I wouldn't be too surprised to learn that a whole lot of staffers in the West Wing are delighted to hear it.

But for a mere $25,000, Ceci Connolly will report that there's bitter fighting within the Dem party.

As a practical matter, the so called centrists need to find out that there is a price to be paid for their resistance to the public's desire. Up til now, there really hasn't been one.

Oh, so Obama is playing 11-dimensional chess again? Yeah, right.

Some people never learn. Nor bother to remember Obama trying to shut the same activist organizations down during the campaign.

Yup. Get back to me when some of these "centrists" start complaining about being pressured from the right or from their insurance industry donors. Until then, it's just partisan whining.

NOTE TO "Analysts" - uh, maybe Obama promised to targets that he'd ask activists to back off, but meanwhile Obama may be (we can never be in his head) fine with it. (Or, Obama is a Super Secret Republican!!!!!)

It's not 11-dimensional chess. It's politics 101, which most people don't understand.

I would never trust Ceci Connelly after what she did to Al Gore in 2000.

On the other hand, Obama is all about bipartisanship, compromise everybody getting along so this story has a ring of truth to it. It's not like he has be all that progressive on other matters.

That goes for Frank C. too. What part of Obama himself being a sincere and open centrist(it's not like he's made any secret of it) do some people still not understand?

This is getting silly. Of course he is a centrist, and of course he's made that clear. It doesn't change the fact that there is no indication that he's actually trying to get the left-activists to let up. It is perfectly consistent with his modus operandi to sympathize with the one hand and still keep pushing with the other.

Frank C. is quite correct. That isn't "11-dimensional" chess (what does that even mean?), that is very basic politics.

Good cop, bad cop.

The complaints from the Blue Dogs and the Dem 'centrists' don't make any sense -- what other pressure can there be to balance that exerted by 300+ lobbyists and $1.4M per day dedicated to kill health care reform?

Hopefully, this is a Rope-A-Dope strategy and Obama wants to show the public that he tried to reach out and do something bipartisan but in the end he had no choice but to move forward without the Republicans, just as it had to be done in the past with Social Security, Medicare, Federal Family & Medical Leave, and S-Chip.

If not, then Obama will be, as Poppy Bush used to say, "in deep do-do".

It doesn't change the fact that there is no indication that he's actually trying to get the left-activists to let up.

He would like them to but doesn't have the power ti make them shut up (fortunately).

Honestly, this is not a difficult concept to grasp. There's no strategery going on here. Obama doesn't like progressive activists, considers them a threat to his mushy bipartisan kumbaya schtick, and made that distaste very clear during his campaign.

I lean toward agreeing with Steve's interpretation of this. Lawmakers in general--especially those who have been part of the Club for awhile--are likely being caught unawares by the instantaneous effects of internet pushback and associated organized response against popular opinion.

They just haven't had to deal with this before, and Obama is apparently assuaging their delicate egos. Sad that he has to do it, but it is the reality. One day we can hope that people put in office those who actually represent them, and campaign finance reform would go a long way toward that.

This isn't Connolly's first article about how her centrist sources think outside pressure is "not productive" -- she had another one just a week ago, on June 28. That one was all about how an "the intraparty rift runs the risk of alienating centrist Democrats who will be needed to pass a bill." (Because passing any bill is what's really important, not passing something effective -- thanks "centrists".)

That was also the article where she summarized a conversation with Adam Green of Change Congress about the politics of the healthcare debate as "Green, in an interview, was hard-pressed to articulate a substantive argument for the public plan..." (His take on this hackery is here.)

This seems to be consistent with Obama's support of Lieberman and Specter. He was a part of an exclusive club and continues to protect members of that club. No surprise here.

Made me think of this past Friday's Bill Moyers interview with progressive theologians, including Cornel West. West said something to the effect of "If Barack Obama wants to be Abraham Lincoln, then I want to be his Frederick Douglass."

Politicans usually need to be shoved into greatness. Lincoln did, FDR did, and Obama does too.

Whether Obama genuinely wants the left to back off or not is only one aspect of this story; the buried lede is that the pressure is actually getting to lawmakers. Time to redouble our efforts.

As to the discussion at hand, I'm with Steve LaBonne. I'm grateful a million times over that Obama is our President, but he's an unabashed centrist who is too often lauded by cheerleaders as having some sort of voodoo like prescience concerning politics that is more likely attributable to having a nimble team.

As LaBonne points out, this isn't the first time Obama has proclaimed the mainstream left to be overzealous and out-of-bounds. It's not political jujitsu; it's a bad habit.

He would like them to but doesn't have the power to make them shut up (fortunately).

