Jane Hamsher’s FDL continues to screw over Democrats who supported the health care reform she demanded they vote for

By On January 16, 2010 · 12 Comments

Jane Hamsher’s FDL’s glorious strategy of helping the progressive movement by 1) getting bloggers to get Blue Dog Democrats to support health care, and 2) then blast those Democrats who supported it to the delight of the Republican Congressional leadership continues.

Today, it’s a SurveyUSA poll done by FDL (always reliable) on the OH-01 rematch between incumbent Congressman Steve Driehaus (D) and former Congressman Steve Chabot (Douce).

Which is remarkably picked up by incredible speed by none other than the Tanned One, House Majority Leader John Boehner on Twitter.

Jane Hamsher, who lobbied us to put public pressure on Steve Driehaus to vote for the House version of HCR (which included a public option.)? Jane Hampsher, who was completely okay with the concept of individual mandates until the public option had to removed to get the bill VOTED ON in the Senate.

Jane Hamsher, who’s now giving John Boehner ammunition to attack the very Democrats who supported the Health Care bill she demanded they support until she decided to oppose it.

On Thursday, Hamsher released a poll about the Democrat in the Second Congressional District of Arkansas showing him losing.? He announced he was not running for re-election shortly thereafter.? Her FDL cultist claim there’s no connection, even when her own blog took credit.? A Democrat Jane has helped the Republicans remove with her newfound partnership with Grover Norquist.? Because this, somehow, is going to get a public option passed in a health care reform bill, as if that is the ONLY reason?we?have to need a Democrat in Congress.

Brilliant job, Jane.

Related Stories

No related stories.

Tagged with: • • •
 

  • Bob Brigham specifically lobbied me to lobby Driehaus on the public option. Now his boss is screwing Driehaus over. Classic.

  • seditious

    The Glaring Lesson Already Evident in Massachusetts.

    Where in the hell are all those independents and moderate voters that the White House and our Democratic Senate have been sucking up to all year long while throwing the Leftist, activists under the bus? Surely that wizard, David Axelrod, didn't get this all wrong! That just couldn't be! Surely Axelrod has succeeded into converting oodles of independents and moderates into Democrats just in time for Tuesday to replace all those nasty “irrelevant” lefties. I mean, wasn't that the the strategy? Trash the “insignificant” Left to win the millions of moderates and Independents?

    I mean, there should be millions of independent voters and moderate voters jumping at the chance now to vote for a moderate Democrat in Massachusetts on Tuesday. Where are they? Oh, no! You mean they didn't convert to be Democrats? Oh, my!

    Why, tell me, is the Left now being scolded by Democratic career politicians for not getting out and working the precincts, working the phones, giving their passion and shoe-leather again? I thought that we were now “irrelevant”, or so we were told right from the White House.

    I gotta wonder: Why didn't all of last year's political compromising, promise breaking, corporate whoring, foreign warmongering, Wall Street loving and bank bail-outing succeed in converting millions of independents and “moderates” into Democrats to replace us who are so nasty, pesky, you know, the left-wing agitators? What happened?

    Why is it, tell me, that the Democratic Party and its politicians — who are swimming in cash from their coddling the insurance cartel and the defense contractors and the energy giants and Wall Street from their giveaways — are now suddenly dialing 911 to the Left begging us to save their asses?

    You mean that all that money might not be enough after all? Surely, they weren't wrong, were they?

    You mean money doesn't vote? Surprise, surprise!

    One would think that after all the compromising, all the butt-kissing of the right-wing, all of the money raised, all of the public trashing of Leftists in this country over the last 11 months, that there would now be millions upon millions of newly recruited independents and moderates to take the place of the Left, to fill our shoes, and to truly make us “irrelevant” at election time.

    Uh, oh! Seems like those that were called “irrelevant” are suddenly very, very relevant, aren't we?

    After sleeping around with everyone but your loyal wife, now you are coming home to your wife with lipstick on your collar, a broken zipper, booze on your breath begging for us to take you back. You know, your “irrelevant wife”.

    On one hand we are dismissed as “irrelevant” and “an insignificant, loud minority within the party” and then on the other hand we are begged and begged to get out once again and save the Party.

    So, which is it? Are we relevant or irrelevant?

    I think that the near begging by President Obama in Massachusetts to save that Senate Seat tells everyone everything they need to know about just who is relevant at election time.

    There's a lesson here: You don't shit all over people who work for you, you don't betray them by going back on your promises and then call them up when your ass is in a sling.

    This is the glaring lesson already evident in Massachusetts.

    http://journals.democraticunderground.com/David…

  • mvirenicus

    YOU TELL EM, SEDITIOUS! YOU GET EM, BOOOY! WOOOOEY!

  • modernesquire

    Thank you for making a point that has absolutely no fucking relation to this diary. You know that public option you love? Steve Driehaus voted for it. And now he's being hung out to dry by the progressives who said they'd have his back if he did it.

    “Progressives” like Jane, who is now giving John Boehner something to wave in our face to make us believe that he's a lost cause. And you'll be the first person to bitch and moan as you sit on the sidelines at the insane legislation Steve Chabot and Speaker Boehner supports, and it will be everyone else's fault but Sideline Seditious.

  • doubleaseven

    “Hampsher, who was completely okay with the concept of individual mandates until the public option had to removed to get the bill VOTED ON in the Senate.”
    Putting a mandate to buy Private Insurance or pay fine is impractical and immoral. Public Option is a safety net to keep the premiums lo enough so they are affordable. The Private Insurers have no natural desire to stop raping the Public like they have been for the last decade. A PO puts a pressure on Ins Co toward lower costs. Paying larger sums of money to subsidize the rapacious premiums is basically transferring Public Money to Private Pockets.

    There are two kinds of supporters for Obama butt kickers and ass lickers. The former are trying to hold Obama's feet to fire so he keeps the promises he made to the Public during the campaign. Just like good friends will do. The latter would sing Obama's praise no matter whether he is going on the wrong track or the right track. As everybody knows that sycophants or insecure hangers on, do no good to a person in the long run.

    Jane Hamsher, many other Progressive groups like PCCC, FDL, MoveOn, DFA, HCAN etc, and other Progressives including myself fall in the first category. OFA is currently in the second category. You have to choose which category you want to belong to.

    Rahm has been telling Obama that there is more than enough of the second category that he can ignore the noisy first category and safely go in the Corporatist direction so ingrained in Rahm & other Clintonistas. But come November they will find out that disaffected base will stay home and independents, who would not like to vote for a pansy Corporatist will just swing the other way.

    Having been a strong supporter of Obama, I pray that he listens to his base and to his own promises. Hopefully he will figure out that to really mean what he said will require that he straightens out or dumps Rahm ASAP.

    There is still time. Question is surrounded by Rahm's impenetrable shield, can somebody carry this kind of input to him.

  • mvirenicus

    It was Obama's nation for the taking. The american people were ready for leadership on all these critical issues. Squandered. Wizard Axelrod indeed. Hehee

  • modernesquire

    Jane Hamsher doesn't really care about mandates. She supported Hillary Clinton in the primaries when the chief difference between Clinton's plan and Obama's plan was that Clinton's had the mandate. Hamsher didn't say a peep about mandates until the public option.

    You're not holding anyone's feet to the fire. Steve Driehaus voted FOR the public option. And now, your roasting him on the hot coals so that John Boehner can step over Drieahus on the way to the Speaker's chair. John Boehner is laughing at you.

    Quit puking up the recycled talking points about a debate we aren't having right now. The issue is that Jane Hamsher is deliberately releasing negative poll numbers on House Democrats WHO SUPPORTED THE GODDAMN PUBLIC OPTION and saying their toast.

    If you, a supporter of the public option, don't see how that hurts your cause, then you need mental health coverage!

  • seditious

    You're right, my post didn't directly address your original diary.

    My guess is that Steve Driehaus will suffer because Rhambama made deals with AHIP PHARMA in the Spring that the Healthcare Reform would not contain a Public Option (or Medicare for All, for that matter).

    People want the real change that was promised. My guess is that Jane Hamsher is working hard to deliver the real change that Obama promised. And that Steve Driehaus will serve for a long time in Congress if that real change is delivered, even if Obama and the corporate Dems are dragged into it kicking and screaming.

  • seditious

    Modern,

    Can you show some proof that Jane supported Hillary in the primary? I did an Advanced Search on FDL and can't find any proof that that is true.

    I did find a post that Jane wrote attacking Clinton backer Lanny Davis.

    http://firedoglake.com/search/?terms=+hillary+c…

    Please provide some proof Modern.

    Or are you just making shit up as you go along?

  • seditious

    http://firedoglake.com/2008/05/31/a-little-civi…

    Here's a direct link to Jane slamming Lanny Davis. Kind of a wierd thing to do for a Clinton supporter, don't you think?

  • Pingback: Jane Hamsher had better not show her putrid face in Ohio()

  • Pingback: Tweets that mention Jane Hamsher’s FDL continues to screw over Democrats who supported the health care reform she demanded they vote for -- Topsy.com()

Looking for something?

Use the form below to search the site:


Still not finding what you're looking for? Drop a comment on a post or contact us so we can take care of it!

Visit our friends!

A few highly recommended friends...

Archives

All entries, chronologically...