"Sanctimonious pride in the purity of their own positions"......Sounds like conservative republicans to me. President Obama is describing republicans. Yes indeed the republicans take pride in the purity of their positions and they fight with everything they have. WHY is it wrong for democrats to fight? Why is it wrong for democrats to be arrogant and show a forceful pride in their core beliefs? They seem to fear the big fight against the big bad republicans.
President Obama says he will visit the tax cut extension for the rich in 2012. That is a joke! No way will he put himself in that position during a campaign....
Democratic caucuses are meeting tonight and again tomorrow. The shit is hitting the fan, stay tuned, this is far from over...
UPDATE: Shaw breaks it down beautifully, please read her post!!
37 comments:
Frodo would remind friends of the poetry of Walt Whitman. Frodo also laments the fact that LaBron James personal tax bill was just reduced by $666,666 for next year, but he also believes that ending "don't ask, don't tell" has to happen, and soon.
Nobody ever remembers how the Captain got the ship home, but they never forget if he fails to do so.
Now don't go all wobbly on me, Sue.
I suggest you and our other liberal friends read what Andrew Sullivan thinks about this.
Also, our very liberal friend, Lawrence O'Donnell, has just stated on his show "The Last Word" that this was the best POSSIBLE deal Obama could get with the Republicans before they take over the House and all the committees that actually write tax laws.
Fa corragio!
The President just made a serious tactical blunder...again....in insulting and lecturing those who put him in office while seeking compromise with those who have done all in their power to destroy his presidency from Day One.
How many (hours, days, weeks) do you think will pass before a DRAFT HILLARY in 2012 movement starts somewhere in cyberspace?
Answer....OMG! There already is a petition to draft Hillary in 2012- and it's been signed by over 300 people!
Ah Shaw my friend.
What Obama is failing to realize is how desperate the republicans were to serve their wealthy benefactors.
He has shown incredible weakness toward republicans. They smell blood and they are on a feeding frenzy. I don't see how they can be stopped because the irony is they arew the party of no. But nobody has yet to tell them no.
You can't show weakness towards your opponent and despite all this blather about comprimise and we're all Americans and the people want them to work together, it ain't gonna happen.
I'll probably get beat up by my left leaning cohorts here but what we need is for Obama to be more like Bush. Decisive and sticking to his agenda. Just not be a freaking moron.
Obama is losing his supporters all over the place. This is just a microcosm of what's going on in Liberal Land. There are hundreds of thousands, maybe millions of bloggers just like us talking about the same thing. Obama doesn't have much time to straighten up. If Congress passes this deficit exploding pander to the rich deal Obama made I'll most likely be signing the Draft Hillary petition I have in my email inbox.
Olberman turned his back on Obama tonight during his special comment.
I guess he has finally had enough of this Manchurian Candidate.
The "Obama apologists" will keep bowing to him, the same as O has bowed to the Corporatistas.
This has made the dems and O null and void for a long long time.
A true progressive campaign must start.
And NO Shillary is not the answer.
She is a uber Neolib war mongering hawk.
A true progressive peace candidate must arise out of these ashes.
How long are we going to beat up on Barack Obama for the economic desaster he inherited from George W. Bush?
You don’t see Republicans fracturing into a million pieces as we Democrats (liberals and progressives) do over every issue.
Ever think that might be where they get their strength?
I had my say about this in a brief post on DemWit.
Reality (?) Zone: “A true progressive peace candidate must arise out of these ashes.” Would that be a real winner like, say, Dennis Kucinich?
This is a time for cool heads and less rhetoric.
BJ
If any issue in the past 2 years has me wobbled it's this one. When I listen to the facts what is in the legislation then I see clearly Obamas reasoning. Then when I listen to angry progressives like Bernie Sanders I get angry all over again. What makes me most angry is the republicans hypocrisy over the deficit problem while demanding tax cuts to the rich without them being paid for. So in the next 2 years the GOP will be fixated on SS and Medicare as a way to reduce debt. I'm not gonna predict what the next election will bring but I do want to see democrats unite behind our president. NO president gives his party 100% of their desires.
Remember the democratic caucuses are working on this as we speak, there still so much going on.
I think all of us here have been reasonable in our debate on these taxcut extensions, want to read a delusional hateful wingnut MF'er talking bullshit on Obama, check out Malcontent. This person can't possibly be an American, he must be from Pluto....
Sorry B.J, but apologists' apologies cannot make up for the fact that this President has been way too quick to cut and run every time the 40% Rushpubliscums stomped their feet.
Yes, the Rushpubliscums held the unemployed hostage.... but we got to that point because the President did not advocate forcefully for the commonsense positions he ran on. He flinched, and the bullies got bolder and bolder, until the only way to get anything done was to do it on their terms.
It's always easier to promise and try for the whole enchilada than it is to get it. Kind of like asking for a raise. Always ask for more than you know you're going to get and settle for an increase that is less than what you wanted but better than what you were getting before.
I'm sorry folks, but I think the extremism on the left is doing as much damage to our country as the extremism on the right. Neither are realistic or healthy.
