Politico author, misinformed or lying (health care summit)

[thesquanderer]

At Politco, today, Carrie Budoff Brown has written a featured article, titled "The Big Bipartisan Lie." It begins:

If President Barack Obama really wanted to show he’s serious about winning over Republicans on health care reform, he could offer up some key concessions at Thursday’s summit, like caps on malpractice awards or allowing insurers to sell across state lines.

These concessions have already been made! The senate and house plans already included the ability for insurers to sell across state lines, and Obama has already said he's willing to consider tort reform in the context of getting a passable bill.

Both the Senate and House bills included the provision for selling across state lines, despite the fact that Obama specifically argued against in when McCain supported it in one of their debates.

More recently, when Obama addressed the Republicans in Baltimore, he said, "from the start, I sought out and supported ideas from Republicans. I even talked about an issue that has been a holy grail for a lot of you, which was tort reform, and said that I'd be willing to work together as part of a comprehensive package to deal with it. I just didn't get a lot of nibbles."

The Democrats have made *exactly* the concessions that the author of this piece says they haven't. Her analysis is either uninformed or disingenuous.

And of course this doesn't even count the concessions made from the outset, like refusing to fight for a public option.

But that's not all. Besides suggesting that Democrats need to do what they have already done in order to show their bipartisanship, what is her suggestion for what the Republicans should do to show theirs?

if Republicans wanted to reciprocate, they could at least acknowledge the congressional scorekeepers are right – the Democratic plans cut the deficit in the long term and rein in health care costs.

That's right. In order to be bipartisan, she suggests, Democrats must change positions, while Republicans merely have to agree to stop lying about the Democrats.

Since when has telling the truth been a concession?

[Vinnie From Indy]

1. A POLITICO writer offering more biased, partisan nonsense

I am hardly shocked.

If anyone EVER wanted proof that Politico.com is merely another propaganda launch platform for the right wing, they need need look no further than when GW "Smirky" Bush went to great lengths to mention the web site at one of his press conferences within days of their going online.

[thesquanderer]

2. news to me

I didn't know about that Bush "endorsement" of sorts. Sounds like Politico is Fox, adjusted so that the bias is less obvious!

I have to give credit to whoever came up with it though. Politico is a great name.

[Echo In Light]

3. Politico is not to be trusted. Very pro rightward-to-moderate leaning propaganda for yuppies

[thesquanderer]

4. I like that

"propaganda for yuppies" - nice description. I could see that being in their mission statement/business plan!

[Echo In Light]

6. "News" for aspiring ladder-climbing types who religiously disavow 'conspiracies' and who...

... deem factual, well sourced criticism of the phony two-party system, the corporate/state nexus and its lucrative war machine, as being "negative" since it calls into question substantial aspects of the belief system required in climbing professional ladders. It's a stereotype, but one that often sticks.

[Spazito]

5. Lying, that is what Politico does best n/t

It is a rabid right wing POS, imo.

[zbdent]

7. Politico doesn't want reality to get in the way

of the lies ...