Question for Obama Critics: What Can Obama Do To Get Lieberman and Others To Not Filibuster

[Yavin4]

Tell me, what can he do? Make a speech? He did that. Get the public to march on the congress? Protesting and marching on congress does not change votes. This aint the 60s. What else can he do to move career politicians who will be around long after Obama is gone.

And, if you use the argument that Bush was able to get things done. Yes, because there was no ideological difference between them and Bush, esp. when it comes to giving tax breaks to the wealthy.

Again, tell me the concrete steps and measures that Obama can do to move these intransigent senators to support a public option.

[villager]

1. terrify them, a la LBJ; threaten the pork that goes to their states, etc.

Buttonhole them, alone, in the White House, and let them know *exactly* what they'll be losing for their state if they cross him...

[Yavin4]

11. First, Obama Cannot Stop Pork from Going Into Their States

And they won't care. Also, if he did carry out that threat, it would damage Obama more than them.

[iceman66]

72. No, but Harry Reid can.

Reid and Obama should be speaking with one voice.

[CTLawGuy]

55. LBJ sure terrified

the 120 Democrats who voted against the civil rights act...

and the 70 who voted against medicare.


Don't get suckered in by LBJ the myth.

[villager]

58. Medicare and the Civil Rights act both passed....

...as I recall...

[CTLawGuy]

99. yeah

because the other party wasn't obstructing everything as a matter of course.

LBJ was lucky in that sense

[krawhitham]

2. be prepared for the canned response "Be a Leader"

Which is bullshit, he has no control over them. No president does or it would not have taken 40 years to get a health care bill

[treestar]

62. Nor would we want that, it is the point of our system that no one

has all the power.

that's what this BS is. Wanting an leftist Bush. Which plays right into the hands of the right, which already claims that we want a "dictator"

[Armstead]

3. reform the whole Democratic Party and stop enabling the Corporate ConservaDems

This is much bigger than Lieberman or even this one issue.

Maybe we have to bite the bullet on this. But this fucking impasse should not have occurred.

Obama has cast his lot with the wrong crowd.

[Yavin4]

12. That Would Take Decades To Accomplish

Not something that can be done by one presidential admin.

[Enrique]

4. we know what he is doing

he's sending Rahm to tell Reid to cave in to Lieberman.

So, the alternative is that Obama could send Rahm to tell Harry to tell Joe to go fuck himself. Right? If he can do the one thing, why can't he do the other?

[DontTreadOnMe]

5. HE COULD DO MANY THINGS!

1. State on National Television that Lieberman will have his committee chairmanship TAKEN AWAY!
And state he is doing it, BECAUSE HE DOES NOT REPRESENT THE MAJORITY OF AMERICANS on healthcare reform!

2. PUT PRESSURE on EVERY other BLUE DOG in the Senate, that Obama will CAMPAIGN AGAINST any DEMOCRAT that does not support healthcare reform!

3. Announce there will be NO MORE PANDERING to the right for the rest of his term as President. STAND FIRM.

I could go on... but I'll take ANY one of the above as a starter.

[ima_sinnic]

8. +++1!

and he could have started early this summer by outlining exactly what "health care reform" should entail. I waited and waited for "details" and he never gave any. then people wonder why we ended up with a shit sandwich--he handed the job over to Max Baucus to "take care of" while he went on vacation, and then, when he came back and the teabaggers were all over the place with their crap, I waited and waited again for him to set them straight. He gave a little lip service to "calling out people who lie," making "an example" of Joe Wilson, but that was about it on that.

[Yavin4]

24. Bill Clinton Did Exactly That In 1993

Bill Clinton formed a HCR reform committee in the White House and put Hillary in charge. They cut out the congress entirely, and then dumped their bill on the doorstep of congress. That tactic was widely cited as the reason why HCR failed in 1993.

Obama took a different approach and gave the congress an outline. The difference is that we're far closer to getting HCR passed than Bill and Hillary did in 1993.

