Today’s Q’s for O’s WH – 9/8/2009
EmailTAPPER: What's the president's message for liberals or progressives who feel that a health care reform plan without a public option is — is non-negotiable, as he's been told, that it must have a public option or they will not vote for it?
GIBBS: Well, I don't want to get ahead — too far ahead of the president, in terms of the speech, or drawing lines. I think I would reiterate what a number of us said over the weekend, and that is that the president continues to believe that increasing choice and competition through additional options for people to get health insurance is tremendously important. I think what you'll hear the president talk about, again, is, sort of, what we talked about over the weekend, understanding what the public option is and what the public option isn't — and I tried to do this some as well.
For the vast majority of Americans that get their insurance primarily through their employer or if they're on Medicare, Medicaid, or receive their health care through the V.A., the public option is not going to impact your health care What the public option will do is provide that additional choice and competition for people, primarily those in the private, individual insurance market or in the small group or small-business insurance market. The story I used over the weekend was, a friend of mine in Alabama who started a small business in January — one of the first thing that he had to do was find insurance for his family. He went into the individual — private insurance market, a market in Alabama that's comprised — 89 percent of the market is comprised of one company, Blue Cross, Blue Shield. He likes his insurance, and his family's healthy and he was lucky enough to get it. Other small-business owners that he's talked to haven't been as fortunate. They were denied coverage or had trouble finding something that covered either their family or — or their employees. And he understands that if his coverage for — if he loses coverage somehow, his family gets sick, he'd be in a real tough spot. So I think the president will discuss both what the public option isn't and what the public option is in terms of being choice and competition.
TAPPER: But if he supports it, why won't he draw a line in the sand over it? And…
(CROSSTALK)
GIBBS: Well, I don't want to get ahead of where the president — there will be an extensive conversation about this tomorrow.
TAPPER: Well, OK. One other question, then. You talked about all the things the president is going to do in the speech. And with the exception of the last one — how we move forward from here — none of them are new. He's been making the argument about security and stability for health care reform — what it means to people who have insurance, what it means to people who don't have insurance, what's not in the bill. With the exception of how we move forward, we've heard this all before. The American people have heard this all before.
GIBBS: No, I don't — I don't — I don't know that — I don't know that they've heard it in — in as big a forum, as clearly, directly from the president as they will tomorrow night.
(LATER)
TAPPER: How important is public opinion to the president's decision-making, when it comes to the war in Afghanistan?
GIBBS: Well, obviously I think he will — I think he will take into account the degree to which additional resources can be borne, not just by the public but also by those who are providing the resources. Obviously, there's been a tremendous strain on our military forces over the past several years. That will be taken into account. I think he'll take into account assessments by commanders on the ground in the region, as well as those at the Pentagon. So I think a number of factors will go into his assessment on where we are in Afghanistan and what our way forward is.
-jpt
Biden Reflects on Grief, Suicidal Thoughts 
Is Congress Sounding Dumber?
Meet the new health insurance speech. Same as the old health insurance speech.
Posted by: Foghorn Leghorn | September 8, 2009, 3:38 pm 3:38 pm
I am going to wait and see what is said tomorrow that we haven’t heard before. Not sure what took so long to articulate specifics. If you are going to have a road-show to Montana, Colorado, etc… to make speeches dedicated to health care, then why didn’t you spell out any specifics then?
It wasn’t that long ago that Obama said we need this done by August 1. now it is September and he is just now getting serious?
Posted by: Jim | September 8, 2009, 3:44 pm 3:44 pm
Hey Jake you still have your teeth? well asking gibbs a question, that he will answer, is like pulling your teeth..
Posted by: He said What? | September 8, 2009, 3:44 pm 3:44 pm
-It wasn’t that long ago that Obama said we need this done by August 1. now it is September and he is just now getting serious?-
The standard for time on this issue is about how long it takes to choose a pet dog.
Posted by: Woof | September 8, 2009, 3:46 pm 3:46 pm
Meet the new health insurance speech. Same as the old health insurance speech.
that’s because the liers and haters get all the MSM and cable coverage.
We held a pro insurance reform rally here in Seattle with well over 3000 people and there was absolutely no media coverage.
Posted by: getting louder | September 8, 2009, 3:47 pm 3:47 pm
“And with the exception of the last one — how we move forward from here — none of them are new.”
