Being in the crisis-management business, you've got to flaunt the times you call it right because they don't come too often. So, with high school gymnasiums and cable talk shows afire with citizens hopping-mad over the bloated House and Senate healthcare-reform bills, I thought it opportune to trot out what I wrote March 24 of this year:

"Are people truly outraged over executive bonuses, or is that merely a symptom of their disgust with Washington's response to the economic crisis? My suspicion is they are angrier at Washington than Washington realizes. Expect the mob to grow and come after bigger game than a faceless set of insurance executives."

Well, the mob has formed. And, while its anger is directed at healthcare, it is borne of deep-seated resentment toward a government they regard as arrogant, imperious, inept, and woefully out of touch with the average tax-paying American.

Curiously, President Obama, a man of legendary persuasive powers, has governed mostly through the muscle of his congressional majority and has failed to build public support for his massive spending, bailout programs and, now, healthcare. One of my Democratic lobbyist-friends, a former senior aide to John Kerry, told me quite plainly months ago the fundamental White House strategy is to push so much through Congress so quickly neither the Republicans nor anyone else has time to mount much resistance. That juggernaut has met its match in healthcare—an issue, unlike bank bailouts, voters can truly relate to. And, by taking the bait and branding the dissenters as right-wing tools, the White House appears petty at a time when people are hungry for the new era of bridge-building political leadership they were promised.

Now, the President and his allies can't return in September and act as if nothing has happened. From a communications standpoint, they should take a pause in the legislative sausage-making process and introduce a clear set of principles—no more than one page-that establishes a moral high-ground clarity to what "healthcare reform" is trying to accomplish and what it consists of. Superficial? Perhaps. But you can't win an argument if you can't set the terms of the debate.

The White House and the Democratic leadership should also give up on characterizing the town-hall protestors as right-wing zealots. Surely, some of them are. However, there is a difference between campaigning and governing. The President's standing as a uniter-not-a-divider is dropping like a rock. He still has a chance to pull this out, but he must publicly stand up to the left-wing of his own party and claim the moderate middle-ground.

Of course, there is always the option of ramming a big, expensive, poorly understood and unpopular bill through Congress. But at what cost, politically? "Once the details of victory were clear, it was hard to distinguish it from defeat," warns Jean-Paul Sartre, another Frenchman familiar with the fury of an angry public.