Obama caves to repubs

[cutthemdown]

Ha Ha it's a swing to the right baby!! Obama going to try and go Bill Clinton and IMO that is good for the country. Looks like he is telling the liberals you are beaten, time to try plan b!!!

Congratulations to the republicans who have already scored a huge victory before even being sworn in.

Smart smart plan by Obama though. He figures most dems will vote for him in 2 years regardless. By swinging to the right he can pick up some independents and have a great shot to win re-election in 2 yrs.

I mean what are dems going to do run against him in the primary? No way!

[peacepipe]

1 and done,won't make it out of his own primary in 2012.

[cutthemdown]

It's been a long time since an incumbent was challenged by his own party in the primary Peace. That is a bold prediction.

[Rohirrim]

1 and done,won't make it out of his own primary in 2012.

Nope. He just officially lost the Left for good. Obama is just another DINO, like Clinton. Progressives have to wake up. Start a new party.

[peacepipe]

Not since jimmy carter,but history does repeat itself.

[BroncoLifer]

Nope. He just officially lost the Left for good. Obama is just another DINO, like Clinton. Progressives have to wake up. Start a new party.

There you go, following the lead of the Tea Party again......

[cutthemdown]

Not since jimmy carter,but history does repeat itself.

Hilliary should step down now and say she never wanted to do those things but Obama ordered her to. Resign and get ready to run against him in 2 yrs. Then just go on the attack for 2 yrs straight on repubs and dems.

I'm dreaming though repubs wont get that lucky.

[JJJ]

He may have just gotten himself re-elected today.

All systems are go now for a 1994-like bull run.

Democratic president bitch slapped back to reality and the center - check.

Republican congress (partial anyway) focused on controlling costs and anymore ridiculous spending bills- check.

Tax clarity provided for the market for a few years - check.

Crazy people like Pelosi put out to pasture - check.

Lets get this mofo started.



2012 Obama re-elected with both houses in Republican hands is looking more like the most likely scenario. He could turn out downright Clintonian if he plays his cards right.

[JJJ]

Nope. He just officially lost the Left for good. Obama is just another DINO, like Clinton. Progressives have to wake up. Start a new party.

Please. And crawl back into the holes of obscruity you creeped out of while you are at it.

How you guys ever got as much power as you did during this brief looney period we will call the Pelosi Years is beyond me and simply a perfect illustration of overreactionism by the electorate at its best. A brief abberation of how even normally the level headed American people can be duped into craziness from time to time.

OK American people, you hate Bush, but enough to put Reid and Pelosi in power? Good lord.

[peacepipe]

All systems are go now for a 1994-like bull run.
one problem taxes were raised in 1994,so I wouldn't count on bull run.
Democratic president b**** slapped back to reality and the center - check.
He's always been in the center, you guys are so far to the right that being a centrist makes a communist.

[JJJ]

one problem taxes were raised in 1994,so I wouldn't count on bull run.

He's always been in the center, you guys are so far to the right that being a centrist makes a communist.

ROFL!ROFL!ROFL!ROFL!

You really gotta wonder whats in that pipe of yours.

[peacepipe]

ROFL!ROFL!ROFL!ROFL!

You really gotta wonder whats in that pipe of yours.

what leftist bill has been passed? is there a public option? NO. single payer? NO. EFCA? NO. Cap & Trade? NO. HC reform bill that passed was originally a republican idea. You know that "mandate"? was an idea originally put forth by Orrin Hatch, republican out of Utah. Please tell me what leftist bill got put into law under Obama?

[epicSocialism4tw]

Please. And crawl back into the holes of obscruity you creeped out of while you are at it.

How you guys ever got as much power as you did during this brief looney period we will call the Pelosi Years is beyond me and simply a perfect illustration of overreactionism by the electorate at its best. A brief abberation of how even normally the level headed American people can be duped into craziness from time to time.

OK American people, you hate Bush, but enough to put Reid and Pelosi in power? Good lord.

There problem is that they were so full of themselves that they didnt take time to read the vote...either that or they didnt care what the populace wanted. I think that it was more the latter than the former. It clearly was an indictment on neoconservativism, and NOT a vote in support of progressive liberalism.

It didnt help them that the Obama admin appointed a bunch of far-left wackos to "czar" positions.

The overeager far left trotted their skinny monsters out of the darkness, and our people responded with shock and disgust.

[epicSocialism4tw]

what leftist bill has been passed? is there a public option? NO. single payer? NO. EFCA? NO. Cap & Trade? NO. HC reform bill that passed was originally a republican idea. You know that "mandate"? was an idea originally put forth by Orrin Hatch, republican out of Utah. Please tell me what leftist bill got put into law under Obama?

Stimulus.

Obamacare.

Pull your head out, guy.

[epicSocialism4tw]

ROFL!ROFL!ROFL!ROFL!

You really gotta wonder whats in that pipe of yours.

He's so far left that he cant even tell what the political spectrum looks like from his vantage.

[BroncoLifer]

He's so far left that he cant even tell what the political spectrum looks like from his vantage.

Maybe he's a CBS News producer.

[JJJ]

what leftist bill has been passed? is there a public option? NO. single payer? NO. EFCA? NO. Cap & Trade? NO. HC reform bill that passed was originally a republican idea. You know that "mandate"? was an idea originally put forth by Orrin Hatch, republican out of Utah. Please tell me what leftist bill got put into law under Obama?

What leftist bill would he like to pass or he tried to pass? All of the above.

I never said he was a successful leftie. Just a leftie.

You got a few crazy leftie deals done just on the strength of his personality alone. No way anything like the HC reform, or the stimulus would have had a chance in hell of passing without his charisma.

[epicSocialism4tw]

Maybe he's a CBS News producer.

Hilarious!

[TonyR]

So, was this worth it? I’d still say no, although it’s better than what I expected over the weekend. It still greatly increases the chances of the Bush tax cuts being made permanent — especially because the front-loading of the stimulative stuff actually worsens Obama’s 2012 electoral prospects.

Overall, enough sweetener has been added to diminish, but not eliminate, the bitterness of the disappointment.
http://krugman.blogs.nytimes.com/2010/12/07/the-deal/

The deal has something to annoy everyone -- but also something for everyone. You're a Democrat? The tax cuts for the rich are extended, and the estate tax deal exempts inheritances up to $5 million while cutting the rate heirs pay to 35 percent. But that's why the Republicans like it. You're a Republican? The tax cuts are only extended for two years, and they're paired with 13 months of unemployment insurance, an extension of a variety of tax credits passed in the stimulus, and a new payroll tax cut -- all of them deficit-financed. But that's why the Democrats like it. You're a deficit hawk? The deal adds more than $700 billion to the deficit. And, let's be honest, you got nothing in return.
http://voices.washingtonpost.com/ezra-klein/2010/12/wonkbook_everything_you_need_t.html

Subtract the $400 billion cost of the Bush tax cuts. Subtract another $140 billion or so, which is the cost of extending the Alternative Minimum Tax patch (and almost certainly would have happened regardless). You’re then left with more than $300 billion in net stimulus over two years. And while that sum will not be enough to fix the economy all by itself, it is serious money. The original stimulus bill cost about $800 billion, and most of the money will have been spent in the first two years after its passage.

This deal looks an awful lot like a second stimulus.
http://economix.blogs.nytimes.com/2010/12/06/a-second-stimulus/

Ezra Klein argues that this might amount to a win for the White House on mid-term political and even policy grounds because of the stimulative effect of the tax cuts and the UI re-up combined. His argument being that there's enough stimulus contained in the deal to measurably improve the economy by 2012 and thus the president's chances of reelection. Not only that, but create a better political climate to re-litigate the tax question. I think Ezra may be on to something (I'll have to give it some thought). But I find myself in a position somewhat similar to that he acribes to a lot of folks on the Hill: it might be brilliant. But it's getting hard to believe it's not brilliant by accident.
http://www.talkingpointsmemo.com/archives/2010/12/thats_not_smart.php?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+Talking-Points-Memo+%28Talking+Points+Memo%3A+by+Joshua+Micah+Mar shall%29&utm_content=Google+Reader

[The tax cut deal] has partially set my mind at ease about the prospects of a GOP strategy of economic sabotage. The tax policy the right wants, though in general bad for the country, is not bad for short-term economic performance. And the concessions they were willing to give Obama in exchange for boosting the incomes of rich people are expansionary in the short-term. So the terrain here exists well within the range of “normal” politics where conservatives want lower taxes on rich people. This is kind of nutty in my view, but it’s a deeply held article of faith on the right and not some ad hoc effort to sink the economy or anything.
http://yglesias.thinkprogress.org/2010/12/the-tax-deal/?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+matthewyglesias+%28Matthew+Yg lesias%29&utm_content=Google+Reader

Obama’s cave-in on taxes will alienate more than vocal progressives. It could be far more politically damaging than that. This is not simply a matter of provoking the base with yet another compromise. This is a matter of abandoning a position that is widely and strongly held throughout his party. In some cases, Obama has angered progressives by doing exactly what he promised during the campaign, but in this case he would be openly repudiating one of the most prominent positions he took during the campaign.
http://www.amconmag.com/larison/2010/12/06/vae-vicitis-to-cave-to-retreat-to-abandon-and-definitely-to-yield/

This is clearly a win for the Republicans, who get everything they want for the rich. The tax cuts on incomes over $250,000 a year will last for two years, versus just 13 months for the extension of federal unemployment benefits, and just one year of lower payroll taxes. Meanwhile, all the Congressional opposition to this deal is going to come from Democrats, who are basically being asked to sign off on exactly the same bill that George W Bush would have asked for, with a spoonful of unemployment-benefit sugar to help the medicine go down. A lot of them will be wistfully eyeing David Leonhardt’s list of what could be achieved with the $60 billion going on those tax cuts for the rich, and wondering how a Democratic president could find himself doing this.
http://blogs.reuters.com/felix-salmon/2010/12/06/tax-cuts-oprah-style/

[Smiling Assassin27]

He may have just gotten himself re-elected today.

