The headline in The Hill says it loud and clear:

 Obama picks public option fight with liberals

Many people are rightly upset that the White House is sending stronger and stronger signals that they are willing to jettison a public option.  What was once the defining feature of the Obama health care plan has now been dismissed with a bipartisan flourish.  "[I]t’s both the right and the left that have become so fixated on this that they forget everything else," he says.

Here’s Kent Conrad on Fox News:

The fact of the matter is there are not the votes in the United States Senate for the public option, there never have been, so to continue to chase that rabbit is just a wasted effort.

If Conrad could set aside his "More About Me" world view for a moment and do some second grade math, he’d see that there aren’t enough votes for a health care bill without a public option in the House

There are 435 seats on the House.  Of those, 257 are filled by Democrats and 178 by Republicans.  Which means a majority is 218.  The Republicans have vowed to vote against health care, period.  The Democrats can pass health care on their own, but if they lose 40 of their own, they only have 217 votes.

There are 57 Democrats who signed the July 30 letter saying that they "simply cannot vote" for a bill that "at minimum" does not have a public plan (PDF).  There are 7 more not listed on the letter who have pledged to vote against any bill that does not have a robust public plan.  That makes 64 Democrats who won’t vote for the "co-ops" that both Kathleen Sibelius and Robert Gibbs say the White House is "open" to.  

Do the math:  257 – 64 = 193.  They need 218 to pass the bill.

So thanks to the progressive members of the House who have pledged to vote against any health care bill that does not have a public plan.  They represent 76% of Americans who want a public plan, and coming from heavily Democratic-leaning districts as they do, an even greater percentage of their own constituents:

These Members of Congress were overwhelmingly elected by Democrats. In voting against any bill that does not have a public plan they are voting their districts.

The White House shouldn’t ask them to do otherwise in order to pander for Republican votes they are never going to get.  If Rahm wants to beat somebody into voting for something that their district doesn’t want, let him go talk to the "centrists" he’s been coddling.