Incidentally, Lieberman was part of the 1994 reform-killing effort, too. From the NYT, August 6, 1994:

… two moderate Democrats voiced opposition to Mr. Mitchell.

…

During Mr. Kerrey’s … He said today that President Clinton should meet with Republican moderates and make a deal with them.

We’ve not found many moderates and so after that ‘meeting’ we decided to defeat them in elections. Now we have more Democrats and we shall move forward on the reform. It may have taken a long time, but now we can proceed.

Even a walnut is considered a fruit. Amazing, huh?

Of course, the Village has lots of fruits and nuts, but that’s another discussion.

Think of the abuses with the IRS and centalized police records.

This is none of the government’s business.

yes, most of us around here are quite aware of the savvy and how harmful it is. I’ve even contributed to that process for years in various jobs I’ve had within BigMedia. Got it.

So as I often do around here, I’m trying to focus on how to overcome these parameters that have been set by previous generations of crooks, and perpetuated by our current gatekeepers.

To me, the best way to overcome the the savvy is getting more of the public active and organized, which is precisely what Obama has been doing since day one. This has to happen first and foremost to Change the cesspool. They aren’t (for the most part) going to change themselves, especially the people who have been there forever and have “seniority” in the system.

Considering President Obama has never wavered from his commitment to organizing the public at levels I’ve never seen before, which BigMoney has actively tried to stifle forever, I trust Obama’s intentions so far. No matter what the issue is, including single-payer, an organized and active public is a necessity. This is at the core of why I’m excited right now, and why I even step back sometimes and try to learn from America’s first melanin-enhanced President. He might know a few things.

BILL MOYERS: One of the subjects not in the debate over health care reform is single-payer. And contrary to what many people think about it being a far left proposal, the polls show that it has substantial support among a large swath of the American people. Many of whom would not call themselves far left.

But Senator Baucus said, its not in the discussion because we’ve gone too far now to go back and consider single-payer. There it seems to me is a very good example of how a legitimate idea gets delegitimated in the debate between the powers that be.

JAY ROSEN: I think it’s a classic example of the real religion of the Washington press, which is savviness. And from a problem-solving point of view, we would certainly want to consider single-payer, because it’s an important option in a debate. But from a savvy point of view, the inside players know that single-payer is never going to be the answer. And they’re already factoring that into their political calculations about what’s likely to result.

Which in a way cuts off the debate that we need to have. And so, the inside players in Washington are able to kind of contain the debate by anticipating the outcome, and then talking about the things that are most likely within that set of assumptions. And this is a normal process in Washington that goes on all the time. And it’s one of the ways that journalists shape the terms of debate.