Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Why not do this all the time?

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » General Discussion Donate to DU
 
kpete Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Sep-19-11 09:40 AM
Original message
Why not do this all the time?
Why not do this all the time?
by David Atkins ("thereisnospoon")



Let's be clear: the President's approach to politics over the previous 18 months has been just short of disastrous. If negative pressure from progressive groups was responsible for the President's spine, then progressive critics will have saved the day and perhaps the 2012 election.

more:
http://digbysblog.blogspot.com/2011/09/why-not-do-this-all-time-by-david.html

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
vi5 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Sep-19-11 09:53 AM
Response to Original message
1. The only reason they're doing it now...
Is because it's re-election time. It's probably killing them to have to tack even slightly left. The reason they haven't been doing this all along is because they don't want to because they don't want any of this stuff but need to do it in order to not completely lose their base.

Nobody serious about any of this stuff would have had an economic team stacked with the goons that were and are in this White House.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ProSense Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Sep-19-11 09:53 AM
Response to Original message
2. So
<...>

Credit for popular proposals including tax increases on the wealthy and drawdowns of unpopular wars:

Mr. Obama will call for $1.5 trillion in tax increases, primarily on the wealthy, through a combination of closing loopholes and limiting the amount that high earners can deduct...Senior administration officials who briefed reporters on some of the details of Mr. Obama’s proposal said that the plan also counts a savings of $1.1 trillion from the ending of the American combat mission in Iraq and the withdrawal of American troops from Afghanistan.

Props for not increasing the Medicare eligibility age:

Administration officials said that the Medicare cuts would not come from an increase in the Medicare eligibility age.

A show of strength by the President; no "weakness" or "capitulation" talk:

In laying out his proposal, aides said, Mr. Obama will expressly promise to veto any legislation that seeks to cut the deficit through spending cuts alone and does not include revenue increases in the form of tax increases on the wealthy.


<...>


...those who have been saying that the President ignores and hates progressives, calling him every derogatory name in the book, are going to take credit for his proposal?




Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
kentuck Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Sep-19-11 10:20 AM
Response to Reply #2
3. That's right!
Doesn't make sense to you, does it?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ProSense Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Sep-19-11 10:24 AM
Response to Reply #3
5. What
"That's right! Doesn't make sense to you, does it? "

...is right: those who have been saying that the President ignores and hates progressives, calling him every derogatory name in the book, are going to take credit for his proposal?

No, it doesn't make sense. In fact, it seems like a blatant attempt to rewrite history.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Pab Sungenis Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Sep-19-11 10:36 AM
Response to Reply #5
6. No, claiming that the President has governed progressively in the past
is rewriting history.

This is a change in direction for the President. And a change for the better. Fear of losing his base is forcing him to do the right thing.

Look at his record on gay rights: abysmal until he lost the Democrats nearly a quarter of the gay vote in 2010. Then suddenly it was an acceleration on DADT and a 180 degree turn on DOMA.

Now he's finally decided to govern like a progressive. Good for him. Let's see him keep it up.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ProSense Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Sep-19-11 11:12 AM
Response to Reply #6
7. Hmmm?
"No, claiming that the President has governed progressively in the past is rewriting history."

History.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Pab Sungenis Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Sep-19-11 11:40 AM
Response to Reply #7
10. Bank bailout.
Extension of Bush tax cuts.
Extension of wars.
The "health care reform" sell-out.
The first stimulus loaded down with tax cuts.
Scrapping the second stimulus.

That's history.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Name removed Donating Member (0 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Sep-19-11 10:21 AM
Response to Reply #2
4. Deleted message
Sub-thread removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.
 
in_cog_ni_to Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Sep-19-11 11:12 AM
Response to Original message
8. He had to enrich Wall Street and the Corporations first. Besides that...it's ELECTION TIME!
He'll play nice with Progressives, we will fall for the rhetoric, he'll win reelection and after he does...it will be the same old shit. We never learn. Every election cycle we are played like fiddles...and fall for it every time. :(
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ProSense Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Sep-19-11 11:20 AM
Response to Reply #8
9. Actually,
Edited on Mon Sep-19-11 11:21 AM by ProSense
"He had to enrich Wall Street and the Corporations first. Besides that...it's ELECTION TIME!"

...he had to pass health care reform and save the economy first.

Senator Franken: The importance of the Reocovery Act

Tuesday, September 28, 2010

M. President, I rise today to discuss something I regret. I regret that Democrats have allowed the word "stimulus" to become a dirty word, one we avoid using. The President spoke a few weeks ago about his new plan to invest $50 billion in new infrastructure-projects that will improve safety and transportation. But he never once mentioned the words "stimulus" or "recovery." And that was probably a smart move on his part. Because frankly, the stimulus has gotten a bad rap. But this is a reputation that it absolutely does not deserve.

