwing down the gauntlet, taunting the president, calling him a liar to his face, saying he is going to kill old people and winking at those who are calling him Hitler. He should not be afraid to at least allude to that craziness as a problem in our politics and refrain from claiming that "extremes" on both sides are equal in the lunacy.
And then there's this:
There are two things you absolutely do not want to do when a bully tries to make your life a living hell: you do not want to ignore them and you do not want to give in to their demands. Unfortunately little Obama did just that and let Beck rant about his green jobs adviser until he felt compelled to resign. Big bad Beck gained strength, resolve, and a more active following and Obama was left wondering who among his administration was going to be targeted next. Now little Obama is not just at the mercy of big bad Beck, but also of every other conservative pundit, blogger, and politician who has been paying attention to how easily little Obama retreats and gives in. It is only a matter of time before his allies will become impatient, disillusioned, and less willing to stand up for their friend. This is a vicious cycle that leads little Obama right where the big bad bullies want him: friendless, cornered, and vulnerable. Needless to say, this is exactly what progressives need to avoid at all costs.
It's already happening. 'Bama beware. Your supporters cannot/willnot support and defend you forever if you do not defend yourself. Even though you started even before day 1 to take actions that would begin to alienate some groups of supporters I suppose there is still time for you to turn this around.

Almost murder? ...

“How in the world can it take so long to find out (whether they would cover the medicine or not) when it could be a matter of life or death,” she said. “It is almost like, in a way, committing murder.”
Almost murder? What do you mean almost!

A blatant sign that the US as a free country no longer exists? ...

No U.S. distributor for Charles Darwin movie because of fear of fundamentalists

Why is the Obama admin surprised over and over again? ...

See what I mean? Why are they surprised? Why do they constantly split the difference on everything, watering down any meaningful differences? If I were making these decisions, I'd be pushing the most liberal judges I could find, and make the Republicans explain over and over why they don't want judges who rule in favor of working people. Why would you throw away that opportunity?

It's a good question. Why IS the Obama administration repeatedly surprised at the actions of the Republicans in Congress? Really it does not put them in a good light. Another political game or merely political stupidity? Why does Obama choose to be played again and again by the Thugs unless he also wishes to accomplish nothing ...

Monday, September 14, 2009

I get email from the Prez. Well not really ...

Mitch Stewart," writes:
Call your representatives, and tell whoever answers where you are from and that you watched the President's address.

Then tell them that you want your representatives to support the President's plan, ask them where they stand -- and thank them if they already clearly support it.

Don't forget to click here to let us know what they said.
Why would I respond to a request to ask those Reps and Senators from Arizona who theoretically represent me to support Obama's plan when I don't really know what his plan is other than an awareness from past and current practices that he favors corporation over people and the rich over the majority of Americans.

Obama has a meeting with Reid and Pelosi. Afterwards Obama continues to increase his rhetoric supporting a 'public option' and Pelosi starts to wind down her once absolute support for the public option. Obama, as far as I can see still has secret deals with Robber Baron corporations already killing people over their health needs. Though Obama appears verbally to support a 'public option' he still does not appear to support the progressive who are working for it nor has he pressured the Blue Curs to cooperate. So why would I call Grijalva with Obama's message when he appears to be doing exactly what I prefer and the Prez is most likely working against both Grijalva and me.

As for McCain and Killer Kyl, we already know they only support corporations and the rich and look forward to the continued peon-ization of America. It's ironic, really, that the insurance control of health care without the balancing presence of a strong public option would support the goals of McCain and Kyl. But since it's a stupid Dem Prez doing the corporate bidding, instead of themselves, they will not support the insurance controlled legislation that will most likely pass without any public option and they will even use the horror of such legislation to help them improve their electoral chance. Stupid Dems indeed.

Too bad rancid doesn't alliterate with Pelosi like it does with Reid ...

Seems Pointless Pelosi has dumped the 'public option' which she pointlessly supported just a few days ago just as Obama starts making speeches espousing more explicit support for a 'public option' and perhaps some other real improvements in health care instead of merely mouthing platitudes while supporting nothing but what will satisfy his owners in the insurance industry.

Is this what they planned in their meetings at the White House?

And then there's this:
Pelosi Fundraiser at UnitedHealth Lobbyist’s Home
These people don't care how corrupt they look.

Does Pelosi's Softening Rhetoric Spell Doom for the Public Option?

[...] But not two weeks ago, Pelosi insisted that a health care bill without a strong public option would not pass the House. That statement was of a piece with similar statements she'd made for weeks, which were based on the progressives' insistence that health care reform's passage depended on the public option.

In other words, since meeting with Obama--who's been notably solicitous of Senate moderates, and notably dismissive of House progressives--her public language has softened notably.

Of course, this is standard operating procedure for Pointless Pelosi. I remember going through disappointment after disappointment after she was selected speaker. Now I consider her useless, pointless. She's just another one of the corporate slaves in Congress selling out their country for a fistful of gold.

Read ...

The peasant mentality lives on in America
Who are the undeserving "others" benefiting from expanded government actions?

Tuesday, September 8, 2009

Who expected Pointless Pelosi to hold the line? ...

Pelosi: A Public Option Is Essential...For the Moment
Rancid Reed's double-dealing is a fixture with the treacherous Dems. But Pelosi seems to want to do the right thing but just doesn't seem to have any guts. Sure wish Clinton was leader in either house. Hard to imagine her as a gutless waffler.

Is Obama so lacking in perception ...

... that he doesn't understand that we need healthcare, NOT Robber Baron corporate defined health insurance from the organizations that are now in the business of killing people by canceling the coverage they've been paying for just when they need to use it?

Health care for everyone of us should be considered a right. Instead Obama and Dems in general seem as inclined to put the obscene profits of the murderering insurance industry above the health of the citizens of this country as are the Thugs.

Sunday, September 6, 2009

Well I wish he had not apologized for ...

... asking questions that are more legitimate than any of the hissy fits the Thugs throw.
Van Jones Resigns
I'm so tired of Democrats reflexively apologizing without thinking. I'm also tired of the lack of official Democratic support for any Democrat except the Blue Curs!

Friday, September 4, 2009

This makes me uneasy ...

In another newsworthy tidbit, Grijalva says Obama signaled that discussions about the public option would continue even after his big speech before a joint session of Congress next week. That may be an indication that Obama won’t be mentioning the public option in his speech, but doesn’t want liberals to despair at that prospect.
I don't know who is thinking that Obama wants 'liberals' to keep from despairing just because he's throwing over the public option. Is it Grijalva or the writer (Greg Sargent)? If it's Sargent then he's just making things up. If it's Grijalva describing how Obama is attempting to con them, then I hope Grijalva and the rest of his group actually have some guts. Something that Obama does not have. Obama's idea of a negotiation and leadership seems to be to make sure nothing changes.

It's so frustrating to see Obama give everything in the store (not to mention the building) away. Does he think they will respect him in the morning? If so, he's a fool. They will continue to pick him apart. The weaker he acts the more fun they will have.


Thursday, September 3, 2009

Letter to Obama from Raul Grijalva and Lynn Woolsey ...

Dear President Obama:

Thank you for continuing to work with Members of Congress to draft a health reform bill that will provide the real health care reform this country needs.

We look forward to meeting with you regarding retaining a robust public option in any final health reform bill and request that that meeting take place as soon as possible.

Public opinion polls continue to show that a majority of Americans want the choice ofa robust public plan and we stand in solidarity with them. We continue to support the robust public option that was reported out of the Committees on Ways and Means and Education and Labor and will not vote for a weakened bill on the House Floor or returning from a Conference with the Senate.

Any bill that does not provide, at a minimum, a public option built on the Medicare provider system and with reimbursement based on Medicare rates-not negotiated rates-is unacceptable. A plan with negotiated rates would ensure higher costs for the public plan, and would do nothing to achieve the goal ofproviding choice and competition to keep rates down. The public plan with set rates saves $75 billion, which could be lost ifrates are negotiated with providers. Further, this public option must be available immediately and must not be contingent upon any trigger.

Mr. President, the need for reform is urgent. Every day, 14,000 Americans lose their health care coverage. We must have health care reform that will effectively bring down costs and significantly expand access. A health reform bill without a robust public option will not achieve the health reform this country so desperately needs. We cannot vote for anything less.

We look forward to meeting with you to discuss the importance of your support for a robust public plan, which we encourage you to reiterate in your address to the Joint Session of Congress on Wednesday.

Lynn Woolsey
Raul Grijalva

Froomkin presents straightforward actions for Obama to follow ...

Paging A Different President Obama
But Obama will not follow the straight forward path because Obama's objectives are not the same as, in fact they conflict with, the majority of Americans who just want decent healthcare.

Make my day, Obama. Prove me wrong!

God these people are uninspiring ...

Theda Skocpol: How Progressives Should Weigh Compromises


Robert Reich: What Obama Must Demand from Congress on Health Care

Accept your lot, you progressive, liberal, lefties. Just listen to us, we get paid to tell you what you can do with your beliefs, with your hope, with your excitement, with your lives. Nothing. Bush and his clone have written your future. Shut up now. We're tired of ignoring you. Go away ...

Obama's failure and betrayal ...

... is reduced to "expect disappointed progressives."
Sources: Expect Disappointed Progressives After Obama's Big Health Care Speech
I still don't know if Obama is souless like Bush or just weak. Where's all those oratorical skills? They disappeared when he got into the White House. He's turned into his predecessor. He's insipid, unconcerned and arrogant. The Republican crazies hate him and actually want him dead (something, I believe, was not wished on Bush the Torturer by liberals). In an environment of vicious hate from the right, Obama chooses to alienate not only the left but everyone (a solid majority, no less) who just wants decent health care. And I though Obama was a smart man. I take it back. Obama is a bought man, bought by the group into which Bush was born.

ADDED: This is an incoherent article: Grijalva: White House Telling Reformers It Will Cease Support for Public Option

The article reports that Raul Grijalva (my rep) is concerned about calls being made or being reported as made by someone(s) in the White House about Obama dropping his off and on support for the public option. Then there a quote from who-know-who (Grijalva?) saying that who-knows-who (Grijalva?) expects "the President to live up to the promises." So is this quote from who-knows-who made at the same time as the report from Grijalva telling us that the White House is preparing the ground to undermine the public option?

Grijalva said the White House is telling health care reformers, "they will cease supporting the public option portion of the upcoming health care reform legislation"

I truly expect the President to live up to the promises he has made to America about real change and that he truly stands for uninsured Americans and working families that need and are demanding a choice of a competitive public option when he addresses Wednesday's joint session of Congress.

Without a public option, this bill is not real reform. Real reform would lower and contain health care costs, precisely what inclusion of a public option would achieve. Without a robust public option, reform will enrich pharmaceutical and insurance companies because it will lack any significant competition and incentives to drive down health care costs for consumers.

Over 60 House progressives have vowed not to vote for legislation that doesn't include a public option--enough to ensure that a bill won't pass if they follow through.