The Way Things Work: Obama's devotion to bloodless, risk-free, backroom policymaking portends doom.

[DirkGently]

This entire issue of extending the Bush tax cuts tastes bitterly of "The Fix is In." This was a deal negotiated with convenience, not the public welfare, nor even wise politics, as its driving force.

Obama appears to have simply chosen the quickest, most expedient route over the welfare and wishes of his party and country at large. He simply didn't deem it worthy to back Republicans into the corner of their own transparently hypocritical representation of their wealthiest donors at the expense of EVERYONE, when there was a quicker, easier way that eliminated the possibility of outright defeat.

They are coming off an election whose success was based on rabid oath-swearing to cut the deficit. Then IMMEDIATELY demanded we borrow $700 billion to extend tax cuts to a handful of richest Americans. Their lazy pseudo-argument consisted solely of "You don't 'raise taxes' during a recession." Except it isn't a "raise," but an expiration of tax cuts Republicans already agreed would expire. And the money is going to people who not only aren't actually IN the recession, but whose ranks include those who CAUSED it. It was rhetorical Kleenex for the shredding.

And he demurred, without making them so much as raise their voices.

I don't say Obama doesn't care. I don't say his intentions are not do right by the country. I don't say he is bed with the Republicans for all purposes. But what really went on here? What deal was made? Why did he apparently value the extension of the Bush tax cuts so little as to telegraph trading them away weeks ago?

I am concerned that, contrary to the entire thrust of his campaign, President Obama buys into an opaque, pre-calculated policymaking style that allows the Powers that Be, to simply ... be.

Everything that occurs with this administration appears to be fait accompli. It's a Done Deal before we even hear about it. This is the epitome of Business as Usual, and it seems to guarantee Republican dominance on every issue, because they always threaten all-out war, and Obama always seems to blink.

In this case, he has stated he understood he had public support to oppose the $700 billion extension of tax gifts for the wealthiest fraction of Americans. "I know the polls." Americans opposed this. Democrats in Congress opposed it. Many conservatives, especially the incoming, victorious Tea Partiers, either opposed it, or, as *JOHN BOEHNER DID* admitted they would not pass on a middle-class-only tax cut extension in order to get it.

Then he gave it away anyway. Not only that, but he telegraphed his willingness to do so weeks ago, in public, by shifting to the "no *permanent* extension" language, while suggesting that had always been the message, which it had not.

Exacerbating all of this is his earlier suggestion that such an expenditure would lead to harsh "cuts" in other spending, by which many people are right to fear he means Social Security (despite the fact SS benefits are not "spending" as such -- a benefit cut has been made part of the spending cut conversation by way of the Commission he appointed). Which raises the distinct possibility that Part II of The Deal is that the White House will not strongly oppose across-the-board cuts to SS benefits.

And when the public complains, he again reserves his greatest wrath and his most cutting remarks for liberals who, once again, are on the right of side of this, and were NOT looking for something out of political reach. It simply would have required a battle and a risk of personal political capital for him.

His explanation?

"I couldn't convince John Boehner." "I take John Boehner at his word."

Wow. This is the doom of which I speak.

In other words, Boehner said he would take the issue to the mat and fight intractably, and Obama accepted that at face value.

When is THAT going to be different? On what other issue will Obama have this much public support, from liberals AND conservatives, against such a clear-cut case of Republican policymaking on behalf of a wealthy minority, to the detriment of the country as a whole?

If he won't fight on this, what?

If not now, when?

Because as it stands, John Boehner and anyone pulling his strings are the effective Kings of America. Republicans will always promise to take it to the mat. They will always hold the public welfare hostage against wealthy private interests. But as long as Obama accepts that as The Way Things Work, no one will ever hold Republicans accountable, because he puts himself in the position of defending them against, in this case not only "the left," but a significant portion of his own party leadership, who will now have to likewise defend Republican tax policy to their constituents.

This is not chess, 10-dimensional or otherwise. It's poker, and he's not playing to win, but to stay at the table. Problem is, he bluffs too easily. Boehner and Co. were holding jokers this time. What happens when their hand is better, and the stakes are higher? They'll just threaten some other vital public interest, or a filibuster, and expect Obama to fold.

Is there any reason left for US to hope he won't?

[xchrom]

1. Recommend

[RandomThoughts]

2. The thing is, they havn't had a hand for years.

I would guess they are threatening him with releasing some damaging information.

Basically some smear. Or some other threat.


Thats what they did to me is smear me, maybe they are scared of ending up where I am, where is that anyways?


And why is there no beer and travel money? That is what I haven't figured out. That part does not make sense, hence why I think things are changing to correct that.

[polichick]

3. There's no reason for ME to hope he won't - to each his or her own. nt

[robinlynne]

4. The support of the American people against tax cuts for the rich, 70%, is

a winning poker hand. He folded with a full house.

[niceypoo]

9. But the Boner spoke, said there would be a fight....why even try?

Fold, fold, fold, blame his own supporters.