There are members of this body who opposed the Recovery Act because they thought it wouldn't work. It didn't jibe with their theory of economics, or how the government should address recessions. And that's fine. They were entitled to vote the way they thought best. But now, a year and a half later, we've been able to see the economic effects of the Recovery Act. And to deny that it has been a success is simply ignoring the data.

A recent poll showed that a majority of Americans believe that the stimulus bill either did nothing to help the economy, or made it even worse. The economic data, however, indicate otherwise. How do we explain this disparity between what people believe and what the data support?

Members of the American public don't form opinions out of thin air. They engage themselves-they watch the news, they listen to speeches by elected officials. And one would expect that watching the news and listening to your elected officials would be a decent way to form an opinion about something. But unfortunately, the talking heads on the news shows, along with many elected officials, having been feeding the American public half-truths about the Recovery Act. And that, frankly, is cheating the American people out of the facts.

Today I'd like to go through some of these claims made by the talking heads and elected officials, and then follow it up with some data. And that way the American people can use the facts to decide for themselves.

<...>

Another vital component of the Recovery Act that is often overlooked is its expanded funding for unemployment insurance that helped keep 3.3 million people, including 1 million children, out of poverty in 2009. Another overlooked but critical program in the Recovery Act is the funding for Head Start. The $2 billion allocation preserved Head Start and Early Head Start programming for 64,000 children across the country-over 900 in Minnesota alone. These programs are helping the most vulnerable kids in our communities.
It's simple-economic analysis suggests that the Recovery Act boosted demand, created millions of jobs, kept families in their homes, and helped the economy start growing again.

Let me tell you what I love about being a Senator. As opposed to being a candidate for Senate. I think most of my colleagues can relate to this. When you're a candidate, you're speaking mainly to your own party. When you're trying to get the nomination, when you're getting out the vote. But as a Senator, you talk to everyone. I travel all over the state of Minnesota and meet with mayors and city council members, and county commissioners, and small businesses.

And everywhere I go, they thank me for the Recovery Act. They thank me for the teachers and firefighters, for the Workforce Investment Act funds, which they used to train people for jobs. For the highway extension or the wastewater plant or the funds for rural broadband or for weatherization of public buildings.

In fact, Michael Gunwald, writing for Time Magazine, said this: "the Recovery Act is the most ambitious energy legislation in history, converting the Energy Department into the world's largest venture-capital fund. It's pouring $90 billion into clean energy, including unprecedented investments in a smart grid; energy efficiency; electric cars; renewable power from the sun, wind and earth; cleaner coal; advanced biofuels; and factories to manufacture green stuff in the U.S. The act will also triple the number of smart electric meters in our homes, quadruple the number of hybrids in the federal auto fleet and finance far-out energy research through a new government incubator modeled after the Pentagon agency that fathered the Internet."

A few weeks ago I heard a prominent conservative talking head on one of the Sunday news shows describe the Recovery Act this way. He said:

If I pay my neighbor $1,000 to dig a hole in my backyard and fill it up again and he pays me $1,000 to dig a hole in his backyard and fill it up again, according to the national income statistics, that's a $2,000 increment to GDP and two jobs have been created. The American people understand, however, there's no real wealth created in this kind of transfer payment.

How out of touch. How downright offensive. And yet this is why so many Americans believe that the Recovery Act hasn't created any jobs or just created jobs for bureaucrats.

You know, I worry that my speech today is too little, too late. I worry that many Americans have already formed their opinion about the Recovery Act-based on the inaccuracies they hear from beltway pundits or from their elected officials.

But, I challenge the talking heads and the elected officials to find the Spencers, Sheilas, Cecils, and Randys in their state-go out and watch them work. Or talk to a teacher in the classroom or a cop on the beat. They're not digging and filling holes in their neighbors' backyards. They're doing skilled, hard, necessary work-rebuilding our roads, teaching our kids-and getting paid for it. With their paychecks, they buy food for their families-which generates more demand. And that's an economic recovery in the making.



Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Pab Sungenis Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Sep-19-11 11:46 AM
Response to Reply #9
11. The "health care reform" that was a giveaway to the insurance industry
by mandating that we all purchase their products?

The same "plan" Dole had in 1996?

No thank you.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Ichingcarpenter Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Sep-19-11 12:02 PM
Response to Original message
12. I don't trust him anymore... supercomputer models are
telling the system that they must give in a little to the populace or else.

Calculated risks are no longer just a term but are in governmental assessments that can be determined by factors imputed into our super computers.

Yeah, I know that sounds like science fiction but
its not. The NSA and other agencies have and use
these computers to analyze data.

I used the most powerful computer in Florida to look at right wing vote in 74 to look at correlations of trends, religion, race, education etc..... that computer strength
is what you have on your laptop these days.


Obama is the better choice you have
but the system is not in his control.








Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Fri Dec 27th 2024, 04:53 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » General Discussion Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC