Chrysler Super Bowl Ad: An Unintended Boost for Obama?

They just don't do it better than this.
It had no political overtones, no mention of President Obama or the Democratic party, and its speaker has in the past endorsed Republicans.
Even with all that, there are some who believe the ad may have crossed the line between non-political and political speech with the mention of the rebirth of the Detroit auto industry thanks in part to policies implemented over Republican opposition by President Obama.
Still, there are a lot of folks who support the president like I do who can't be anything short of pleased with the Chrysler ad.
Here is the ad:

The problem for the Republicans with this ad is not only that it was non-partisan with a narrator with a decidedly Republican political past, but it reinforces the President's message of economic recovery in the face of GOP opposition.
It makes it even easier for the Obama campaign and other Democrats to compare their record of recovery with the GOP's do-nothing approach and Mitt Romney's call to let the U.S. auto industry go bankrupt.
I'm wondering how Romney tries to spin his way out of this one (among many other things) as the presidential campaign progresses.

Obama takes off the kid gloves and fights back HARD for healthcare reform

Now THIS is a fighter. He's re-casting the debate, portraying Republicans and their insurance company allies as obstructionists who don't want to do anything to pass any real healthcare reform.
Now let's see what he says about the SPECIFICS of the public option, then we're gonna say something.
Now here's the complete speech:

Visit msnbc.com for Breaking News, World News, and News about the Economy

Obama: Another Bill McKay? Stay Tuned

Back when I was much younger, there was a movie called "The Candidate" in which Robert Redford portrays an idealistic liberal California senatorial candidate Bill McKay who, with prodding from his chief political adviser, compromises his ideals after he wins his party's primary but still wins the general election over a classic right-wing Republican incumbent.
I wonder if a somewhat similar scenario applies to President Obama who ran on a series of progressive ideals during his memorable 2008 campaign, but seemingly has begun a process of compromising all that he ran on down the river.
Call it a case of recognizing political reality, but what happened to the fight and commitment Obama showed during his campaign?
Polls show Obama's popularity down, but he has been down before? Remember the Rev. Wright fiasco during the primary season in which Obama overcame with a magnificent speech he gave on race in Philadelphia?
He's going to have to do it again on Wednesday when he addresses a joint session of Congress, but instead of speaking about an overall issue like he did about race relations last year, he's going to have to be far more specific than he's ever been on healthcare reform.
Obama wasn't the first choice of many progressives during the campaign when it came to healthcare reform. Many chose John Edwards who had been speaking forcefully and with compassion on the issue since his first presidential run in 2004 while others backed Hillary Clinton, who fought a losing battle for healthcare reform in 1993.
Still others chose Dennis Kucinich, the only candidate willing to stick his neck out for single-payer "Medicare for All" coverage.
But even during the campaign, Obama was unwilling to embrace Kucinich's message or some of the more aggressive approaches both Clinton and Edwards were advocating.
Instead, his message (which continues to this day) was simple. If you liked the insurance coverage you have, you can keep it, only we'll make it cheaper to have.
He spoke of the need for a public option in general terms, never in the specifics many on the left wanted. He spoke of the need to have that force to keep health costs down and insurance companies honest, but he never defined what he meant by "public option."
Is this "public option" a type of Medicare that will help folks pay for basic care and services and can't turn you down because of pre-existing conditions or current systems, or is it a watered down co-op proposal such as the one Sen. Kent Conrad (D-N.D.) has advanced?
People were willing to forgive Obama for not having some specifics when he spoke about healthcare reform during the campaign, but this time, with his presidency seemingly on the line, folks won't be so forgiving if he doesn't fight for what many thought he was for during the campaign on an issue as big as this one.
I'm waiting to hear the details about what Obama will talk about, but if he doesn't speak forcefully and specifically for a robust public option, he'll become nothing more than just a Bill McKay-type who turned his back on his principles once he got elected and will be worthy of nothing more than a strong primary challenge in 2012.

