Jack & Jill Politics

President Obama took a thinly veiled shot at the Fox network Thursday, in remarks on health care reform in the ...

... Eisenhower Executive Office Building.

At a morning event with nurses, Obama reiterated the key points from his speech to Congress Wednesday night — and jabbed at the one network that chose not to air his address on broadcast television.

"Just in case folks weren't tuned in last night — if they were watching 'So You Think You Can Dance,'" Obama said, "a show Michelle likes, let me explain more briefly than I did last night what health insurance reform will mean for ordinary Americans."

Fox aired the dance contest show on its local affiliates, though Fox News covered the president's speech live.

Obama's comments weren't the White House's first shot at Fox's programming decision. Appearing on the cable morning show "Fox & Friends" Wednesday, White House press secretary Robert Gibbs jabbed his interviewers, telling them: "I do hope people will check into the reality of what's going on in America, rather than the distraction of a reality TV show."

There will be no beer summit or even a telephone conversation between President Obama and Rep. Joe ...

... Wilson (R-S.C.), according to White House Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel.

Asked if the president plans to meet or talk with the congressman who interrupted his speech Wednesday, Emanuel gave American Urban Radio's April Ryan a flat: "No."

Obama's top aide also said he and Wilson are "friends" who have "known each other for years," and "it is time to move on."

Ezra Klein

Joe Wilson’s "you lie" comment might be a great boon to the Democrats in their bid to pass health care.

EVOLVES TO

Michael Scherer (Time.com)

Joes Wilson broke decorum when he screamed "you lie" which may come back to hurt Republicans. Obama stared back at him and you could seem him twitch.

EVOLVES TO

Rush Limbaugh

And ladies and gentlemen Mr. Obama was calling Mr. Wilson a liar so he had to respond. Did you see the way that Obama twitched? Ladies and gentlemen that’s the type of twitch you see from the type of man Obama is (unsaid: Black) when he’s ready for a barroom fight or to push you aside and ravage your sister. We’ve all seen that twitch before and we’ve all known what it means.

EVOLVES TO

Drudge

Breaking Headline: Obama twitch is seen as a challenge not only to Wilson but anybody who disagrees with him. Obama wants a barroom fight – and watch your sister.

EVOLVES TO

Politico

"The Twitch" – major backlash on Obama’s response to Joe Wilson’s comment – while Wilson is nothing more than a back bencher, Obama raised his stature by using body language to make what feels like to a lot of people a direct threat, to Wilson, the Republicans and their sisters.

EVOLVES TO

Fox News

We are spending all day discussing "The Twitch," which is getting people really riled up in the real America (show signs of teabaggers carrying signs saying "Don’t Twitch on Me!") We have noted body language psychologist Dr. Kraz Y. Town to talk about it.

Town: Yes, I want to show you these pictures of Hitler speaking at Nuremberg. You see the same type of twitch.

EVOLVES TO

Sarah Palin (Twitter)

Don’t "Twitch on Me" buddy. I’ve seen that Twitch before and I know to get out of the room fast or I’m going to wind up with a black eye or pregnant

EVOLVES TO

George Will

The first thing a president must have is decorum. You would never see Ronald Reagan twitch like that, make that type of unabashed challenge to a lowly backbencher. Mr. Obama has done himself and his country a disservice.

EVOLVES TO

David Broder

While I understand that the comment was inappropriate all eyes were on Obama and not Joe Wilson. Obama broke comity and destroyed bipartisanship with that twitch. This is our town Mr. Obama and we don’t appreciate you twitching in it.

EVOLVES TO

Chris Mathews

Mathews: Hi, this is Chris Mathews on Hardball. We’re going to be talking about "The Twitch" with a Democratic consultant. Didn’t Obama make a real mistake with that Twitch?

Democratic Consultant: Well, I’ll admit it wasn’t Obama’s bed moment, but he was doing it in response to a comment.

Mathews: Come on Joe Wilson is a nothing, a nobody, and hey, we all know what that twitch means. I’m a lunch bucket kind of guy, I’ve been in bars, I have a sister.

Democratic Consultant: Well we need to admit Obama made a mistake with the Twitch and try and move on and pass health care.

