Wars Within: Obama wants fight with GOP — but battles loom among Democrats

ABC News’ Rick Klein reports: Remind us of who the enemies are again?

The White House’s public stance is back to campaign mode — marginalizing Republicans, castigating insurance companies, offering for-us-or-against-us formulations.

But President Obama, at some point soon, is going to have to get tough (or at least get clear) with his fellow Democrats. We’re beyond any point where getting a Republican (make that two Republicans) on board for health care is a realistic goal.

The push for health care — mops and all — is entirely and exclusively about Democrats seeing past their differences to get a bill done. (Anyone other than the president able to pull that one off?)

The fissures on the Hill aren’t healing themselves. (And with Rahm’s Rule about advertising against Democrats effectively repealed — a new ad targeting Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid is up Monday — we’re moving toward open season in the ad wars.)

Until or unless the C-SPAN cameras get to roll — we’ll have to learn the parameters (and fire up the stakeholders) in other ways.

It doesn’t sound good for the public option, in the Senate bill: “There will be compromises,” Senior White House Adviser David Axelrod told ABC’s George Stephanopoulos on “This Week.”

“He is not demanding that it is in” the final legislation, Valerie Jarrett, said on “Meet the Press.” “He thinks it’s the best possible choice.”

“It’s not the defining piece of health care,” said White House Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel.

Last spring’s (and also last summer’s) headlines, fresh today: “The White House is waiting for Congress to settle on a final health care bill, even though President Barack Obama has a clear preference in favor of at least one specific — the much-debated public option, advisers said,” Steven R. Hurst reports for the AP. “Obama, however, will not demand that legislation include a government-run insurance plan intended to drive down costs through competition with private insurers.”

Plus, reports Stephanopoulos: “On the deficit, [Axelrod] signaled that President would sign $248 billion dollar ‘fix’ in Medicare doctor payments scheduled for a vote this week — even if specific ‘pay-fors’ not attached.”

Bloomberg’s Al Hunt does some handicapping: “There won’t be a full-fledged government-run program, or public option, though the measure will have a fallback safety net that will put pressure on the private health-insurance industry on premiums and coverage,” he predicts. “The odds are a measure will pass — assuming Snowe stays on board — with Christmas lights and music in the background when Obama signs it.” 

From one who knows politics: “I wish we could have a public option, but I’m also a realist,” former DNC Chairman Terry McAuliffe tells TPMDC, saying that a public option is “probably not” going to be in the final bill.

Oh, the ironies here: “For Democrats determined to get a health care bill, Sen. Roland Burris is like the house guest who couldn’t be refused, won’t soon be leaving and poses a plausible threat of ruining holiday dinner,” per the AP’s Laurie Kellman. “Suddenly, he can no longer be ignored.”

“I would not support a bill that does not have a public option,” Burris, D-Ill., tells Kellman. “That position will not change.”

New pressure from the left, on health care: With Reid, D-Nev., already on the air in his re-election bid, the Progressive Change Campaign Committee (PCCC) is going up with a new ad in Nevada, pressing for a public option with a Nevada nurse who lost her insurance: “Is Harry Reid strong enough?”

A light public schedule for the president — though his top aides on health care will be on the Hill with Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid and company.

Sounds so easy, except it couldn’t be harder: “Mr. Reid and Ms. Pelosi are at the moment working independently to merge sweeping health care bills produced by two committees in the Senate and three in the House into bills each must squeeze through the respective chambers. Then, Democrats hope, they will negotiate one final version between them before sending it to Mr. Obama’s desk,” Carl Hulse and Robert Pear write in The New York Times.

Too much sugar? “With problems for the president in Afghanistan, health care and unemployment, some critics on both the left and right are asking: Is the president essentially ‘too nice’ to make the important decisions?” per ABC’s David Kerley.

GOP strategist Kevin Madden: “The president has reached a tipping point whether deliberation is starting to look like hesitation. . . . One of the biggest risks there, the American public begins to question whether or not you have the leadership skills.”

Watching the left: “To the mad-as-hell conservatives on the right, now add a new and increasingly vocal group of critics attacking President Obama — impatient Democrats on the left,” David Saltonstall reports in the New York Daily News. “Obama’s favorable rating among Democrats in general remains a stratospheric 89%, according to a Gallup Poll released last week. But increasingly, noisy factions on the party’s most liberal flank — among them gay rights proponents, pro-choice activists and immigration reformers who Obama courted last year — are incensed that their causes have taken a backseat to the White House’s all-out push on health care reform.”

Roll Call’s Keith Koffler: “In his first nine months, Obama has followed an agenda that raised concerns among unions, Jews, gays and Latinos — groups that backed him overwhelmingly and without which he cannot be re-elected. The complaints for now are mostly muted, and any damage done can be reversed. But all have high expectations for the president, and a few — particularly labor leaders and gays — view his presidency as the first, and perhaps the last chance for some time, to achieve long-coveted goals.”