I think BJ is correct that the GOP is taking advantage of the dissension in the Democratic ranks. This doesn't mean we should have blind loyalty but it doesn't mean that people like Infidel, Shaw, BJ and me are apologists either. It is extremism that blinds.
How many have counted the number of Rethuglicians who, on camers, said they would NEVER vote to raise the deficit? And what did they do? Held the American people hostage until they raised the deficit to enrich themselves!
Open your eyes and ears and look at how those lies and greed are going to play out when they run to keep their seats in the next election? Can't raise the deficit for those who have lost their jobs and unemployment insurance, but can raise it for enriching themselves! Something is wrong with that picture!!!
At least President Obama wasn't willing to make things harder for the millions of people who are in dire straits. Can you say the same about the selfish, greedy Rethugs?
The Rethuglicans did everything in their power to help the Bush gang sink the Ship of State. Obama is doing all in his power to keep it from sinking. Think about it for a while! Thinking is good exercise for the brain.
The rhetoric is coming from the left with that tired old talking point of holding the middle class and the unemployed hostage because of the mere existence of Republicans.
The unemployment bill could have been a separate bill with a way to pay for it and everyone would be happy,that's real compromise. It has no business being tied to the tax bill and has nothing to do with it.
Then Obama goes off on one of his cry baby speeches.Booohooohooo.
He should do it or not and stop playing games. It's more embarrassing than Bush mispronouncing "Nuclear"
The lame duck congress can pass anything they want so why didn't they? They rammed through everything else they wanted to.
The democrats are the ones keeping everyone "hostage".
Something someone else said and something most of us seemingly haven't considered.
"One important point about Obama's tax compromise is that it was made in a world different from the one anticipated when he was making promises during the campaign. Obama's economic promises anticipated a mild downturn, not a major economic crisis. But this week's compromise was crafted after unemployment numbers edged up to an unexpected 9.8 percent."
http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/article/2010/dec/07/compromise-moves-obameter/
B?J?
Cool heads is what got the dems where they are.
Their pockets are filled with the same payola as the repubs.
It was Blanche Lincoln who came up with the Estate tax deal.
WHY?
The dems do not need more academia as your self and others.
The dem party needs street fighters.
You put down Kucinich, and you probably do not think much of Sanders either.
How about Feingold?
Imo he will run against O FOR 2012.
I guess they are not dem elite enough for some one as omnipotent and educated as your self.
TNLIB
That is nonsense.
O knew how bad the economy was when he came into office. His whole demeanor changed after he was briefed before he was even sworn in.
He had Larry Summers [Clinton's Bankster] and Tim Geithner running the show. He even kept Bernanke when he could of and should have replaced him.
Obama has been a hostage to the Banksters since day one.
This should have told every one that he was a Bankster's president.
He did nothing for jobs, he did nothing for foreclosures.
Lisa, you really shouldn't come here and make pronouncements on subjects you know nothing about.
Your last comment shows your total ignorance on the subject. Read up on the 60 votes rule and cloture.
Please. You're embarrassing yourself.
The GOP threatened 98% of the American taxpayers with an INCREASE IN TAXES unless the wealthiest of wealthy people got a break in taxes as well.
What don't you understand about that sort of unconscionable blackmail?
"Lisa, you really shouldn't come here and make pronouncements on subjects you know nothing about.
Your last comment shows your total ignorance on the subject. Read up on the 60 votes rule and cloture.
Please. You're embarrassing yourself."
Shaw, I think you touched a nerve as "she" deleted her post and Sue didn't.
I find this MOST amusing.
she didn't delete, C. That was just a double post by Leslie. Read lisa while shes still up.
I have not yet seen any of Obama's critics explain what, specifically, he could have done to get a better outcome in the face of the Republicans having both the numbers and the determination to filibuster.
As I said before, the President is not a dictator and does not have absolute power to do whatever he wants so long as he is just determined enough. The system doesn't work that way.
Next year the situation will be worse as the Republicans will have a House majority and a larger Senate minority. And much of the blame for the consequences of that lies with the political purists on the left who decided it wasn't worth turning out to vote this time.
I explained what he could have done Infidel.
He got played by thugs who know how to play the game better than he and his people do.
I am in no way wrong to demand better performance and defense of progressive values from the man I donated and worked to elect in 2008.
Infidel: Ditto. Ditto. Ditto.
Oh well, an asumption on my part. It's not like she hasn't done that kind of thing before.
"The GOP threatened 98% of the American taxpayers with an INCREASE IN TAXES unless the wealthiest of wealthy people got a break in taxes as well."
Shaw that is a poor argument 2 reasons 1-It's not the wealthiest of the wealthy.It was 2 or more people combined making 250,00 but nice try.
2-You can also say that Obama threatened to increase taxes too by not keeping the tax rates for everyone which many people think is good to do during this time of high unemployment.
He wants high taxes and 248 new regulations on businesses and then tells us he cares about the economy and the middle class.
I guess he know best with his vast background of economics and business management.
"He wants high taxes"--Lisa
Back that statement up with facts.
Lisa, Obama offered to set the limit at 1 million annual salary. Is that anywhere close to what you make?
When he started at 250k, don;t you think 1 million is a reasonable compromise?
Obama was willing to make sure every family making less than 1 million a year got a tax break, but that was not good enough for the GOP.
Where exactly did the GOP compromise on this bill?
Here's a quote from Dan Bartlett, formerly of the Bush Admin...
"We knew that, politically, once you get it into law, it becomes almost impossible to remove it,” says Dan Bartlett, Bush’s former communications director. “That’s not a bad legacy. The fact that we were able to lay the trap does feel pretty good, to tell you the truth.”
Does this sound like a party that was seeking compromise, or a way to work together?
Lisa, if as you say, President Obama wants high taxes, can you explain why the largest chunk of the stimulus bill [over 246 billion] went to lower taxes and give businesses and individuals tax breaks?
And can you explain why no Republicans have been out there arguing for keeping the Obama tax cuts?
Lisa, I am just askin...
Truth 101: I explained what he could have done Infidel.
Where? Not in your comment here. What specific course of action could he have taken to get the original plan through in the face of Republicans who were clearly willing and able to filibuster it?
Remember, Obama did get an extension of unemployment benefits. That will have far more impact on the people who are depending on those benefits than keeping or eliminating the tax cuts would have had, on anybody.
I suggest you reread my comment Infidel.
The republicans are beholding to their wealthy benefactors. Before the month was over they would have come to Obama and been far more accomodating.
Obama showed no patience, courage or skill. And in reality, he hasn't yet in his dealings with republicans.
I know as well as anyone the mess Obama inherited. He's allowed himself to be forced into accepting policy from the same batch of kooks that led us into it.
My constant battle with most here on the left is how we present the argument. I frame it through perception and appealing to people that aren't political junkies or diehard Libs like us. many here on the left think numbers and condecension are the key.
Obama and the Dems won because even the most politically disinterested observeer saw the devastation republican policy brought our Nation. Memories are short and 2010 proved it. I'm sick of losing elections.
A big old double ditto to Infidel753's "Next year the situation will be worse as the Republicans will have a House majority and a larger Senate minority. And much of the blame for the consequences of that lies with the political purists on the left who decided it wasn't worth turning out to vote this time." BJ
LT101: You are right, condescension never works. We will never win over anyone by telling them they are stupid and don’t know the facts. Here is a comment I left on my own blog post, “The double fork:”
I had a call today from a dear friend, an absolutely brilliant woman who will be 93 in February. I have known her and loved her for 45 years. Conversations with her are amazing. At one point, she began to talk about this tax cuts issue, and it took everything in my power to keep my mouth shut and listen. There was no way I was going to challenge a 92-year-old woman on the telephone. She defended the rich’s right to their tax cuts and called Obama “incompetent.” She said the rich provide jobs for the poor, that Democrats want to tax everyone into the ground, and on and on. I suppose the moral in what I’m relating is that people view an issue from their own perspective (she is rich by my standards) and no amount of facts will sway them from their preconceived notions. BJ
(Sue: Thanks for the update and Shaw's link.)
I suggest you reread my comment Infidel.
I did. I see no prescription for "what, specifically, he could have done to get a better outcome in the face of the Republicans having both the numbers and the determination to filibuster", which was my question.
The President's critics in this case are attacking him for failing to do something he does not have the power to do.
Senate Democrats didn't have the power to do it either. Under the current rules, if they cannot muster 60 votes, the item does not pass. This needs to be fixed at the beginning of the next term, but those are the current rules.
Dave stop calling it a tax break,people got a check for 250.00 That's what you are calling a tax break.
The tax break that businesses got was only for new hires which was just another phony thing because if you aren't doing more business you aren't going to hire anyone.
Oh and Dave maybe you should have a converstion with Larry Summers abOut taxes.
Obama is the president Infidel. He has the power of the veto and the bully pulpit.
The republicans need their tax breaks for the wealthy. They need to keep government broke so it can't regulate their misbehaviours.
They would have come to Obama and Obama could have made them comprimise on his terms instead of the republicans.
Why does our sidfe forget that repubs won't have veto proof majorities? Continuing to pussyfott with Boehner and McConnell is fruitless. They have their agenda and why anyone thinks it's a good idea to let them control the discussion is a mystery to me. They need their shit too. Stop giving it to them without getting more back.
I'm sorry if you're not understanding what I'm saying Infidel. I really am.
I agree Truth...
“Stop giving it to them without getting more back.” Perhaps there was a strategy behind Obama’s decision that would have allowed us to “get more back.” I highly recommend you go back to Sue’s post and follow the link in her update to Shaw’s post. IMO, you won’t find a clearer assessment of the whole picture anywhere else on the Web. Of course, House Dems today cut their own throats. And, so it goes. BJ
Human beings are perhaps never more frightening than when they are convinced beyond doubt that they are right.
Post a Comment