All these administration spokes-people SPEAK FOR THE ADMINISTRATION

[Kurt_and_Hunter]

Every week we get the same routine up in here.

The administration sends people out to present a position.

Then folks here say that isn't the administration position.

Mystifying... are we supposed to think the Obama administration is the most incompetent, dishonest administration ever?

Because that's the argument... a bunch of free-lancers submarining the President, a WH whose true positions are secret, every statement presumptively disingenuous in service of some clever well-intentioned deception.

The Obama administration is SMART and ORGANIZED. This administration is hailed as being more on-message than almost any other administration.

The administration knows exactly what it is saying.

And when it states a position on high-profile Sunday shows then walks back the position for the blogosphere mid-week, then repeats the position on more high-profile shows it suggests message management for two audiences, not a plague of rogue spokesmen who have to be corrected all the time, yet are sent out again and again.

The fall-back position of, "I'll wait to hear it from Obama" makes little sense. People like Rahm say things Obama doesn't want to say. That's why you have people like Rahm.

So give Obama the basic respect of assuming he has some level of control over his own administration.

[tridim]

1. But never quote Obama directly, K&H doesn't apporve of that. nt

[Kurt_and_Hunter]

2. You are continuing something from another thread, and foolishly too

You continually post a comment Obama made in July as a contradiction of hundreds of things the administration has said since July as if the administration has nothing to do with Obama.

Precisely what the OP is about.

[tridim]

3. keep ignoring reality. He said it, he meant it. Period.

[Kurt_and_Hunter]

4. And it was so awesome he's afraid to use up his mojo by ever saying it again

It would be INCREDIBLY USEFUL if he repeated that comment.

Why do you suppose he doesn't?

[tridim]

8. Obama supports the PO and has said so many times.

You're right though, he has only spoken that exact quote once.

Feel free to point me to a quote where he has specifically said he doesn't support the PO.

[Kurt_and_Hunter]

19. He is not likely to say that. That's the whole point...

He keeps sending people out to explain that he has no PO veto-threat and that there is no PO line in the sand. When an administration keeps sending the message that there is no line in the sand on the PO it contradicts a soft earlier suggestion that there might be.

Unless one considers whatever Obama says as being in an entirely separate class from what people who speak for him say. A spokesman can go off reservation but when lots of spokesmen are on message it is far from unreasonable to think they are speaking for the administration.

If President Obama's current thinking is that he plans to reject (veto or leave unsigned) any bill without a strong PO he has the option of personally correcting Ms. Jarrett for her comment today. I don't think he will. (But would be pleased if he did.) Instead Gibbs will be asked about it and will say, "President Obama continues to support the public option," which I don't doubt at all. Liking the idea isn't the same as going to the wall for it.:

MS. JARRETT: So he's a big believer in the public plan.

GREGORY: But the question I'm asking is will he push for it and demand it here is the--in the final version of reform?

MS. JARRETT: He's pushed for it, certainly, but he's realistic to say we've got to look at all options. He has said very clearly he thinks it's the best option, and we'll see what happens.

GREGORY: So he's not demanding that it's in there.

MS. JARRETT: He's not demanding that it's in there. He thinks it's the best possible choice. But I think, David, let's not underestimate how much progress we've made. The fact that there's agreement on so much means that we are right on the brink of delivering for the American people, and that's a positive sign for our country.

[Clio the Leo]

20. What I think is intriguing is that, while I agree with you on this OP...

.... you and I obviously dont agree on their stand on the PO.

I've never been a Senator .... but I am a salesperson .... I make my living getting people to buy stuff they don't necessarily want. So I can only apply my own real-life experience. I know that you CANNOT get anyone to buy anything by DEMANDING they do it. You have to make them want it. Show them why it's in their best interest to get it and do it in a way that does not hurt their ego and pride.

I fail to see how sending your surrogates onto the talk show circuit to say publicly that the President wants this or that ... when the real negotiations go on behind closed doors ... accomplishes anything other than coddling your base.

With Senator Snowe's vote (and while we may question her motivation her or her ultimate loyalty, we cannot question the fact that she voted for the Baucus bill) did the President achieve that feat by sending Ax out to demand that Ms. Snowe do so? I certainly dont recall that ever happening.

But what I do remember are several private meetings Ms. Snowe had with the President before her vote.

The President is nothing if not a very talented salesman.

[Aramchek]

5. "The Obama administration is SMART and ORGANIZED" True. The naysayers are the morons.

but you know that already, don't you?