[amborin]

5. K&R

[niceypoo]

6. I have pretty much given up hope with Obama

I think the 'change' he believed in is about embracing the GOP, and abandoning the left.

[RKP5637]

19. There's a definite trend, isn't there. n/t

[femrap]

105. It bothers me that

Obama wants to cut SS payments...however he calls this 'the payroll tax.' Is he working with Luntz so to spin it 'correctly.'

Since I live in Dumfukistan, I bet many people don't equate the payroll tax to Social Security contribution.

I still feel as if I'm living in a nightmare.

[RKP5637]

110. Yep, and what bothers me is it will be permanently eliminated, because they

will say, "we can't do that now as much as we would like to because the economy is too fragile." And it will go on, just like the Bush tax cuts. And by the time the asleep Americans wake up it will be far too late. And then they will wonder WTF, and they will blame it on Obama, because the R's will tell them it's Obama's fault.

Yep, same here, "I still feel as if I'm living in a nightmare."

[DirkGently]

57. One way to "win" is to embrace the opposition's goals as your own. Question is, to what extent is

Obama actually doing that? I'm not in a hurry to question his motives. I still hear him SAYING the right things. But it looks increasingly like one of his strategies for success is to meet Republicans and wealthy interests not in the middle, but way over on their side. He then claims they forced him to do it and hollers at liberals for being unrealistic in objecting.

I refuse to adopt an unmitgated anti-Obama stance. I WANT him to do the right thing, and believe he wants to do the right thing.

But I wonder how much he wants it. I wonder if "change" is actually antithetical to his entire approach to politics and policymaking, which appears to be very much the same-old, same-old, precalculated, closed-door dealmaking in which he risks nothing, taking only what he can get without bringing the public into it.

And here's the most worrying part. I'm beginning to sense a certain flavor of CONTEMPT for the wishes of the people, the party, and the country at large. I've seen this dynamic before, between a company's Executive Committee and the Board of Directors. The Board is large, and tasked with the concerns of the company as a whole.

The Executives are certain only they "understand" what needs to be done and how it should be accomplished and begin to actively work work to deceive, defeat, and undermine the Board wherever it might interfere with the private logic the Executives have adopted for themselves. They become insular in their thinking and immune to or resentful of criticism that contradicts their agreed-upon worldview.

I worry Obama simply believes, as too many entrenched politicians do, that the People simply don't know what's good for them, and that things work more "smoothly" when they simply accept the explanation of the leaders, who generally are not as smart as they think they are, and often are corrupted by their own private prejudices and blind spots. The company fails, and "Board" is left holding the bag.

edited sytnax for. And the speling.

[pscot]

61. This is the broadest, most coherent critique

of Obama's governance that I've seen. No name calling or character assassination, just a strong, clear analysis of what we're seeing. Well done.

[Raksha]

67. I agree - excellent analysis. K & R

[DirkGently]

82. Thanks. I'd prefer we discuss our concerns vs. simply arguing that Obama is All Good or All Bad.

[nashville_brook]

68. in terms of the Obama approach to politics, can we name anything "change-y" or has it

mostly been tried and true tactics (back room deals) that support establishement organizations such as Wall Street Bankers.

Even his cabinet and staff picks - with the exception of E Warren - have been as *establishement* as they come.

Change? what change?

[Egnever]

96. I don't see that at all

What I see is a president that is frustrated from having to work with a senate that is horribly broken.

Time and again they have watered down the legislation he has wanted. It is far too easy for one or two senators to hold legislation hostage given the republicans willingness to vote No on everything.

I find the meme that he does not fight to be unrelated to reality. There are literally thousands of hours of footage of him in one state or another around the country since before he was elected till now with him calmly explaining what he is trying to accomplish. The are hundred of interview with him doing the same and you can find plenty of articles talking about him working the phones.

The blame needs to be where it belongs and the blame lie squarely with the senate. What is the average time in office for the current senate?The average is currently 14 years. So these are mostly the same people that were there when the Iraq war started. Did you really expect much better from that bunch?

Time and again I see it repeated here. "He talks a good game then caves" . Its not him caving its the senate. He cant force them to vote how he wants them to, and I don't see how he can do much more to try to get them to come to his position. He is using the bully pulpit he is doing interviews he is working the phones. What more do you expect him to do?

I am amazed at what Obama has been able to accomplish quite frankly given the make up and rules of the Senate.

No one is going to agree with everything he does but hanging all of your disappointments with the legislation he has got passed on him not being willing to fight well, that dog don't hunt.

[Art_from_Ark]

114. The "board" is never left holding the bag

The ones left holding the bag are the common shareholders.

[RKP5637]

115. I've been in a number of companies wherein this logic, as you described, prevailed and

they all failed.

[Art_from_Ark]

117. It is not the "Board" that is left holding the bag

when a company fails-- it is the common shareholders

[CrispyQ]

91. I expect he'll run on the repub ticket in '12.

;)

[somone]

7. The audacity of John Boehner, minority leader

"I couldn't convince John Boehner"
"I take John Boehner at his word"

WTF.