I don't find that persuasive. No, he doesn't have the power to order them to shut up, but you cite the campaign, where he asked them to step back and they did, and there's no evidence that he's done that here. All the article says is that he "expressed concern" to congresscritters on a private conference call (that some of the usual whiners leaked to a friendly reporter), and in response, the White House had no public comment.

Throughout the campaign Obama stressed again and again that change is effected from the bottom up. I'm happy to go with that.

Quickly, if you think that a Senator from North Carolina who doesn't have to run for re-election for another 5.5 years is changing her stance on a question because of MoveOn, you're an idiot.

Bottom Line: if the opposition ads weren't resonating with their constituents, these DINO's would have nothing to worry about.

I would be amazed if the Obama administration actually contacts these groups with their "concerns." They would be buying into a lot of trouble about an issue in which they purportedly agree with the "opposition" (us).

Shade, sure there isn't.

If you pretend that news stories aren't evidence.

If you pretend that past patterns of behavior aren't evidence.

Really, what you're trying to say is that we can't PROVE hes trying to do that. But then, a 'You can't prove it!' isn't really much of a defense outside a court of law.

Obamatons have been playing this game for months. "It's just a media story! you can't prove it's accuracy!" I've seen this game being played on DailyKos and MyDD. I'm starting to see no real difference between the behavior or right-wing Democrats and Neocons. Making up BS and taking refuge in audacity are the orders of the day.

Obama doesn't like progressive activists

Oh bull, he was with progressive anti-war activists back before he was even elected to the Senate, not to mention his history as a community organizer.
Although he doesn't fall much to the left of center on the broad political spectrum, he's probably the most progressive-activist friendly president we've ever had. That's not saying much, but considering the alternatives I'll gladly take him.
Whether it's gay rights groups, labor unions, anti-war groups, etc., at least he's bringing them back into the debate and listening or responding to them--as opposed to shutting them out altogether.

Oh bull, he was with progressive anti-war activists back before he was even elected to the Senate, not to mention his history as a community organizer.

And of course people never change, especially not when they develop political ambitions. Yawn.

The Obamabots are hardly even trying any mor;, this kind of lame stuff is the best they can manage.

Honestly, this is not a difficult concept to grasp. There's no strategery going on here. Obama doesn't like progressive activists, considers them a threat to his mushy bipartisan kumbaya schtick, and made that distaste very clear during his campaign.

Steve gets it right.

Bring me some evidence that Obama's people are actually twisting some progressive arms. Until then he is just expressing his "genuine" sympathy the travails of a bunch of centrist a**holes who are going to have to openly chose between their insurance lobby patrons and their constituents.

The real issue here is campaign finance reform. The centrists like being bribed. Legalized bribery is how they stay in office. Being a Senator beats working, and it has great health insurance benefits.

"devote their energy to promoting passage of comprehensive legislation."

If leaning on the people who are holding up the works is not "promoting passage of comprehensive legislation", then what is? Frankly I would say that the right wingers like Feinstein and Lincoln (note to editor: a centrist is someone like Pres. Obama. People to the right of him are right wing, radical reactionaries) need to have some serious leaning in order to counteract the pressure from the big money boys.

And of course people never change, especially not when they develop political ambitions. Yawn.

He already had political ambitions, and held state political office, when he came out strongly against the war. It was when he ran for U.S. Senate--still not good enough for you, I'm sure.
Facts get in the way of your Obama-bashing schtick once again.
YAWN

Who's bashing? While I don't agree with centrists, there's nothing wrong with being one. Which is why I'm baffled by the continued determination of some people to fool themselves into believing Obama is a progressive, in spite of all the evidence to the contrary.

A centrist Democratic President who can be pushed and nudged by the Left is not a terrible thing, in fact it's probably the best our system can come up with right now. Work with that reality instead of fruitlessly denying it.

The Obamabots are hardly even trying any mor;, this kind of lame stuff is the best they can manage.

At least I can manage to read a calendar, something the mindless Obama-bashing Steve Labonne apparently has yet to master.
Obama was part of the progressive anti-war movement while he was running for the U.S. Senate--and he didn't change his opposition to it after he "developed political ambitions".
Oops, facts get in the way of Steve's schtick.
FAIL

Which is why I'm baffled by the continued determination of some people to fool themselves into believing Obama is a progressive, in spite of all the evidence to the contrary.

Read my posts, I didn't say he was a progressive, I put him at just left of center. What I disputed was your assertion that he doesn't like progressive causes or groups--based on the fact that he ran for the U.S. Senate as well as for president on an anti-war platform. To be more specific, anti-Iraq/war of choice based on lies.

A centrist Democratic President who can be pushed and nudged by the Left is not a terrible thing, in fact it's probably the best our system can come up with right now. Work with that reality instead of fruitlessly denying it.

If Obama and the Democrats had invited the progressives to the table from the getgo, then this could be possible.

But they did not - even though they did invite the Republicans.

Anyone who simply "works" with Obama and the "centrists" under these circumstances is a patsy.

McGuff makes the opposite error from that of the Obamabots- writing Obama off. You don't have to be "invited to the table" to push him- he can be forced to pay attention. Clearly, the pressure on Senators from activist-groups commercials DID get his attention. He didn't like it, but that's immaterial- politicians never like being muscled (I'm sure the Senators in question didn't), but they still respond to it if the pressure is sufficiently worrying to them (just ask newly minted public-option supporter Kay Hagan.)

Progressive activists ARE listening to Obama - the Obama who said "change comes from the bottom up".

Moveon.org fundraising actually had an uptick after Obama's appeal to stop... maybe it's a calculated move on his part, maybe not. Either way, dear centrists, here comes change.

I guess I failed to state my position clearly, because I pretty much agree with Steve LaBonne.

To my way of looking at things, there is a difference between "working" with centrists, on the one hand, and "pushing" them, on the other.

And, when you have not been invited to the table, you are not obliged to mind your table manners when dealing with those who have.

I guess I failed to state my position clearly, because I pretty much agree with Steve LaBonne.

In that case, my apologies for misreading you.

It makes no sense to label Democrats who are opposed to a viable public HC option which the majority of their voting constituency are in favor of as, "Centrists", or "Moderates". That defies logic. It's tantamount to calling, Benedict Arnold, a Centrist Patriot,and, for pretty much the same reason.

Are you kidding me? The only thing Obama & the rest of the elite in washington disagree on is the best way to convince the american public to bend over. The good news is that Every Last One of them is going to be out soon.

http://michael-e.com/2009/06/dear-congress-your-fired/

I see more and more Dems joining together because we've been through the debate (for decades) and we know the issues and that the current legislative efforts are focused on the critical points.

I think Pres. Obama has led this well and the Congressional Dems have done a good job of getting it done.

We just need to be united for the final push and I believe that it will be easier than what we've already been through.

To say, as Steve LaBonne does, that Obama is a centrist and not a progressive is not Obama-bashing, or even derogatory: it's just the reality, and one we can live with, given the alternative available. Obama campaigned openly as a unifier, and we voted for him with our eyes open. Where the hell did we expect him to unify a fractious country? On the left? The fact that his approval ratings are high as they are, particulary among independents (with some understandable day-to-day ups and downs) shows that he has largely succeeded in inclinational terms. Now it's time to turn that inclinational unity into congressional votes. If some Hill Dems are complaining, that is a very good sign that the pressure is working; let's keep it up. Obama is merely hand-holding and tear-drying, otherwise you can bet the headlines would read "Obama Blasts Left Critics!" Clearly that is not the case. Obama knows the Republicans are irrelevant in this fight, and he is very cleverly allowing them to demonstrate that to the country at large. The real fight is in our own party. And here's the good news: Not only don't we need the 40 Republican Senators; we don't even need all 60 Democrats. We can pass a progressive health reform bill as a reconciliation measure with only 50 Democratic senators plus Biden (as Clinton did with his first economic package when Gore broke the tie). But, if we can't muster 50 Democrats in the Senate on an issue this vital, we won't deserve to call ourselves Democrats or be the party in power.

I'm growing increasingly weary of all the Obama Kremlinologists. It doesn't really matter wtf Obama believes, because the prescription for the Left is the same in any case -- put pressure on the Obama admin and the Dem Congress to do the effing right thing.

Ceci "Al Gore invented the Intenet" Connolly's still working for The Washington Post? Well, that explains why the WaPo brass had the bright idea to pimp out their hired help to D.C.'s movers and shakers.

http://michael-e.com/2009/06/dear-congress-your-fired/ -- Michael E, @16:58

Chalk it up to my foreign asshole-ism but, somehow, I tend to pay more attention to commenters -- even the blogwhoring ones -- who know the difference between "you're" and "your"... Unless, of course, they state, up front, that English is not their first language :)

Excuse me. Very nice work, I would love to use you for my wedding. Help me! Please help find sites for: Proventil and pneumonia in toddler. I found only this - fda and proventil hfa. Proventil, after the cost his sense was instructed and later read by the culture satellite. Proventil, nazism provides to exist polish and visible and standard cream time lot sensations wonder a younger experience. THX :-(, Merrill from Zambia.