Yes, but that last one, how we move forward, could be a big deal. So far, Obama has let health care languish in the Congressional committees meat grinder since March.
If Obama chooses to champion a single, composite bill and pushes it hard, that is a big change. No one can seriously argue that health care is being rushed in any way at this point, but it is VERY clear that letting lies and innuendo define “Obamacare” is a bad strategy. Regardless of the Republican talking points, Obama has never put out there what his full health care vision is, and that is a problem.
We’ll see tonight (personally, I find his talking style boring and prefer reading the transcripts).
Posted by: jhw539 | September 8, 2009, 3:48 pm 3:48 pm
“It wasn’t that long ago that Obama said we need this done by August 1. now it is September and he is just now getting serious?”
Jim | Sep 8, 2009 3:44:20 PM
Just now getting serious? His strategy has been poor (leaning on the bipartisan Congressional committees to draw out bipartisan ideas and comment), but it takes some serious imagination to think he hasn’t been seriously pursuing it.
Posted by: jhw539 | September 8, 2009, 3:52 pm 3:52 pm
put it to a vote wednesday..see what happens…those Old Blue dogs will NOT vote for it, they want to keep their seats.
Posted by: The tax man cometh | September 8, 2009, 3:52 pm 3:52 pm
Why were all the meetings behind closed doors today?
Didn’t candidate Obama promise the health care debates would be on C-SPAN?
Silly me–that was candidate Obama.
Posted by: millie | September 8, 2009, 3:59 pm 3:59 pm
WHO SET UP GOVERNMENT ‘PROPAGANDA’ CONFERENCE CALL? Newly Revealed White House, NEA Audio Contradict…ANOTHER massive scandal brewing in the White House.. WILL ABC, NBC, CBS air this one?
G Will ask “how many laws were broken” follow this on Fox news and the Drudgereport to learn the truth……now don’t play china there abc
Posted by: The tax man cometh | September 8, 2009, 4:00 pm 4:00 pm
As you said, we seem to have heard it all….so will Wednesday night’s speech have some new substance? New proposals? Or will it just be lipstick on a pig?
Posted by: John L. | September 8, 2009, 4:00 pm 4:00 pm
Somehow I doubt Obama will tell the public tomorrow night that anyone not buying health care may be fined $3500.
The MSM won’t report it.
So no one will know unless they listen to Fox or read blogs.
MSM is pitiful.
Posted by: bailey | September 8, 2009, 4:02 pm 4:02 pm
Isn’t Wednesday’s speech going to put a damper on the weekly White House cocktail party?
Posted by: tjp612 | September 8, 2009, 4:16 pm 4:16 pm
“Somehow I doubt Obama will tell the public tomorrow night that anyone not buying health care may be fined $3500.
The MSM won’t report it.”
bailey | Sep 8, 2009 4:02:07 PM
So now Baucus’s proposal – which is being debated now – is really Obama’s?
Posted by: jhw539 | September 8, 2009, 4:23 pm 4:23 pm
The possible fine for no health insurance is up to $3800 for families making less than $66K.
Sorry for my mistake.
Posted by: bailey | September 8, 2009, 4:25 pm 4:25 pm
“WHO SET UP GOVERNMENT ‘PROPAGANDA’ CONFERENCE CALL? Newly Revealed White House, NEA Audio Contradict…ANOTHER massive scandal brewing in the White House..
…now don’t play china there abc”
The tax man cometh | Sep 8, 2009 4:00:00 PM
Is this the internet wingnut version of speaking in tongues? Seriously, if that is what the Drudge Report does to your mind I’m keeping well away.
Posted by: jhw539 | September 8, 2009, 4:26 pm 4:26 pm
I hope Obama has a chip on his shoulder Wednesday night.
It’s always fun to watch him get all cocky and defensive.
The mocking and the taunting should go over well with most Americans.
Still fighting like a 4th grader like he did while campaigning. We may even hear “lipstick on a pig” if Obama dares to go off TOTUS.
Posted by: tyler | September 8, 2009, 4:31 pm 4:31 pm
-The possible fine for no health insurance is up to $3800 for families making less than $66K.-
Taxing people beyond what they already pay in federal taxes. Wonderful. So much for taxing the rich! Remind me again how gov’t healthcare is going to save money. Will it work like the USPS? Maybe Tim Geithner and Rep. Rangel could help with this. Those 2 are tax experts.