[Yavin4]

16. Response

<<1. State on National Television that Lieberman will have his committee chairmanship TAKEN AWAY!
And state he is doing it, BECAUSE HE DOES NOT REPRESENT THE MAJORITY OF AMERICANS on healthcare reform!>>

And Liberman would still filibuster. How would that stop him?


<<2. PUT PRESSURE on EVERY other BLUE DOG in the Senate, that Obama will CAMPAIGN AGAINST any DEMOCRAT that does not support healthcare reform!>>

Ben Nelson represents a state that voted for McCain and Bush. Obama does not have any credibility in that state. If you take out someone like Ben, then a Republican is guaranteed a win there.


<<3. Announce there will be NO MORE PANDERING to the right for the rest of his term as President. STAND FIRM.>>

That does nothing.

None of what you propose does in any way move these senators off of filibustering.

[Inuca]

90. Stop being rational, please

it's useless :cry:

[bluethruandthru]

26. This battle was lost when we failed to communicate the health care message effectively.

I'm not sure who deserves the most blame...but the disinformation campaign about health care rivals the days of Clinton. When you have 30 percent or so of citizens who are convinced that it's in their best interest to keep the insurance companies fat and happy...you've got problems.
We all know the media is controlled by the right wingers...but there really should have been a full court press when the President first took office to get out the truth about how our current system works and why it hurts all Americans.
There never seemed to be a unified, concise message and that just opened the door for the teabaggers, fox news and all the rest. They controlled the message.

[Yavin4]

31. He Gave A Prime Time Speech from Congress on Healthcare

He also toured the country giving speeches about HCR.

What more commmunication do you want him to do?

[bluethruandthru]

35. I'm not saying it was all Obama's fault.

I never felt there was a concerted effort to get out a clear, concise message. We need to take a page from the Republican playbook and get a set of talking points and stick with them.
Obama also didn't stand firm on what he wanted in HCR. He really should have made his case for the things he had to have and stuck with them. The only thing he seemed to focus on was how much it would cost. Saying things like "affordable health care for all Americans" is not a firm message.

[angee_is_mad]

43. repubs are more unified

than us, so talking points will not work. The bluedogs will just go on faux news, scareboro, and cnn and blast against the talking points.

Remember, there are more conservative dems than moderate repubs in DC now. the gop is basically a southern party and that is what the trifling bluedogs are dealing with.

[treestar]

69. But those are just speeches! That's not action!

:sarcasm:

[CTLawGuy]

56. at least for one and two

what happens when Lieberman or other blue dogs switch parties in response? Bye bye any hope of any legislation until 2011, that's what. You don't want to burn your bridges in this environment.

[uponit7771]

61. ...and that'll FORCE Lieberman to change his vote?!?!?!

[treestar]

63. Does the President control the chairmanships in the Senate?

Why would LIEberman care? He'd still be a Senator.

[AllentownJake]

6. I think doing a simple vote count on controversial legislation before you try to enact it

Is common sense.

[msongs]

7. hapless harry reid needs to make lieberman do an old fashioned fillibuster - they want one let em

have one only they have to stand there in the senate and read the phone book for a couple of months until the entire nation sees just who and what is responsible for senate dysfunction. Maybe Obama could tell Reid to do that.

[rzemanfl]

9. I absolutely agree. Make them actually fillibuster. No more of

this threat shit-do it or shut up.

[liberalpragmatist]

14. Doesn't work that way anymore

Senate rules no longer require them to talk non-stop. Because of a rules change in the '70s, the minority could just go home - Democrats would be the ones who had to talk forever.

[rzemanfl]

23. You're right. What a bullshit operation the Senate is. n/t

[LooseWilly]

40. Please provide a link to this rule change.

If so... to quote the Huffington Post... "We're Screwed."

Just kill the fucking thing then.

[liberalpragmatist]

48. Here you go

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/02/23/the-myth-of-the-filibuste_n_169117.html

[DCBob]

52. This should be posted prominently somewhere since so many on DU are confused about it.

There must have been a million posts in the past few months that include the phrase "make them filibuster!!"

[valerief]

10. Use the Patriot Act and put them in Gitmo as domestic terrorists.

He can do that, but he won't. It seems the prez is getting exactly what he wants. I don't want to believe it, but I can't not believe it.

[Jakes Progress]

13. Air Strike? nt

[Popular Front]

15. As an Obama supporter, I can say this: fire Rahm, fire Geithner, fire Summers

At the very fucking least.

[Yavin4]

18. Again, How Does That In Any Way Stop The Filibuster?

What does that do? He might as well kick Bo the dog out of the White House for that matter.

[Popular Front]

20. It shows that he means business

Or else he can kiss his poll numbers goodbye.

[Yavin4]

22. Why Would Lieberman et al Be Swayed...

if Obama fired Geithner or Rahm? Explain. How would that make them change their vote?

[KoKo]

17. I'd like to know what YOU THINK he should do so I understand where you are coming from before

I post something. Can you do that?

[Yavin4]

21. I Really Cannot Think of Anything Else That He Could Do

Bottom line is that there are career senators in that congress who will be in that chamber long after Obama is gone. Moving them off of a potential filibuster is going to take considerable compromise. IOW, if you want any reform at all, you're going to have to take a very watered down bill and fight another day to make it better with the hope that we can elect more progressive senators to congress.

[KoKo]

100. I hear 'ya..but how much farther are our Dems going to push the "carrot treat" forward

for us? It seems we are told to keep electing more donkeys while they move the carrot treat farther and farther out. Seems like a game at this poing.

[Clio the Leo]

19. Hop into a phone booth, put on his tights and get ON IT!

Ya know!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kVFdAJRVm94

"Just snap his fingers and fix the USA!"

[uponit7771]

25. Punch them in their damn mouths

[Yavin4]

28. That's Illegal and an Impeachable Offense

And it still would not get them to not filibuster.

[uponit7771]

30. but it would make people feel good though

[Yavin4]

32. Punching Lieberman In The Face Is Not Going to Stop Him

From filibustering.

[treestar]

68. Nah, they'd still find something wrong with it

If obama punched them out, went on Teevee and took LIEberman's chair away and drew caricatures of LIEberman and made fun of him (and his wife) and told LIEberman Connecticut would get no more federal funds (he can do this on his own, and he can also betray the voters of Conn. who voted for them, after all that would make the progressives feel better and they'd vote for him - oh, but wait, they won't . . . ).

If Obama did all that, the posts on DU would stay the same. It would not be enough.

[quakerboy]

27. Squelch their careers.

Does he lead the party? Can he influence whether the national party supports them in their upcoming re-election bids?

I rather suspect that he has some substantial pull within the DNC, and even with the DCCC and the DSCC. If that is true, he can effect whether they receive money/support from the national party. I am 100% sure that he could at the least have a cooling effect on how much support they receive from the national party. I know for a fact that he can make promises to either show up to support people in their re-election bids, or to show up to support their primary challengers and stay home or disavow in the general.

He also has a veto pen. He can say what does not meet the bar for his signature. He can also make it clear that he will veto things that unfairly benefit the states of senators who go against him.

Some politicians are safe, presidential and national support or not. Many are less safe. I do not know about Lieberman, but it is my understanding that the "others" you mention are the most tenuously held positions. In re-election terms, they are the weakest, not the strongest. And Obama can bring at the least his own personal authority and coat tails to bear for or against them. And I would argue it is reasonable to believe he could also bring the power of the national party apparatus to bear for or against them.

[Yavin4]

29. These folks are politicians as well

The one thing they know how to do really, really well is get elected. They won in states that Obama lost to McCain. States like Ark, LA, and Neb. They have no fear of him.

[quakerboy]

36. I think that is a naive statement

They won with the support of the national party. Who is the most visible face of the national party? It is my understanding that most of them are really hurting in the polling so far. Grassroots liberal groups are already on the warpath, and with not much encouragement would remove their support on the left. The president can damage their support in the middle. That only leaves the right, and the right generally prefers to bring in its own ideologically pure nutjobs.

[Yavin4]

38. Again, Nelson won in a state that Obama lost

What damage can Obama do to him?

[quakerboy]

39. Obama Won 47% of the state

and one out of the three electoral votes.

Overall in the state, Obama Got 333,319 votes to McCains 452,979 . Ben Nelson got 377,907 2 years before that. His opponent got only 213,054.

Notice anything? Obama got a very similar amount to what Nelson got. The big variance looks to be in how many Republicans showed up, not in the Democrats support. In 06, Republicans were DOA and Dems had a full head of steam. What happens if in 2012 reverse is true, when Republicans have a full head of angry "enough of this shit" steam, and the national democratic party chooses to put its resources towards other areas than Nebraska? What happens if the president shows up and supports a primary challenger who tears Nelson a new one with his democratic support?

You can argue whether it is worth the likely loss of having a Democratic Caucusing senator from the state of Nebraska. But arguing that it cannot be done is not credible.

[Yavin4]

41. What I Am Arguing Is That Threatening Nelson Won't Sway Him

Even if Obama threatens him with everything, Nelson still won't budge from his position. You have this belief that Obama can somehow move Nelson which just is not true.

[quakerboy]

44. I answered your question

You don't like my answer, but I answered it. You havnt given any reasons that it is incorrect. The only one that I can see would be to arguing that Nelson has absolutely no interest in being re-elected, but that seems unlikely.

[Yavin4]

45. No, You Did Not Answer The Question

You failed to provide one clear thing that Obama could use that would get the intransigent senators to change their vote. Everything that you proposed would not work. It just would not.

[quakerboy]

47. Just say no. No reasoning, just "NO".

I am sorry, but that's not adequate reasoning anywhere except the Republican caucus.

[Yavin4]

33. I'm Still Waiting for My Answer

I still have not gotten it yet.

[Beetwasher]

81. Don't Hold Your Breath, Reality Is No Salve For Bitterness

People just want to scapegoat Obama.

[uponit7771]

34. Other than put people on blast there's NOTHING he can do. He's not a dictator, he can only preasure

...Reid at this point for reconciliation.

[Yavin4]

37. Thank You.

You made my point.

[Tom Rinaldo]

42. My answer is here...

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=433x60002

[Yavin4]

46. That's An Answer for Harry Reid

Not Obama.

[Tom Rinaldo]

86. No it's an answer for the Democratic Party. And Obama is the leader of the Democratic Party

Reid is the one tasked with the means to implement that decision, but he does not operate as a totally independent free agent - he is part of the Democratic leadership and so is Obama. They form a team. Ask them and they will tell you that themselves.

[Honeycombe8]

49. Drop the health care reform attempts. They have failed. Move on to something...

they can actually do something about. Global warming, jobs, the economy. The Dems have fought the health care war and have lost.

[TheKentuckian]

95. What would lead you to think that we won't have eerily similar problems

with any and every initiative?

Maybe the players change a little depending on the area in question like Rockefeller being a stalwart on health care but an expected roadblock to any substantive energy reform. More or less you can count on obstruction and some asshole hijacking any effort. At this point, I'm fairly certain that there isn't a single thing we can tackle that won't end up something wholly different than we'd like to see.

Maybe we could eek out some kind of halfway effective jobs program and I'm certain we could do a bi-partisan fucking up of public education but you have to about bet the farm that energy, environment, the needed levels of financial reform, and campaign reform will all be compromised into somewhere between minimal results and possibly making things worse just like health care/insurance reform.

I'm pretty much now just in a "less bad" holding pattern because I can't count enough votes to expect comprehensive solutions. I think we all have been expecting more than reality allows.
A (D) by your name does not mean you are a liberal and our problems are so large and dug in that we require liberal solutions not conservative ducttape rigging or centrist patchwork answers. With the bunch we have in place we can't even get close to moderate fixes that at least would attempt to bring some semblance of restoring order to the status quo like fair trade, the public option, cap and trade, and common sense regulation much less anything like wholesale reforms to new ways of functioning.