EVOLVES TO

Michael Scherer

Obama’s Twitch is causing him enormous trouble. It’s hard to believe this type of blowback. How did the White House lose control of an issue that should have played in their favor?

EVOLVES TO

Ezra Klein

As idiotic as the twitch is, it looks like it is going to doom the public option

Those words cut in politics. When directed at the President of the United States, during a prime time address to the nation no less, they cut deep.

So when Rep. Joe Wilson, a little known Republican and Army reserve veteran from South Carolina shouted them at the nation's commander-in-chief on the night of Sept. 9, heads snapped. The House Chamber took a collective gasp. Nancy Pelosi, sitting behind Obama, tensed and scowled as if she had just witnessed a crime, her disgust unhidden.

Even Obama, who had just dismissed conservative claims that illegal immigrants would be able to take advantage of health-care reform, was taken aback. He looked to his left, adjusted his arm, part nervous twitch, part macho posturing, and shot back at Wilson, "That's not true." And there, for a moment, the nation watched two men, elected to lead, call each other the worst thing in politics — dishonorable deceivers.
At the moment Wilson exploded, the outburst seemed like an assault on the President. Soon afterwards, it was clear that it had been a gift. Wilson had, in an emotional expression, proven Obama's point: the summer of town halls had been less a discussion than a circus, a forum where misinformation was vindicated by passion, where disrespect was elevated as a virtue. Now the circus had come inside Congress.

The President's seemingly simple statement, that "the reforms I am proposing would not apply to those who are here illegally," is not hard to check. In the Senate Finance Committee working framework for a health plan, which Obama's speech seemed most to mimic, there is the line: "No illegal immigrants will benefit from the health care tax credits." Similarly, the major health care reform bill to pass out of committee in the House, H.R. 3200, contains a Section 246, which is called, "NO FEDERAL PAYMENT FOR UNDOCUMENTED ALIENS." Some Republicans have claimed that these protections are too weak, since they do not require stringent eligibility checks that would prevent illegal immigrants from gaming the system...

He (Wilson) was claiming something — benefits for illegal immigrants — that is expressly prohibited in the major legislative efforts in both houses of Congress. He was becoming the sideshow the President wanted to spotlight, and as such Wilson handed a great gift to his political enemies, for whom he clearly has little regard.

House Majority Whip Jim Clyburn (D-SC) appeared on the Bill Press radio show this morning, and said that Rep. Joe Wilson's (R-SC) written apology for having shouted "You lie!" at President Obama wasn't good enough.

Instead, Clyburn says Wilson should go to the well of the House -- the same place where he made the insult -- and give a public apology there.

"That's a cowardly way to do it," Clyburn said of the written statement. "He ought to man up and go down to the well of the House and say, I acted with a lack of decorum the last evening, and I apologize to the President of the United States, and I apologize to my colleagues in both bodies, and I apologize to the people of South Carolina for having done so.

A Member should avoid impugning the motives of another Member, the Senate or the President, using offensive language, or uttering words that are otherwise deemed unparliamentary. These actions are strictly against House Rules and are subject to a demand that the words be taken down. A demand that the Member’s words be taken down results in the clerk reporting the words and the chair ruling on the propriety of the words. (If the demand is made in the Committee of the Whole, the Committee rises and reports them to the House where the Chair rules on their propriety).

The offending Member may obtain unanimous consent to withdraw the inappropriate words or the demand may be withdrawn. Following such a withdrawal, the Member proceeds in order. However, if the Member’s words are ruled out of order, they may be stricken from the Congressional Record by motion or unanimous consent, and the Member will not be allowed to speak again on that day except by motion or unanimous consent.

References to the Senate or Executive Branch
Until the 109th Congress, it was not in order to make certain references to the Senate or individual senators. However, at the beginning of that Congress, the House removed the prohibition on making references to the Senate, leaving only the requirement that debate be confined to the question under debate and avoid “personality.” The precedents of the House allow a wide latitude in criticism of the President, other executive officials, and the government itself. However, it is not permissible to use language that is personally offensive to the President, such as referring to him as a “hypocrite” or a “liar.” Similarly, it is not in order to refer to the President as “intellectually dishonest” or an action taken by the President as “cowardly.” References to the Vice President, in spite of his role as President of the Senate, are measured against the standard used for the President rather than prior standards used to govern the Senate.

