Lieberman's revenge.

[JDPriestly]

Lieberman was resoundingly rejected by Democrats in the primaries last year.

Now he is getting his revenge. How?

By gutting the public option and the Medicare buy-in from the health care reform.

Why is that revenge?

In discussing the bill, Lieberman suggested that without the public option and the Medicare buy-in, the bill would preserve the cost-cutting measures. So, some DUers have asked, "What cost-cutting measures was he talking about?"

The cuts to Medicare. The bill has been in a constant state of flux, but it is my understanding that just about the only cost-cutting measures in what remains of the bill are cuts to Medicare.

There are at least two kinds of Medicare cuts in the bill.

The first cuts are those to the Medicare Advantage plans. That may not mean much if you are 45 and your employer picks out your health care plan for you and your health care plan has a list of preferred doctors. But if you are 85, just a bit confused, and all of the sudden you have to find a doctor, remember his or her name and telephone number and figure out what specialist you want to treat your Alzheimer's, the cuts to Medicare Advantage could determine whether you find the medical care you need to die in dignity or not.

The second cuts as I understand the bill are cuts in the standards of care for seniors, such as what tests and treatments are available under Medicare.

These cuts could be very unkind to seniors. And, unless there are other cost-cutting measures in the bill that justify the sacrifices seniors will be asked to make under it, they could easily drive seniors to abandon the Democratic Party and vote Republican or stay home in droves. I know, Sarah Palin is pretty scary. But for seniors, so is the idea of cuts to Medicare.

Keeping in mind that Lieberman is, in his heart, a Republican and also that he has a score to settle with the Democratic Party, what better way could he do it than to sour seniors on the Democrats?

And he has nothing to lose from this deal. For now, he stays a "Democrat." He gets to keep his post on the Homeland Security committee, and then he just waits until the election. Seniors vote for Republicans. The Republicans win. And Lieberman switches parties.

So, who gets the last laugh? Certainly not Rahm Emmanuel or President Obama.

We have to stop this. Call as many liberal Democratic members of Congress as soon as you can and tell them: no bill is better than a bill with neither a Medicare buy-in nor a public option. Placing the entire brunt of saving health care costs on seniors will spell disaster for the Democratic Party.

[KharmaTrain]

1. Slight Correction...

Lieberman lost the primaries and hasn't been a Democrat since 2006.

Otherwise you are spot on. He's all about Joementum these days and his so-called "independent" personna. It's what gets him on the teevee shows and feeds his huge ego. Also he's found it far more profitable to support the insurance companies that replaced Democrats as a major source for his campaign cash and also feathers his wife's nest. The dude sold out long ago and now it's all about him, his ego and need for vengence...even if it means going against things he said or stood for in the past.

I do disagree that no bill is better than getting something passed as this is what Joementum and his big money insurance buddies hope you'd do. It's far easier to ammend a bad bill than to walk away and let the bastards win.

[Vinnie From Indy]

2. Blaming Lieberman is EXACTLY what they want people to do

The fact is that Joe Lieberman has not stopped or gutted anything that other DEMOCRATIC Senators did not want stopped or gutted. Laying the blame at Joe's feet is political misdirection at it's finest. Joe has simply accepted being the bogeyman for other Senators. This bill would pass with a public option if Obama and some Democratic Senators wanted it to.