We need 5-10 more liberals/strongly left leaning moderates in the Senate (and probably more work than we'd like to admit needs doing in the House) just to really modify things and real paradigm shifts probably jump that number around 25. It wouldn't hurt to shrink the Confederates down to a 30ish or lower level either because as is they are always a single vote away from being a gremlin in the works and you can bet your ass they'll generally be able to find at least one on anything major.

Sixty is no better than 51 if you have no way to keep assholes in line on procedure, which we don't. Plus, we have drastically overrated the make up of the caucus since we don't even have anywhere near 50 to do what we actually believe needs to be done in any given area. Fifty is our number in the Senate just to make serious adjustments and that likely depends on what is being tackled, we may not really have that on a thing or two.

Our hand is more or less a pair of Jacks not the full house that people tend to pretend. Our 60 is more of a stop/slow the digging sort than a climb out of the hole coalition. I think its time to admit this to ourselves so that we can work from where we are rather than where we think we should be because that is just pretending and wishing big wishes.

[lamp_shade]

50. K&R

[jgraz]

51. Well, for starters, Obama could have refrained from campaigning for Lieberman's worthless ass.

Just a suggestion...

[Beetwasher]

82. Lieberman Would Still Be A Senator And Still Be Obstructing

Wouldn't have changed a damn thing.

[muriel_volestrangler]

53. Attack Republicans and Lieberman as wanting insurance profits over people's lives

Make them afraid of losing their next election. Say that the Democrats had an electoral mandate for the public option - it was the 1st bullet point in the 2008 Democratic platform, and it's right there in Obama's manifesto too. Say, loudly and again and again, that the people voted for, and want, a public option, and a minority of self-interested and greedy senators are willing to let people die just to shore up insurance company profits. Get someone to call Lieberman a killer.

Attack.

And, behind the scenes, remind any waivering Democratic senators that they'll look pretty damn stupid supporting the Republicans against the expressed will of the people, and they'll get shafted in their next primary if they don't shape up and start behaving like a member of the party.

[uponit7771]

66. K, people...THEY DON'T CARE ABOUT THE ATTACKS! They're NOT up for reelection and they do NOT get ...

...their money from Joe Blow American

[muriel_volestrangler]

84. Well, there's Vitter up for re-election in 2010

he may need to save his seat somehow. Even if others aren't up for reelection until 2012, let them know this will never be forgotten.

[treestar]

73. This is the closest I've seen to a real answer

Attacking insurance companies does work. They are faceless and only their employees will resent it.

I would look at the electorate of Conn. too. They were very pro-Obama and elected LIEberman before Obama. They might take obama's side of LIEberman's.

[backscatter712]

54. I'd suggest waterboarding.

Give Kapo Joe a drink...

[crappyjazz]

57. Unfortunately, you pose a question based on an assumption.

The assumption that Obama actually wants to stop the "filibuster" and get health reform passed that benefits Americans and not Corporations.

[uponit7771]

59. I'll take Obama at his word, you can call him a liar like the teabaggers are doing

[crappyjazz]

96. Feel free to, many do take politicians at their word.

I don't. And if you wonder if the typical retort you used hurt my feelings or enraged me, it didn't, mostly because it doesn't make sense.

[Moochy]

91. exactly Lieberman is the "bad cop" or the "scapegoat"

depending on your world view.

[treestar]

60. He should twist LIEbermans' arm, literally

Tell LIEberman to meet him outside for an ass-kicking.

That's what LBJ would have done, dammit!

He should use the bully pulpit. Oh wait. That's just speaking. Speaking does not get us anywhere.

He should LEAD, dammit! Tie LIEberman to a rope and then pull the rope in the LEAD!!!!! He should put LIEberman on a leash and LEAD him!

[uponit7771]

64. Feels good to read it but Lieberman still wouldn't change his vote....

[goclark]

92. "Lil Joey is not going to change his vote folks

This is the most attention he has had in a very long time.

I am enjoying this discussion however because I am learning - that is so refreshing because that has not happened at DU in a long time. No name calling, only "Informed Discussion.."