Our President's Moving Tribute To Ted Kennedy

Our president's moving tribute to a senator who one might as well say represented everyone as prolific a senator and advocate that he was:

Visit msnbc.com for Breaking News, World News, and News about the Economy

More Fighting Words Needed From Obama On Healthcare Reform

Our president gets one point-- you have to keep repeating the same points over and over again to get things done in Washington.
No one ever said it was going to be easy to pass healthcare reform in this country, and, like in the past, insurance companies and their Republican allies are fighting tooth and nail to keep the current corrupt system in place.
But at least our president keeps fighting (albeit not as strongly as I think he should), and that's to his credit. Here's the tape of his latest weekly message:

While the president repeats the answers that have been most frequently given to the myths about "death panels" (or the "pulling the plug on Grandma" argument) and how it would lead to a "government takeover" of healthcare, he makes this additional statement about the public option:

Now, the source of a lot of these fears about government-run health care is confusion over what’s called the public option. This is one idea among many to provide more competition and choice, especially in the many places around the country where just one insurer thoroughly dominates the marketplace. This alternative would have to operate as any other insurer, on the basis of the premiums it collects. And let me repeat – it would be just an option; those who prefer their private insurer would be under no obligation to shift to a public plan.

So what kind of a "public plan" are we talking about, a Medicare-style government-run one or a weak "co-op" plan that Sen. Kent Conrad (D-N.D.) is pushing?
It is disturbing that our president doesn't define this further, and it is even more disturbing that he isn't using any harsher language about those who have been spreading outrageous lies about his proposal.
I wish he would call spades spades and call his Republican, insurance company, and right-wing talk show critics who spread the lies exactly what they are, liars, and do it forcefully and with conviction.
I appreciate that he is using his extensive "political capital" to pass this important measure, and it is also impressive that he has said that he is willing to be just a one-term president if that's what it takes to achieve healthcare reform.
But on this public option, he must define it sharply and specifically, not leave any door open for any weak-kneed substitute like the co-op idea that Conrad and others are advancing.
Is there any room for co-ops in any healthcare reform program? Here's what thebagofhealthandpolitics has said about that:

A co-op that operates under a national framework can be successful. This non-profit model is successful in many western European countries. But it is not the lame, state-based co-ops of Kent Conrad’s dreams; Conrad’s state-base co-ops wouldn’t have a large enough pool to alter the market, reduce costs and increase access. The end game is upon us, but for our side to be successful, we need the House to pass a strong bill with stringent regulations on the insurance industry and a strong public option, administered by the federal government.

So what is the use of dealing with those who want to defeat or weaken any healthcare legislation? I haven't heard our president give an answer to that question.
We need to see much more fight from this president than he's shown, espcially when calling out his lying critics, and pressure must be placed on Democrats, both real and "blue dogs," to pass legislation that has a strong, not weak or in name only, public option that is not watered down by those with stakes in preserving what is wrong.

How Much Is Opposition To Healthcare Reform Built On Lies? ABC News/WaPo Poll Doesn't Answer

Watch all the cherry picking that will be done by those in the media looking for trends against healthcare reform.
On the heels of a SurveyUSA Poll indicating 77 percent support for the choice of a public option, a new ABC News/Washington Post poll shows an erosion of support for not only the public option, but President Obama himself and how poorly he and those around him have handled the battle for healthcare reform.
Here's an exerpt from the Washington Post story on the ABC News/WaPo poll:

Disapproval of Obama's handling of the health-care issue reached 50 percent in the new poll, the highest of his presidency, and 42 percent of those surveyed say they now "strongly disapprove" of the way he is dealing with his main domestic priority. Views of the president's actions on reform have dropped most sharply among seniors and independents.

The story then goes to discuss its public option findings:

The poll was completed just as a new debate about a public health insurance option erupted after administration officials appeared to signal their willingness to jettison the proposal as part of an eventual compromise. White House officials later insisted that there had been no change in their support for the public option as they sought to reassure Democrats furious about what they regarded as an administration cave-in.
In the survey, 52 percent of Americans said they favor the government's creation of a new health insurance plan to compete with private insurers, while 46 percent are opposed. That is a big shift from late June, when 62 percent backed the notion and 33 percent opposed it.
The drop in support for the public option has been particularly steep among political independents, the closely watched group so critical to the Democratic takeover of Congress in 2006 and Obama's victory last year. Two months ago, independents supported the public option by a 2 to 1 ratio. Now, 50 percent are in favor, and 47 percent are opposed.
Seniors have also become decidedly negative toward the proposal: In June, seniors were evenly split on the plan, but now a majority strongly oppose the idea.