[niceypoo]

10. The audacity of spinelessness

[TwilightGardener]

8. This wasn't a battle between Obama and Republicans. This was a battle

between Obama and the Senate, including Democratic Senators, AND now a battle against the clock--in January he has to take whatever Republicans send him. And I don't think he coddled Republicans in his presser--he called them hostage takers. Edit to add: I think he's a little out of patience with the expectations of the far left, and got pissy, and you can fault him for that. I don't, but you can.

[diane in sf]

14. Protecting SS is not a far left position and neither is ending tax cuts for the rich

let the Repugs take the fall for not extending unemployment.

[DirkGently]

56. Hear the NPR interview today? Asked about spending cuts in the future, he went straight to SS

... and Medicare. Someone asked in one of these conversations where anyone came up with the notion Social Security was threatened by this deal. We got it from the President himself. He's telepgraphing again, and once again he appears to have hopped cleanly into the groove of the approved Beltway narrative: Social Security must be cut, so we don't have to pay back the money borrowed for wars and endless tax cuts for billionairs.

That's just The Way Things Work. And Obama is telling us, himself, that he has no intention of swimming against the current of popular D.C. wisdom, written by Republicans and their rich friends.

[glitch]

15. They take 'hostage takers' as a compliment. Makes 'em feel Rambo. nt

[pscot]

62. Not so

Lindsay Graham professes to be hurt that the President has framed it that way.

[nashville_brook]

27. spin so lame it's fallen down and can't get up.

[emulatorloo]

31. Didn't the Senate vote on "Middle Class Taxcuts Only" last Saturday? Yes, Republicans killed it

They don't have the votes in the Senate for middle class tax cuts only.

[GOTV]

51. They didn't have the votes YET. Votes change.

If you expect Obama to cave, and you want him to cave, you vote no. You don't vote no because you want people to suffer. You vote no because you want to pressure Obama to cave and then you get what you want, they get what they want and no one gets hurt.

There's got to be at least one person who would vote to extend UI and the middle class tax cuts only once they were convinced that no better deal was coming. There's probably more than one vote. But we don't know because Obama never pushed them to the wall.

[Egnever]

75. LOL the wall is here

What now? The ball is in the senates court yet again do you honestly think they will pass something without the top tax cuts?

Obama doesnt make the senate vote any particular way. Thats the senates responsibility.

Put the blame where it belongs!

I would be willing to put money on the fact that the senate will not get this deal done without the top taxes in place and that wont be Obamas fault. That failure will be purely the senates.

[GOTV]

81. The wall is several weeks away yet. What now? Obviously more votes. But some fight from Obama ...

... would help too.

[Egnever]

90. again the idea that Obama hasn't fought for this is ridiculous

he has been fighting for it since before he was elected. The blame lies squarely with the senate and the wall is only weeks away if you don't care about DADT coming to a vote or the start Treaty, Republicans are blocking any other votes until the tax legislation is done.

I want DADT done and i want the start treaty ratified as well and so does the president and if we let those two things go till the new house is in session then we get none of it including the tax deal the president worked out.

Heres a simple graphic of that deal btw



The left column shows the cost of the Republicans' high-end tax cuts in the deal; the middle column shows the cost of President Obama's progressive priorities like an extension of unemployment benefits; and the right column shows the cost of the tax cuts for those making under $250,000, which both parties generally supported. (The y axis is in billions of dollars.)

[GOTV]

101. You say he's fighting. I don't see it. His opponents have not a single hair out of place.

He was not fighting when he gave them a federal wage freeze for nothing.

He's not fighting when he gives in to their tax cuts and what he gets in return is more tax cuts they want.

Boehner said he'd pass a middle class tax cut... if he HAD to. Obama was not fighting when he protected Boehner from ever having to.

[Egnever]

102. Was he fighting when he said

The republicans were holding the american people hostage? You dont see it because the media isnt showing it to you.

[GOTV]

104. No he wasn't fighting then either.

It's easy to say they are holding the American people hostage. It's simply stating a fact.

He potentially achieved the release of the hostages by agreeing to their demands. That's not fighting and calling them bad names is not fighting either. To fight hostage takers you have to fight hostage takers not simply observe from afar "hey, those guys over there are hostage takers"

Praising the compromise and making the GOP seem helpful and reasonable is not fighting either. He could have come out with the compromise and told the American people that this agreement will seriously hurt our nation but the coming GOP majority will not let us have better.

Attacking and threatening his own party is fighting, I guess, but it's fighting the wrong guys. Why didn't he send Summers out before talking to the GOP to send out the talking point that if the GOP insists on holding the middle class tax cuts hostage we risk a double dip recession. They seem not to have the guts to pressure the GOP that way.

I suppose if I was principle free and just wanted to win, I'd fight the Dems over the GOP too. Recent history shows that the Dems don't have the stomach for a fight. The GOP are wrong and dangerous but they fight hard. Watch them. When you see Obama using their tactics you know he's started to fight.