All systems are go now for a 1994-like bull run.

Democratic president b**** slapped back to reality and the center - check.

Republican congress (partial anyway) focused on controlling costs and anymore ridiculous spending bills- check.

Tax clarity provided for the market for a few years - check.

Crazy people like Pelosi put out to pasture - check.

Lets get this mofo started.



2012 Obama re-elected with both houses in Republican hands is looking more like the most likely scenario. He could turn out downright Clintonian if he plays his cards right.

or...

He just bent over George Soros and the Left Machine that mobilized so dramatically in 2008. You see a primary challenge of a sitting president who has demonstrated his lack of backbone and total foresaking of his campaign values. check.

He was elected by Independents on the idea that only the rich would be taken to the woodshed with tax increases, which turned out to be a lie, sending Independents to the Republicans. check.

Obama gets his unemployment extension, which as study after study show, keeps unemployment high. With current unemployment of youth at an all time high, he loses the youth vote because he promised them the world and gave them a pink slip and eviction notice. check.

Luckily for Obama, there is a trap door. Republicans are just idiotic enough to step on their own genitalia over and over again with rampant spending, elitism, and hawkish foreign policy. Repubs say they're here to lead and govern, but the allure of power and money has always been too damn powerful for them.

[epicSocialism4tw]

or...

He just bent over George Soros and the Left Machine that mobilized so dramatically in 2008. You see a primary challenge of a sitting president who has demonstrated his lack of backbone and total foresaking of his campaign values. check.

He was elected by Independents on the idea that only the rich would be taken to the woodshed with tax increases, which turned out to be a lie, sending Independents to the Republicans. check.

Obama gets his unemployment extension, which as study after study show, keeps unemployment high. With current unemployment of youth at an all time high, he loses the youth vote because he promised them the world and gave them a pink slip and eviction notice. check.

Luckily for Obama, there is a trap door. Republicans are just idiotic enough to step on their own genitalia over and over again with rampant spending, elitism, and hawkish foreign policy. Repubs say they're here to lead and govern, but the allure of power and money has always been too damn powerful for them.

Our interests now span the globe. The repubs and dems alike try to use the US voter to fund a globalist agenda.

Our globalist agenda runs counter to the agenda of the average citizen in most ways. People like Soros view the US as the global government and have tried to influence US elections to suit globalist ends.

The repubs and dems are pulled in those directions. They need to be put in check. When we're closing factories here and relocating them to Taiwan, Indonesia, China, Mexico and India, you know somethings wrong.

[TonyR]

He may have just gotten himself re-elected today.

Good to see you get it, even if your buddies don't.

And notice that Obama has secured - with Republican backing - a big new stimulus that will almost certainly goose growth and lower unemployment as he moves toward re-election. If growth accelerates, none of the current political jockeying and Halperin-style hyper-ventilation will matter. Obama will benefit - thanks, in part, to Republican dogma. So here's something the liberal base can chew on if they need some grist: how cool is it that Mitch McConnell just made Barack Obama's re-election more likely? Bet you didn't see that one coming, did you?
http://andrewsullivan.theatlantic.com/the_daily_dish/2010/12/obama-president-mcconnell-sucker.html

[Smiling Assassin27]

I forgot one more thing. He froze government salaries and utterly pi$$ed off the union bosses in doing so. This deal, they have already said they would vehemently oppose. Not that the union brass/scum have anywhere else to turn, but they just may support a guy that primaries Obama.

Congrats, Mr. President. You got every side of the aisle to dislike you. If that ain't bi-partisan, I don't know what is.

[JJJ]

Good to see you get it, even if your buddies don't.

And notice that Obama has secured - with Republican backing - a big new stimulus that will almost certainly goose growth and lower unemployment as he moves toward re-election. If growth accelerates, none of the current political jockeying and Halperin-style hyper-ventilation will matter. Obama will benefit - thanks, in part, to Republican dogma. So here's something the liberal base can chew on if they need some grist: how cool is it that Mitch McConnell just made Barack Obama's re-election more likely? Bet you didn't see that one coming, did you?
http://andrewsullivan.theatlantic.com/the_daily_dish/2010/12/obama-president-mcconnell-sucker.html

But you do realize he will be completely impotent to pass any more crazy leftie idealogy yes?

Especially after 2012 he will simply sit back, veto a few things like Clinton did with welfare reform (twice I believe before Newt finally rammed it home), and get ready to write the book. Only problem is we probably won't have some cool sex scandal to keep us occupied. Obama is a bit boring in that regard.

He will be president but he is neutered.

[epicSocialism4tw]

I forgot one more thing. He froze government salaries and utterly pi$$ed off the union bosses in doing so. This deal, they have already said they would vehemently oppose. Not that the union brass/scum have anywhere else to turn, but they just may support a guy that primaries Obama.

Congrats, Mr. President. You got every side of the aisle to dislike you. If that ain't bi-partisan, I don't know what is.

The modern left is so militant in its partisanship, that it was inevitable that they turned on Obama. A president literally has to "cave" on some issues to get anything done. They would have rather Obama sat with his arms folded like a petulant child and screamed "Noooooooooo!"

There are factions all over the far left (including former Obama czar and admitted communist revolutinary Van Jones) who are encouraging people to consider violent revolution.

[peacepipe]

The modern left is so militant in its partisanship, that it was inevitable that they turned on Obama. A president literally has to "cave" on some issues to get anything done. They would have rather Obama sat with his arms folded like a petulant child and screamed "Noooooooooo!"

There are factions all over the far left (including former Obama czar and admitted communist revolutinary Van Jones) who are encouraging people to consider violent revolution.you need to take a good look in a mirror to find a "militant partisan". not to mention tea baggers.

[Rohirrim]

All this does is put us deeper in debt while widening the economic chasm to ahistorical proportions - shoveling more wealth into the maw of the unquenchably greedy. Let the rightards wallow in their ideological purity. They are sitting on a volcano. Their smug arrogance will have a short life. Proverbs 16:18

[epicSocialism4tw]

you need to take a good look in a mirror to find a "militant partisan". not to mention tea baggers.

http://www.stealthfusion.com/research/van-jones/van-jones-salute.jpg

http://www.newsrealblog.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/06/jones.van_.convocation.300.jpg

http://www.yesmagazine.org/images/issues/101/49Van_VanFist.jpg

[cutthemdown]

Obama could very well get re elected because of this. It won't be a lefty dream though. If things improve not only will Obama benefit, but the republicans and the Tea Party will big time. They will make more gains in the house and senate which is where the real power is anyways.

Things get better repubs say look we made it happen. Things don't they say look Obama still screwing everything up.

Not to mention the get to redistrict to elect repubs for yrs to come. Things are really going well right now for republicans.

Also most of the damaging scandals are dems right now.

[Requiem]

Asking anyone here to analyze five to ten major pieces of his policy platform as President and explain to me how Obama's actions as President have been "so far left." Quite simple really, if you have a knowledge of politics and ideology.

[cutthemdown]

Asking req to explain why his question has anything to do with a discussion about Obama caving to the Republicans on the Bush era tax cut issue.

His push for a public option in healthcare was far left. It got whittled down to only left of center. Still though a liberal idea.

His Supreme court nominees have been liberal.

He abandoned his cap and trade but that was very liberal. He would have loved it though.

Directing much of the stimulus not to create jobs but to save union jobs was IMO liberal.

schip expansion using money to give more poor kids healthcare was pretty liberal.

His public lands bill put tons of land off limits to business forever.

Gave FDA way more power, Gave EPA way more power.

Pushed for Stem Cell research and expanded the National Service.

Still not every liberal idea is bad IMO. Stem cell research, national service, I like those ideas. I am nationalistic so anything that gets more Americans working for the good of the country seems good in small amounts. Don't want to crazy but a little liberalism is good just like some right ideals are also good.

It's why we call it the center. Obama will pulled there by the right in Congress and it will all work out.

I'm feeling really optimistic we are about to turn the corner as a country.,

[JJJ]

Asking anyone here to analyze five to ten major pieces of his policy platform as President and explain to me how Obama's actions as President have been "so far left." Quite simple really, if you have a knowledge of politics and ideology.

How about you do it smartboy?

I don't think the burden is on us or anyone else to prove Obama is a leftie, it is on you to prove he is not.

[Requiem]

If you are going to make claims about his ideological placement in the realm of politics, yes -- the burden of proof is indeed on you.

Though, you just say he is, without providing evidence. I would be glad to conduct any counter argument on his politik if you guys actually provided one to go against.

Cut actually had a decent start, but that is not the substantive type of policy I am looking for.

Actually understanding ideology and how people fit into the political spectrum would be salient for anyone attempting to engage in discussion. The simple fact that yourself or others cannot provide a sound argument regarding such speaks volumes regarding your aptitude to discuss these matters.

[cutthemdown]

I may not be smart enough in political science to formulate the type of in depth analysis Req asking for. I think if we held every subject or opinion up to that type of scholarly level of deduction and debate then most things around here wouldn't past the muster.

I think the point Obama has swing to the center, caved on the tax issue, and that he is doing it because of repub gains in congress is a fact and doesn't need much debate.

Now how liberal is he compared to Carter, Clinton, FDR, etc etc I am not pretending to be smart enough, or really interested enough to give the type of response I guess req looking for.

Sounds more like an assignment in a college level poli sci class.

[L.A. BRONCOS FAN]

Nope. He just officially lost the Left for good. Obama is just another DINO, like Clinton. Progressives have to wake up. Start a new party.

But...but...but McNameChange and all the rest of the right-wing mouth breathers said he was a socialist. ???

;)

[L.A. BRONCOS FAN]

I may not be smart enough in political science to formulate the type of in depth analysis Req asking for....

There's never been any doubt about that. Ha!

[L.A. BRONCOS FAN]

All this does is put us deeper in debt while widening the economic chasm to ahistorical proportions - shoveling more wealth into the maw of the unquenchably greedy. Let the rightards wallow in their ideological purity. They are sitting on a volcano. Their smug arrogance will have a short life. Proverbs 16:18

Obama and the Dems have done a good job of dispelling whatever was left of the illusion that either major party answers to "we the people." They are all nothing but a bunch of bought-and-paid-for whores, and there's nothing left of our political system but the rule of private interests/the highest bidder.

[JJJ]

If you are going to make claims about his ideological placement in the realm of politics, yes -- the burden of proof is indeed on you.

Though, you just say he is, without providing evidence. I would be glad to conduct any counter argument on his politik if you guys actually provided one to go against.

Cut actually had a decent start, but that is not the substantive type of policy I am looking for.

Actually understanding ideology and how people fit into the political spectrum would be salient for anyone attempting to engage in discussion. The simple fact that yourself or others cannot provide a sound argument regarding such speaks volumes regarding your aptitude to discuss these matters.

No, when you make a crazy statement like Obama is not on the left the burden is clearly on you. Only you and a few of your crazy friends don't believe Obama is well to the left. Everyone else on the planet knows he is left and can easily analzye the evidence trail.

He was amongst the most liberal voting member of the Senate. (when he actually voted)
Full support of cap & trade.
Full support of a single payer medical care system.
Full support of increasing taxes on small businesses and those making over 250k.
Full and complete support of the unions and cutting special deals for union employees.
Massive expansion of the public payrolls under his watch.
Daily bashing of wall street and insurance companies and business in general.
Full supporter of abortion rights & government funds to perform abortions.
Full supporter of aggressive gun control.
Fully opposes school vouchers.
Full supporter of abolishing don't ask don't tell.
Fully supports federal funds subsidizing alternative energy.
Full support of Keynesian economic theory to get out of a recession.
Fully supports extending unemployment benefits for over three years. Three years! That is welfare not unemployment.

Only the blind would call that a set of centrist positions.

His senate voting record as measured by a liberal organization:

Ratings of Obama's liberalism by the Americans for Democratic Action (ADA), based on 20 ADA-selected votes each year, declined from 100% in 2005 to 95% in 2006, with one vote the ADA counted as not-liberal in 2006, and 75%, with five missed votes, in 2007.[56][57]

A study of the voting records of all 100 senators, using an average of the ratings of seven liberal interest groups, described Obama as "among the most liberal", scoring an 92%, of the Democrats.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Senate_career_of_Barack_Obama

If it is so salient get cracking. Convince us. Let's here your arguments for why you think he is in the center.

[L.A. BRONCOS FAN]

He was amongst the most liberal voting member of the Senate. (when he actually voted)


That's not saying much.

The Democratic party has moved so far to the center over the last 30 years that newcomers like you have no clue what a real liberal looks like.

[epicSocialism4tw]

That's not saying much.

The Democratic party has moved so far to the center over the last 30 years that newcomers like you have no clue what a real liberal looks like.

You guys have been telling us for a long time (except for Gaffney, he readily admits that he's a radical socialist) that you guys tend to be more moderate...now here you are saying that liberals are really a bunch of radicals.

Make up your mind.

[cutthemdown]

There's never been any doubt about that. Ha!

Maybe I could find a cartoon that sums it all up.

[L.A. BRONCOS FAN]

Maybe I could find a cartoon that sums it all up.

That's not a bad idea.

I have no doubt that a cartoon is a more effective form of communication than most of your posts.

[L.A. BRONCOS FAN]

You guys have been telling us for a long time (except for Gaffney, he readily admits that he's a radical socialist) that you guys tend to be more moderate...now here you are saying that liberals are really a bunch of radicals.

Make up your mind.

It's not my job to correct your laughably skewed historical perspective.

According to the metric used by you and the rest of the Bush Youth, Eisenhower, Nixon, and Ford were three of the most extreme socialist presidents America has ever seen.

[L.A. BRONCOS FAN]

Obama caves to repubs

This thread title underscores what's so distasteful about you and the morally bankrupt idiots who comprise today's GOP (a party that Reagan would probably no longer recognize.)

Obama tries to compromise with you, (something he did even when he had the majority in both chambers and didn't need to compromise) gives you what you want, (tax cuts for the super-rich) and you still stick a shiv in him.

This proves beyond a doubt that people like you don't give a f_ck about the fate of this country - the only thing you care about is getting a "win" for Team GOP.

[bronclvr]

Obama tries to compromise with you, (something he did even when he had the majority in both chambers and didn't need to compromise) gives you what you want, (tax cuts for the super-rich) and you still stick a shiv in him.

This proves beyond a doubt that people like you don't give a f_ck about the fate of this country - the only thing you care about is getting a "win" for Team GOP.



Yes, but if the tables were turned and you were the one "winning" you wouldn't be complaining, so what's your point?

I am very happy right now-there are checks and balances in place, and even your boy has come to the light-I think I'll vote Democratic in the next Presidential Election!

[TonyR]

I just find it sad and pathetic, not to mention hypocritical, that you righties are celebrating this "compromise". You wanted to run the Dems out and install the GOP primarily because you think we need to get our fiscal house in order. Then you celebrate a deal that's going to do just the opposite. Really? You don't see how stupid that is?

[bronclvr]

I just find it sad and pathetic, not to mention hypocritical, that you righties are celebrating this "compromise". You wanted to run the Dems out and install the GOP primarily because you think we need to get our fiscal house in order. Then you celebrate a deal that's going to do just the opposite. Really? You don't see how stupid that is?



I don't support this idealogy if you are referring to me-I'm just old fashioned and want things the way the were-you know, all jumbled up where nothing actually gets done, but everybody feels good-looks like mission accomplished! :thumbsup:

[TonyR]

What we saw and what I think we'll see borne out by subsequent events is Obama revealing in a very public way the choice he has made between the two political personas he has simultaneously inhabited throughout his candidacy and his presidency. He has tried to be both pragmatist and progressive savior. And even when he stopped trying to be the savior after he was elected, he was at a certain level content to let supporters continue to project that persona on to him.

Today, he very clearly and loudly said: that savior persona is not me. I am the pragmatist. And you know what, I don't have a whole lot of patience for the idealists. I share their ideals, but I don't share their approach and I'm not going to get bogged down in recriminations over not living up to some abstract ideal.

http://www.talkingpointsmemo.com/archives/2010/12/seminal_moment_1.php?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+Talking-Points-Memo+%28Talking+Points+Memo%3A+by+Joshua+Micah+Mar shall%29&utm_content=Google+Reader

[mhgaffney]

Welcome to Debt Peonage...

Gotta love this piece my Michael Hudson.
MHG

December 8, 2010

Game Plan for a Flat Tax, Social Security Cutbacks and Austerity

Obama's Sellout on Taxes

By MICHAEL HUDSON

http://www.counterpunch.org/

I almost feel naïve for being so angry at President Obama’s betrayal of his campaign promises regarding taxes. I had never harbored much hope that he actually intended to enact the reforms that his supporters expected – not after he appointed the most right-wing of the Clintonomics gang, Larry Summers, then Tim Geithner, Ben Bernanke and other Bush neoliberals.

But there is something so unfair and wrong that I could not prevent myself from waking up early Tuesday morning to think through the consequences of President Obama’s sellout in the years to come. Contrary to his pretense of saving the economy, his action will intensify debt deflation and financial depression, paving the way for a long-term tax shift off wealth onto labor.

In achieving a giveaway that Democrats never would have let George Bush or other Republicans enact, Obama has laid himself open to the campaign slogan that brought down British Prime Minister Tony Blair: “You can’t believe a word he says.” He has lost support not only personally, but also – as the Republicans anticipate – for much of his party in 2012.

Yet Obama has only done what politicians do: He has delivered up his constituency to his campaign backers – the same Wall Street donors who back the Republicans. What’s the point of having a constituency, after all, if you can’t sell it?

The problem is that it’s not going to stop here. Monday’s deal to re-instate the Bush era tax cuts for two more years sets up a 1-2-3 punch. First, many former Democratic and independent voters will “vote with their backsides” and simply stay home (or perhaps be tempted by a third-party candidate), enabling the Republicans to come in legislate the cuts in perpetuity in 2012 – an estimated $4 trillion to the rich over time.

Second, Obama’s Republican act (I hate to call it a compromise) “frees” income for the wealthiest classes to send abroad, to economies not yet wrecked by neoliberals. This paves the way for a foreign-exchange crisis. Such crises traditionally fall in the autumn – and as the 2012 election draws near, it will be attributed to “uncertainty” if voters do not throw the Democrats out. So to “save the dollar” the Republicans will propose to replace progressive income taxation with a uniform flat tax (the old Steve Forbes plan) falling on wage earners, not on wealth or on finance, insurance or real estate (FIRE sector) income. A VAT will be added as an excise tax to push up consumer prices.