Now back to "Lil Joey ~ he feels like he is Superman now and he is the STAR of the hour for M$M.

The only thing that will work is educating the people about his terrible evil and make him the devil that he is. That is IF the M$M allows that to be done.

How many minutes do we have until the vote is taken ?

I may be wrong but I say PASS the Bill with as many positive changes as we can make at the last minute and then have a full press campaign to tell America how "Lil Joey and the Rethugs messed it up.

Some are still blaming Harry and Obama for it ~ that is way to late in the game.

Have you noticed that the Rethugs rarely complain about one of their own,that's why they have gotten the upper hand in this and many other issues.


:dilemma:

[asdjrocky]

65. 51 votes. nt

[uponit7771]

67. Obama can not force Reid by law or force to force cost controls via reconciliation...

...I wish he could because this would be over before Christmas if that was so.

[asdjrocky]

74. But he can force him to cave to Lieberman.

Sorry, my head is spinning.

[uponit7771]

75. Link and quote? TIA

[asdjrocky]

79. I don't play that game.

It's been reported by several sources. If you're not up to date, don't blame me.

[uponit7771]

85. Thought so, you can only find "sources"....Come on people, lets deal in facts not in "sources"

[Efilroft Sul]

70. The video link to the Young Turks' rant on the front page has some ideas.

n/t

[uponit7771]

71. Do any of those FORCE the hands of the opposing dems?! Again, speach's threats demonizing hasn't....

...worked why keep beating our heads against the wall.

Lieberman is a red herring, Reid can pass cost controls via reconciliation and this will be all over before news years

[Efilroft Sul]

76. The reconciliation tactic is exactly what the TYT video urges.

This issue has been so mishandled by the Democrats in Congress and in the White House.

[uponit7771]

77. Again, the White House can NOT FORCE.....FORCE Reid into reconciliation no matter how...

...it's been handled.

We need reconciliation for the cost controls and we'd be done, Obama can't MAKE Reid do such...

[Efilroft Sul]

83. True, but the White House and Reid can strategize together. If they had the will.

If Obama's the chessmaster like people claim he is, then he and Reid should have a strategy in place where reconciliation is the card to be played. If no such plan is in place, then the leadership of the Democratic Party is beyond pathetic.

[uponit7771]

87. Reid "I don't work for Obama" (link)....

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/01/07/harry-reid-i-dont-work-fo_n_155838.html

This could be over by New Years if they force price controls via reconciliation but that would take Reid and Reid is not playing ball right now.

[Efilroft Sul]

94. And I found a link for you, FWIW.

I believe it's the story with the "sources" that you've questioned in several posts on DU.

White House to Harry Reid: Cut Deal with Joe Lieberman —
http://www.politico.com/news/stories/1209/30572.html

Some back and forth going on about who's cajoling whom and whether or not the White House is pressuring Reid to cut a deal with Lieberman.

Joy to the world.

[JamesA1102]

78. Pics of Lieberman in bed with Tiger Woods LOL

[uponit7771]

80. lofl!!!

[depakid]

88. Oh poor weak and powerless Obama

"Leader" of the Western world- in the most powerful office, and can't manage to get a responsible bill through the Senate.

[uponit7771]

89. Leader = dictator?!

[freddie mertz]

93. Hate to say it, but it is probably too late.

He gave it up in August so far as I am concerned, with the "sliver" speech.

This has been a long time coming, and the ditch is dug.

[TheKentuckian]

97. A little "clandestine action" might be the best option

Hey, in this economy any one of us can be forced into early retirement, even Senators.

Other than that there are severe limits on the effectiveness of our sticks and apparently corporate carrots are more tasty.

[Hell Hath No Fury]

98. Sic Rahm on them.

He is a Chicago knee-capper. He made most of the phoney Dems and can threaten to kill their careers, cut off funding, expose their secrets, whatever unless they vote on the bill the right way.

Problem is, Rahm is huge part of the problem right now, so he cannot be part of the solution unless O were to make it so.

And it looks like O does not want to make it so.