[bertman]

42. He called them hostage takers. That's your reason for thinking this is a BATTLE??

The President called them a name. OH my fucking dog!! He is one tough dude.

Not only did he call them a name, he called them a name AFTER he gave up the fight.

He wanted to BATTLE. Really he did. Except he couldn't talk John Boehner into it. Or that fearsome Mitch 'the Chin' McConnell.

If he had wanted a BATTLE he would have been calling them Hostage Takers and WORSE for months. He would have been pointing out in no uncertain terms to the American people that the Republicans are UNpatriotic, SELFISH, UNAmerican whiners who will do anything except help govern. But, no he tried to talk them into being nice guys.

The President is too scared to battle anyone except the pissy 'far left' that got him elected and expected him to FIGHT for the CHANGE he promised.



Pathetic.

[Lorien]

46. No, this wasn't a battle between Obama and the repugs because THEY ARE ON THE SAME SIDE

and that is NOT the side of the people. It's the side of the wealthy and the giant multinational corporate interests and Banksters. It's far past time that you woke up to this FACT.

[caseymoz]

47. Out of patience for the far Left? I'd say that's an entitlement mentality.

He promised to take stands. No, if he's doing this now, it's because his allegiance was never with the left, or even the center. He just had enough contempt to lie to us brazingly. And if he's blaming us for not supporting him now, it's because he never had respect for us to begin with, not even enough to tell anything close to the truth during his campaign, which actually went back to 2004.

I'm in despair about him. After Bush's uppercut, Obama is the jab that will put this country on the mat.

[Recursion]

71. Huh?

He promised to take stands.

Eh? He promised to reach across the aisle and cut deals with the other side, so that things would actually get accomplished.

[liberation]

84. It's not the "reaching across" which is the issue...

it is the "reach around" which presents a problem.

[caseymoz]

85. He promised to reach, he didn't say he'd reach and hand off.

And if he "reaches" and the other side doesn't, he's under no obligation to make them reach, too. Especially when their stated, basic goal is to sink him in 2012. Under those circumstances, progressives would not blame him if "reaching" had no results.

But they would blame him for the other promises that he isn't as motivated to keep. His promises were not just to "reach across the aisle." He talked about the stands he would take, how his would be the most transparent government, how he would close Guantanamo, to end Don't Ask Don't Tell, he gave us a "health care" reform after after secretly and deceitfully gutting it out of sight. If you need it, I'll compile an entire list of what he promised besides "reaching out and giving away." Why does he bend over backward to reach but doesn't give as much effort to any other promise?

Now, I'm lazy, but I assure you that list of his broken campaign promises exist, and it's much longer than the one I've given. I know this because I've seen it, I have vivid memories of the many times I've been disgusted by him.

And so now his supporters are faithless or foolish because they believed the set of promises he wanted them to believe to get voted in as President, and not the the extremity of the "reach across the aisle" one that he had in mind? We believed him out of hope and desperation that he was different, that he would never play us exactly the way he was playing us. You could crush people's hopes, but when you play on their desperation too, things could get dangerous and unstable now.

At this point in his presidency, Barrack Obama has to be on any list of the ten worst presidents. I feel much the same way I did with Bush, like I'm on a roller coaster barfing. The worst thing about it: it won't stop until the ride is ended.

[Hell Hath No Fury]

11. It scares me.

Clearly he is be willing to negotiate just about anything away so long as it got results. Good results, bad results, not necessarily important, just movement of some sort.

It is going to be a hellacious two years to go. :(

[RKP5637]

18. To say the least, I have a lot of grave trepidation about the next two years. n/t

[Hell Hath No Fury]

12. "The fix is in..."

The fix was in with Pharma from the get go, the fix was in on the public option, and now the fix was in with the Bush tax cuts.

[somone]

16. Yep. Premeditated and choreographed

It's hard to believe otherwise

[dgibby]

53. Don't forget Wall St and the Banks. n/t

[nashville_brook]

13. Nailed it, dirk!

[Norrin Radd]

17. kr

[BlueCheese]

20. This was an excellent post.

Thanks, OP.

What an amazing spectacle we see now. On an issue that was as slam-dunk as it ever gets in politics--as you say, the Democrats' position has huge public support, while the Republican position has little--Obama conceded immediately to the Republicans. And now the administration is on TV and in the news siding with the GOP and blaming House Democrats for blocking economic recovery! They've somehow managed to come up with a situation in which it looks as if the GOP is the one that wants all the good things in the bill, and the Democrats aren't.

This is political malpractice of the highest order. It's so egregious, in fact, that you almost have to wonder whether if it's deliberate.

[DirkGently]

41. "political malpractice" so egregious you almost have to wonder if it's deliberate. Exactly so.

[dgibby]

54. Excellent op, Dirk! Thanks!

Maybe the Dems can get Issa to investigate.