Third, the tax giveaway includes a $120 billion reduction in Social Security contributions by labor – reducing the FICA wage withholding from 6.2 per cent to 4.2 per cent. Obama has ingeniously designed the plan to dovetail neatly into his Bowles-Simpson commission pressing to reduce Social Security as a step toward its ultimate privatization and subsequent wipeout grab by Wall Street. This cutback will accelerate the point at which the program moves into supposed “negative equity” – a calculation that ignores the option of restoring pension funding to the government’s general budget, where it would be paid out of progressively levied income tax and hence borne mainly by the wealthy, not by lower-income wage earners as a “user fee.”

So the game plan is not merely to free the income of the wealthiest class to “offshore” itself into assets denominated in harder currencies abroad. It is to scrap the progressive tax system altogether. The Democratic Congress is making only token handwringing protests against this plan, no doubt with an eye looking forward to the campaign contributors two years down the road.

Crises usually are orchestrated years in advance. Any economic recovery typically is shaped by the way in which its predecessor economy collapsed. Medieval Europe’s emergence from the Dark Age, for example, was shaped by ancient Rome’s debt crisis caused by its aggressive oligarchy. In a similar fashion, the coming epochal tax shift off finance and property onto labor will be introduced in response to the dollar’s crisis, in much the way that we have seen Ireland and Greece tap their pension funds to bail out reckless bankers. In America as in Europe, the large “systemically important banks” that caused the crisis will be given enough money by the government – at the expense of labor (“taxpayers”) to step in and “rescue” the bad debt overhang (i.e., toxic junk).

The tactics of this fiscal game sequence are so time-tested that there should not be much surprise. So President Obama’s deal is not only financial and fiscal in scope, it is a political game changer. When Congressional Democrats sign on to this betrayal of their major election promise, they will be re-branding their claim to be the “non-Wall Street party,”

Barack Obama was trained as a lawyer. I’ve rarely met a lawyer who understands economics. That’s not their mind-set. They make deals to minimize the risk of surprises, often settling in the middle. That is legal pragmatism. When candidate Obama promised “change,” I don’t think he had any particular change in economic policy in mind. It was more a modus operandi. I suspect that he simply thought of the Presidency as being referee on “bringing people together.” Probably this personality trait was formed as a teenager, in the kind of popularity contest that teenagers engage in student council elections. Obama’s aim was to be accepted, even admired, by negotiating a compromise. He probably didn’t care much about the content.

He did care about getting political campaign backing, of course, and the rules for this are clear enough in today’s world. He was given a policy to plead, and a set of experts to plead his case. There are always enough Junk Economics advisors to work on politicians to try and convince them that “doing the right thing” means helping Wall Street. It is not a matter simply of believing that “What’s good for Wall Street is good for the economy.” To hear Tim Geithner and Ben Bernanke tell the story, the economy can’t function without a “solvent” banking system – meaning that no bank is to lose money. All gamblers on the winning side (such as Goldman Sachs) are to be made whole in cases where they cannot collect from bad casino-capitalist gamblers on the losing side (such as A.I.G. and Lehman Brothers).

So should we say that Obama’s plan really helps the economy simply because the stock market jumped sharply on Tuesday? Or are we dealing with a zero-sum game, where the predator’s subsidy is at the cost of the host economy?

Contra Obama’s pretense, cutting taxes for the rich will not spur recovery. The wealthiest 2 per cent do not spend their income on consuming more. They invest it financially – mainly in bonds, establishing more debt claims on the economy. Giving creditors more money will deepen the economy’s debt deflation, shrinking “the market’s” ability to spend on goods and services. And part of the tax subsidy will be recycled into Congressional lobbying and campaign contributions to buy politicians who will promote even more pro-financial deregulatory policies and tax benefits. There still has been no prosecution of banking crime or other financial fraud by large institutions, for example. Nor is there any sign of Attorney General Holder initiating such prosecutions.

It is a travesty for Obama to trot out the long-term unemployed (who now get a year’s extension of benefits) like widows and orphans used to be. It’s not really “all for the poor.” It’s all for the rich. And it’s not to promote stability and recovery. How stable can a global situation be where the richest nation does not tax its population, but creates new public debt to hand out to its bankers? Future tax payers will spend generations paying off their heirs.

The “solution” to the coming financial crisis in the United States may await the dollar’s plunge as an opportunity for a financial Tonkin Gulf resolution. Such a crisis would help catalyze the tax system’s radical change to a European-style “Steve Forbes” flat tax and VAT sales-excise tax falling almost entirely on employment? Big fish will eat little fish. More government giveaways will be made to the financial sector in a vain effort to keep bad debts afloat and banks “solvent.” As in Ireland and Latvia, public debt will replace private debt, leaving little remaining for Social Security or indeed for much social spending.

The bottom line is that after the prolonged tax giveaway exacerbates the federal budget deficit – along with the balance-of-payments deficit – we can expect the next Republican or Democratic administration to step in and “save” the country from economic emergency by scaling back Social Security while turning its funding over, Pinochet-style, to Wall Street money managers to loot as they did in Chile. And one can forget rebuilding America’s infrastructure. It is being sold off by debt-strapped cities and states to cover their budget shortfalls resulting from un-taxing real estate and from foreclosures.

Welcome to debt peonage. This is worse than what was meant by a double-dip recession. It will be with us much longer.

Michael Hudson is a former Wall Street economist. A Distinguished Research Professor at University of Missouri, Kansas City (UMKC), he is the author of many books, including Super Imperialism: The Economic Strategy of American Empire (new ed., Pluto Press, 2002) and Trade, Development and Foreign Debt: A History of Theories of Polarization v. Convergence in the World Economy. He can be reached via his website, mh@michael-hudson.com

[Requiem]

If it is so salient get cracking. Convince us. Let's here your arguments for why you think he is in the center.

First and foremost, I will preface my statement with the following:

Bringing up Obama's voting record as a Senator is irrelevant to his time as Presidency. If you have followed his Presidency, you will realize that his time as a legislator and that of President are highly variable, in fact completely different. It was easy for you to go ahead and attempt to cherry pick some issues, (some issues that are really not issues at all, nor have any sort of ideological tie or leaning) to try and prove your point, but essentially that is all it was.

Obama's constituents, his base if you will, has been highly disappointed in his efforts and policy implementation over his two year course as President. One key aspect to analyzing ideology is foreign policy, which for whatever reason you left out in your analysis.

In two years as President, Obama increased efforts in Afghanistan and has come up with a more hawkish and abysmal foreign policy effort in the GWOT than his predecessor. One of his first orders of business was re-issuing drone attacks into Pakistan and elsewhere that Bush had done before he completely abandoned that theater and decided to make his divisive shift to Iraq to confront this ideological war.

How about abandoning the closing of GITMO, which was essentially one of the forefront reasons liberals were cheering for him during the primaries in 2008. Not only that, but his excessive use of executive orders to circumvent the E-L relationship is extremely troublesome, and on par and overreaching of his predecessor, though this is not an indicator of ideological standard, but demonstrates a willingness to go on his own accord rather than what party members seem would deem in their best interest.

In regards to economic and domestic policy, you've brought up some points that I would like to address:

Obama played the middle on the economic stimulus road and ended up suggesting for half of the amount that his advisers within his cabinet were lobbying for. What Congress has done is another story. Obama has even been hesitant to ask for additional aid in this regard, contrary to what you have suggested.

As far as Universal Healthcare, Obama's plan is not even near as left as you would want to imagine. What came out and what was passed was reconciled, and extremely similar to what Romney proposed and implemented back in Massachusetts when he was head honcho there. Just curious, how much about the law do you actually know? My guess is not much when you are using it as a bastion of liberalness on behalf of Obama. Every top political pundit in the nation realizes this, and has stated this time and time again as a reconciled measure affirming a centrist stance on the issue. Might want to take a gander at how everything shook down in that regard.

(Examples: No public option, less than universal coverage, reduced penalties pertaining to refusal, tax hikes on abortions.)

Pertaining to cap-and-trade, his position is also to the right of his common party, whom rather suggested carbon emission taxes, as opposed to this cap-and-trade system that actually benefits those who are doing contributing to the significant changes in the environmental dynamic. This is a huge position in regards to environmentalism efforts, in which many of his supporters feel that they've been pissed on for.

He may be a supporter in the repeal of don't ask, don't tell -- but those efforts are at a complete stall, and a position he has pretty much abandoned within two years. As you can see, this illustrates my point of being for something, yet not taking the initiative to see it through. His governance in this regard shows a different shift in action related to belief.

More on economics, Obama had actually wanted to re-allocate funds from TARP (30 billion) and use it for small-business lending. Furthermore, I suggest you look into the Volker Rule. Hell, look at his economic advisers and appointments. Those clowns are pretty much as centrist as you get.

It was also convenient for you to ignore Obama's proposal of extending tax cuts to small businesses, which was highly criticized by his party in the Legislature. He also proposed tens of billions of dollars being sent to the SBA (Small Business Administration) to encourage growth in that regard as well, which was met by disdain from his party.

Republicans have actually been pretty supportive of Obama's initiatives to increase lending and support to small businesses. His party, highly critical.

On education, this is a fantastic excerpt I would encourage you to read (http://blog.jaredwilliam.com/2010/05/obama-and-education-or-how-i-knew-he-was-a-centrist/). Hardly uber-liberal on that front.

More so than anything, his platform and how he has governed and sentiments by those who elected him show a clear disdain or concern for what he promised. His actions while in office have been nothing close to what people were hoping for (those who voted for him) which is illustrated by what I have discussed above.

This was just a few things off the top of my mind, without doing any more extensive research on the matter, which isn't even referencing the breaking news that came out yesterday pertaining to tax cuts.

I will provide more later, but have errands to run before we get more friggin' snow.

[Spider]

Good to see you get it, even if your buddies don't.

And notice that Obama has secured - with Republican backing - a big new stimulus that will almost certainly goose growth and lower unemployment as he moves toward re-election. If growth accelerates, none of the current political jockeying and Halperin-style hyper-ventilation will matter. Obama will benefit - thanks, in part, to Republican dogma. So here's something the liberal base can chew on if they need some grist: how cool is it that Mitch McConnell just made Barack Obama's re-election more likely? Bet you didn't see that one coming, did you?
http://andrewsullivan.theatlantic.com/the_daily_dish/2010/12/obama-president-mcconnell-sucker.html

LOL .....no he didnt .....

[TonyR]

I have to mostly agree with Req here. But even more than being a "centrist" Obama is a pragmatist. He's proven it time and time again. Sometimes hard to see/hear it through the MSM and right wing clap trap but that's what he is first and foremost.

[cutthemdown]

This thread title underscores what's so distasteful about you and the morally bankrupt idiots who comprise today's GOP (a party that Reagan would probably no longer recognize.)

Obama tries to compromise with you, (something he did even when he had the majority in both chambers and didn't need to compromise) gives you what you want, (tax cuts for the super-rich) and you still stick a shiv in him.

This proves beyond a doubt that people like you don't give a f_ck about the fate of this country - the only thing you care about is getting a "win" for Team GOP.

If you read my post you would see that I said this move could get Obama re elected. I think country poised to do very well next 2 yrs and if it does I will probably vote for Obama just like I did Clinton for his 2nd term. I don't believe in changing managers during an uptick in the American economy.

Let me guess though you have never voted for a repub? You saying what you just did is the biggest joke the board has ever seen. No one, I repeat no one is more partisan and unfair then you are.

[Spider]

LOL , well I m not shocked here at all , anyone that can chew the Clintons up and spit em out for any office , then turn around and Make Hillary work under them ........ Very very shrewed politicians .....The writing was on the wall bout obama, people just didnt read it ......Thats why I laughed my ass off when people said he was elected cause he is Black ....got feelin Obama will be more successful Them Clinton ever was

[Rohirrim]

I would like to correct an error in Obama's speech yesterday. He said that this country "...was founded on compromise." No. It wasn't. It was actually founded on a refusal to compromise. There was a declaration of principles followed by the Revolutionary War. We won our independence by fighting to the death, not by pragmatic compromise, which (ironically enough) is what the Tories of the time (today's conservatives) wanted us to do.

[Rohirrim]

I have to mostly agree with Req here. But even more than being a "centrist" Obama is a pragmatist. He's proven it time and time again. Sometimes hard to see/hear it through the MSM and right wing clap trap but that's what he is first and foremost.

Which is why I won't be voting for him again. I hope he gets a strong primary challenger from the Left.

[Spider]

Wouldnt be shocked at all if Obama wanted this stimulus but didnt want the fall if it went bad , if it goes bad now bedwetters also have to carry alot of the blame , if it goes good Obama gets all of the credit like clinton did ............ win -win for obama and protecting Democrats ..... I like this , alot

[cutthemdown]

This thread title underscores what's so distasteful about you and the morally bankrupt idiots who comprise today's GOP (a party that Reagan would probably no longer recognize.)

Obama tries to compromise with you, (something he did even when he had the majority in both chambers and didn't need to compromise) gives you what you want, (tax cuts for the super-rich) and you still stick a shiv in him.

This proves beyond a doubt that people like you don't give a f_ck about the fate of this country - the only thing you care about is getting a "win" for Team GOP.

This coming from the guy who wrote a thread title making it look like Cheney was going to be arrested. You are the worst when it comes to misleading titles.

This however is not misleading. It's a fact because of the repub gains in Congress Obama was forced to cave and give all Americans an extension of the Bush tax cuts. Anyone who says that isn't how it went down is a ****ing liar and they know it.

[cutthemdown]

Wouldnt be shocked at all if Obama wanted this stimulus but didnt want the fall if it went bad , if it goes bad now bedwetters also have to carry alot of the blame , if it goes good Obama gets all of the credit like clinton did ............ win -win for obama and protecting Democrats ..... I like this , alot

You kidding? Things get worst repubs blame Obama. Things get better they say see all we needed was Congressional power and we turned things around.

Obama can get re-elected off this if things go good though i do agree. The problem is if they go good then for sure repubs take over both arms of Congress and Obama will be diminished even more.

[TonyR]

I would like to correct an error in Obama's speech yesterday. He said that this country "...was founded on compromise." No. It's wan't. It was actually founded on a refusal to compromise.

I agree. Obama should have fought this and made the GOP the "bad guys" rather than letting them prance around like they won something.

[Spider]

You kidding?


Things get worst repubs blame Obama. Things get better they say see all we needed was Congressional power and we turned things around. LOL you better learn history ...........

Obama can get re-elected off this if things go good though i do agree. The problem is if they go good then for sure repubs take over both arms of Congress and Obama will be diminished even more.
:rofl: u like fairy tales dont you ...... stop and think for a second . how hard did the right try and get Clinton ?......Even with Bill helpin out Hillary , Obama walked the dog on em , then had her work under him .... you sure dont know how to read people do you

[cutthemdown]

LOL , well I m not shocked here at all , anyone that can chew the Clintons up and spit em out for any office , then turn around and Make Hillary work under them ........ Very very shrewed politicians .....The writing was on the wall bout obama, people just didnt read it ......Thats why I laughed my ass off when people said he was elected cause he is Black ....got feelin Obama will be more successful Them Clinton ever was


huh?

[Spider]

I agree. Obama should have fought this and made the GOP the "bad guys" rather than letting them prance around like they won something.
why ? the more they think they won , the more easier it will be to set em up

[bronclvr]

I agree. Obama should have fought this and made the GOP the "bad guys" rather than letting them prance around like they won something.

Everyone wins on this one-People who are having trouble finding Jobs are helped, and Businesses and Corporations are stimulated to continue to buy Machines and build Inventory which will hopefully increase J-O-B-S-what's not to like? You guys need to keep your eye on the ball-

[cutthemdown]

Obama had no choice because he wanted unemployment extended again. He is basically the repubs bitch for the next 2 yrs and will do exactly what we say. If he doesn't he won't get re elected, if he does he will.

He knows the dems won't run someone against him in primary either way. He will get dem vote. Right now he is trying to secure the independents and it could just work.

Obama had no choice after the ass kicking dems just took. They have very little pull right now.

[Spider]

huh?

too big of words for you ? oh wait , your the one that thought LABF put up a misleading thread title ..... Ok lets put it like this , the reps went after clinton for everything , from whitewater to FBI travel gate had to settle for Clinton lied about a blow job.... Obama beat both Clintons .......Clinton even had the white sands scandal , Then renting out Bedrooms in the white house to the highest bidder , even passed Legal partial birth abortions ,dont ask dont tell , even threatened to release the fed reserve of oil if the prices got to high and obama kicked their collective asses all over america ...... Just keep thinking that the reps will come out smellin like a rose with another Large stimulus on their watch :rofl:

[Spider]

Obama had no choice because he wanted unemployment extended again. He is basically the repubs b**** for the next 2 yrs and will do exactly what we say. If he doesn't he won't get re elected, if he does he will.

He knows the dems won't run someone against him in primary either way. He will get dem vote. Right now he is trying to secure the independents and it could just work.

Obama had no choice after the ass kicking dems just took. They have very little pull right now.

:rofl: if that helps you thinking this , go right on head

[Spider]

Everyone wins on this one-People who are having trouble finding Jobs are helped, and Businesses and Corporations are stimulated to continue to buy Machines and build Inventory which will hopefully increase J-O-B-S-what's not to like? You guys need to keep your eye on the ball-
well it is a good thing for all the people , just like the previous stimulus was , but in todays political climate ..... It maybe his Idea , but let the otherside take all the risk

[cutthemdown]

I could care less about the spelling because I do that as well, but I just can't understand what you want to say arachnid boy.

Well the Bushes got beat once also then came back and won so I wouldn't count ole Hilliary out just yet.

She can still quit Obama and turn on him.

[cutthemdown]

well it is a good thing for all the people , just like the previous stimulus was , but in todays political climate ..... It maybe his Idea , but let the otherside take all the risk

Why Obama signs the bills. The buck always stops with the President. Things go good, or bad, Obama will be taking or getting some of that blame.

It's impossible to shield yourself as President. It's a lot harder then just wearing a rubber with your truckstop whores.

[Spider]

Why Obama signs the bills. The buck always stops with the President. Things go good, or bad, Obama will be taking or getting some of that blame.

It's impossible to shield yourself as President. It's a lot harder then just wearing a rubber with your truckstop whores.

LOL if you say so ...........

[Spider]

I could care less about the spelling because I do that as well, but I just can't understand what you want to say arachnid boy.

Well the Bushes got beat once also then came back and won so I wouldn't count ole Hilliary out just yet.

She can still quit Obama and turn on him.

LMAO may I suggest you drink near -beer , like Odouls before reading and posting ......just tryin to help

[cutthemdown]

Funny Spider because you are just so dumb. What was your GPA in HS? or did you even finish?

