Obama did not agree with Reid's idea and Digby denounced the Obama administration at the time for uhm well under the circumstances it could only be for not trusting Lieberman. Now that Lieberman has proven that he can't be trusted, Digby has forgotten her earlier criticism and suggests that Obama and not Digby was the one who agreed with Reid.
I think that various people owe Rham Emanuel an apology.
update: I am one of them. I was very enthusiastic when Reid brought a bill with the opt out public option to the floor. I knew he wasn't using reconciliation. I assumed that 4 of Lieberman, Landrieux, Lincoln, Snowe and Nelson would accept some reasonable compromise short of the trigger. I was wrong in just the way that Digby was wrong.
Reid trusted Lieberman. Digby supported using reconciliation. However, knowing that Ried was going for 60 including Lieberman, she sided with Reid and against Emanuel arguing that "The White House denies the specifics, but there's reason, based on past behavior, that they are so enamored of having Olympia Snowe on board so they have accepted triggers and expect Reid to back their "deal." "
OK so Snowe is irrelevant, because ... well not because Reid was going to use reconciliation. The only rational reason for Digby to denounce the willingness to make a major sacrifice to get Snowe's vote was opposed by Digby was that she trusted Lieberman.
The corrected sentence is "If Digby and Reid actually formed their strategy around the idea that "Lieberman will come around," [and] if the bill fails it's [Reid's] fault.
For Digby to pretend that Obama was more blinded by optimism about Reid (and Nelson) than Digby when her blog archive proves the opposite, shows a near Senator [dirty word deleted] like recklessness.
She still refuses to admit that she was wrong wrong wrong about dealing with Snowe writing "President Snowe is pretty much with him, so there's not much help there."
This is a sentence written by someone who just can't face the fact that she was wrong. Snowe's stated position is to the left of Lieberman (she supports a triggered public option and he opposes even that). She has shown every sign of bargaining in good faith while he obviously isn't bargaining in good faith. When discussing Lieberman, Digby stresses his petty motivations and dishonesty. When she discusses Snowe, they are irrelevant.
Look Digby Rham was right and you were wrong. Admit it. You'll feel better afterwards.
Actually in the old post Digby said a trigger was "unnacceptable." If that means anything, it means that she would support a filibuster of a bill with a trigger joining Joe Lieberman and the Republicans. posted by Robert
permalink and comments3:06 AM