As President Obama addressed a joint session of Congress on Wednesday night, the nation's rapidly deteriorating discourse hit yet another low.

It happened at 8:40 pm, just after the president vowed to lawmakers that his health-care reform proposals would not provide benefits to illegal immigrants. As millions of Americans watched from home, Rep. Joe Wilson (R-S.C.) shouted at the president from his fifth-row seat: "You lie!"

Murmurs of "ooh" filled the stunned chamber. Nancy Pelosi's chin dropped. Obama moved on to the next sentence in his speech, about how no federal money would be used to fund abortion. "Not true!" came another shout.

The national debate, already raw for years, had coarsened over the summer as town hall meetings across the country dissolved into protests about "death panels" and granny-killing. Guns were brought to Obama appearances. A pastor in Arizona said he was praying for Obama to die.

But even by that standard, there was something appalling about the display on the House floor for what was supposed to be a sacred ritual of American democracy: the nation watching while Cabinet members, lawmakers from both chambers and the diplomatic corps assembled.

Wilson was only the most flagrant. There was booing from House Republicans when the president caricatured a conservative argument by saying they would "leave individuals to buy health insurance on their own." They hissed when he protested their "scare tactics." They grumbled as they do in Britain's House of Commons when Obama spoke of the "blizzard of charges and countercharges."

When he asserted that "nothing in this plan will require you or your employer to change the coverage or the doctor you have," there was scoffing and outright laughter on the GOP side. Rep. Jeb Hensarling (Tex.) shook his head in disbelief. Several Republicans shouted "What plan?" and Rep. Louis Gohmert (Tex.) waved at Obama a handwritten poster he made on a letter-size piece of paper: "WHAT PLAN?" Gohmert then took that down and replaced it with another handmade poster that said "WHAT BILL?" ...

But while the majority of both parties' lawmakers behaved as adults, the insolence by House Republicans stole the show. There was derisive laughter on that side of the chamber when Obama noted that "there remain some significant details to be ironed out." They applauded as he spoke of "all the misinformation that's been spread over the past few months." They laughed again when he said that "many Americans have grown nervous about reform."

When Obama addressed the charge that he plans "panels of bureaucrats with the power to kill off senior citizens," someone on the GOP side shouted out "shame!" The president went on: "Such a charge would be laughable if it weren't so cynical." "Read the bill!" someone shouted back. Obama mentioned those who accuse him of a government takeover of health care. "It's true," someone shouted back.

The antics continued when Obama urged opponents to "come to me with a serious set of proposals." About 20 Republican members raised copies of the GOP health-reform proposal over their heads. They raised their props again when Obama criticized those who think "it's better politics to kill this plan than improve it."

Even as Obama delivered a tribute to the late senator Ted Kennedy, Rep. Tom Price (R-Ga), a leader of House conservatives, perused his BlackBerry. Shortly before the speech ended, Rep. Patrick McHenry (R-N.C.) walked out to beat the rush.

Above all, though, was Wilson's effrontery. From the reaction in the chamber -- one Democrat could be heard calling for him to be thrown out -- Wilson knew he had stepped in it. He shrugged, then consulted his BlackBerry. He puffed out his cheeks to exhale and licked his lips.

Toward the end of Obama's speech, the text of which was handed out before the congressman's outburst, was a fitting rebuke of the sort of behavior Wilson had just exhibited. When "we can no longer even engage in a civil conversation with each other over the things that truly matter," Obama said, "we don't merely lose our capacity to solve big challenges. We lose something essential about ourselves."

As Obama spoke these words, Wilson twiddled his thumbs, then took his BlackBerry from its holster to consult it yet again. The speech ended, and, as his colleagues applauded, Wilson beat a hasty retreat.

An incensed White House Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel went up to GOP Reps. Roy Blunt (Mo.) and Paul Ryan (Wis.) to complain about the outburst. "No president has ever had that happen," Emanuel said. "My advice is he apologize immediately. You know my number."

Wilson did as Emanuel advised. After all that shouting, it's a wonder he wasn't too hoarse to place the call.

It's impossible to say with certainty whether President Obama's speech on health care reform last night will have the intended impact. Will intra-party differences between Democrats be resolved? Will public attitudes shift back in the White House's direction? Did the speech help reframe the debate? We don't yet know.