From the other side (yes, there’s still another side): “House Republicans are planning an interest-group strategy to try to stop a health care bill and will spend the next three weeks arguing that the Democrats’ measure will be a bad deal for small businesses, senior citizens, and women and children,” Kara Rowland reports in the Washington Times. “With Republican lawmakers vastly outnumbered in the chamber, party leaders say their best strategy is to sway the public against Democrats’ health care plans. The best way to do that, they say, is to synchronize their messaging to focus on specific groups that could suffer from effects of the bill.” Business scorecard: “The drug industry stands to gain in a health-care overhaul by getting tens of millions of newly insured customers, while insurance companies — especially those that cater to the individual market — look like they are in for a tougher time,” The Wall Street Journal’s Janet Adamy and Greg Hitt report.

MoveOn.org picks up the pace in blasting insurance companies, with a new print ad set to run in Wednesday’s Washington Post: “INSURANCE COMPANIES TO AMERICA: DROP DEAD.” Says the ad: “HEALTH INSURANCE COMPANIES ARE WILLING TO LET THE BODIES PILE UP, AS LONG AS THEIR PROFITS ARE SAFE.”

Intriguing strategy: “The White House and congressional Democrats are working to marginalize the Chamber of Commerce — the powerful business lobby opposed to many of President Barack Obama’s first-year priorities — by going around the group and dealing directly with the CEOs of major U.S. corporations,” Politico’s Lisa Lerer reports.

You think those folks are concerned? What about former Alaska governors who have books coming out soon?

ABC’s Teddy Davis: “Former Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin is once again weighing in on the health reform debate, this time echoing the insurance industry’s argument that the individual mandate contained in the Senate Finance bill will prove unworkable as young and healthy Americans conclude that they are better off paying a small fine than purchasing costly insurance.”

Palin, R-Alaska, in her Facebook message (by far her wonkiest to date): “Even factoring in government subsidies, the cost of purchasing a plan is much more than $750,” Palin writes. “The result: many people, especially the young and healthy, will simply not buy coverage, choosing to pay the fine instead.”

The administration’s new Sudan policy officially is being announced Monday at the State Department.

“Human rights organizations focused on curbing the genocide in Darfur reacted warily towards the Obama administration’s new stance towards the government of Sudan, to be announced on Monday by Secretary of State Hillary Clinton,” ABC’s Jake Tapper and Kirit Radia report. “The new strategy of engaging Khartoum constitutes a change from the policy held by President George W. Bush, as well as the campaign rhetoric voiced by then-candidate Obama one year ago.”

On Afghanistan — a delay that makes more sense by the day: “The White House signaled Sunday that President Obama would postpone any decision on sending more troops to Afghanistan until the disputed election there had been settled and resulted in a government that could work with the United States,” Peter Baker and Sabrina Tavernise report in The New York Times. “The signals come as Republican critics already are complaining that the president is taking too long to decide whether to send the additional 40,000 troops requested by his commander, Gen. Stanley A. McChrystal.”

Kerry diplomacy, in Afghanistan: “Senator John F. Kerry of Massachusetts held a prolonged meeting last night with President Hamid Karzai of Afghanistan and urged him to agree to a runoff vote or take other steps to end the postelection crisis that has gripped the Afghan government for the past two months,” The Boston Globe’s Farah Stockman writes.

“Kerry, chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations committee, has played a mediating role since he arrived in Kabul on Friday. . . . But it was unclear last night whether Kerry was able to persuade the Afghan leader to accept the results of an election complaints investigation, which called for a runoff election between Karzai and Abdullah, his top challenger.”

Why the new strategy has to wait, still: “It would be entirely irresponsible for the president of the United States to commit more troops to this country, when we don’t even have an election finished and know who the president is and what kind of government we’re working with,” Kerry said on CNN.

Rahm Emanuel, on CNN: “The question does not become how many troops you send, but do you have a credible Afghan partner for this process that can provide the security and the type of services that the Afghan people need.” More voices for the president to consider: “As Obama reviews U.S. strategy for the war in Afghanistan, meeting with generals, Cabinet secretaries and diplomats, he has received informal advice from those most touched by the eight- year conflict: the parents who sacrificed children, the spouses who lost their mates, and the soldiers who left behind limbs,” Bloomberg’s Hans Nichols writes.

Getting the politics: “The bonuses are offensive and to the firms that still have federal TARP money there’s some jurisdiction, the pay master of Treasury is working on trying to limit that,” Axelrod told George Stephanopoulos on “This Week.” “They ought to think through what they are doing and they ought to understand that a year ago a lot of these institutions were teetering on the brink and the United States government and taxpayers came to their defense.”

Some context: “But the administration’s tone appeared muted compared with attacks made earlier in this year, as Democrats — with an eye toward the 2010 midterm elections — seek to put a positive spin on recent economic developments,” John D. McKinnon and Naftali Bendavid report in The Wall Street Journal.

On the Hill — Countrywide pressure, as applied by Rep. Darrell Issa, R-Calif., ranking member of the House oversight committee: “If you think moderate Democrats are afraid of voting for ObamaCare, you should see how they react to a potential vote on the Countrywide Financial loan scandal,” James Freeman writes in a Wall Street Journal op-ed.

A Democrat breaks: “Both parties must decide that they can’t protect their members, no matter how powerful they are,” freshman Rep. Mike Quigley, D-Ill., tells the Journal. “Stupidity wears both hats.”

Getting in front (and worried about the stimulus jobs numbers out at the end of the month): New Recovery Act numbers Monday. “The Obama Administration today announced that preliminary indications are that state governments will credit the Recovery Act with creating and saving at least 250,000 education jobs across the country when reports filed on Recovery Act education spending to-date are posted online later this month.”

In Virginia: The Washington Post endorses Democrat Creigh Deeds for governor. “If the current campaign for governor has clarified anything, it is that state Sen. R. Creigh Deeds, the Democratic nominee, has the good sense and political courage to maintain the forward-looking policies of the past while addressing the looming challenge of fixing the state’s dangerously inadequate roads. The Republican candidate, former attorney general Robert F. McDonnell, offers something different: a blizzard of bogus, unworkable, chimerical proposals, repackaged as new ideas, that crumble on contact with reality.”

Still a chance for Deeds? “With just over two weeks left until Virginia’s gubernatorial election, Democrat Creigh Deeds is left with a narrow path to victory, one that hinges on energizing key demographic groups and the durability of the Old Dominion’s new politics,” Politico’s Jonathan Martin reports. “Virginia’s Washington, D.C. suburbs, where one-third of voters reside, have gone from being a battleground region to a Democratic bulwark in recent elections, making it dangerous to write off Deeds just yet.”

In New Jersey, The Philadelphia Inquirer endorses Sen. John Corzine, D-N.J., as does The New York Times.

How Corzine may pull it off. “On Monday Joe Biden will appear with Corzine at a noon-time rally in Edison and Barack Obama will swoop in to embrace the governor Wednesday afternoon in Hackensack,” Walter Shapiro writes for Politics Daily. “Aided by a superior Democratic get-out-the-vote drive, Corzine is now widely expected to prevail over Christie and Daggett after a campaign that embodies the sports concept of winning ugly. The post-election Obama talking points will probably stress the Democratic Party’s resilience in New Jersey. And while the president himself may deserve a sliver of the credit, the Obama campaign’s 2008 mantra of hope will have absolutely no connection with anything that will happen in the cynical precincts of New Jersey politics.”

In Pennsylvania, the mystery Senate endorser is a guy who won the primary but lost the general: From the release: “Former Democratic U.S. Senate nominee Ned Lamont will endorse Congressman Joe Sestak for the Democratic nomination to the U.S. Senate TODAY, 19 OCTOBER, outside Independence Hall in Philadelphia.  Ned Lamont is one of the only Democratic challengers in our nation’s history to overcome an incumbent Senator in his party’s primary.”

In Connecticut, mind those flips: GOP Senate candidate Rob Simmons, in a blog posting: “I did a lot of listening, and concluded that I was wrong about two issues I supported in Congress – the Employee Free Choice Act (also known as “card check”) and “cap and trade.”  After hearing more from the people who would be most affected by these bills, I became convinced they would cause more harm than good and I would oppose them in the Senate.”

Transitions: Daniel Sepulveda, now an assistant U.S. Trade Representative in the Obama Administration, is headed to Sen. Kerry’s office, as a senior adviser on commerce, trade, and business issues. Says Kerry, in a statement going out Monday: “Danny knows how to navigate the Senate and the Administration and brings with him the political savvy and policy expertise to dive in head first. He’s a sharp mind and a big thinker who will lend his skill on everything from telecommunications to trade and immigration at a time when we have more on our agenda than ever before.”

The Kicker:

“Got to be able to B.S. a little.” — Professional poker player Phil Ivey, to Roll Call, on the similarities between politicians and poker players.

“job inquiries … expertise requests … business deals … reference requests … getting back in touch” — Sarah Palin’s “interested in” list, on her new Linkedin page. 

For up-to-the-minute political updates check out The Note’s blog . . . all day every day:

http://blogs.abcnews.com/thenote/