[Spider]

Funny Spider because you are just so dumb. What was your GPA in HS? or did you even finish?

you are pretty worked up , ur not going to hyperventilate are you ? maybe some Prozac and a couple of hours in your happy place is what you need

[TonyR]

Everyone wins on this one...

Well, maybe. Depends on how you look at it I guess. Check out Larison's comments on the subject:

The most tiresome response to this deal I have seen is the claim that it somehow helps Obama with “the center” because the left is unhappy about it. It seems clear to me that he has put himself in the position of being identified with the interests of the wealthy and powerful yet again, which has been one of the administration’s problems for two years. Something like two-thirds of the public favored letting the top rate go up, and that includes the precious voters of “the center,” and Obama has now effectively taken the very unpopular side of this debate.

http://www.amconmag.com/larison/2010/12/07/uniting-behind-fiscal-irresponsibility/

[cutthemdown]

you are pretty worked up , ur not going to hyperventilate are you ? maybe some Prozac and a couple of hours in your happy place is what you need

Not at all you make me laugh. Seriously out of the whole board you are the funniest person here. Without your trucker theories on the world the mane would be boring!!!

All of us white collar boys love hearing your hick point of view. It's like watching a reality show about a trailer park full of characters!!!

[Rohirrim]

I agree. Obama should have fought this and made the GOP the "bad guys" rather than letting them prance around like they won something.

All I needed to know about this deal I learned when I saw McConnell's big **** eating grin after it was announced. That spoke volumes.

[Rigs11]

the stimulus included 280 billion in tax cuts so i dont' know how the hell that is only a left/liberal action.

The continuation of the wars in afghanistan and iraq is definetely not a liberal action.

the continuation of gitmo and bush era surveillance techniques is Definetely not a liberal action.

His proposal to open up more waters to drilling is definetely not liberal.

Deportations of illegals are actually up since obama took office. Again how is that liberal/leftist?

if anything the prez is more centrist than anything.The rightards just like to scream that he is a far radical leftist. But then again facts are not taken into account by the rightards.

[Spider]

Not at all you make me laugh. Seriously out of the whole board you are the funniest person here. Without your trucker theories on the world the mane would be boring!!!

All of us white collar boys love hearing your hick point of view. It's like watching a reality show about a trailer park full of characters!!!

well maybe some day they will do a reality show about long beach drunks who get testy when the man trick refuses to put out ....... that should be a hoot

[TonyR]

By yielding on the tax cuts, Obama extracted Republican leaders' support for extending unemployment benefits for the long-term unemployed -- and large majorities of independents support both measures. Additionally, according to a post-election Gallup poll, by 49% to 24%, independents are more inclined to favor partisan compromise over principled standoffs in Congress. Thus, rather than get mired in a partisan squabble that could result in higher taxes for the middle class come January, Obama can present himself as the architect of a new era of compromise.

While Republicans generally don't agree with extending unemployment benefits, they broadly support extending the tax cuts, and at least a slim majority of Democrats support both measures. In fact, the only groups not supporting both proposals are liberal Democrats and conservative Republicans. The more moderate members of both parties join independents in generally supporting the proposals.

http://www.gallup.com/poll/145109/Americans-Support-Major-Elements-Tax-Compromise.aspx?utm_source=tagrss&utm_medium=rss&utm_campaign=syndication&utm_term=All%20Gallup%20Headlines

[cutthemdown]

well maybe some day they will do a reality show about long beach drunks who get testy when the man trick refuses to put out ....... that should be a hoot

There you go saying how you are peoples man trick again. What is it with you? Are you gay now?

Also the rest of us can handle our drinking. Not all of us a hick trucker who can't help himself when it comes to his bottle of cheap whiskey. I Don't blame you though I have seen your pictures. LOL!!!!!!!!!! I would probably drink also if I had your life.

[Spider]

There you go saying how you are peoples man trick again. What is it with you? Are you gay now?

Also the rest of us can handle our drinking. Not all of us a hick trucker who can't help himself when it comes to his bottle of cheap whiskey. I Don't blame you though I have seen your pictures. LOL!!!!!!!!!! I would probably drink also if I had your life.

LOL thats why you didnt show up ..... u know all to well I would have snapped you in 2 like a twig , didnt have anything to do with wasting gas money .....LOL I doubt you could handle any kind of life , much less mine :rofl: .... if you had to live my life , it would have broke you in a months time if not less

[JJJ]

too big of words for you ? oh wait , your the one that thought LABF put up a misleading thread title ..... Ok lets put it like this , the reps went after clinton for everything , from whitewater to FBI travel gate had to settle for Clinton lied about a blow job.... Obama beat both Clintons .......Clinton even had the white sands scandal , Then renting out Bedrooms in the white house to the highest bidder , even passed Legal partial birth abortions ,dont ask dont tell , even threatened to release the fed reserve of oil if the prices got to high and obama kicked their collective asses all over america ...... Just keep thinking that the reps will come out smellin like a rose with another Large stimulus on their watch :rofl:

Was that some beach shagging scandal I didn't hear about?

White sands. Ha!

That is funny shiat. I think you meant Whitewater there chief.

[Spider]

Was that some beach shagging scandal I didn't hear about?

White sands. Ha!

That is funny shiat. I think you meant Whitewater there chief.

LOL , yo udont remember the selling of Military secrets , a death of a china man and a lost hard drive found at white sands ?
LMAO

[Spider]

Maybe Beck should reopen that for alot of you bedwetters :rofl:

[Requiem]

I have to mostly agree with Req here. But even more than being a "centrist" Obama is a pragmatist. He's proven it time and time again. Sometimes hard to see/hear it through the MSM and right wing clap trap but that's what he is first and foremost.

Very much so.

Obama had majorities with his party in our legislature and had the ability to pretty much do whatever his voters wanted (his campaign promises), but he never put his foot down and pushed stuff through, instead, he mediated and worked towards the middle ever since being elected. His most recent actions are even more indicative of that. It is quite crazy how much the MSM has been able to spin him off into some fearsome mongrel with socialist aptitude when his governance suggests anything but that.

His liberal beliefs came by the wayside when he had the chance to govern. They literally could have shoved everything down the throats of the Republicans but chose not to.

Riggs brought up some good points too.

As I've said, there is a huge difference in prior belief and the changes that happen to a President after being elected.

The Political Compass test is a very sound indicator of where politicians relate on scales pertaining to individual rights and economics, and Obama is nowhere near guys like Sanders and the far left of his party.

I don't know if we will see a challenger in the primaries against Obama. Not sure how good it would be for the party, considering they are already having trouble as is -- unless people are under the impression that such a challenge would benefit the Democrats in the immediate future, which I am not sure of.

[JJJ]

First and foremost, I will preface my statement with the following:

Bringing up Obama's voting record as a Senator is irrelevant to his time as Presidency. If you have followed his Presidency, you will realize that his time as a legislator and that of President are highly variable, in fact completely different. It was easy for you to go ahead and attempt to cherry pick some issues, (some issues that are really not issues at all, nor have any sort of ideological tie or leaning) to try and prove your point, but essentially that is all it was.

Obama's constituents, his base if you will, has been highly disappointed in his efforts and policy implementation over his two year course as President. One key aspect to analyzing ideology is foreign policy, which for whatever reason you left out in your analysis.

In two years as President, Obama increased efforts in Afghanistan and has come up with a more hawkish and abysmal foreign policy effort in the GWOT than his predecessor. One of his first orders of business was re-issuing drone attacks into Pakistan and elsewhere that Bush had done before he completely abandoned that theater and decided to make his divisive shift to Iraq to confront this ideological war.

How about abandoning the closing of GITMO, which was essentially one of the forefront reasons liberals were cheering for him during the primaries in 2008. Not only that, but his excessive use of executive orders to circumvent the E-L relationship is extremely troublesome, and on par and overreaching of his predecessor, though this is not an indicator of ideological standard, but demonstrates a willingness to go on his own accord rather than what party members seem would deem in their best interest.

In regards to economic and domestic policy, you've brought up some points that I would like to address:

Obama played the middle on the economic stimulus road and ended up suggesting for half of the amount that his advisers within his cabinet were lobbying for. What Congress has done is another story. Obama has even been hesitant to ask for additional aid in this regard, contrary to what you have suggested.

As far as Universal Healthcare, Obama's plan is not even near as left as you would want to imagine. What came out and what was passed was reconciled, and extremely similar to what Romney proposed and implemented back in Massachusetts when he was head honcho there. Just curious, how much about the law do you actually know? My guess is not much when you are using it as a bastion of liberalness on behalf of Obama. Every top political pundit in the nation realizes this, and has stated this time and time again as a reconciled measure affirming a centrist stance on the issue. Might want to take a gander at how everything shook down in that regard.

(Examples: No public option, less than universal coverage, reduced penalties pertaining to refusal, tax hikes on abortions.)

Pertaining to cap-and-trade, his position is also to the right of his common party, whom rather suggested carbon emission taxes, as opposed to this cap-and-trade system that actually benefits those who are doing contributing to the significant changes in the environmental dynamic. This is a huge position in regards to environmentalism efforts, in which many of his supporters feel that they've been pissed on for.

He may be a supporter in the repeal of don't ask, don't tell -- but those efforts are at a complete stall, and a position he has pretty much abandoned within two years. As you can see, this illustrates my point of being for something, yet not taking the initiative to see it through. His governance in this regard shows a different shift in action related to belief.

More on economics, Obama had actually wanted to re-allocate funds from TARP (30 billion) and use it for small-business lending. Furthermore, I suggest you look into the Volker Rule. Hell, look at his economic advisers and appointments. Those clowns are pretty much as centrist as you get.