We do know, however, that the president did exactly what he needed to do, and delivered what was probably the best speech of his presidency.

Under the circumstances, it's safe to assume Obama didn't want to have to deliver this speech at all. Remember, the White House wanted the House and Senate to pass their respective bills in June. The president would have been just as happy if a national address before a joint session of Congress was entirely unnecessary.

But the summer was unkind to reform. As Obama explained last night, "Instead of honest debate, we have seen scare tactics.... Too many have used this as an opportunity to score short-term political points, even if it robs the country of our opportunity to solve a long-term challenge. And out of this blizzard of charges and counter-charges, confusion has reigned."

So, the president set the record straight, and delivered on some specific benchmarks... (for more checkout link)

I think what you saw yesterday was very predictable. Again, big media sets up this narrative of the "Make or break" speech. Again, Obama shoots the lights out. Again, Obama says something innocuous, "no illegal immigrants will be covered." Again, a Republican overplays his hand. The temptation is to say that Obama planned for August to happen, that he baited his adversaries, the way Deion Sanders used to bait quarterbacks. Probably not. Still, the catch-up speed is incredible.

We (liberals) have spent so much of our time on the losing end of the past 30 years, that the impulse is to fight every battle, and challenge every press release. Moreover, media has uncovered our inner crazy. HuffPo blasts every utterance from Jon Kyl in bold font. Politico reports every feint and jab, like it's the whole fight. I'm not blaming them, they're doing well because they've figured out something about our inner animal.

It's fine for us laymen to indulge that, but I don't want to be led by people who think that outlets (including this one) which weigh in on who "won the week" are some kind of gauge of their actual progress. I don't want to be led by people who think that "getting angry" is a actual political strategy. I want to be led by a killer. A cold, unemotional, professional killer.

I keep meeting lefties who tell me Obama's "too soft" with these guys, and I keep looking at them like they're crazy. I am going to go out on a limb and say that there is something deeper at work here, something beyond the policy fights. I think a lot of us don't just want Obama to be effective, we want him to exact some measure of revenge. It's smart to understand the difference between the two, and moreover, how the desire for one can undermine the other. A section of conservatives love Sarah Palin because she drives liberals crazy. That she drives a lot of other people crazy too, and hence undermines herself, is beside the point.

Let's not make that mistake. Besides. If it's blood on the walls you want, the GOP is doing fine by itself...

Rachel Maddow's initial reaction to President Obama's health care speech to a joint session of Congress was largely favorable, particularly the end of the speech in which the President promised to "call out" Republicans who misrepresented his plan and offered what Maddow described as a "full, basically formal, at length defense of liberalism":

The president gave what I think is the only full, basically formal, at length defense of liberalism and defense of the idea of government for the people's good, in ideological terms. It's the most ideological I've ever heard him be and I think liberals will be happy.

How do you assess President Obama's speech tonight?

You can look at it as a blueprint--and try to decide whether Obama's health care plan makes sense. I think it does, although, to be fair, I've thought that all along.

You can judge it as a political exercise. Did it help Obama's cause or hurt it? My colleague Jon Chait is skeptical, arguing that speeches don't really move public opinion. Then again, the opinions Obama needs to change were the ones from people sitting in the House of Representatives, listening to him. And, if my colleague Suzy Khimm is right, he may have succeeded there.

But there's a third way to think about the speech. You can see if was about something more than health care reform--specifically, whether it was an effort to say something broader, about how our society is organized and how we might be able to change it.

I think it was, if you listened long enough. And I liked what I heard, even if Obama said it in his typically nuanced way.

The critical passage came at the end, after Obama was done laying out all of the problems with American health care and after he was done explaining, or trying to explain, how his health care plan would solve those problems. That's when he turned a bit more pensive and wistful--you could see this was the part of the speech he liked best--and started sounding a bit more like a preacher than a lawyer.

He invoked the spirit of Ted Kennedy, reminding people of Kennedy's determination to help the disadvantaged and marginalized. He conjured up the examples of Medicare and Social Security, noting the tough battles waged on behalf of each. And then he made his argument:

our predecessors understood that government could not, and should not, solve every problem. They understood that there are instances when the gains in security from government action are not worth the added constraints on our freedom. But they also understood that the danger of too much government is matched by the perils of too little; that without the leavening hand of wise policy, markets can crash, monopolies can stifle competition, the vulnerable can be exploited. And they knew that when any government measure, no matter how carefully crafted or beneficial, is subject to scorn; when any efforts to help people in need are attacked as un-American; when facts and reason are thrown overboard and only timidity passes for wisdom, and we can no longer even engage in a civil conversation with each other over the things that truly matter -- that at that point we don't merely lose our capacity to solve big challenges. We lose something essential about ourselves.

It's a careful statement, deferential to critics in the way Obama typically it is. But it's also a pretty clear defense of government--at a time when defending government is pretty controversial.

We saw that in August, when town hall meetings dredged up some pretty primal feelings. The protesters showing up at these events weren't simply angry about health reform. They were angry about every government program since the New Deal. Most Americans don't see things quite that way; Medicare and Social Security remain incredibly popular. But government remains unpopular in the abstract, as it has been at least since the time of Ronald Reagan.

With these final passages, I think, Obama was trying to shift that mindset--to remind people that government is already a part of our lives, and a force for good, in ways that are entirely consistent with basic notions of citizenship and shared responsibility.

To be sure, none of this will affect the outcome of the health care reform debate. But if Obama can convince Americans that govenrment works--an effort that will require action, yes, but also some words--it might shape debates in the future.

Looks like there's some news in the speech after all. Quite a bit.

On the policy front, President Obama tonight endorses, clearly and unambiguously, a requirement that everybody obtain insurance--that is, an individual mandate. He has not done that before, not this explicitly.

He also says employers will have to provide insurance or bear some of the costs. That's not news exactly; he's said that before. But it's part of the same package.

That’s why under my plan, individuals will be required to carry basic health insurance – just as most states require you to carry auto insurance. Likewise, businesses will be required to either offer their workers health care, or chip in to help cover the cost of their workers. There will be a hardship waiver for those individuals who still cannot afford coverage, and 95% of all small businesses, because of their size and narrow profit margin, would be exempt from these requirements. But we cannot have large businesses and individuals who can afford coverage game the system by avoiding responsibility to themselves or their employees. Improving our health care system only works if everybody does their part.

Later, Obama makes clear that health reform should cost about $900 billion. He's put that much money on the table before, but it wasn't clear whether he would try to seek more funding. Clearly he won't. On the other hand, given the current political environment, $900 billion is--just barely--what you need to reach universal coverage, or at least put us on a trajectory to it.

Obama also endorses a proposal that the Senate Finance Committee has taken up. The proposal--which, as I recall, came from Senator John Kerry--would tax insurance companies when they provide expensive insurance policies. It's an indirect way of capping the tax exclusion on health benefits, something most economists believe can help slow down health spending.

Also of interest: A promise to provide low-cost, bare-bones policies right away--merely as a stopgap, until full reforms kick in. (This is an effort to make sure Americans see at least some benefits right away.) Elsewhere, Obama talks about malpractice reform--again, more explicitly than he has before, presenting it as an effort to reach across the aisle.

And the public plan? He gives a lengthy, strong defense of the idea. It could have come straight out of the literature of groups like Health Care for America Now--or the writings of Jacob Hacker. But he also makes clear, to left as well as right, that he's open to compromise.

Those seem like the major developments on the policy front. The tone is pretty striking, too. Obama reaches out to Republicans in several places. But he also comes down hard--very hard--on opponents who are merely out to defeat reform.

September 9, 2009
The following statement has been posted on the Mayo Clinic Health Policy Blog site:

Mayo Clinic strongly supports President Obama’s call for health insurance reform and health care delivery reform, and agrees with the President’s position that the status quo is not acceptable. We believe that a bipartisan, collaborative approach is essential to achieving significant, patient-centered health care reform.

Mayo Clinic and the many organizations and individuals working with us in the Mayo Clinic Health Policy Center are strongly in favor of reform of both health care delivery and health insurance. True health care reform is getting better results for the money spent. Better results for money spent is what we meant by high value health care: better outcomes, safer care, better service and at lower costs over time. And this will translate to better access to medical services for all Americans.

We agree with President Obama’s focus on insuring all Americans and reforming the health care payment system.