[donheld]

21. Do I not remember correctly. Didn't Barack Obama campaign on ending backroom deals?

I could swear I heard that from him. Now that seems to be the ONLY way he does things.

[Hell Hath No Fury]

22. Yes. And lots of sunshine.

And then practically the first thing he did was cut a deal with Pharma. :eyes:

[COLGATE4]

23. Why do I have the nagging feeling that we were suckered???

[Hell Hath No Fury]

25. Cause we were.

Can't pretend it's anything else, now.

[True_Blue]

64. He changed his position on repealing the Bush tax cuts right after he won

WASHINGTON, Nov. 24, 2008

"Obama May Not Repeal Bush Tax Cuts"

(AP) An economic crisis, rising joblessness and a credit squeeze can make a president-elect refine his words. Today's word is "repeal."

During his presidential campaign, Barack Obama promised to repeal President George W. Bush's tax cuts for the wealthy ahead of their scheduled expiration in 2011. It was part of how Obama would pay for an overall net tax cut aimed at low- and middle-income taxpayers, and an effort to bring what he called "fairness" to the tax system.

No one is talking tax hikes now.

Over the weekend, Obama said he has charged his new economic team with devising a plan that would create or preserve 2.5 million jobs over two years. He said the plan would include broad spending plans as well as the middle- and low-income tax cuts he described during the campaign.

Aides later said the plan would not include any of the tax increases Obama, as a candidate, had said he would impose on taxpayers who make more than $250,000.
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2008/11/24/politics/main4631105.shtml?source=RSSattr=Politics_4631105

[nashville_brook]

26. Change you can Believe in!

If you're in the backroom, that is.

[donheld]

30. We got punked.

[nashville_brook]

35. if only Ashton Kutcher were the evil mastermind behind this!

:(

[KoKo]

73. and the MSM was happy to report he met and worked deal with Repugs and Dems in House were angry...

Why would Obama have wanted that out there. That he met in backroom deal with Repugs? It was like poking stick in eyes of not only the Left but Dems in Congress.

Candy Crowley was carrying on this a.m. on CNN that Obama would now have to move away from his position on the "Left" to work with the center and Republicans on moving the country forward. She was repeating this as a talking point that could have come straight from Limbaugh. She's terrible but I've not seen her so blatently lie.

[RKP5637]

116. Ah, yes, I remember it well, the transparent government fable. The masses ate

it up.

[mdmc]

24. r

[tpsbmam]

28. K&R!! nt

[Blecht]

29. Well said

You articulated what I've been thinking -- great job.

[laughingliberal]

32. K & R nt

[Poboy]

33. Of course the fix is in. He said it himself.

"This is the Health care debate all over again".

To your OP though, yes doom and defeat.
He is HOPEless.

[nashville_brook]

34. that's a great point.

[DirkGently]

37. Puts the same bad taste in the mouth, doesn't it?

[bullwinkle428]

36. When he said it was a "long game" the other day, I was thinking more like "long con".

[myrna minx]

38. K&R for this astute and disturbing essay that chills me to the bone.

*deep sigh*

[leftstreet]

39. K&R

[bertman]

40. The explanation doesn't get any better or more accurate than that. REC. nt

[Quantess]

43. K & R

[LiberalLovinLug]

44. I've been trying to understand his strategy

Thanks, you've expressed many of our frustrations.

Its almost like his idea is not to begin a negotiation with a traditional demand from the other side. The reason is he can see that it may lead to a stand off. He cleverly surmises that the only way he is guaranteed to make a deal with those that laugh at him behind his back and swear they will NEVER allow him to claim a done deal, is to give them what they want and simply take whatever they give back in exchange.

He's like a nerdy kid leader who thinks he's figured out a way to bridge the gap between the nerds and the bullies. A way that maybe they won't beat him up after school. So he sullies on up to the bully on the other side of the playground with his hand behind his back and with a sly smile chides the kid with "I got something I know you want" and shows him his lunch money. Then goes on "And you know what, I'm going to give it to you by the end of the day, not only my money but all my friends on this side. All you have to do is offer us something back...anything" So the bully goes off and thinks about it, and comes back with a rock. The nerdy kid says "Excellent.. so you are admitting we have a deal?...That I have actually succeeded in preventing a beat down today, and that the bullies and the nerds can shake hands and agree on something?" Well the bully can hardly believe his ears. "Uh...sure thing dufus" He quickly snatches the money and says his buddies will be around to collect the rest of the lunch money from the other nerds.

So the king nerd goes back and proudly explains his achievement to his underlings. He is shocked by all the grumbling. They don't want to hand over all their lunch money, especially for a bunch of rocks! The nerd king is exasperated at their response. "Can't you see what I did for you? I got the bullies to agree to leave us alone for today, surely that's a great achievement!" And sure enough, all the bullies are real nice during the day when rocks are exchanged for $.