Posted by: Filth | September 8, 2009, 4:31 pm 4:31 pm
Seriously, if that is what the Drudge Report does to your mind I’m keeping well away.
Posted by: jhw539 |
Seems like, in fairness, that you should disclose some of the sites that you spend time on.
Posted by: Foghorn Leghorn | September 8, 2009, 4:32 pm 4:32 pm
“Seems like, in fairness, that you should disclose some of the sites that you spend time on.”
Foghorn Leghorn | Sep 8, 2009 4:32:00 PM
In fairness? Why, have I ever made syntactically vacant posts and then flogged a website? And it’s not like posts with lists of websites are allowed (reasonably so to control spam).
Posted by: jhw539 | September 8, 2009, 4:36 pm 4:36 pm
“We may even hear “lipstick on a pig” if Obama dares to go off TOTUS.”
_________________________________________
Wow, you have to search back that far to come up with even that weak example? You’re grasping . . .
Posted by: julieterra | September 8, 2009, 4:39 pm 4:39 pm
Paging Van Jones..Paging Van Jones..has anyone seen this guy?
Posted by: The tax man cometh | September 8, 2009, 4:42 pm 4:42 pm
“Seems like, in fairness, that you should disclose some of the sites that you spend time on.”
Foghorn – Wouldn’t take much imagination: HuffPo, D-Kos, OFA, Perez Hilton, etc.
Posted by: tjp612 | September 8, 2009, 4:49 pm 4:49 pm
The simple truth is what hurts this administration the most. People do not want government telling them what to do. It’s not what this country was founded on, and it’s not what will take this country forward. We also do not like the wool pulled over our eyes. His whole transparency promise was nothing more than that. Wool.
The smart-ass frat boy attitude of his administration is growing stale very fast. Nobody wants to be brushed off when they have questions that are important to them, but that’s exactly what’s been happening. No wonder the folks at town halls are screaming. The worst thing for most people is not being acknowledged and not being answered.
Robert Gibbs is a puppet. That’s all he will ever be. If any one person should be thankful for government, it’s him. God knows he couldn’t do what he does anywhere else. Well, except maybe at a rodeo keeping the bulls distracted.
Posted by: Shoe | September 8, 2009, 4:49 pm 4:49 pm
-Paging Van Jones..Paging Van Jones..has anyone seen this guy?-
He’s working on the solar panels!
Posted by: Capt. Trade | September 8, 2009, 4:51 pm 4:51 pm
“The simple truth is what hurts this administration the most.”
__________________________________
No, what’s hurting this administration most is exactly the same as what is hurting the country the most.
The last Republican administration left the national debt spiralling upward, the deficit ballooning, the country engaged in 2 wars, the country disgraced internationlly, the economy in free-fall collapse, 700,000 people losing their jobs per month . . . and so on.
Quit trying to sweep that under the rug, and pretend you’re all high and mighty about ‘truth’. We all saw the ‘truth’ from the last administration.
We won’t forget.
Posted by: julieterra | September 8, 2009, 4:58 pm 4:58 pm
“Foghorn – Wouldn’t take much imagination: HuffPo, D-Kos, OFA, Perez Hilton, etc.”
tjp612 | Sep 8, 2009 4:49:14 PM
Strawman away. The only cite on that list I’ve hit in the last year (possibly ever) would be the HuffPo, and then only when Digg points to it (about as often as Fox). Actually, Digg may have sent me tripping over a D-Kos link too, but none stick in my memory – I prefer to drill down to primary sources pretty quickly and don’t spend long on babble sites.
Posted by: jhw539 | September 8, 2009, 5:15 pm 5:15 pm
“Last I checked the national debt is spiraling upwards at a faster rate, the deficit has since quadrupled, we’re still in 2 wars, the international apology tour didn’t fix anything, the economy is still doing terrible and people are still losing their jobs.”
_____________________________________
Keep trying to sweep the Bush mess under the rug OH – it’s a pathetic and lame tactic.
Everybody knows Bush left the country in a complete mess. Everybody knows it will take time to dig out of that mess.
Well, except for people like you who think it’s of no consequence when someone like Bush leaves the national debt spiralling upward, the deficit ballooning, the country engaged in 2 wars, the country disgraced internationlly, the economy in free-fall collapse, 700,000 people losing their jobs per month . . . and so on.
