Obama on Public Option: Two Steps Forward One Step Back

From Michelle Malkin, "White House Public Option Ploy: A Trial Balloon, Not a White Flag":

Do you believe the Sunday spin on the White House’s alleged “retreat” from the Obamacare public option? ....

The real Obama is a declared proponent of single-payer and universal health care Trojan Horses. All else is political theater.

From Wikipedia, on the phrase, "Two steps forward one step back":

Two steps forward one step back ..." is a catchprase reflecting on an anecdote about a frog trying to climb out of a water well; for every two steps the frog climbs, it falls back by one step, making its progress arduous.

The phrase is sometimes cynically rearranged to "One step forward, two steps back..." to reflect a situation where, seemingly for every attempt to make progress in a task, an actual retrograde performance is achieved.

The most infamous "cynical rearrangment" is Vladimir Lenin's, and his Communist Party tract, ONE STEP FORWARD, TWO STEPS BACK (THE CRISIS IN OUR PARTY:

One step forward, two steps back. . . . It happens in the lives of individuals, and it happens in the history of nations and in the development of parties. It would be the most criminal cowardice to doubt even for a moment the inevitable and complete triumph of the principles of revolutionary Social-Democracy, of proletarian organisation and Party discipline. We have already won a great deal, and we must go on fighting, undismayed by reverses, fighting steadfastly, scorning the philistine methods of circle wrangling, doing our very utmost to preserve the hard-won single Party tie linking all Russian Social-Democrats, and striving by dint of persistent and systematic work to give all Party members, and the workers in particular, a full and conscious understanding of the duties of Party members, of the struggle at the Second Party Congress, of all the causes and all the stages of our divergence, and of the utter disastrousness of opportunism, which, in the sphere of organisation as in the sphere of our programme and our tactics, helplessly surrenders to the bourgeois psychology, uncritically adopts the point of view of bourgeois democracy, and blunts the weapon of the class struggle of the proletariat.

In its struggle for power the proletariat has no other weapon but organisation. Disunited by the rule of anarchic competition in the bourgeois world, ground down by forced labour for capital, constantly thrust back to the "lower depths" of utter destitution, savagery, and degeneration, the proletariat can, and inevitably will, become an invincible force only through its ideological unification on the principles of Marxism being reinforced by the material unity of organisation, which welds millions of toilers into an army of the working class. Neither the senile rule of the Russian autocracy nor the senescent rule of international capital will be able to withstand this army. It will more and more firmly close its ranks, in spite of all zigzags and backward steps, in spite of the opportunist phrase-mongering of the Girondists of present-day Social-Democracy, in spite of the self-satisfied exaltation of the retrograde circle spirit, and in spite of the tinsel and fuss of intellectualist anarchism.

Note: This post is simply making comparisons. Barack Obama's ideological program is modeled along Leninist lines, as I have noted previously. See, "Should Revolutionaries Feel Good About Obama?"

See also, Andrew Waldron, "What Barack Obama Learned From the Communist Party."

Plus, at Memeorandum, Mark Ambinder, "Administration Official: 'Sebelius Misspoke'."

Related: Lee Cary, "The Array of WH ObamaCare Tactics Grows."

Whole Foods Boycott: Leftists Don't Want Discussion

From Radley Balko, on "Whole Foods":

Let me see if I have the logic correct here: Whole Foods is consistently ranked among the most employee-friendly places to work in the service industry. In fact, Whole Foods treats employees a hell of a lot better than most liberal activist groups do. The company has strict environmental and humane animal treatment standards about how its food is grown and raised. The company buys local. The store near me is hosting a local tasting event for its regional vendors. Last I saw, the company’s lowest wage earners make $13.15 per hour. They also get to vote on what type of health insurance they want. And they all get health insurance. The company is also constantly raising money for various philanthropic causes. When I was there today, they were taking donations for a school lunch program. In short, Whole Foods is everything leftists talk about when they talk about “corporate responsibility.” ....

And yet lefties want to boycott the company because CEO John Mackey wrote an op-ed that suggests alternatives to single payer health care? ....

Is this really the state of debate on the left, now? “Agree with us, or we’ll crush you?” These people don’t want a dicussion. They don’t want to hear ideas. They want you to shut up and do what they say, or they’re going to punish you.

Yes, this is the state of the debate.

Thanks Radley!

Milk Carton Politician: Won’t You Come Home, Russ Carnahan?

Ed Morrissey started the meme with, "Who Are Your Milk Carton Politicians?"

But you've got to love this picture, from Dana Loesch, "Desperately Seeking Russ":

Moe Lane has more, "Have You Seen Me?"

My name is Russ Carnahan (D, MO-03), and I’m lost ...

I was last seen a week or so ago, hiding in a garage after a get-together I threw ended with some people that I invited beating up a guy. I’ve dropped off the face of the earth since then. No Twitter*, no blogging, nothing from work… I’m just gone. Now, I’ve had a bit of a sheltered life, and I’m not used to it when things go bad: so I may in a bad place right now.

Added: The Blog Prof, "Entire New Hampshire Congressional Delegation In Hiding - Avoiding Constituents." (Via Memeorandum.)

The Revolt of August: GOP Sees Revival in Health Care Opposition

From Janet Hook, at the Los Angeles Times, "GOP Seeks Its Revival in the Revolt Against Obama's Healthcare Plan":

Conservatives are calling it their August Revolt -- a surprising upsurge of activism against President Obama's proposed healthcare overhaul.

Spurred on by the success of their efforts to dominate the news at Democratic town hall meetings, conservative groups are reporting increases in membership lists and are joining forces to plan at least one mass demonstration in Washington next month.

But the conservative mobilization has also created an unusual dilemma for Republican leaders, who want to turn the enthusiasm into election victories next year but find themselves the target of ire from many of the same activists.

Sen. John Cornyn (R-Texas), chairman of the GOP's Senate campaign committee, was booed at a "tea party" rally in July for supporting the government bailout of the financial services industry.

