Despite “no means NO!” message, Obama/DNC employ old campaign face for new health care spin

Jake Tapper’s on top of the news again, reporting on the new start up of the old campaign staff. Yes, folks, in the wake of the much misinterpreted and desperately spun MA special election loss, David Plouffe… Obama campaign manger and mastermind of the Greek columns staging… is back on the payroll. If you thought Obama or the DNC accurately “heard” the message of the MA voters, you thought wrong.

Oh yes, Obama got in front of the cameras to announce a hold on the proceedings until Scott Brown gets seated. He said all the words to give the impression that he suddenly became astute to the nation’s wishes… but then he sent his henchman, Rahm’bo, behind the scenes to solicit Pelosi on the feasibility of passing the Senate bill as written. Whoops… no go there.

As a master of media manipulation, Obama refocused the headlines… this time on a front line assault on the banks. But I have no doubts the back rooms were busy with a new tact on the old agenda…. how to repackage the box of manure called healthcare for public consumption.

Enter the old campaign face – David Plouffe – specifically setting up camp with the DNC for new and improved spin.

“Plouffe is one of the smartest guys in the business, he has the full trust of the President and his team, and we appreciate any and all help he can give us,” White House communications director Dan Pfeiffer said. “This is a very challenging political environment and you want all the best players on the field.”

In the wake of the loss of the Massachusetts Senate seat — the first time a Republican has been elected to represent the Bay State since 1972, when President Obama was 11 — the president has ordered a review of the Democratic Party’s entire political operation.

In addition to the return of top aides such as Plouffe, other mid-level operatives from the 2008 Obama campaign who helped bring candidate Obama victories in Iowa and in Feb. 5 “Super Tuesday” primary states, will be enlisted to work on campaigns to keep expected Democratic losses to a minimum, aides said.

My guess is we can assume this will fall into the “jobs created” math for this POTUS. For indeed, they are assuring the current operatives they are not being replaced, but “augmented”.

Tapper’s crackerjack news bulletin hits the media waves today, and already Plouffe is busy earning his keep with his first op-ed in WaPo today.

With few exceptions, the first off-year election in a new president’s term has led to big gains for the minority party — this was true for Harry Truman, Dwight Eisenhower, Ronald Reagan and Bill Clinton. After two election cycles in which Democrats won most of the close races and almost all of the big ones, Democrats have much more fragile turf to defend this year than usual. Add to that a historic economic crisis, stubborn unemployment and the pain that both have inflicted on millions of Americans, and you have a recipe for a white-knuckled ride for many of our candidates.

But not if Democrats do what the American people sent them to Washington to do.

In 2006 and 2008, voters sent an unmistakable message: We want decisive change. This was not just a change of political parties. Instead of a government that works for the entitled and special interests, a government that looks out for Wall Street, they wanted a government that works better for them, a government that plays the role it should to help foster the security of the middle class.

~~~

[Mata musing: talking points headlines of op-ed below]

— Pass a meaningful health insurance reform package without delay.

— We need to show that we not just are focused on jobs but also create them.

— Make sure voters understand what the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act did for the economy.

— Don’t accept any lectures on spending.

— “Change” is not just about policies.

— Run great campaigns.

— No bed-wetting.

Let’s remember why we won in 2008 and deliver on what we promised. If Democrats will show the country we can lead when it’s hard, we may not have perfect election results, but November will be nothing like the nightmare that talking heads have forecast.

My my… sounds like a more succinct version of the Dem talking points, post Brown, that I mentioned in my post, The Rise and Fall of BHO a few days ago. And typical Plouffe style, it’s dumbed down for the masses for maximum effect.

Despite the MA election results, neither Obama, nor the Dem Congress, is willing to let the House/Senate attempts at “remaking” healthcare go without a serious battle. Even one that is simmering below the media radar. So topping the list is the favored spin supporting the status quo … you know, the one that says MA voters are just beside themselves with fury that the Dems didn’t pass national healthcare by the special election date, or it’s a misunderstood policy victim.

Now what feeble brained amoeba could buy that argument with a straight face? (assuming, of course, a feeble brained amoeba has a face at all….).

As Plouffe’s “drive ’em home” #1 talking point on health care summarizes:

Only if the plan becomes law will the American people see that all the scary things Sarah Palin and others have predicted — such as the so-called death panels — were baseless. We own the bill and the health-care votes. We need to get some of the upside. (P.S.: Health care is a jobs creator.)

Remember that line… we’re apt to hear the increased tie between “jobs” and “healthcare” coming up big time. Less overt will be that “trust us, it’s really gonna work” bit.

Since I’m going to ignore the other BS talking points and focus mainly on healthcare here, let’s examine what the Dems persistently refuse to accept. And that is the spectrum of those opposed to this plan are as wide as the political spectrum itself. In this case, you have those on the far left just as unhappy with the propositions as you have with the far right. Despite the origin, the meaning of “no” still means “NO!”

The Brown win was, bar none, a testament to the less favored discussion on O’healthcare opposition… it’s infringement on the 10th Amendment and states’ rights. The MA voters want to kill national healthcare because they have their own… for good or bad… and don’t feel the need to pay for the rest of the states who haven’t found their own solutions.

This reality may chagrin a few conservatives who may wish to believe the blue state of MA suddenly found their “inner Joe Lieberman”, as the new phrase goes. But it doesn’t change the nation’s opinion…. there is no lack of reasons for why many oppose this diabolical monstrosity the Dem Congress has attempted to bring to life. Some because it is not a single-payer right out of the legislative gate, others because we see the financial drain on a nation’s wallet while doing nothing to curb medical costs to the patient. But the least discussed reason is the bastard step-child…. the unmitigated intrusion into what has been seen as overreaching economic expansion into the states fiscal responsibilities to their denizens.

States’ rights was the founding reason for the Cornhusker payola. Nebraska’s Nelson was saying that if you are going to rape the states, Nebraska can’t afford the contraception. What was possibly the most offensive about Nelson’s dirty deal was that he was okay with the rape… he just wanted to be recompensated for the act (which, it can be said, puts it into a totally different category altogether).

If you still reject this reason for a “nay” vote, you may want to consider that Louisiana is floating a bill to make O’national health care illegal in LA. California, despite it’s economic woes, is ready to pile on and follow MA suit by reviving a bill for CA single payer. This follows the same states’ rights pattern that Florida had when they introduced a bill amending the state’s Constitution last July, prohibiting the Feds from intruding on State territory.

Out of the norm extremist states, you think? Quite the contrary. The Tenth Amendment Center website tracks such legislation. And according to their website, 17 states have introduced legislation (still waiting in the process wings) to effectively nullify any federal healthcare. Four of them had failed legislative attempts: NM, MI, ND and WY. Arizona’s legislation has successfully passed one chamber as of this post.

The point here is that “no means no!”… despite the reasons. If we junk the current path, we may be able to find a bipartisan path that encompasses major issues like states rights and medical costs without giving the whole enchilada to Congress and the feds.

However, with the reappearance of Plouffe, the campaign stager, it’s more evident than ever that Obama and Dems have heard the nation… and will simply find a way to make the unpalatable… palatable.