It was also convenient for you to ignore Obama's proposal of extending tax cuts to small businesses, which was highly criticized by his party in the Legislature. He also proposed tens of billions of dollars being sent to the SBA (Small Business Administration) to encourage growth in that regard as well, which was met by disdain from his party.

Republicans have actually been pretty supportive of Obama's initiatives to increase lending and support to small businesses. His party, highly critical.

On education, this is a fantastic excerpt I would encourage you to read (http://blog.jaredwilliam.com/2010/05/obama-and-education-or-how-i-knew-he-was-a-centrist/). Hardly uber-liberal on that front.

More so than anything, his platform and how he has governed and sentiments by those who elected him show a clear disdain or concern for what he promised. His actions while in office have been nothing close to what people were hoping for (those who voted for him) which is illustrated by what I have discussed above.

This was just a few things off the top of my mind, without doing any more extensive research on the matter, which isn't even referencing the breaking news that came out yesterday pertaining to tax cuts.

I will provide more later, but have errands to run before we get more friggin' snow.

So many words, so little information. Seriously, is this all you can bring?

You and Rigi citing his abandoning of Gitmo as evidence he is a centrist is just hilarious. You have to separate intent from actions.

He would have closed Gitmo in a heartbeat if he could actually figure out how. Just being incompetent and not able to carry out your stated goals doesn't make you a centrist. It makes you a failed liberal.

Same for the public option. If he could pass it tomorrow he would. He can't. But that doesn't make him a moderate.

Obama's base are bunch of lunatic lefties. They can't be used as a logical guiding post for determining his leftist shading. Rational thought processes are not their strong point.

Lets look to the moderates. The people in the middle that voted him into office abandoned him completely in the last election. That is all the evidence you need to know that your boy is way too far left of center for comfort for most Americans. Besides the 13 other reasons I gave you already.

We also know the plan the whole time was for Obama to try and appear moderate to the public while his henchmen Pelosi and Reid did his liberal tidings for him. Worked great on health care and the stimulus. No compromise needed when you ram it home with supermajorities without letting the opposite party even read the bill.

[cutthemdown]

LOL thats why you didnt show up ..... u know all to well I would have snapped you in 2 like a twig , didnt have anything to do with wasting gas money .....LOL I doubt you could handle any kind of life , much less mine :rofl: .... if you had to live my life , it would have broke you in a months time if not less

So funny you believe that. You're a piss ant loser and have never backed up one thing you said on the Mane.

You are a joke to everyone.

Wear your little trucker jacket and when I am done with you I will wipe my ass with it.

LOL that time you came up with the I had no wheels to drive excuse LOL!!

No one is afraid of you arachnid boy or your throat punching threats, phantom fights, is a running joke on the Mane.

I am easier to find then you that is for sure.

[Requiem]

This coming from the guy who wrote a thread title making it look like Cheney was going to be arrested. You are the worst when it comes to misleading titles.

There was nothing misleading about the title of the Cheney thread.

An indictment means formal charges are being brought against someone.

In Nigeria, against Cheney, that was the case.

The question there is whether or not Cheney will be extradited to Nigeria for these charges and the impact or significance international law has on this issue.

[cutthemdown]

Besides show up? You said you were going to meet me at a bar of my choice, then decided I should have to drive half way to meet you. LOL you are such a joke. How many people have you done this to now? Not once have you ever came through. I'd be more afraid of you falling on me after I knocked you out then I would be of you.

[cutthemdown]

There was nothing misleading about the title of the Cheney thread.

An indictment means formal charges are being brought against someone.

In Nigeria, against Cheney, that was the case.

The question there is whether or not Cheney will be extradited to Nigeria for these charges and the impact or significance international law has on this issue.

Uh maybe put Nigeria in the thread title. You don't think that is a core element of the story? Nope he wanted people to click thinking it was an American court.

[JJJ]

LOL , yo udont remember the selling of Military secrets , a death of a china man and a lost hard drive found at white sands ?
LMAO

Yep, you are right. Forgot all about that one.

[Requiem]

So many words, so little information. Seriously, is this all you can bring?

You did not refute one thing from it. I don't see the problem with it.

You have to separate intent from actions.

He would have closed Gitmo in a heartbeat if he could actually figure out how. Just being incompetent and not able to carry out your stated goals doesn't make you a centrist. It makes you a failed liberal.

Same for the public option. If he could pass it tomorrow he would. He can't. But that doesn't make him a moderate.

I already said there is a difference between belief prior to governance and action subsequently. He could have used an EO on Gitmo, and didn't -- and he hasn't been shy about using them. On the public option, he abandoned that idea, even when he had a super-majority.

You do realize this is an argument against yourself?

Obama's base are bunch of lunatic lefties. They can't be used as a logical guiding post for determining his leftist shading. Rational thought processes are not their strong point.

His base is abandoning him. Guess why.

Lets look to the moderates. The people in the middle that voted him into office abandoned him completely in the last election. That is all the evidence you need to know that your boy is way too far left of center for comfort for most Americans. Besides the 13 other reasons I gave you already.

First, Obama isn't my boy -- never has been. He was in my opinion, a superior candidate than McCain, hence my vote for him.

Secondly, you are lying about the 2008 exit polls. 39 percent of voters were Democrats and he took 89% of their vote. 32% were Republicans, he took 9% of their vote. Out of the remaining 29% (independents, moderates) -- he only beat McCain by an 8 percent margin, with 4% going to an alternative to those two. Clearly, the seven percent difference in registration turnout had more of an impact than the 8 percent swing of independents. Your story would hold water if Obama took the independents by a greater margin, but he didn't.

We also know the plan the whole time was for Obama to try and appear moderate to the public while his henchmen Pelosi and Reid did his liberal tidings for him. Worked great on health care and the stimulus. No compromise needed when you ram it home with supermajorities without letting the opposite party even read the bill.

Obama has been at odds with Pelosi and Reid since the get go since he has opposed a lot of what they were willing to offer. They never rammed home **** with their super-majorities. Not sure what you are even trying to attempt here, but a logical argument surely hasn't been an option.

Care to refute the points I made in my post or just say they weren't good enough?

This isn't an engineering handbook. We are talking about political dynamic. Dynamic -- fluid, with change. Not something static like you are pretending it to be.

[cutthemdown]

Yep, you are right. Forgot all about that one.

wow

Spider - 1
JJJ - 30489

He's catching up!!!!!

[Requiem]

Uh maybe put Nigeria in the thread title. You don't think that is a core element of the story? Nope he wanted people to click thinking it was an American court.

An indictment was brought up against him, and the thread provided where it was. Sorry.

[cutthemdown]

His letting terrorists even be tried in civilian court is very liberal IMO. It's a bad idea as was proven by all the evidence that got thrown out.

[cutthemdown]

An indictment was brought up against him, and the thread provided where it was. Sorry.

Ok whatever. Do you disagree with my point that this has zero chance of ever putting Cheney in danger of losing his freedom? You don't really think that do you? If so take the bet I am sure there are some good charities you would love to see my 1000 bucks go to.

[Spider]

So funny you believe that. You're a piss ant loser and have never backed up one thing you said on the Mane.

You are a joke to everyone.

Wear your little trucker jacket and when I am done with you I will wipe my ass with it.

LOL that time you came up with the I had no wheels to drive excuse LOL!!

No one is afraid of you arachnid boy or your throat punching threats, phantom fights, is a running joke on the Mane.

I am easier to find then you that is for sure.yeah yeah scream how tough you are , i told you then i will meet you or get as close as possible ,and you didnt show when I contacted you , but since your feelin like a man , and you dont have a job that matte3rs , come out ot colorado ......Greeley let me know when you get here .. LOL we both know you dont have the balls

[Spider]

Yep, you are right. Forgot all about that one.

:thanku:

[Spider]

Besides show up? You said you were going to meet me at a bar of my choice, then decided I should have to drive half way to meet you. LOL you are such a joke. How many people have you done this to now? Not once have you ever came through. I'd be more afraid of you falling on me after I knocked you out then I would be of you.

LMAO bar fly talkin tough now he knows I am a local driver now and not OTR LMFAO ........

[Spider]

Ok whatever. Do you disagree with my point that this has zero chance of ever putting Cheney in danger of losing his freedom? You don't really think that do you? If so take the bet I am sure there are some good charities you would love to see my 1000 bucks go to.

If Backpeddaling was an Olympic sport, your mug would be on a box of wheaties

[Rigs11]

So many words, so little information. Seriously, is this all you can bring?

You and Rigi citing his abandoning of Gitmo as evidence he is a centrist is just hilarious. You have to separate intent from actions.

He would have closed Gitmo in a heartbeat if he could actually figure out how. Just being incompetent and not able to carry out your stated goals doesn't make you a centrist. It makes you a failed liberal.

Same for the public option. If he could pass it tomorrow he would. He can't. But that doesn't make him a moderate.

Obama's base are bunch of lunatic lefties. They can't be used as a logical guiding post for determining his leftist shading. Rational thought processes are not their strong point.

Lets look to the moderates. The people in the middle that voted him into office abandoned him completely in the last election. That is all the evidence you need to know that your boy is way too far left of center for comfort for most Americans. Besides the 13 other reasons I gave you already.

We also know the plan the whole time was for Obama to try and appear moderate to the public while his henchmen Pelosi and Reid did his liberal tidings for him. Worked great on health care and the stimulus. No compromise needed when you ram it home with supermajorities without letting the opposite party even read the bill.