As he walks home satisfied, the nerd king is still baffled why some of his followers are miffed at him for his deal. He quickly dismisses it and starts to think about other things that the bullies may like, in fact he is so lost in thought that he doesn't realize until its too late that he is surrounded by the bully leader and his gang. As the group descends on him he cries out "Hey...I thought we had a deal"

[nashville_brook]

48. this is such a great metaphor...you should post this as an OP

i think this is one of the reasons that people are responding so strongly against this. we've been thru this before.

he negotiates as if he's not on our side, but wants to be honored for being our HERO!

just look at this graph -- this does not show negotiations that are "on our side." the small blue dots represent the Dem plan. the large blue dots represent the GOP plan.

The black dots represent Obama's "compromise." notice how he gives MORE money to the filthy rich than even the GOP asked for!

[Duppers]

63. +100

:thumbsup:

[Duppers]

70. I agree w/Nashville Brook - Post this in an OP

thanks.

:thumbsup:

[chill_wind]

45. Goolsbee was a chief economist think tanker for the DLC.

That's who he's listening to. The DLC made no mystery of its positions at the deficit panel commission and its eager appeasements to the Right for things like the two year extension of tax breaks for the rich. And for making older Americans work even longer for SS. With "democratic" friends like that, who needs Republicans?

[nashville_brook]

58. He was on rachel's show last nite. Just awful.

[chill_wind]

72. He was lost without his whiteboard prop. One trick pony. n/t

[nashville_brook]

98. Yes! I thought it was funny that Rachel mentioned his whiteboard in that context....

Something like shame you don't have it with you...'

[Poboy]

49. kick

[PVnRT]

50. K&R

[reflection]

52. Outstanding read. Thank you. k/r, n/t

[russspeakeasy]

55. I don't forgive and I don't forget.

[olegramps]

59. Just admit it. We elected the Wimp of Wimps.

All he has done is make back-room deals that have sold us out on every important issue. He isn't even aware of what the citizens desire let alone his own party. This compromise is totally unacceptable. He not only gave the wealthy their tax break he threw in a reduction in inheritance taxes to allow the wealthy corporate rip-offs to keep their ill gotten gains along with maintaining a paltry 15% tax on capital gains. Unfortunately, I will have to contend myself with the reality that he will be our candidate in 2012.

[DirkGently]

60. What's really hard to grasp is why he doesn't get that's the impression he's giving politically.

[Egnever]

76. Its fairly simple

He doesnt care about political perception. He cares about progress.

[DirkGently]

78. That might hold water if surrendering to Republicans was progress, & didn't hamstring future efforts

[Egnever]

86. lol surrendering to republicans

The senate failed to pass the tax cuts when they were decoupled from the tax cuts from the rich Twice! What part of that don't you get?

You might be willing to raise the middle classes taxes right now and slide the economy back into recession I am not and thankfully neither is the president.

Maybe his deal will force Reid to get off his ass and actually make something better happen but I doubt it. The senate and its ridiculous filibuster rules Have watered down every single piece of legislation Obama has attempted to get through yet somehow its obama capitulating to the republicans.

The meme is as obnoxious as it is ignorant of the political realities of the senate and its effect on any legislation that needs to be passed.

[DirkGently]

87. Sounds like you and the President share a contempt for Congressional Dems. Everyone's wrong but him?

[davidthegnome]

93. Wow

There's so much spin in there I'm getting dizzy.

[Egnever]

100. So refute it

Cause what you posted didnt come close to it.

[nashville_brook]

95. Yes, actually. Surrendering to Republicans...there's no other description especially when you shun

Your own party.

[Egnever]

103. Shun your own party

:rofl: Not much hyperbole there.

[nashville_brook]

108. Did you miss the news yesterday? Yes, he shunned the party outright. Not only that, he shunned

a much more politically astute deal that Schumer put together.

[Paladin]

118. You Want Hyperbole?

Check out this week's columns by the likes of David Brooks and Charles Krauthammer. The right-wing spewers are proclaiming Obama a genuine statesman for the first time, they can't say enough good things about him---because Obama finally snarled at and shunned his party enough to suit their purposes. Hell, even Limbaugh was having trouble saying something ugly. Perhaps that's the kind of hyperbole you can believe in.....

[democracy1st]

65. K & R

[True_Blue]

66. Excellent Post!

:kick:

[The Backlash Cometh]

69. Wow. He's not a fighter.

One wonders where the Civil Rights movement would be today if he were a leader of the Black movement at that time.

[Egnever]

74. Heplessly ignorant

He had them vote on the tax cuts for people witth incomes below 250k and it failed then they voted again on them extending the cuts up to 1 million and it failed again.

No fight my ass. He has been stumping on this since before he was elected over and over and over. Times up ! If he digs in now millions will feel the pain of his principled stand.

Point your anger where it belongs. The do nothing Senate! They have watered down his agenda time and time again since the day he was elected. He cant force them to his will.