There is one BIG problem with the ABC News/Washington Post poll: It fails to deal with the REASONS for the opposition to healthcare reform.
It also fails to check into WHERE those surveyed got their health insurance reform information from.
The latest NBC News/Wall Street Journal expanded on that, as Rachel Maddow so brilliantly reported earlier in the week:

And King One Eye in Daily Kos expanded on Maddow's report further:

new NBC/Wall Street Journal poll featured on the Rachel Maddow show included questions centered on the recent health care debate. What made this poll unique was that four of the questions sought to ascertain whether the respondents believed statements that were known to be untrue. Here are the results broken out by which news sources the respondents favored:

On Health Care Reform, Those Who Believe That It Will... MSNBC/CNN Viewers Fox News Viewers
Give Coverage To Illegal Immigrants: 41% 72%
Lead To A Government Takeover: 39% 79%
Pay For Abortions: 40% 69%
Stop Care To The Elderly: 30% 75%

Let me repeat: These are statements that are known to be untrue, yet Fox News viewers believe them in overwhelming numbers. It's bad enough that approximately 40% of MSNBC/CNN viewers believe these myths, but clearly Fox is producing an audience of vastly misinformed, cultural illiterates.
The problem with having a national news organization that is polluting the population with lies about critical public issues is that it makes democracy impossible. And that, of course, may be the goal of Fox and its corporate overseers. Democracy is such a messy affair, what with all the people voting and stuff. If your objective is to manipulate government, you can't get very far if voters are actually familiar with the issues and are capable of making sound judgments. So Fox News found it necessary to invent a platform of fake agendas to create fear and then purposefully indoctrinate their predominantly Republican and southern viewers to believe in them.

It sure makes you wonder about the validity of the negative ABC News/Washington Post findings on the public option since that survey did not delve into what folks believed or didn't believe about the proposal.
The ABC News/Washington Post poll also failed to take into account discontent with Obama because of his failure (and especially that of those around him) to enunciate a clear vision of what they wanted from the start and sticking to it.
Notice also the timing of the ABC News/Washington Post poll-- it was taken when both Obama and his HHS secretary-- Kathleen Sebelius-- were giving signals that they were willing to ditch the public option if that's what it took to pass healthcare reform.
That would make anyone, including me, wonder about the commitment of someone to stand by his principles and fight for them even if it meant costing them legislation or popularity points.
Given also the findings of the NBC News/WSJ poll, it's a big mystery why the ABC News/Washington Post surveyers didn't ask their respondents what they believed about the president's healthcare reform proposal and how they'd feel once they were explained what the proposal really was.
In the light of something I've heard Chuck Todd of NBC said, that once folks were explained what the Obama proposal really was (with the public option), 53 percent would support it, it's a mystery why the ABC/Washington Post poll didn't do the same.
The corporatists opposing healthcare reform may be gleeful about the poll, but I wonder what they'll feel when their house of lies is fully exposed and the American people revolt against them because of how they've been misled.
And when that reality hits, watch the flimsy house of lies crash before us.

Anti-Healthcare Reform Group Plans More Protests

Even when confronted with polls showing 77 percent support for a public option in any healthcare reform bill, failed health industry executive and head of the so-called "Conservatives for Patients Rights," Rick Scott, continues on in his make believe world that his side against any reform is winning the battle.
According to Greg Sargent, Scott's organization is planning a new series of ads and other activities designed to defeat the measure (and healthcare reform in general).
Here's part of what Sargent reported:

In a clear sign that conservatives are worried that the public option could still survive, an internal memo from a top anti-health care reform group claims that “rumors of its death” have been “greatly exaggerated,” discusses plans to run new ads targeting it, and vows to redouble efforts to foment opposition to it at town hall meetings.

The Sargent piece continued:

The internal memo, which I (Sargent)obtained from a source, was created by staffers at Conservatives for Patients Rights, the well-funded group run by controversial former hospital exec Rick Scott, who reform proponents see as public enemy number one.
The memo discusses a “Martha’s Vineyard ad strategy” that’s set to kick in next week. According to a source familiar with the group’s plans, this is a reference to a planned national ad targeting the public option that will reference the President’s vacation.

You can see the complete memo from Scott after clinking on this link.
Another thing. Whenever you read or hear of any story about Rick Scott and his orgainzaition, look no forward to his checkered past in the healthcare industry
To hear more about who Rick Scott is and what he represents, check out this video:

...and this video in which Scott is unable (or unwilling) to give straight answers about his checkered past in the health insurance industry:

You would think the anti-healthcare reform advocates would find a better advocate for its cause than Rick Scott, especially after one hears about his past and how he answers questions about it.

It's Time For Cable Networks To Turn Off Fox After Defense of Anti-Semitic Question

After hearing about how both the Fox "news" channel and CNN Headline News run segments defending a woman who likened President Obama with Adolf Hitler during Rep. Barney Frank's townhall, I felt like the Peter Finch character in "Network," who urged his listeners to climb on their rooftops and proclaim, "I'm Mad As Hell and I'm Not Going To Take It Anymore."
It is totally disgusting that the two above-stated news organizations ran segments trying to make the anti-Semitic questioner look like a hero with Frank being cast as the villain.
I don't mind constructive debate and even strong criticism of President Obama's healthcare proposal based on accurate information. What I do mind is anti-Semitism and the refusal of those who encourage its propagation to condemn it.
For those who haven't seen the clip, here it is:

For those who are wondering what the Fox propagandists said in defense of the anti-Semitic questioning, Keith Olbermann was spot-on tonight in his "Worst Person in the World" segment:

Visit msnbc.com for Breaking News, World News, and News about the Economy

And finally, a Daily Kos diarist, Griffin459, reported about his rightful disgust toward a CNN Headline News piece also defending the anti-Semitic questioner.
Here's part of what he reported:

Just a few minutes ago while changing channels, I saw CNN Headline News show a segment of Barney Frank's Town Hall meeting from last night. BUT, it was edited to show Representative Frank picking on her!!
I immediately sent an e-mail to CNN Headline News to complain about this outrageous editing of an important story. Here is my e-mail:

Approx 10 min ago you had a short story about Barney Frank's Town Hall meeting. Before the clip, the CNN Anchor said that at times it got down right disrespectful. You then showed the clip of a woman saying to Rep Frank, " why do you support this policy?". You then played segments of Rep, Frank saying "what planet are you from? and "talking to you is like talking to my dining room table." A logical assumption from your report was that Rep. Frank was Disrespectful. Your report did not show that the woman was carrying a sign that had Obama drawn like Hitler and your report did not show the woman comparing Obama's policies to Nazis. I think that this is a mistake that should be corrected IMMEDIATELY. Thank you!

I simply do not understand how this was a simple mistake, the editing was purposely done to make the woman who was attacking Obama in a sympathetic light...

There can be no respect given to anyone who portrays our president as Adolf Hitler or anyone pertaining to the Nazis who murdered 6 million Jews during World War II.
There can never be any place in our airwaves for personalities who defend the bringing up of such slime during their shows.
And there can never be any place in our democracy for those who'd rather carry inflammatory pictures depicting Obama as Hitler or any other matter of personal attack or lie against our president.
At the very minimum, I demand that CNN Headline News not only apologize for the anti-Semitic defense, but those responsible for putting together the report be severely disciplined.
In addition, in the light of their actions in enabling the inflammatory attackers of both Obama personally and the spreading of lies about his health care proposal, more than a mere apology is needed to start repairing the grotesque wrong the Fox "news" channel continues to perpetrate.
What's needed is to hit the Fox channel where it hurts the most-- in the wallet.
I praise those waging the continuing campaign for accountability against Fox personality Glenn Beck for his inflammatory remarks calling Obama a racist.
I feel now it must be taken a step further. In addition to calling on advertisers to pull their ads off Beck's show, I feel maximum pressure must be placed on cable networks that carry the Fox channel.
Regardless of whatever bribe those running Fox may bring the cable networks, pressure must be brought on the networks to end the anti-Semitic and inflammatory slime Fox has propagated by pulling the channel off their networks.
It's time Fox is brought down to its knees and put out of business. It's bad enough that it hasn't acted like a real news channel for many years, but this latest defense of a questioner's anti-Semitism should raise questions about whether it belongs on anyone's cable lineup.

Gibbs: Obama Still Supports Public Option

After hearing all the rumors about possible waivering in the Obama Administration for a robust public option in any healthcare legislation, we now read this from our president's press secretary, Robert Gibbs, on the subject:

Speaking to CBS News’ Face the Nation on Sunday, White House Press Secretary Robert Gibbs emphasized that President Barack Obama still supports having a "public option" for health care, which the White House believes will introduce additional competition and lower prices in the insurance market.

I'm amazed that the White House hasn't pressed perhaps one of the strongest arguments for a public option-- it sure hasn't led to a government takeover of the package delivery business (just ask two private companies, FedEx and UPS, when it comes to gaining a large chunk of the package delivery business even with competition from the U.S. Postal Service).
If FedEx and UPS can compete effectively against the USPS, why can't private insurers if they really think they have an effective, customer-friendly, and affordable product to sell? I sure hope we hear that argument more.

More Mainstream Media Outlets Wake Up To Lying Right-Wing Healthcare Attacks And Those Funding Them

I'm glad that some in the media are finally waking up to the barrage of lies and baseless personal attacks that have been made against President Obama's healthcare proposal.
As I was checking out Daily Kos this morning, I was happy to see a diary that explained how it's no longer just Keith Olbermann and Rachel Maddow that are exposing the right-wing lies and those who are propagating them in the mainstream media.
The article cited in the Daily Kos diary couldn't have been more direct:

Much of the money and strategy behind the so-called grassroots groups organizing opposition to the Democrats' health care plans comes from conservative political consultants, professional organizers and millionaires, some of whom hold financial stakes in the outcome.

From reading the rest of the McClatchy story, these folks fighting the Obama plan sure aren't the average folks that they're selling themselves as.
As a point of review, let's take just one of those mentioned as opponents of the Obama plan-- Rick Scott.
Here's the excellent Think Progress piece explaining who Rick Scott is:

And here's Rick Scott having problems giving straight-forward answers to the queries of CNN's Rick Sanchez:

There's still some time left before Congress reconvenes to consider the president's proposal, but as the time draws near, I'm glad to see so many fighting back against the right-wing lies and more folks in the mainstream media exposing the lies for what they are and those who are propagating them.

Obama Fights Back (Again) Against Right-Wing Smears!

"When the going gets tough, the tough get going."
--John R. Wooden, former UCLA basketball coach (from his Pyramid of Success).
What I really like about President Obama (among other things) is that he's a fighter. He's not afraid to take on tough causes even if it costs him some polling points and he keeps on fighting even against powerful interests fighting against his proposals.
During his townhall today in Colorado, our president got real tough against those spreading outrageous lies about his healthcare proposal. Here's a clip:

Here's a transcript of what our president said as reported in a Daily Kos diary:

". . . we shouldn’t have a public option, now I believe that we should on balance. It’s not perfect, it’s not going to solve every problem, but I think it actually would keep the insurance companies more honest. You can have a honest disagreement with me on that. What you can’t do, or you can, but you shouldn’t do is start saying things like ‘we wanna set up death panels to pull the plug on Grandma’ I mean, come on! I mean, I just. . . First of all, first of all, when you make a comment like that- I just lost my grandmother last year I know what it’s like to watch somebody you love who’s aging. . . deteriorating . . . and have to struggle with it. So the notion that somehow I ran for public office, or members of Congress are in this so they can go around pulling the plug on Grandma? I mean, when you start making arguments like that, that’s simply dishonest. Especially when I hear the arguments coming from members of Congress in the other party who, it turns out, sponsored similar provisions. Here’s what this is about, here was the genesis of this little piece of information—we had a provision in the House bill that would give the option, the option, of somebody getting counseling on end of life care or hospice care and have it reimbursed by Medicare. The option, voluntary, so that you’d have more information on how to deal with these situations. Turns out, the biggest proponent of this was a Republican Congressman who is now a Senator and a colleague of Mr. Udall and Mr. Bennett. Turns out, in Medicare Part D, which was passed by a Republican Congress, they had the exact same provision! So when I have people who just a couple of years ago thought this was a good idea now getting on television suggesting that it’s a plot against Grandma or to sneak euthanasia into our health care system, that feels dishonest to me. And we’ve got enough stuff to deal with, without having these kinds of arguments.

Yep, like Muhammad Ali once did in the ring, he floats like a butterfly and stings like a bee.
And despite what some in the media who appear still mesmerized by what happened in 1993 might say, I suspect this is the most likely outcome of the healthcare fight:
Our president will succeed with our help just as Ali did in upsetting George Foreman to regain his title.

Overcoming The Right-Wing Lies and Scare Tactics: Obama (Again) Sets Record Straight On Health Care

Here's our president's weekly address in which he explains (again) his healthcare proposal:

What impressed me about this message is how our president speaks about what's really going on despite the news media's obscession with the right-wing hooligans whose only agenda is to prevent any real health care reform from happening:
Here's part of what the president said:

Now, I know there’s been a lot of attention paid to some of the town hall meetings that are going on around the country, especially those where tempers have flared. You know how TV loves a ruckus.
But what you haven’t seen – because it’s not as exciting – are the many constructive meetings going on all over the country where Americans are airing their hopes and concerns about this very important issue.
I’ve been holding some of my own, and the stories I’ve heard have really underscored why I believe so strongly that health insurance reform is a challenge we can't ignore.
They’re stories like Lori Hitchcock’s, who I met in New Hampshire this week. Lori’s got a pre-existing condition, so no insurance company will cover her. She’s self-employed, and in this economy, she can’t find a job that offers health care, so she’s been uninsured for two years.
Or they’re stories like Katie Gibson’s, who I met in Montana. When Katie tried to change insurance companies, she was sure to list her pre-existing conditions on the application and even called her new company to confirm she’d be covered. Two months later, she was dropped – after she’d already gone off her other insurance.
These are the stories that aren’t being told – stories of a health care system that works better for the insurance industry than it does for the American people. And that’s why we’re going to pass health insurance reform that finally holds the insurance companies accountable.
But now’s the hard part. Because the history is clear – every time we come close to passing health insurance reform, the special interests with a stake in the status quo use their influence and political allies to scare and mislead the American people.

Notice the last part of this passage. Just as the news media seems incapable of reporting the straight facts about President Obama's popularity (which is still at 60 percent despite media claims of eroding support), it doesn't want folks to know that our president has respectfully and in a clear and to the point manner fielded even the most skeptical of questions about his proposal in BOTH the New Hampshire and Montana townhalls.
It's time the news media stopped presenting fringe right-wing hooligans who'd rather obstruct and prevent any meaningful discussion of healthcare reform as representative of mainstream America and instead listen to folks like those highlight by our president both at his townhalls and in his latest weekly message.

Obama's Popularity Holds Steady Despite Lying GOP, Insurance Company Attacks

For those bent on cherry picking only for the polls that reflect negatively on President Obama and Democrats in Congress, you will find no solace with this poll.
According to the latest Research2000 poll posted in Daily Kos:

Given that the dominant story in the public conversation over the past week has been the health care townhall meetings, it is not completely unreasonable to suggest that the protest tactic employed by the opponents of reform (and at least tacitly cheered on by Congressional Republicans) has not had the desired effect of cratering Democratic numbers and resurrecting Republican ones.
Quite the opposite, this weeks shows a continuation of two trends apparent over the last month: a slow but palpable recovery in support for Congressional Democrats, and the perpetuation of a long slide in support for Congressional Republicans.

The finding shows President Obama's popularity still steady at 60 percent while the Republican slide continues.
The finding also confirms the latest Gallup finding I discussed that had our president's approval numbers at 63 percent.
If anything, these numbers prove that the rabble rousers the Fox propaganda channel, Republicans, and their insurance companies represent only a fringe of American society and not the mainstream when it comes to healthcare reform or anyone else.
It's time CNN and others stop legitimizing the right-wing goons and rabble rousers and expose them for what they are-- a fringe group that's clearly in the minority on healthcare reform despite the heavy dose of lies and disinformation they have unleashed against it.

Is Obama Rope-A-Doping His Way To Victory In Healthcare Fight?

I've seen sports analogies after sports analogies, but I saw one that's perfectly fitting to describe President Obama's strategy on winning real healthcare reform to the American people.
The analogy can be found in the headline of a Daily Kos diary that was posted today:

Obama Rope-a-Dopes Republicans, Media on Health Care Reform Fight

I've heard of Obama's strategy as being "political ju jitsu" when Obama's calm demeanor throws all the idiocy that's been unleased against him back at his opponents at an even more ferocious manner, but this is the first time that I've heard of Obama's approach being likened to Ali's "rope-a-dope" strategy against George Foreman in the famed "Rumbie in the Jungle" in Zaire.
As one who actually has seen the fight, I understand what the blogger is talking about. Ali just takes everything Foreman can unleash.
Foreman winds up punching himself out, and Ali came back with a ferocious combination that knocked the then-reigning heavyweight champion out.
Judging from some of the polls (at least the latest Gallup poll that has the president's popularity back up to 63 percent (sorry mainstream media, he's not going down and the yellers and screamers aren't winning the day!), the Obama strategy is working quite well. If he keeps this up, this is what's going to happen at the end of the healthcare fight, with Obama scoring the knockout just like Ali did:

Should Obama Compromises Cause Defeat of Healthcare Reform? I Don't Think So!

It's so interesting to watch how many folks want President Obama to already have fixed all that is wrong in our country after only six months on the job.
He (with help from the Democratic Congress) have accomplished much so far, including pass a stimulus package that (at least) has stalled the downturn caused by the failed policies of George W. Bush and Republicans in Congress.
Now our president is trying to pass a robust health insurance reform that will cover most, if not everyone, and will curb some of the most abusive practices of the insurance industry, including denying coverage due to pre-existing conditions and the right to deny, or even end, coverage under the power of "recission."
Granted, Barack Obama, as a candidate for the office that he now holds, made a series of promises that involved keeping lobbyists out of White House deliberations and, in addition, called for the government to be able to negotiate drug prices with pharmaceutical concerns.
Now that the president and his men have negotiated an $80 million deal with pharmaceutical concerns in exchange for the dropping the ability of government to negotiate with pharma companies to lower prescription drug costs, he has caught fire from lots of folks who thought he wouldn't break that promise.
One former Clinton administration official, Robert Reich, even said the Obama deal "undermines democracy."
But really, is this really undermining democracy what we're talking about? Or is it really breaking campaign promises what we're talking about?
Yes, Obama did say those things on the campaign trail, but once he became president, did anyone really think that he was going to emerge from the health care battle with legislation that was so perfect that folks on the progressive side would be able to climb on their cars in sheer celebration?
The way Congress works and given the massive donations many in Congress have received from insurance company and pharmaceutical concerns, the chances of the most perfect bill in the universe passing Congress were, at best, very slim.
I'd like to know more details about what the Obama administration GOT in legislative concessions from Big Pharma to go on top of the $80 million pledged and the additional $150 million Big Pharma is pouring into an advertising campaign calling for passage of the legislation.
The concessions the president has made are painful enough, but given the choice of even the compromise legislation Congress is about to pass or passing nothing at all while 47 million Americans go without health insurance (among other things), I'd rather have that little something, even if it means making some painful compromises to get it.
I'd like to know that I will not be discriminated against due to pre-existing conditions and if I have to go to the hospital for some major surgery or something else, no insurance company will be able to deny me coverage under any "recission" rights. I'd also like to be able to choose between a bunch of coverages with a public option that would be available if I could no afford to have health care from private insurance concerns.
That's the least I want from the legislation that Congress passes, and if that's all Congress does, I'd say "dayenu," (Hebrew for "that is sufficient.").

The Doctor Was DEFINITELY In When It Came To Healthcare on "Countdown"

I never thought I could have seen a better case for real national healthcare reform that that which was presented tonight by guest host Dr. Howard Dean on "Countdown with Keith Olbermann."
In his show, the doctor talked with a Democratic House member. Chris Van Hollen, on prospects for passage along with a former insurance company executive on the need for a real public option.
He also had an author show why the VA (yes, a public entity) offers far better medical coverage than even private insurers and a clip of Jon Stewart taking apart a right-wing critic of the current progressive proposals.
Here's Dr. Dean talking with Van Hollen:

Visit msnbc.com for Breaking News, World News, and News about the Economy

...and with the former insurance official:

Visit msnbc.com for Breaking News, World News, and News about the Economy

...and now on VA health care:

Visit msnbc.com for Breaking News, World News, and News about the Economy

...and finally, Jon Stewart taking apart a right-winger:

Visit msnbc.com for Breaking News, World News, and News about the Economy

Powerful