President Obama has betrayed us all.
The world is coming to an end.
Also, we should all vote Republican or for Ralph Nader.
because that will do a lot of good. And attacking and thinking ill of
President Obama is very rational. And constructive.
more below the fold.
Normally, I am fairly laid back in critiquing others' diaries. However, I don't feel a need to be exceptionally deferential or charitable towards diaries that are blindly aimed shotgun blasts.
I am troubled by the fuzzy thinking in this diary. It is true that I have written and read more math proofs than daily kos diaries. And good, well-written proofs indicate the path that the writer intends to take to prove the theorem. Often, in proofs, the path chosen is stated explicitly. One will be told the method of proof: direct, indirect, proof by contradiction... In diaries, the line of argument or reasoning is usually not stated explicitly. However, the reader ought to be able to discern the argument that the writer is making and the conclusion that the author is drawing and wants us to draw. This is even more true in persuasive writing. In this diary, I will analyze the argumentation of the above diary and the conclusions drawn in it. Finally, I will express my concerns about the ultimate outcomes of this type of illogical / irrational attack upon our President and his administration.
This is as close as we can get to the conclusion of the syllogism by David Sirota.
Clearly, this is a telling indictment of the health care law itself, strongly suggesting that it was constructed by the Obama administration - as some progressives argued - as a massive taxpayer-financed giveaway to private insurers like Wellpoint.
- Liz Fowler did not think that the public option could pass.
- Liz Fowler worked for Well Point recently.
a. Liz Fowler will attempt to apply and interpret the health care reform act in as corporate friendly manner as possible
b. The health care reform act makes health care in America worse than if it had not passed.
c. The Obama administration, and clearly President Obama, himself wants to do whatever he can to help corporations even if it hurts most ordinary Americans.
This syllogism is a fail. I will simply say that axioms 1 and 2 in now way necessarily imply 3a or 3b or 3c. We could put a truth table to represent the fail of the syllogism if we so desired. But it is enough to say that propositions 1 and 2 can both be true and propositions 3a and 3b and 3c can all be false.
The reason there is not a public option is not because of Liz Fowler, nor because of Max Baucus, nor is it because of President Obama. It failed because of: Joe Lieberman, Ben Nelson, Mary Landrieu, and Blanche Lincoln. We saw this when they opposed even the opt out. It failed because these Democratic Senators were willing to filibuster Democratic, popular legislation.
Ultimately, Liz Fowler works for the Obama administration and is subject to his authority. Through this health care reform act, 95 percent of Americans will be covered. Hispanics and African Americans have been overrepresented among the uninsured. While it would have been much better if it had a public option, the health care reform act is a step forward. (cf Ezra Klein, Paul Krugman, Jon Cohn) .
May I point out that Jacob Hacker, the original proponent of the public option thought it was better to pass this bill rather defeat it because of the lack of a public option ?
People suspicious of President Obama who fail to take into account political realities produce offspring with these views. Persuading Democratic and Progressive voters to stay at home or vote third party will lead to more Republicans being put in charge. It will be deleterious to our nation. It appears that these "progressives" may not have thought about the consequences of their actions.
The following comments by alba and juturna are very illuminating.
that probably got buried. That comment explains that Liz Fowler is a deputy in a department that is headed by Jay Angoff, a man with sterling left-wing credentials who has a history of going very hard after the insurance industry. Even if Liz Fowler is a total sell out (a dubious proposition given her less than 2 years of employment by Wellpoint and her many years of work on Capital Hill for Democratic leaders on the health care issue), she is not the top regulator and will be reporting to a man with impeccable credentials from the consumer perspective. . .
Let's see... she must have had an evil motive (6+ / 0-)
maxomai, jj32, Geekesque, yella dawg, math4barack, CalliopeIrjaPearl
behind her contributions to the campaigns of Obama and Judy Feder.
Feder served in the Clinton administration as Principal Deputy Assistant Secretary of the Department of Health and Human Services. A Democrat, she then went on to run unsuccessfully for Representative of Virginia's 10th District. She was also supported by NARAL, the AFL-CIO and several other unions, Emily's List, Henry Waxman, Louise Slaughter, Debbie Wasserman-Shulz, the Human Rights Campaign PAC, The Sierra Club and NOW.
In my view, SoCalSal's analysis is more reasonable and compelling
the link to the Montana newspaper did it for me (9+ / 0-)
Geekesque, cherryXXX69, yella dawg, RandomActsOfReason, math4barack, CS in AZ, juturna, gobears2000, LiLaF
and here's what I posted to that other diary --
Fowler seems a likely fit even if the diary (and related links) don't specify her job title and function at HHS.
Let's see... Fowler has worked for Senators Baucus and Moynihan, and for Rep. Pete Stark, D-Calif. She's familiar with the lawmaking process, knows where to get answers, probably has a pretty good understanding of how government works and how to get things done.
In addition to a law degree, Fowler has a doctorate in public health from Johns Hopkins University. Good! She's smart and motivated.
Fowler headed up a team of 20-some Senate Finance Committee staffers who helped draft the bill in the Senate. Fowler is not only familiar with the Health Affordability Act, she helped to write it. She won't have a huge learning curve. AND she has demonstrated managerial skills.
Fowler was vice president of public policy at WellPoint from 2006 to 2008, helping develop public-policy positions for the company. Great! She's got industry experience too, so she'll have some inside-knowledge advantage when sticky issues arise, and she knows just who to talk to to get those issues resolved.
Fowler was the keynote speaker at the annual Montana Healthcare Forum in June, where she led discussions on how the health reform legislation would affect Montana. Get those speaker feedback forms, stat! If she can clearly explain the legislation to healthcare workers and to state health officials, I want to hire her!