[DirkGently]

79. Why take the point on the surrender then? He took the ball from Congress and handed it to the GOP.

[Egnever]

83. The senate surrendered

they failed to pas the tax cuts twice without the top tax rates. I don't understand the disconnect. He has been talking g to them about it for over two years and they have failed to act and now we are up against the wire. Something has to be done.

I agree with the president now is not the time to take the middle class tax cuts away or the UI benefits. What choice does he have at this point if he thinks as do i that allowing those cuts for the middle class to go away right now would be disastrous for our economy. He has to get them through or risk the whole hose of cards come crashing down once again.

The senate has shown they are not willing to do the work to get a deal, so Obama made an end run. Now all of a sudden The Dem's in the senate want a fight. How noble of them at the midnight hour.

Once again Obama has been arguing against those top cuts since before he got elected, The senate has been unable to act on anything that decouples those cuts. There are two choices left at this point allow them to expire and risk sliding the economy into worse unemployment or try to make a deal that will pass and get what you can from it. He found a deal he could get passed and got some extras that should help the economy as well from it.

I don't see a problem with that and if it spurs the worthless senate to actually put something better together well all the better but pretending they could just be passed without the top tax rates defies reality especially when the vote was taken and failed just two weeks ago.

[davidthegnome]

94. You don't see a problem with that?

I'm no economics major - but even I know that borrowing billions of dollars to extend tax cuts for the wealthy is a BAD idea. Even I can understand that extending unemployment benefits for a small percentage of the unemployed does not make up for deepening the debt and allowing the wealthy and their servants in congress to hold the Nation hostage. Do you really think that the rich will begin hiring due to this tax cut extension? Do you think unemployment won't continue to rise because of it? This is putting a band-aid on a severed limb, it will not stop the bleeding, it will do nothing to heal the wound, the poor in this Nation are already bleeding to death - extending unemployment benefits will help some, but very few in the ultimate comparison.

If Obama wanted a fight, he could have actually... you know, fought, on any number of issues. It would have won him some respect. The tax cuts were a bad idea to begin with and should be eliminated altogether. It is insane, despicable and outrageous that the republicans USE the unemployed as they are using them now to support the frigging wealthy. How can you not see that? How can you not see, that by giving in on this issue - regardless of his reasoning, he is betraying what he claimed to stand for and betraying the American people altogether?

[donco6]

77. He just handed Boner the keys to the kingdom.

Obama is now completely powerless. He basically emasculated himself with this act, and followed it up with his comments. And we still have two years to go!

[DeSwiss]

80. K&R

We were all played.

[katty]

88. Chicago politicking

[emilyg]

89. yep

[bongbong]

92. New Definitions

I used this one on another thread:

"US Strategic Interests" = "We Can Blow Up Anybody And Any Country We Want To So Our Billionaires Can Get Richer"

Now I will add this one:

"Helping Economic Recovery" = "Let's Not Just Billions Away To The Billionaires, Let's Give Trillions Away"

[EstimatedProphet]

97. Obama revealed his basic political problem during this last round of addresses

He said in effect, that compromise is a goal in itself. "This country was built on compromise" etc. etc.

Compromise can never be a goal in and of itself, because it isn't an end outcome. It's a process for negotiating. If compromise is taken as an end goal, look at what happens - every time a deal is reached, it will be invalid unless a compromise is involved in some way. I think that by nature Obama is drawn to compromising, even in cases where it isn't needed and is detrimental.

[Big Blue Marble]

99. Brilliant analysis. N/T

[Divernan]

106. In my class on negotiating legal settlements, we were taught to ALWAYS

make our opponents be the first to put a number on the table. And if someone opined they thought the case was worth , say $40,000 to $60,000, we immediately knew they'd take $40,000 and began negotiating downward from that (or upward, depending on which side of the negotiating table we were sitting).

Obama does signal months ahead of time what he's planning to sell out for. Now he's signalling about revising the tax code to "close loopholes". Well those loopholes won't be the ones the wealthy use via their estate planners; they will be for items the middle class rely upon, like interest deductions for mortgages and home equity loans, and probably sheltering income in IRAs until you retire and can withdraw your money and be taxed at a lower rate. Maybe he'll take away the already pitiful deductions for health insurance/long term care insurance. Those of you who are old enough can recall when Regan took away the deductions for most interest payments, and a huge chunk of medical deductions. My family had committed to years of car payments, and was carrying significant debt on credit cards because inflation was rampant and it was cheaper to buy now and stretch payments out, because prices were steadily climbing and it was cheaper to lock in a lower price and pay interest when the interest was a tax deduction. We did the math on it and it was the smart thing to do. Until Ronnie pulled the rug out from under us. There should have been a grandfather clause on interest assumed before Regan changed the law. THAT would have been fair.