And one of the GOP's most reliable conservatives, Rep. Bob Inglis of South Carolina, was shouted down at a recent town hall meeting when he criticized a conservative broadcaster and tried to counter claims that children would soon be forced to receive swine flu vaccinations.

"You cannot build a movement on something that is not credible," said a frustrated Inglis, referring to the vaccine issue and other false rumors being spread by more aggressive critics of the health bill.

"Going door to door, I found opposition tending toward hostility," Inglis added. "At town meetings, the hostility went straight through to hysteria."

Some GOP leaders, such as former vice presidential nominee Sarah Palin, have tapped into the unrest -- with Palin stoking fears on her Facebook page of "Obama death panels" that would result from the healthcare legislation. That claim, too, has been widely discredited.

Well, it's a little more complicated than that. No, there aren't "death panels" per se, but the "Complete Lives System" is real, and the administration's top policy advisor on health care, Ezekiel Emanuel, distanced himself from his own writing to minimize the political damage to ObamaCare. Not only that, Sarah Palin has emerged as an even bigger star among conservative circles than ever. No one has the finger on the pulse of the right's grassroots better than the former Alaska governor. Many of the right's establishment media poobahs dismiss her, but Palin's lining up for the 2012 GOP nomination better than ever. Most of all, Palin is President Obama's worst nightmare.

As for the Republicans, the House GOP caucus is now talking as though a comeback in 2012 isn't out of the question. As Byron York points out:

In recent weeks, poll after poll has shown Republicans neck-and-neck, or even ahead, of Democrats. Even a National Public Radio survey found Republicans in the lead. "There's no question that you're seeing a shift across virtually all the polling," says one GOP strategist, "with Democrats losing ground."

Republicans were sensing momentum earlier in the summer, but events of the August recess -- specifically, the town hall meetings in which opponents of the Democratic health care reform plan have turned out in force -- have changed their view. "This month has opened our eyes," says one plugged-in House aide. "We're seeing real people who are fired up who weren't engaged before -- the first time we've had a popular movement that could really benefit us electorally."

Hook's piece at the L.A. Times shows a more ambiguous picture. Conservatives are organizing outside of the GOP's organizational structure. I know personally that all the tea-party activism I've been involved with this year has been specifically non-partisan. In the months before next year's election, the most logical home for most of these folks will be the Republican Party. But that depends on the policy positions and voting records of individual members Members of Congress. Still, our single-member district plurality vote system results in a stable two-party competition, and I doubt activists are looking to start a new third party. If anything, congressional candidates will need to adopt the Palin-model if they hope to have a credible "outsider" status for their electoral runs.

Other than that, a lot can happen in 15 months. The Obama administration might very well achieve some large policy successes, and the president himself might get a better knack for policy-making his second year in office.

That said, the notion that the GOP would be considering a return to power so soon after the 2008 debacle was unthinkable at the beginning of this year. The healthcare debate is indeed a turning point. Decisions on both sides of the political aisle will determine how things develop going forward, but the GOP's grassroots is massively emboldened by their successes so far, and the right's "rebels" of 2009 will undoubtedley shape the next stage of political action.

Cartoon Credit: Chris Muir, "Waiting for GOP."

At the Precipice? What Happened to 'Comprehensive Health Care Reform'?

I'm intrigued by the increasing emphasis of the president and top members of his administration on "health insurance reform." Robert Gibbs, at the video, in an interview with Harry Smith on Face the Nation, concedes that Democrats are backing away from the "public option." Meanwhile, he hammers the point about passing "health insurance reform":

Yet, a look back at the administration's earlier language finds a much more sweeping agenda for "comprehensive reform." Here's the president, in his first speech to a joint session of Congress on February 24th, announcing the need to move this country forward:

None of this will come without cost, nor will it be easy. But this is America. We don’t do what’s easy. We do what is necessary to move this country forward.

For that same reason, we must also address the crushing cost of health care.

This is a cost that now causes a bankruptcy in America every thirty seconds. By the end of the year, it could cause 1.5 million Americans to lose their homes. In the last eight years, premiums have grown four times faster than wages. And in each of these years, one million more Americans have lost their health insurance. It is one of the major reasons why small businesses close their doors and corporations ship jobs overseas. And it’s one of the largest and fastest-growing parts of our budget.

Given these facts, we can no longer afford to put health care reform on hold.

Already, we have done more to advance the cause of health care reform in the last thirty days than we have in the last decade. When it was days old, this Congress passed a law to provide and protect health insurance for eleven million American children whose parents work full-time. Our recovery plan will invest in electronic health records and new technology that will reduce errors, bring down costs, ensure privacy, and save lives. It will launch a new effort to conquer a disease that has touched the life of nearly every American by seeking a cure for cancer in our time. And it makes the largest investment ever in preventive care, because that is one of the best ways to keep our people healthy and our costs under control.

This budget builds on these reforms. It includes an historic commitment to comprehensive health care reform – a down-payment on the principle that we must have quality, affordable health care for every American. It’s a commitment that’s paid for in part by efficiencies in our system that are long overdue. And it’s a step we must take if we hope to bring down our deficit in the years to come.

Now, there will be many different opinions and ideas about how to achieve reform, and that is why I’m bringing together businesses and workers, doctors and health care providers, Democrats and Republicans to begin work on this issue next week.

I suffer no illusions that this will be an easy process. It will be hard. But I also know that nearly a century after Teddy Roosevelt first called for reform, the cost of our health care has weighed down our economy and the conscience of our nation long enough. So let there be no doubt: health care reform cannot wait, it must not wait, and it will not wait another year.

The president speaks of "health care reform" and "comprehensive health care reform." The message isn't just reforming insurance markets; it's to "conquer disease" and find "a cure for cancer," to make the "largest investment in preventive care" and to bring "costs under control."

In June, in an address to the American Medical Association, the president announced his broad ambition that "health care reform is the single most important thing we can do for America's long-term fiscal health." The AMA speech marked the administration launch of the major legislative push for comprehensive reform.

By July, though, during his weekly radio address on health care, the president had begun to shift toward the "insurance reform" angle (after months of grass roots tea party activism). But he still implies grand designs in denouncing those attacking his program as socialist:

Those who oppose reform will also tell you that under our plan, you won’t get to choose your doctor – that some bureaucrat will choose for you. That’s also not true. Michelle and I don’t want anyone telling us who our family’s doctor should be – and no one should decide that for you either. Under our proposals, if you like your doctor, you keep your doctor. If you like your current insurance, you keep that insurance. Period, end of story.

Finally, opponents of health reform warn that this is all some big plot for socialized medicine or government-run health care with long lines and rationed care. That’s not true either. I don’t believe that government can or should run health care. But I also don’t think insurance companies should have free reign to do as they please."

Yet, by yesterday, in Grand Junction, Obama was shifting gears, attacking insurance firms and markets. The president argued that Americans were being "held hostage by health insurance companies that deny them coverage, or drop their coverage, or charge fees that they can't afford for care that they desperately need."

Obama also backed away from the "robust public option" that's been a centerpiece of the plan:

The public option, whether we have it or we don't have it, is not the entirety of healthcare reform. This is just one sliver of it, one aspect of it ... And by the way, it's both the right and the left that have become so fixated on this that they forget everything else.

As we've seen all this weekend, now the administration's all about "health insurance reforms" that will provide "consumer choices" and "competition."

It's quite a dramatic change, rhetorically, and it shows the huge public scale of resistance to Obama's policy hubris. But I'm still not convinced the administration is defeated. Rick Moran argues that ObamaCare is on the "precipice of failure." But now with the new Democratic meme converging on "insurance co-ops," which will include "nonprofit insurance cooperatives," I'm again confident the left is practicing the classic Leninist strategy of one step backwards and two steps forward.

See also, Fox News, "Public Option Losing Steam? White House Open to Health Care Reform Without Government Plan." Also, check Memeorandum.

Conservatives: A Win on Public Option is One Battle on Road to Victory

Leftist Joe Sudbay is whining about how the White House, in "dropping" the public option, will "sacrifice good policy and principles for politics any day." Basically, another netroots radical takes issue with the administation for "blowing off" the party's socialist base.

Actually, I doubt the public option is indeed "off the table." The Politico has a report, "White House Backs Away From Public Health Care Option." But check Gaius at Blue Crab Boulevard, who nails what's really happening at this stage in Democratic-socialist healthcare reform:

To my fellow bloggers on the right,

This is NOT a victory ....

At best, we have won a skirmish - IF this is not smoke being blown by the Democrats smoke-blower-in-chief. (I am not convinced we have won even that much just yet.) Yes we have made a serious dent in their schemes, but we are not even close to being out of the woods on this yet.

We have a long way to go on this. Remember that Pelosi has already required that reconciliation be used - meaning that only 51 votes are needed in the Senate. Remember that there is a lot more to hate in these various bills being touted by the Democrats than just the public option.

If they get anything at all, they are looking at this as the camel’s nose under the tent. They will increment and “improve” anything they can get passed until it is socialized medicine. That is the ultimate goal. That is what Clinton pushed and that, very, very clearly, is the message of this article.

This is not a victory. We have to keep focused and keep fighting. We have to.

More at the link.

David Gregory Compares Town Hall Citizens to Oklahoma City Bomber

The transcript is here.

NBC's David Gregory, on Meet the Press this morning, first asked Democratic tax-evader Tom Daschle if the town halls have "derailed healthcare reform." He then follows up Daschle by smearing citizen protesters as threatening violence against the government. Highlighting one protest sign with Thomas Jefferson's quote that "the tree of liberty must be refreshed with the blood of patriots and tyrants," Gregory claims it's "become a motto for violence against the government ... Timothy McVeigh, the Oklahoma City bomber, had that very quote on his shirt the day at the Murrah building when 168 people were killed":

Of course, there is no motto of violence against the administration or Congress. The question was posed to Senator Coburn, and while he clearly pwned both Senator Daschle and hardliner Rachel Maddow throughout the program, he needed to first totally repudiate Gregory's line of questioning. If you check the video, the references to the Nazi signs were those of the Lyndon LaRouche forces. That group has been thoroughly discredited as having nothing to do with the conservative tea party movement and the town hall protesters. Gregory's clips are rank misinformation, a shameful display of dishonesty on the part of both Gregory and Meet the Press.

At the video, the guy with the gun is William Kostric. He was carrying his gun legally. The Secret Service was fully aware of him at the time of the town hall and had placed him under surveillance. Kostric was later interviewed by Chris Matthews. He said that "I'm not advocating violence ... I'm advocating an informed society, an armed society, a polite society."

Gregory's leaving out context and deceiving viewers. See, "MSNBC Joins Campaign of Anti-Gun Bigotry," and "MSNBC Spreads Fear and Prejudice Over Gun Owner at Obama Event."

Note that Senator Coburn absolutely dominated the larger health policy discussion, and Rachel Maddow came off as incredibly frustrated and completely underwater on details. See, "Maddow Battles Dick Armey In "Meet The Press" Debut ." (Via Memeorandum.)

Kathleen Sebelius: Public Option 'Not Essential Element' of ObamaCare

The Rhetorican's got the news, "Public Option? We Don’t Need No Stinkin’ Public Option!"

I'm just inscreasingly astounded when listening to Democrats arguing that greater government control is going to "restore" competition to insurance markets. Here's John King's interview with Health and Human Services Secretary Kathleen Sebelius on this morning's "State of the Union":

Sebelius argues at one point that "it's good to have consumer choice ... to let people choose an option in the new marketplace .. and it's good to have competition for private insurers who will inherit a lot of new customers."

It's almost mindboggling to listen to this, Orwellian even. Governments do not promote competition in markets. Governments regulate markets. One of the biggest marketplace inefficiencies right now is that consumers cannot buy private insurance across state lines. As Michael Tanner has pointed out in his article, "Obama Kills Health Competition":

Obama's plan ... will ultimately result in less competition, not more ... Though few realize it, it's illegal to purchase health insurance across state lines. This effectively creates insurance cartels in each state. Tear down this barrier to interstate commerce, and you'd instantly increase competition.

See also, Michael Tanner, "PERILS OF OBAMACARE: THE THREE BIG LIES."

And note something else: The Democrats at taking one step back to allow two steps forward (a classic Leninist prinicple). Don't believe for a second that a public option is off the table. By demonizing insurance companies, the administration's hoping to deflect criticism of ObamaCare onto the "greedy insurance monopolies"

For more on that, see my piece yesterday, "Obama's Town Hall at Grand Junction, Colorado: 'Nobody's Holding Insurance Companies Accountable'."
Plus, CNN, "Sebelius: There will be competition with private insurers" (via Memeorandum).

New Drugs Save Lives: Killing Big Pharma Would Kill Patients - NOT Greedy Capitalists

Considering the increasingly inane blogging over there, I'm tempted to say that the dorks at Lawyer, Guns and Money must be swamped with back-to-school prep. The only problem is that these guys don't prep! Well, at least not Robert Farley, who likes to glance at book manuscripts while dribbling a few whiskey sours down his mug and then calling that a "book review."

Well, "Scholarly" Scott Lemieux's not much better, considering his recent post, "Points About the Indefensible American Health Care System That Need To Be Made More Often." And what are those point?

Fun fact the media never tells you: as a % of GDP, the US has greater public expenditures on health care than the UK does. Not total expenditures, we know that. Public expenditures. More big government health care in the US than the UK.

And then Little Scotty adds this flourish of demonization:

And even the grossly underfunded British system doesn't seem to produce demonstrably worse results than the American one with it extra-expensive layer of corporate looting.

Hey, that's it! Corporate looting! Get rid of that and we'll be home free!

Wrong. New drugs save lives.

Check out The Astute Bloggers for a smart corrective to these statist authoritarians, "BASIC FALLACIES AND LIES OF THE LIBERAL ARGUMENT THAT USA HEALTHCARE IS WORSE THAN EUROPE'S":

Liberals are essentially arguing that we spend more because a lot goes into the pockets of insurers and not to doctors and nurses or actual care.

This is a lie ....

And pharma companies spend BILLIONS developing a SINGLE drug and many do not pass muster. To pay for the research which leads to life-saving and life-extending medicine, they need a high return on the drugs which do pass muster.

Killing Big Pharma would NOT kill greedy capitalists; it would be committing GENOCIDE against people who need new drugs to be developed.

We do spend more because of the GREED OF LAWYERS: we have a runaway tort system which allows lawyers to get billions each year from lawsuits against our healthcare system operators. Defensive medicine is extra expensive.

If we reined in the lawyers we'd save BILLIONS - ENOUGH TO INSURE ALMOST EVERYONE WHO WANTS INSURANCE BUT CAN'T AFFORD IT WITH VOUCHERS!

Check out more good stuff from The Astute Bloggers!

Nazis for Me? How Soon They Forget Bush as Hitler

From Andrew McCarthy at National Review, "Nazis for Me, but Not for Thee: Why shouldn’t socialized medicine prompt comparisons to National Socialism?":

Nazi Germany is a useful historical example of socialism run amok. The genocide and terrorism ultimately practiced by the Nazis were horrible — that goes without saying. But National Socialism went on for a dozen years, it was the last stage in a progressive nationalization of German society, and there was a lot more to it than genocide and terrorism. It cannot be that because there was genocide and terrorism, the socialist aspects of National Socialism are outside the lines of acceptable political discourse. Given the immense popularity of Jonah Goldberg’s Liberal Fascism, one of the most important political books of the last quarter-century, it doesn’t look like Americans are as convinced as Mort Kondracke seems to be that these comparisons are verboten.

Morton Kondracke slammed Rush Limbaugh for comparing Democrats to the Nazis.

Of course, we just emerged from 8 years of "BusHitler" demonization, so it's a bit hard to swallow the left's outrage. See, "The Left's Nazification of Bush." And Democratic Underground proudly boasts a huge roundup, " “Bushitler” (George W. Bush comparable to Adolf Hitler)."

Also, from Zombie, "Bush as Hitler, Swastika-Mania: A Retrospective."

At recent rallies, town hall meetings and “tea parties,” a few protesters have shown up with signs comparing Obama to Hitler (i.e. depicting him with a Hitler mustache), or displaying swastikas in the context of implying that Obama and/or his administration are Nazi-like.

One would think that this would not be particularly newsworthy, but Democrats, the White House and their supporters are expressing outrage at this “horrifying” and “menacing” turn of events ....

Since I had a front-row seat between 2003 and 2008 at anti-Bush protests in the San Francisco Bay Area, where I saw literally THOUSANDS of Bush/Hitler comparisons and swastikas, I thought perhaps it would be useful to compile here in one place a small sampling of them — to prove beyond any doubt that Hitler and swastikas were referenced incessantly at basically every single protest during the Bush administration. Anyone who claims otherwise is lying, as is anyone who claims that people who bring swastikas to rallies are necessarily self-identifying as Nazis.

Related: I retired from Rule 5 blogging, but GSGF, my friend and young neocon, forwarded me the hotness!

What is Astroturfing?

From Jimmy at the Sundries Shack, "AstroTurfing: What It Is and What It Isn’t":

Let’s be clear. The protesters you’ve seen opposing Obamacare generally aren’t AstroTurfers. Indeed, there is no evidence at all that Obamacare protesters have done any AstroTurfing. The supposed gotcha memo that the left waved around like a bloody shirt a couple weeks ago (before Mary Katharine Ham showed their outrage was more fake than Lindsey Lohan’s lesbianism) wasn’t an AstroTurfing effort either. It was good-old grassroots activism, just like our President used to do, except the guy who wrote the memo wasn’t actually paid to be an activist. The Tea Party movement is a grassroots movement, even though they have some semblance of organization.

Great post. Read the whole thing, here.

Plus, at Gateway Pundit, "Of Course. Obama Busses in Supporters at Grand Junction Rally Too."

And check the video at the Peoples Press Collective. The ObamaBots, at the least, should make their own signs.

Meghan McCain Wants to Finish Off the GOP

I didn't know Meghan McCain was a genuine skank. Yeah, I'm up on Ms. McCain's wars with everybody who's somebody on the conservative right today, but I had no idea that her brand of "progressive GOP politics" includes posting tweets like this one:

And actually, I backed John McCain in 2008 (surprise!), so I normally wouldn't argue that he was out to kill the GOP.

No, I'm just spinning the title of this entry off the New York Post's piece from earlier today, "Meghan McCain, Blonde Bomb Shell: John McCain Wounded the GOP; His Daughter Is Out to Finish the Job":

I liked Meghan McCain. In her faux hipster Urban Outfitter threads, she attempted to humanize her cantankerous, over-the-hill father during the presidential election with her "cute" bloggette. She recommended bands, shared playlists and posed cheekily in a controversial kaffiyeh that those crazy Columbia kids were wearing.

At this point, someone (maybe her mother?) suggested she should speak for the youngin' mavericks out there. She anointed herself head cheerleader on a one-woman squad, and went to work on her vision of a new Republican Party. A kinder, more gentle GOP where all everyone felt loved. In essence, one that would look more like an elephant in donkey's clothing.

The Daily Beast, Tina Brown's answer for those who thought the Huffington Post wasn't left-wing enough, gave her a weekly column and she was promptly booked on every Republican-hating show from "The View" to Bill Maher. Boy did she deliver -- a perfect underhand lob right over team liberal's home plate. With her bleached blond hair, heavy eyeliner and oodles of "umms" and "likes" she looked more like Lauren Conrad than Peggy Noonan.

Then came the blogs ... oh the blogs! Posts riddled with self-indulgent drivel and giggling suggestions on how bring more youth into the listless party fold. "Go Gay, GOP!" Each had one overarching theme: To win, the Republicans needed to be more like ... the Democrats.

"I don't know exactly what about me threatens them (Michelle Malkin, Ann Coulter and Co.) so much, other than that people are listening to me," she writes in her latest cranium-inflating missive to the kids on the Internets. She brags that she has twice as many followers on Twitter as Malkin. "And trust me, Twitter is more of an indication of where young people are than books published." Books are so for old people!

Yeah, Twitter, where Meghan can brag about how she loves guys who're down with mofo!

More at the link.

I'm sending this post to Robert Stacy McCain (The Other McCain) to see what kind of fisking he'll work up (if any) on Meghan's lastest splash in the news.

P.S. Folks know I have something of a bad-boy rep on the right, but boasting my mofo creds on Twitter isn't part of my repertoire!

Obama's Town Hall at Grand Junction, Colorado: 'Nobody's Holding Insurance Companies Accountable'

President Obama spoke at a health care town hall today in Grand Junction, Colorado. With this event the president has confirmed that the Democratic political calculus has shifted away from a "robust public option" to "vilifying insurance companies." The Denver Post has the text of Obama's opening remarks, including lines like this:

These are ordinary Americans, no different than anyone else, held hostage by health insurance companies that deny them coverage, or drop their coverage, or charge fees that they can't afford for care they desperately need.

It's wrong. It's hurting too many families and businesses. And we're going to fix it when we pass health insurance reform this year.

Also:

No one is holding the insurance companies accountable for these practices. But we will. We're going to ban arbitrary caps on benefits. And we'll place limits on how much you can be charged for out-of-pocket expenses. No one in America should go broke because they get sick.

This tack comes at precisely the same time that Democrats are backing off the "public option." According to the Politico (via Memeorandum)

After the toughest week yet for health reform, leading Democrats are warning that the party likely will have to accept major compromises to get a bill passed this year – perhaps even dropping a proposal to create a government-run plan that is almost an article of faith among some liberals ....

In two town halls so far, Obama has spent far more time talking up the need to reform the insurance system than making a full-throated pitch for the public insurance option.

Still, even though the "robust public option" is apparently off the table, the president's comments this week indicate that aggressive insurance regulation is likely, including an "insurance mandate" of public insurance to "compete" with private companies (different line, same baloney).

Here's President Obama disussing insurance "options" in Grand Junction:

... if you like your health care plan, you can keep your health plan. If you like your doctor, you can keep seeing your doctor. I don't want government bureaucrats meddling in your health care - but the point is, I don't want insurance company bureaucrats meddling in your health care either. So if you're one of the nearly 46 million people who don't have health insurance, you will finally have quality, affordable options.

But note this comment from the Heritage Foundation:

Although he once opposed the idea, President Obama is now open to the imposition of an individual mandate that would require all Americans to have federally approved health insurance. This unprecedented federal directive not only takes away your individual freedom but could cost you as well. Lawmakers are considering a penalty or tax for those who don't buy government-approved health plans.

The fact is that President Obama still wants a public national healthcare program - ObamaCare - and he's making some tactical adjustments to his public relations campaign. No matter what happens, the Democrats will attack the private marketplace and will likely frustrate private competition and consumer choice. Thus, conservatives have to keep the pressure on all the way into September and beyond. Kill health reform altoghether, if the Democrats are going to be driving the legislation.

See also, CNN, "'Arbitrary' health care policies would end, Obama tells town hall," and the New York Times, "Obama Says Insurers Are Trying to Block Change."

ObamaCare and the History of Eugenics

Glenn Beck, on Wednesday, got worked up during his "One Thing" segment. He was discussing the history of eugenics and how health rationing in Weimer Germany rationalized the lives of people with deformed limbs, like the fellow in the picture below. Beck's daughter was born with cerebral palsy, and Beck got choked up when he said "her hand looks just like this." See, "The Horror of Eugenics Happened; What Can We Learn From That Mistake?":

Beck's careful, at the video, to reject the argument that the Democrats would implement a policy of eugenics. He's simply having viewers think about the political and economic history that brought those policies into place in the 20th century:

And wouldn't you know it, the radical left doesn't want people talking about this stuff. Yep, folks like "Color of Change" just want Beck to STFU, a position that's gotten pretty common among the Democrats of late. William Jacobson has more, "Ten Top Reasons I'm Happy About The Glenn Beck Boycott":

A group called Color of Change is putting pressure on advertisers to stop running ads on the Glenn Beck show on Fox News because Glenn Beck said mean things about Barack Obama. Apparently several advertisers, including Geico, Sargento Cheese, and others, have succumbed to the fear.

Read the whole thing (the boycott will fail, and will likely have negative reverberations against leftist attempts to squelch freedom of speech).

Dems' Socialist Health Plan Saps Obama's Political Capital

From Shannon Bream, "Obama's Push for Health Care Reform May Use Up His Political Capital":

Barack Obama promised on the campaign trail to change Washington if elected president, and he rode a wave of support based partly on that pledge all the way to the White House.

But change doesn't come cheap, and securing health care reform may wind up costing him much of that support -- known in Washington as political capital.

There already are signs that Obama's support is waning -- notably in his approval rating -- as he and Democratic leaders push to pass an overhaul of the nation's heath care system. And many of the people attending legislators' town hall events this month are voicing outrage and skepticism.

"That's really a big problem for a president that's persuasive but suddenly half the country says I just don't trust you," Stuart Rothenberg, a political analyst, told FOX News.

More at the link.

Image Credit: The Astute Bloggers, "WHO YA GONNA BELIEVE, ME AND THE CHICAGO MACHINE OR A MOB OF SENIORS, INDEPENDENTS AND CHRISTIANISTS!?"

Our Country Deserves Better: 'Oppose ObamaCare'

From Our Country Deserves Better PAC, "Oppose ObamaCare":

The support link is here.

Disabled Woman Assaulted at Adam Schiff Town Hall: Kimberly King Speaks Out Against 'ACORN PRO-OBAMA THUGS'

Gateway Pundit provides the video, "Handicapped Woman Cries After Assault By Union Thugs at Town Hall (Video)":

There's more to the story: If you look at the start of the video, you'll see a "Sepulveda Boulevard" street sign, which is West Los Angeles. Protesters turned out yesterday for a demonstration at Senator Dianne Feinstein's Westwood Office at the intersection of Sepulveda and Santa Monica Boulevards. Check the page for the National Inflation Association. They've got loads of YouTube videos from the event. They've also got an accompanying article, "Violence at Town Hall Meetings Could Escalate" (another link is here):

We believe the violence erupting today at health care town hall meetings is only a sign of things to come. These meetings will likely get louder and more raucous in the upcoming weeks and if Obama moves forward with his plan to socialize health care in America, the violence could potentially escalate to an uncontrollable level.

It turns out that the woman in the video is Kimberly King.

She's got a report of an ObamaThug assault posted at a 9/12 Project message board, "I'm a Disabled Woman - I Was Assaulted at a Health Care Town Hall by ZEALOTS!" Ms. King says a scuffle broke out as she was accosted by left-wing goons (edited):

As we all know things are getting nasty at these town halls and once it happens to you personally it shakes you to the core and the culprits are NOT the crazy right wing mob ... IT'S ACORN/PRO-OBAMA bused in THUGS DOING IT!! ....

I am disabled. I currently have a ruptured spinal wire from a spinal implant and will be having my SEVENTH surgery since 2001 within the next week. I also have multiple health problems including little use of my left arm from nerve damage and horrible problems walking since the wire ruptured. I am in such pain it's difficult to describe, but being there today was important.

We arrived at 4:30 pm and the Alhambra police positioned me right down front by the barricade next to the raised dais where the Congressman was to be situated. The town hall was actually to be held at 5pm but didn't begin until 7pm. At 5:30 I needed to go the restroom so my best friend went to help me (I'm in a neckbrace and using a walker) and my husband remained with our seats.

Upon returning a group of pro-reform women were standing in front of my seat waving their ready made ACORN designed signs. My husband tapped one of them on the shoulder and courteously asked her to move as his wife needed her seat. She ignored him. I said "excuse me" THREE times and she looked at me and said, "You can sit over there where the other handicaps are sitting." (Mind you this was in the hot sun on metal folding chairs and we had brought my own chair. That area was for handicapped and elderly constituents of Mr. Schiff's ...) I told her "I need my chair NOW!" as my arm was giving out and I was about to fall. My husband finally screamed "MOVE!" She and her coven screamed, "NO! WE DON'T HAVE TO MOVE ANYWHERE!" I had no choice but to shove her aside with my walker as I was about to fall and SHE STOMPED MY FOOT! I collapsed in the chair and screamed in pain. She and her friends started screaming "She's LYING! SHE'S LYING! SHE ASSAULTED HER!!"

Of course other onlookers immediately swept in and backed us having seen her interfere with me getting in my seat and saw her stomp my foot. Fortunately the kind policeman who placed us there came over and informed them I was the front of the line and to move. This harpie then started to mock me, laugh at my condition, even went so far to suggest I was faking, called me a effing bitch, this woman screamed at me so loudly just spewing hate that I was in tears: "You want everyone taken care of and you're so concerned about others well being but you were more than happy to let me fall on the concrete and then step on me! You are a liar! You are a hypocrite! Shame on you!" I screamed "GET AWAY FROM ME!" over the din of 3000 folks in attendance some guys in suits finally came over and said she would be ejected if she said anything else to me.

Typical report on how "compassionate" are the left-wing activists.

This is the first I've heard of Ms. King's story, but her incident is totally in line with what I reported earlier. See, "Astroturf at Adam Schiff Town Hall: ACORN, AARP, Organizing for America, SEIU, and Stalinist Apparatchiks for ObamaCare!"

Obama Health Care Address: Admitting Defeat, President Lashes Out Against 'Those Who Would Stand in the Way of Reform'

Here's President Obama's weeky address, focusing on ObamaCare:

At about 3:25 minutes, Obama claims that "those who would stand in the way of reform will say almost anything." That's pretty rich coming from the most dishonest president in history.

But crucially, the president is implicitly admitting he's lost the debate over his administration's plans for healthcare nationalization. We saw the shift in political framing yesterday: The gist of presidential rhetoric is moving away from the healthcare "system" to the "health insurance industry." Obama's trying to focus on the sob stories of the uninsured to build heartbreak sympathy for his colossal ObamaCare takeover. It's fundamentally phony.

Yesterday's Washington Post caught the dynamic, "Obama Pushes Insurance Reforms
As He Hits the Road, President Finds Few Openings to Confront Critics of Plan."

Shannon Bream and Griff Jenkins on ACORN Astroturfing at Arlen Specter Town Hall: 'A Referendum on Washington'

This updates my report from last night on the ACORN thugs who were bused into Arlen Specter town hall on Wednesday.

Check out Shannon Bream and Griff Jenkins at the video. ACORN confirmed the group's Astroturfing to Fox News. At about 3:20 minutes, Jenkins argues that the town halls are "more a referendum on Washington than a discussion on about health care":

See also, "Inside ACORN's Presence at Penn. Town Hall."

Plus, Gateway Pundit, "Terrific!... Greta Interviews Couple Who Filmed ACORN Buses At Penn Town Hall."

Earl Ofari Hutchinson Smears Concerned Citizens as 'Fist Shaking Town Hall Shock Troops'

The New York Times laments the impotence of the Obama cadres, who have failed to match the genuine citizen outrage against ObamaCare. See, "Health Debate Fails to Ignite Obama’s Grass Roots."

But check out Earl Ofari Hutchinson's piece at Huffington Post, "Why the Right is Winning Its War Against Obama":

Obama's worst mistake has been to misread the election results. Much is made that he got more white votes than John Kerry or Al Gore, revved up young whites, and totally exorcised race from the campaign. Obama's win supposedly was final proof that America had finally kicked the racial syndrome. This is the stuff of media talk and wishful thinking. Despite a GOP racked by sex and corruption scandals, an anemic presidential opponent, a laughingstock vice presidential candidate, a collapsed economy and an outgoing GOP president with a rating worse than Herbert Hoover's, McCain still crushed Obama by a twelve point spread among white voters.

The route was not just among old, Deep South unreconstructed or latent bigoted white male voters, but in virtually every voter demographic among whites, including a dead heat with Obama among a majority of younger white voters. This doesn't tell the whole story of the sharp racial divide Obama faces. A sizeable percentage of whites were disgusted enough with Bush's policies to stay home on Election Day, but not disgusted enough with him and his policies to vote for Obama. The Henry Louis Gate's affair and the right's town hall rabble rousing have made more whites wary of Obama's policies. Polls after the Gates outburst showed that a majority of whites condemned Obama for backing Gates and even more ominous expressed grave doubts about his policies. A painful reality is that the crushing majority of whites who oppose Obama or disavow his policies for racial, party, or ideological reasons or personal prejudices, are fast forming the backbone of the radical right's counter insurgency against him.

The radical right has gotten its way in the media with its fist shaking town hall shock troops. But the White House has given the counterinsurgency a generous boost with its fits and starts, and conciliation on health care, and waffling on a total rollback of Bush policies. Obama hasn't lost the war yet, but without a huge battlefield counterattack, defeat may not be far off.

Hutchinson provides more evidence that the left has ignited a "race war" to try to win the healthcare debate. See Matt Welch, "More Scenes From the Health Care Debate Race War."

More at Memeorandum.

Senator Tom Coburn Town Hall: Obama 'Cannot Steal the Future From Its Grandchildren'

From KTUL-Tulsa, "Hundreds Attend Coburn Town Hall Meeting":

There was such a turnout for Thursday morning's town hall meeting with Oklahoma Senator Tom Coburn in Muskogee that the meeting had to be moved from an auditorium into a larger area.

At least five hundred people showed up for the first of three town hall meetings for Coburn Thursday. Others are planned later this week and next week. Coburn is holding the meetings to discuss important issues for Oklahoma and the nation.

The meeting was to be held in the NSU-Muskogee auditorium, but there were so many people who showed up, the auditorium was emptied out and it was moved into the lobby, which is a larger area to accomodate them all.

He told the gathered crowd that he would cherish a debate on health care in the Senate and that the country cannot steal the future from its grandchildren. He also spoke to one man who indicated a Canadian health care system might be a better way to go because of the costs.

"I would dispute you on the facts," Coburn said. "The fact is that that two million Americans every year are alive and cured from cancer in this country because they DON'T have Canadian health care. We have a 30-percent better cure rate on almost every cancer than Canada does and the reason is that you may get diagnosed early but you get ability to get in line. And the average breast cancer patient in Canada today waits six months before they're in treatment. That's six months. Now, we don't want to get in a line. Access to care isn't getting in a line. There's no question it costs less in Canada, but there's no question that millions of people come to this country so that they will have life rather than lose life."

Coburn said there is little common sense in Washington and that "if the rest of Americans were as involved as the people in this room, we could fix America in one election."

Coburn urged the gathered crowd to quit hiring career politicians.

Recall that Coburn is a licensed physician specializing in family medicine and obstetrics.

Coburn is a sponsor of the Patients’ Choice Act of 2009.

The bill is described as "strengthening the relationship between the patient and the doctor; using the forces of choice and competition rather than rationing and restrictions to contain costs; and ensuring universal, affordable health care for all Americans."

San Francisco Tea Party Blasts ObamaCare: 'It's Shovel Ready'

This is the scene, from PipeLine News, "Boisterous Tea Party Held In San Francisco":

Nearly 1,000 turned out this afternoon in the "Belly of the Liberal Beast," San Francisco, to protest Obama's healthcare plan and his attempt to impose a socialist model on the United States.

The participants gathered in Justin Herman Plaza, probably startling remnants of the noontime lunchers streaming back to their high-rise office buildings, as the Tea Partying crowd slowly swelled.

A strictly do-it-yourself event, there was none of the mass-produced signage usually present in large numbers at the more normal for this city, lefty street events. Also absent were the socialist and communist merchandise booths that were arrayed throughout all of San Francisco's anti-war confrontations.

Michael Krantz, at the Huffington Post, struggles to turn all these folks into Nazis, "Who Would Jesus Insure? Tea Party Dispatch From San Francisco."

But Michelle Malkin has the better line, "Nancy Pelosi, Babs Boxer, and Dianne Feinstein cannot be happy campers."

Rasmussen Reports: 54 Percent Say No Healthcare Bill Better Than Congressional Plan

From Rasmussen, "54% Say Passing No Healthcare Reform Better Than Passing Congressional Plan":

Thirty-five percent (35%) of American voters say passage of the bill currently working its way through Congress would be better than not passing any health care reform legislation this year. However, a new Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey finds that most voters (54%) say no health care reform passed by Congress this year would be the better option.

More at the link.

Another Staged Obama Town Hall in Montana

The Los Angeles Times reports a receptive crowd for today's town hall in Montan: "Obama's Seeking Out Skeptics of Healthcare Reform." But this guy at Fox4KC wasn't too thrilled (edited):

Packed with supporters except for a couple of "wild cards" allowed in ... it was obvious that they were mostly hand-picked supporters when Obama said "keep on knocking on doors, tell your neighbors, spread the facts." He wouldn't have said that to a room full of unknown quantities before he even fielded the first question. All this town hall did was to give him a soapbox ...

This is a man who is both morally and spiritually bankrupt.

That's what I took away from this staged town hall meeting.

Also, from the Wall Street Journal, "Insurance Salesman to Obama: Why Are You Vilifying Insurers?"

Plus, Obama's changing his message on the town halls. See Ben Smith, "Obama embraces the new "exception not the rule" strategy on town halls" (via Memeorandum).

Professor Caroline Heldman Clueless on Politics of Town Halls

I first saw Professor Caroline Heldman last year, on the O'Reilly Factor, in the weeks before the November election. According to her information page, she is an Assistant Professor of Political Science at Occidental College. Professor Heldman co-edited a book on feminist electoral politics (Rethinking Madam President: Are We Ready for a Woman in the White House?). She also published an article at Ms. Magazine last year, "Out-of-Body Image: Women See Themselves Through Eyes of Others." Her 2005 curriculum vitae lists two other books, but they don't turn up on a Google search. Heldman holds a Ph.D. from Rutgers University. She took a Bachelor's in Business Administration from Washington State University in 1993.

I mention all of this to provide some background to Heldman's latest appearance on the O'Reilly Factor last night. At the video, O'Reilly talks to both Scott Rasmussen (of Rasmussen Reports) and Professor Heldman. The discussion follows the Talking Points segment. Rasmussen gives an accurate background analysis of what's happening with President Obama's public support on key issues, and particularly the recent surge in public opposition to ObamaCare.

Both O'Reilly and Rasmussen argue that the tea parties/town halls are having an effect on the Obama administration. Basically, as public support for the grassroots demonstrators has gone up, pubic backing for the ObamaCare fiasco has gone down. Heldman first shakes her head in agreement with Rasmussen, but when O'Reilly asks her, "as a political scientist," what she thinks is happening, Heldman argues that the protests are related to a "broader concern" with "the loss of healthcare." But actually, polls have showed that roughly 8 out of 10 Americans are satisfied with the quality of their healthcare and their insurance coverage.

Then, when O'Reilly continues, saying Americans are very clear on ObamaCare ("they don't want it"), Heldman comes back with, "I disagree with you ... we need a piece of legislation first. And what's needed prior to producing legislation is democratic debate. And what's happening at these healthcare forums is folks are coming and shutting down debate. So I don't think people know much about healthcare ..."

Professor Heldman concludes with some spurious comparison to "healthcare lobbies" in 1993, which purportedly distorted the Clinton adminstration's reform program away from "the best interest" of the public. (I gather that would be single-payer nationalization.)

Watch the video. Heldman shows all kinds of exasperated body language to indicate her frustration with the way the discussion's going. But she's clearly wrong on facts, and most importantly, she's badly misinformed with what's happening today on the conservative street with regards to the town halls.

From my perspective, as a blogger and a teaching political scientist, this year's been one of the most incredible learning experiences on democratic participation in American life. Americans aren't buying the left-wing smears of tea-partyers as astroturfed mobs. USA Today's poll this week was particulary telling. The survey indicated, by 2-to-1 margin, a shift in public sympathy toward the town hall demonstrators. Fifty-one percent said the town halls are an example of "democracy in action." Certainly Professor Heldman's entitled to her opinion, but as she's a political scientist, I'd expect her to have a more rigorous grasp of survey trends if she's going to be speaking on the topic as an expert.

Also, in a related development, Michelle Malkin reports that John L. Jackson, Jr., who holds the majesterial title of Richard Perry University Associate Professor of Communication and Anthropology at the University of Pennsylvania, has attacked Malkin's book, Culture of Corruption, as a "hate crime: "That's the implicit message of this screed from the Chronicle of Higher Education."

Jackson's piece is titled, "The Rising Stakes of Obamaphobia." And once again, we see the same lefist canards and ignorant characterizations of the protests. Jackson at one point argues that:

A relatively small group of like-minded people can have a disproportionate impact on our collective public stage, especially if they make effective use of new media technologies ....

Americans' current "run on guns" isn't just about a potential change in national policy around gun control and the right to bear arms. Some of it also seems to be predicated on an uptick in right-wing militias and their renewed calls for a "race war." Part of it is about a kind of "racial paranoia" linked to economic insecurities, a racial paranoia that pivots on a growing social movement around reactionary racial politicking.

It turns out that Professor Jackson has apparently made his academic mark with this kind of bull-hockey analysis. He's the author of Racial Paranoia: The Unintended Consequences of Political Correctness, yet another argument for the "hidden," "unseen" racism that's allegedly destroying our country.

It can't be said enough - and I attest to this as both an activist and an analyst - that the right's grassroots movement is really unprecedented in recent years. Folks in the left-wing media and the radical academy are doing themselves tremendous harm in misunderstanding what's really happening, and in disrespecting that which they don't understand.

It's bothersome, frankly. I wish I'd known back in 1992 what I know now about politics and ideology. I might have done some things differently in life. On the bright side, recent experiences in blogging and political activism are making me a better professor.