Joe Wilson is an A-hole . . . but he may be right

Okay, Rep Wilson is a jerk. Let's agree on that. In the U.K., parliamentarians can stand up and call out the Prime Minister during questions. They can call the P.M. all kinds of names, including a "liar". But we don't have that tradition here. Usually, the President is treated with deference by the Congress and they politely listen to what the President has to say and show some respect for the Office. Agree or disagree, we are all Americans and the President is the President of all of us. So, ding Rep Wilson for being a jerk. It will be interesting to see if he gets re-elected.

But, that's where it should stop. Let's move on. There are far more important things to do than to focus on this guy from South Carolina who blurted out something stupid (are we talking about their Governor or one of their Congressmen . . . sorry, I lost my train of thought).

Regarding the speech the other night and its implications, I have an observation.

Much has been written about the way that President Obama was walking a thin line in that speech between the liberal wing of his Party and the conservative wing of his Party (along with Independents who are concerned about mundane things like deficit spending and leaving our children with a gi-normous bill to pay for our profligate spending). It seems to me as I read this commentary, and listened to, and re-read portions of the speech, that President Obama said things that mean different things to different audiences. Maybe this is an old politicians trick, and maybe he is just damn good at this, but he said things in such a way that a wide range of the political spectrum can project their beliefs onto what he said and nod their head and say "yeah, that's more like it".

For instance, the President said that if you like your current coverage, you can keep the coverage you have today, but the legislation is just going to enhance its value by eliminating waste and inefficiency. Sounds great and who can argue with that? Only thing is, nobody who thinks about these issues seriously believes that this is anything other than fantasy or political posturing.

This was, in my view, an effort to stifle the dissent from the disgruntled masses who have currently health insurance and largely like what they have, which is a very large majority of us, by the way. By telling us what we want to hear, he's hoping that we now will go silently along with his proposals.

It is an interesting political game he is playing. I think he feels he needs something (anything at this point) to pass so he can claim victory and go home. It is not so much about fixing what's wrong, as it is about making incremental change and hoping he comes out looking good in the end.

The game is afoot.