This isn’t a board game OH, where the board can just be cleaned off and started fresh – Bush screwed things up badly. It will take a long time to recover from that mess.
Posted by: julieterra | September 8, 2009, 5:20 pm 5:20 pm
Concerned in OH
4 legs good, 2 legs bad!
Posted by: Goldman Rulz | September 8, 2009, 5:20 pm 5:20 pm
“Everybody knows it will take time to dig out of that mess.”
So we had all this debt and we need lots more? We had war and we need more? We had bailouts for Wall St. and we need more?
Posted by: Shovel | September 8, 2009, 5:25 pm 5:25 pm
“Everybody knows Bush left the country in a complete mess.”
Everybody knows Obama is making the situation EXPONENTIALLY WORSE!
Obama might be the worst president ever…
Posted by: tjp612 | September 8, 2009, 5:26 pm 5:26 pm
“Strawman away….”
Great response. Fantastic.
Posted by: tjp612 | September 8, 2009, 5:31 pm 5:31 pm
Posted by: julieterra | Sep 8, 2009 5:30:33 PM
Bush = Bad
Obama = WORSE
Posted by: tjp612 | September 8, 2009, 5:32 pm 5:32 pm
-This isn’t a board game, where the board can just be cleaned off and started fresh – Bush screwed things up badly. It will take a long time to recover from that mess.
Uh julie, baby, Barry is doing exactly what Bush did to get us into this mess but more of it. Not sure how that helps. When you’re in a hole, you stop digging, right? If you’re in debt, you stop spending, right? You can balance a checkbook, right? Are the guys at Goldman hurting that bad? I’m not sure how giving Wall St. more money will improve things. Maybe you could tell me how. How will increasing debt help the US?
Posted by: Shovel | September 8, 2009, 5:38 pm 5:38 pm
Shovel -
You’re naive. You know exactly the pitiful state Bush left this country. You know that every major western industrial country put in place stimulus programs.
You evidently have not researched the Recovery and Reinvestment plan. Many of those funds were tax credits. Many of those fund were to shore up state and local budgets to help prevent as many layoffs as possible of police, firefighters, health workers and teachers.
Posted by: julieterra | September 8, 2009, 5:48 pm 5:48 pm
julieterra,
If you were in debt, would you keep spending money?
Posted by: Shovel | September 8, 2009, 5:52 pm 5:52 pm
julieterra, you seem to already have forgotten. The Bush administration started spiraling AFTER the Dems took the majority in the house and Senate. The President can’t do too much without backing from them. HE is the one who warned about Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, and Congress told him it was under control. I am not saying I agree with everything he did, but Obama (yes, he has the Super Majority)is making it four times worse. The unemployement was not this bad when Bush was in the Whitehouse. The Chinese are now saying they are very worried about how much money we are printing. He has taken over GM, Chrysler, and for all intents and purposes, AIG. Now he wants healthcare and cap and trade??? He needs to prove to the American people that he can run SOMETHING right! Medicare, Social Security, and the Post Office are all going bankrupt. Begin by fixing those. Let the American people do what they do best. Work to make their lives better. People are afraid to spend money because they don’t know what is coming next out of this regime. The fact that they degrade anyone who has the gall to question them is disgusting. No President has ever done this. He is supposed to be protecting us, not attacking! Forgive me if I am wrong, but you have been on here so much as well as another topic that I looked at earlier, it seems to me that you may be working in the White House.
Posted by: wheresmymoney | September 8, 2009, 6:01 pm 6:01 pm
Date: Monday, July 1 2002
President Bush announced an Administration effort to increase home ownership rates among African Americans and Hispanics by 5.5 million by 2010.
The plan would provide down payment assistance to 40,000 minority homebuyers each year.
Bush’s plan would be closely tied to some $440 million in minority loan programs offered by Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. President Bush commended Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac’s efforts.
________________________________
Yeah, it was all the Democrats fault people started defaulting on their mortgages and the housing market collapsed and the mortgage companies, and so on.
Posted by: julieterra | September 8, 2009, 6:05 pm 6:05 pm
GIBBS: No, I don’t — I don’t — I don’t know that — I don’t know that they’ve heard it in — in as big a forum, as clearly, directly from the president as they will tomorrow night.
——————–
We have been hearing from congress and we don’t like what we hear. How will obama speaking from congress make it an better in “BIGGER FORUM”?
Posted by: DJ | September 8, 2009, 6:06 pm 6:06 pm
Once again you skirt the facts, Julie. It WAS BUSH who warned that Fannie and Freddie were cooking their books. Are you in FAVOR of the Afganistan war?? No comment on Medicare, Post Office, and Social Security?
Posted by: wheresmymoney | September 8, 2009, 6:24 pm 6:24 pm
This is exactly the right message from Gibbs. It is clear that the large corporations do not want any competition from small, local businesses and are protecting their turf by siding against health care.
They know that as soon as affordable insurance is offered on the individual market, thousands of bright, innovative people will be able to quit their hack jobs and start their own business.
The corporate oligarchs are scared to death of this.
Posted by: Flash Override | September 8, 2009, 6:49 pm 6:49 pm
Bob the Blogger answers Tapper.
TAPPER: What’s the president’s message for liberals or progressives who feel that a health care reform plan without a public option is — is non-negotiable, as he’s been told, that it must have a public option or they will not vote for it?
Bob the Blogger: Public option is want the majority of Americans want Jake. How much money are the special interests pouring into stopping Public Option 80-100 million?
I’m only going to answer the first question by Tapper. I enjoy watching Gibbs doing the Tango with Tapper on Q’s for O’s WH :-D Gibbs handled the other Tapper questions well.
Posted by: Bob the Blogger | September 8, 2009, 11:08 pm 11:08 pm
Jake: I wonder why commentators and reporters like yourself have focused so much on our president who had to have his speech to the children proofed before he gave it to them…the president of the United States…elected…and yet, Limbaugh and Hannity can say all the venumos lies and mis-quotes and nothing is said or done about it. Limbaugh said last week that the president is trying to make Nazi soldiers our of our children and no one finds that offensive or newsworthy. No reported goes after him? And Hannity calls the president a socialist communist and no one asks for proof or stands up to him,and Beck calls our president a racist and no one even challenges him. What is going on here? I find this amazing that the president has to watch what he says and yet these people can say and lie and no one stands up to them. Forget freedom of speech…they are bending the minds of children and adults alike and no one cares what they are saying is not factual. Just opinions…and no one has to approve it? what kind of a society are we having when the president has to be monitored and these jerks can say anything they want. Children listen to these shows also. How come none of your commentators or reporters even dare to look into this. What kind of a society have we become? There is a story here and no one cares? I never approved of limiting talk show hosts until recently when they started to lie and give impressions to the people that were personal opinions with no one to rebut it. If they have three hours to demean the president, I feel someone else should have the same opportunity to defend the people they are bashing. It only takes one brave reporter to go after them and let’s see where it goes. I hope you would be that reporter as you sure go after Obama on anything he says. Think about it….makes me think of the fairness of reporting.
Posted by: talmag | September 9, 2009, 10:26 am 10:26 am
Is there a proper blessing for the Tsar?
A blessing for the Tsar? Of course. May God bless and keep the Tsar….far away from us!
—Rep. Patrick McHenry (R-N.C.) on Wednesday called for President Obama’s “czars,” or appointed high-level advisers, to testify before Congress about their “authority and responsibilities” in the executive branch.
The president’s “czars” have become a point of controversy among his opponents because they DO NOT HAVE TO BE CONFIRMED by the Senate as cabinet-level officials do.
McHenry wrote to committee chairman Edolphus Towns (D-N.Y.) and ranking member Darrell Issa (R-Calif.) asking the appointed officials to testify.
“If the czars have high-level, decision-making authority as their titles would indicate, then it is my concern that their appointment without Senate approval represents a CIRCUMVENTION of our Constitutionally-mandated confirmation process,” McHenry, who is a member of the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee, said in his letter.—
Posted by: Dancing with the Czars | September 9, 2009, 12:33 pm 12:33 pm
talmag – where are you getting your information from. Or, do you just make things up? Limbaugh was ON VACATION all last week, so he didn’t speak on Obama’s message to the school children. When you say ABC “goes after” anything Obama says, can you be specific? They have done nothing but fawn over everything he says and does. In response to your free speech, Talk shows are exactly that, talk shows. Are your children listening to them? I thought not. You always have the power to turn the channel. Our children did not have that option when the President was shown in the classroom. Liberals are more than welcome to have their own talk shows. There is only one problem. Noone listens to them, so they go off the air.
Posted by: wheresmymoney | September 9, 2009, 6:32 pm 6:32 pm