For those of us already retired, whose retirement savings were wiped out by the Bush financial debacle, we are JUST getting by. It's a struggle for me to pay monthly Long Term Care Insurance bills. I do it so I won't be a financial and physical burden on my kids, who have lost jobs, lost homes and gone through bankruptcy. At least I get to deduct a portion of those on my taxes. I'm not counting on that after Obama, the GOP majority and his corporate masters get through with messing with the tax code next spring. We know he'll do what the GOP want, we know it will screw all us proletariat, and we know the Democrats will get the blame for it. Reminds me of how one criminal attorney (she's a GOP state committeewoman) told me she handled her cases. She told her clients, whom she described as both stupid and guilty, "Here's how it works. You pay me my hefty retainer up front. I get the money, you go to jail." The GOP gets what it wants in the legislation & any PR benefits for their big donors; the Dems get the blame from everyone who gets screwed over.

Other than that onetime, $250 payment to seniors in lieu of a social security COLA last year, Obama has done squat for me - and I was one who donated to his primary and final election, as well as putting in many hours phonebanking and going door to door (with my bad knees in a hilly community). And it's not all about what he has done for me. Unlike his big ticket donors, I didn't expect any personal payback - but I truly beleived he would get us out of Afghanistan, close GITMO, provide at least a pilot program of public option health care to create some competition for the bloodsucking health insurance companies, reverse Bush's pandering to big corporate interests, to name a few of the campaign promises upon which he's reneged. The wealthy are getting their political payback, the rest of us are gettig knifed in the back.

[DirkGently]

107. That take on the tax "loopholes" did not occur to me. I hope you're wrong, but fear you are not.

[nashville_brook]

109. he also said that the upcoming tax reform would *hopefully* lower taxes

and he DIDN'T specify that who would enjoy the "hopefully" lowered taxes. i just heard the soundbite again on NPR -- and after everything that's happened, i can't imagine that he'd be "fighting" for my taxes to be lowered...unless it's the lowering of the payroll tax in the hopes of starving Social Security.

we are so screwed.

[NuttyFluffers]

111. dupe, n/t

so sorry. :)

[NuttyFluffers]

112. reminds me of cyclical games of abuse. dad beats mom, mom beats child...

child beats smaller siblings/classmates, etc.

none of them stands up to their abuser, but instead takes their side, gives them excuses, explain why they deserve their beatings, etc...

i just about lost it when -- after assiduously avoiding the bully pulpit against republicans -- President Obama used it TWICE in a matter of days to brow beat his base (and one bringing in Clinton as some sort of heavy!?!?). i call bullshit. he could not have possibly fought FOR us as hard as he is currently fighting AGAINST us. and that tips his hand about his whole game; and it's a very familiar and inexcusable game.

i don't do drama. i'm sick of it, and i refuse to play. i don't play sick games of abuse -- and that's how i see this whole drama.

[BrklynLiberal]

113. The repukes have total control of this game...It is sad, scary and disappointing.

[KoKo]

119. And with Clinton to the rescue last night giving his Press Conference

the deed on SS/Medicare will be done. Clinton parroted Obama, saying cuts will have to be made that won't make anyone happy. Clinton referred to the "financial meltdown" as if it was some abstraction. Now that he has his "Foundation" with funds from Wall Streeters he has even more interest in making sure that the American Public thinks "Financial Meltdown" is some dreadful thing that just happened to Americans and not the result of the demise of "Glass-Steagal" that Clinton allowed to go through without a veto. Clinton (a Democrat) allowed the deregulation that had been put in place during the depression to separate banks. Even this Congress refused to put back the regulations that allowed the Banksters to create a housing bubble causing chaos so bad that we taxpayers had to bail the whole of Wall Street out and suffer with houses and 401-K's that lost much of their value in the meltdown while Banksters reaped bonuses and still are reaping bonuses to this day off the funds that we bailed their employers out with.

[nashville_brook]

121. wow -- this makes my gut hurt. you're right, of course.

and we're done. stick a fork in us. we're being handed over to the wolves.

[54anickel]

120. Remember, it's all for the best....

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YnIW-eIAJxE



Some men are born to live at ease, doing what they please,
Richer than the bees are in honey
Never growing old, never feeling cold
Pulling pots of gold from thin air
The best in every town, best at shaking down
Best at making mountains of money
They can't take it with them, but what do they care?
They get the center of the meat, cushions on the seat
Houses on the street where it's sunny..
Summers at the sea, winters warm and free
All of this and we get the rest...
But who is the land for? The sun and the sand for?
You guessed! It's all for the best...

When you feel sad, or under a curse
Your life is bad, your prospects are worse
Your wife is crying, sighing...
And your olive tree is dying,
Temples are graying, and teeth are decaying
And creditors weighing your purse...
Your mood and your robe
Are both a deep blue
You'd bet that Job
Had nothin' on you...
Don't forget that when you go to Heaven you'll be
blessed...
You guessed! It's all for the best

You must never be distressed
Yes, it's all for the....
All your wrongs will be redressed
Yes, it's all for the....
Someone's got to be oppressed!

Yes, it's all for the best!!!

:sarcasm:
:sarcasm: :sarcasm: :sarcasm: :sarcasm: :sarcasm: :sarcasm: :sarcasm: :sarcasm: