Prez Kumbaya instead of William Jennings Bryan

Yes, instead of the hand-holding, “post-partisan” Barack Obama, on an issue like national healthcare, we needed William Jennings Bryan reminding everybody, especially in those “blue dog” Democratic House districts, how we are being crucified on a cross of spiraling heatlh costs and denied insurance claims and coverage.

But, there’s several problems.

First, Prez Kumbaya has possibly been singing with the wrong crowd, and repeatedly.

Next, as the prez allegedly continues his “full-court press” (only if he’s playing on an elementary school cafeteria gym floor), he’s not warning us that, by saying IT will get healthcare reform done, the health insurance industry is getting ready to do more crucifying of the American public.

What’s going to happen is something like Waxman-Markey: A “cure” that is a Band-Aid, and a small one at that, and that kicks the problem down the road enough to potentially be worse than doing nothing.

Forget the “angry black man” worries, just be angry. But, per the first link, not very likely.

Update, Aug. 3:You read a column like this one by Health and Human Services Secretary Kathleen Sebelius, and you, if you’re like me, think one of the following, or more:

Why isn’t Obama saying this himself?
Why wasn’t Obama, Sebelius or somebody from the administration saying any of this a month or more ago?
Is Obama telling this face-to-face to Blue Dog Democrats?

Meanwhile, Obama has AGAIN flip-flopped on the role of groups like MoveOn, once more saying he DOESN’T want them pressuring him and Congressional Dems from the left.

And, ultimately, on which side will a president who opted out of public campaign financing find his bread buttered?

Earlier this week, several polls came out noting that support for public-option national healthcare HUGELY divided on age lines, with senior citizens either largely deceived by Republican lies that Medicare allegedly isn't a government program, or else out of pure "I got mine" greed, strongly opposed, 40-64 folks neutral to favorable and under 40 definitely favorable.

Steve Pearlstein of the Washington Post, after calling the deceptions oriented toward the first group of seniors “a flat-out lie”:

By poisoning the political well, they've given up any pretense of being the loyal opposition. They've become political terrorists, willing to say or do anything to prevent the country from reaching a consensus on one of its most serious domestic problems.

closes with a note to the Jim DeMints of the world, on the political issue:

If health reform is to be anyone's Waterloo, let it be theirs.

Indeed, if we want to put this in terms of raw political calculus, this can be a counter-shift as big or bigger than Nixon’s “Southern strategy,” only this time, generational.

So, can, and will, Obama do it? Stay tuned.

Update, Aug. 13:Obama HAS lost control of healthcare debate – and why

White House Press Secretary Robert Gibbs may dodge the issue, whether artfully or not (I say not; he’s becoming Ari Fleischer-like), but I think many supporters of major healthcare reform, let alone opponents, agree that President Barack Obama has lost control of the debate on the issue (if he ever was on top of it in the first place).

Why? Beyond the reasons above ...

Another reason? As exemplified on his approach to economic issues, he’s a micromanager. Elsewhere, he’s been described as “professorial” in his public speaking style on big issues. Neither works with this.

And, Paul Krugman wonders how Obama “will deal with the death of his postpartisan dream ,” then notes he has part of the blame for his lack of pushing and explaining the bill, first, and his lack of passion, second.