[depakid]

6. Given the history of messaging on health care since May "smart and orgranized" aren't words I'd use

Indeed, "muddling through" would even be a generous description.

[Tom Rinaldo]

7. I see no flaws in your logic

You got my "rec" just for laying it out there.

[high density]

9. Does everybody forget Obama's speech from September?

Axlerod today: The president has very consistently and clearly articulated his support for a public option. He thinks that having competition within the healthcare system is healthy.

Instead of doing the Bushco "my way or the highway" they are continuing to act as if they're open to ideas. The people who wanted a left version of Bush should have figured out months ago that Obama isn't that guy.

[Tom Rinaldo]

10. The real discussion isn't over whether Obama supports a public option

Clearly he does. The only question is how strongly he supports a public option, and how hard he is willing to fight for it's inclusion in the final legislation now. Or conversely, whether he is prepared to make the case that legislation that passes without it is still quality health care reform, and that the lack of a public option in that final legislation is not of great importance.

[high density]

14. I still believe Obama's speech from September

He said we need some sort of cost controls and he doesn't see any way to do it other than the public option. But he's open to other ideas that would fulfill those goals (wink wink). Jarrett and Axelrod said the same thing today.

The problem seems to remain for the slice of DU that endlessly demands Obama make a statement that he will veto anything that doesn't have the public option in it. That's just not going to happen and for that they feel he's selling us out.

I see no reason worrying in the meantime about how hot or cold his support is for issue XYZ. I do believe he understands this is a life or death subject and so far he has articulated his thoughts on the solution to the problem very clearly.

[Tom Rinaldo]

17. Political calculations are difficult enough to make as an insider

As an outsider to the process I can't do more than begin to guess what is being planned by those on the inside and why. Clearly Obama has not ruled out signing a bill without a strong public option, or any public option at all. As you say, he has not threatened to veto anything without one. Just as clearly Obama voices his support for the merits of the public option. That much is available for all to see.

I like Obama, I believe for the most part we agree on general goals and certainly he is far superior as President to any Repbulican I can remotely imagine being in that office. But since I am not an insider I will make my case on his effectiveness as a leader regarding health care reform by the results that he ultimately signs his name to. Anything short of a strong public option included (with perhaps the concession of individual state opt outs) will, shall I say, underwhelm me. If that happens I hereby put you on notice that I will be one of those who will harshly second guess both the tactical and substantitive choices he made during this entire health care battle. And if Obama wins a real public option I am willing to give him credit for deftly managing the process. Results have consequences. He asked us to help put him into a very hot kitchen. I will judge him by what he serves up out of it.

Obama took single payer off the table and pointedly failed to make a robust public option his non negotiatable bottom line. That may yet turn out to have been a brilliant strategy for reason we will all read about after the fact. But he made those choices and if he can not deliver I will be critical of his leadership in this fight. For now I reserve judgement.

[depakid]

11. Sorry, but what we've been getting border's on incompetency

You don't go out yesterday with guns blazing for the insurance industry and turn around today and sound wishy washy and enable your opponents about such a critical point.

[high density]

12. It's only wishy-washy to people who take AP interpretations as holy gospel

If you what to feel that way, that's fine, but I'm willing to interpret it differently. Go on youtube and watch the speech again from September if you're getting worried.

[depakid]

13. The messages coming from all three branches of government were right on point

No ambiguity about the approaches- now, one day later, we get these statements on the Sunday shows backing off, suggesting some sort of "compromise," gutting a robust public option.

People think:

:wtf:

That's not how you win policy fights- although it does make people wonder whether winning the fight for a public option (or any of the other threats) was serious at all.

And it affects their credibility in future battles.

[high density]

15. Backing off? Nonsense. You really need to read the transcripts.

They said exactly what they always said, and then stopped short of the "veto anything without PO" demands from DU. This is nothing new for sure.

The only :wtf: people are those here at DU that have this absurd recency bias for lame AP news stories that invent their own logic to support the corporate agenda.

[depakid]

16. I've read several transcripts- and the statements are wishy washy

Who knows WTF the administration's willing to fight for?

Now, contrast this with Republicans (who have along track record of ACTUALLY WINNING policy battles). They stay on point- they keep pressing. They don't play these games, which is a major reason why they win- EVEN WHEN THEY'RE OUT OF POWER.

[Life Long Dem]

18. The President is always available for questions.

So when they go around Obama I feel it's another way to distort the story. First we had rumors, then we had anonymous sources, and now we have the administartion said this or that or whatever they feel like distorting.

[polichick]

21. It does seem silly to imagine that these spokespeople don't speak for the prez. nt