This is the problem though, you guys want it both ways. You rip on him for being a radical leftist in wanting to close gitmo, then when he changes course you rip him for not sticking to his radical leftist ways.it's silly really.

[JJJ]

I already said there is a difference between belief prior to governance and action subsequently. He could have used an EO on Gitmo, and didn't -- and he hasn't been shy about using them. On the public option, he abandoned that idea, even when he had a super-majority.

You do realize this is an argument against yourself?


This is crazy talk here. He said, after taking office, he will close Gitmo in 12 months. It didn't happen because he was talking out of his ass and didn't have any idea of how to actually do it. An EO wouldn't have solved the problems with the closing, it would have exacerbated them. Your logic is he didn't use something that wouldn't of worked in any case, look how moderate he is. Laughable logic.

He abandoned the public option because it woudl have never passed, i.e. he was forced to. He passed it without the public option with only one vote to spare. There is no way he gets the Obamacare passed with the public option in place because more moderate democrats would have abandoned the plan. Had he enough votes we would have the public option I am sure.

Only with your pretzel logic can either of these things be arguments against myself.

[cutthemdown]

Then take the bet arachnid pussy boy.

[JJJ]

This is the problem though, you guys want it both ways. You rip on him for being a radical leftist in wanting to close gitmo, then when he changes course you rip him for not sticking to his radical leftist ways.it's silly really.

He didn't have a change of conscience on Gitmo. He still wants to do the stupid **** of trying them in liberal courts. Gitmo was a free political gift Bush gave Obama. He used it to the extreme and then when realized all his arrogant claims of decisiveness were not backed up by any logical plan he had to back off. Sorry no credit given for such a cluster****.

If he came out and said I was wrong, Bush was right, and we are going to keep it open indefinitely I may give him some kudos. But I won't hold my breath.

[cutthemdown]

LMAO bar fly talkin tough now he knows I am a local driver now and not OTR LMFAO ........

No one ever cared what you are or where you were arachnid pussy boy. No one ever takes you seriously because you never came through on any of your throat punching threats.

Besides like I said I would kick your ass anyways. You are a fraud and a huge arachnid pussy boy.

[cutthemdown]

yeah yeah scream how tough you are , i told you then i will meet you or get as close as possible ,and you didnt show when I contacted you , but since your feelin like a man , and you dont have a job that matte3rs , come out ot colorado ......Greeley let me know when you get here .. LOL we both know you dont have the balls

Another you didn't meet me story from arachnid pussy boy. That's what they are stories people. I said meet me at a gig, I am easy to find, you've never showed that any I can remember.

Like I said though you would just get stomped so why would an arachnid pussy boy show?

[Spider]

No one ever cared what you are or where you were arachnid p***Y boy. No one ever takes you seriously because you never came through on any of your throat punching threats.

Besides like I said I would kick your ass anyways. You are a fraud and a huge arachnid p***Y boy.

you got me scared now bar fly ...... please dont come to colorado:spit:

[cutthemdown]

If Backpeddaling was an Olympic sport, your mug would be on a box of wheaties

If throat punching was an Olympic sport you would talk about competing then say Olympics didn't come to your city and get out of it.

[Spider]

If throat punching was an Olympic sport you would talk about competing then say Olympics didn't come to your city and get out of it.

LMAO so says the bar fly that couldnt make it from Long Beach to Onterio

[cutthemdown]

you got me scared now bar fly ...... please dont come to colorado:spit:

No but you are all upset about it. I can feel your hate. Let it flow through you....then go take it out on one of your truckstop hookers.

[cutthemdown]

LMAO so says the bar fly that couldnt make it from Long Beach to Onterio

I said come to Long Beach, you said you would, you didn't show. End of story.

[Spider]

No but you are all upset about it. I can feel your hate. Let it flow through you....then go take it out on one of your truckstop hookers.

LMAO ........ you are an Idiot ........

[cutthemdown]

I wouldn't even walk across the street for you arachnid pussy boy. Until I have a real reason to fight, like defending myself, or punishing someone for doing something, there is no need. You are a fraud and no one is afraid of you. You always say I will be there, then come back with some story about how your truck cant be driven to this place etc etc and you have to come meet me. LOL what a joke the arachnid pussy boy is.

[Spider]

I wouldn't even walk across the street for you arachnid p***Y boy. Until I have a real reason to fight, like defending myself, or punishing someone for doing something, there is no need. You are a fraud and no one is afraid of you. You always say I will be there, then come back with some story about how your truck cant be driven to this place etc etc and you have to come meet me. LOL what a joke the arachnid p***Y boy is.

LMAO defending yourself or stopping someone from taking your drink ?

[Rigs11]

He didn't have a change of conscience on Gitmo. He still wants to do the stupid **** of trying them in liberal courts. Gitmo was a free political gift Bush gave Obama. He used it to the extreme and then when realized all his arrogant claims of decisiveness were not backed up by any logical plan he had to back off. Sorry no credit given for such a cluster****.

If he came out and said I was wrong, Bush was right, and we are going to keep it open indefinitely I may give him some kudos. But I won't hold my breath.

fair enough, what about the wars?

[bronclvr]

Some millionaires say, 'Tax me, please!'

http://lifeinc.todayshow.com/_news/2010/12/08/5613910-some-millionaires-say-tax-me-please

[cutthemdown]

LMAO defending yourself or stopping someone from taking your drink ?

This is just lame. You can't even smack talk and rip on someone good. Best you come up with is me sending blueflame a little PM about banning myself from the WPR forum? Man that is classic coming from the throat punching, hooker using, trucker from the sticks.

Just stop now before someone notices the thread.

[Spider]

This is just lame. You can't even smack talk and rip on someone good. Best you come up with is me sending blueflame a little PM about banning myself from the WPR forum? Man that is classic coming from the throat punching, hooker using, trucker from the sticks.

Just stop now before someone notices the thread.

LMAO , you cant even ban yourself , you got no will power , you re a weak man , maybe a couple of drinks you could muster up enough fortitude , to stop coming here ........ :rofl: ..... Drunks = all the same .......

[Spider]

Cuthtedown tag line ......... Help me please...I need some serious intervention LOL

[L.A. BRONCOS FAN]

GOP blocks legislation to award seniors $250 (AP) (http://us.lrd.yahoo.com/_ylc=X3oDMTJhN2RwNm1uBF9TAzM5ODMwMTA0MQRnc3RhdGUDM QRwb3MDNgRzZWMDbndfdG9wc3RvcmllcwRzbGsDdGl0bGUEdGF yA25ld3MueWFob28uY29t/SIG=142fmrf8n/**http%3A//us.rd.yahoo.com/dailynews/rss/topstories/*http%3A//news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20101209/ap_on_bi_ge/us_social_security_no_cola)

And these are the slime bags Obama wants to compromise with?

He might as well just switch parties.

[epicSocialism4tw]

GOP blocks legislation to award seniors $250 (AP) (http://us.lrd.yahoo.com/_ylc=X3oDMTJhN2RwNm1uBF9TAzM5ODMwMTA0MQRnc3RhdGUDM QRwb3MDNgRzZWMDbndfdG9wc3RvcmllcwRzbGsDdGl0bGUEdGF yA25ld3MueWFob28uY29t/SIG=142fmrf8n/**http%3A//us.rd.yahoo.com/dailynews/rss/topstories/*http%3A//news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20101209/ap_on_bi_ge/us_social_security_no_cola)

And these are the slime bags Obama wants to compromise with?

He might as well just switch parties.

Bush hands LABF to Cheney:
http://images.sodahead.com/polls/000795001/polls_reuters9_0041_710024_answer_4_xlarge.jpeg

[mhgaffney]

I would like to correct an error in Obama's speech yesterday. He said that this country "...was founded on compromise." No. It wasn't. It was actually founded on a refusal to compromise. There was a declaration of principles followed by the Revolutionary War. We won our independence by fighting to the death, not by pragmatic compromise, which (ironically enough) is what the Tories of the time (today's conservatives) wanted us to do.

This.

[mhgaffney]

But I would not call it pragmatic compromise -- more like surrendering beforehand.

[epicSocialism4tw]

I would like to correct an error in Obama's speech yesterday. He said that this country "...was founded on compromise." No. It wasn't. It was actually founded on a refusal to compromise. There was a declaration of principles followed by the Revolutionary War. We won our independence by fighting to the death, not by pragmatic compromise, which (ironically enough) is what the Tories of the time (today's conservatives) wanted us to do.

Ah yes...Rohirrim comes back with his "Liberals should rise up and kill conservatives" mantra.

Good stuff there, oldie. I guess you have nothing to live for but your liberalism.

[mhgaffney]

He didn't have a change of conscience on Gitmo. He still wants to do the stupid **** of trying them in liberal courts. Gitmo was a free political gift Bush gave Obama. He used it to the extreme and then when realized all his arrogant claims of decisiveness were not backed up by any logical plan he had to back off. Sorry no credit given for such a cluster****.

If he came out and said I was wrong, Bush was right, and we are going to keep it open indefinitely I may give him some kudos. But I won't hold my breath.

What?!

How can JJJ be so ignorant 9 years down the road? You'd have to conclude that he actually got stupider with time.

Most of the people incarcerated in Gitmo are totally innocent -- and should simply be released. They were swept up off the street and sold to the stupid Americans for fast cash.

Maybe a couple of them are truly terrorists.

[Rohirrim]

Ah yes...Rohirrim comes back with his "Liberals should rise up and kill conservatives" mantra.

Good stuff there, oldie. I guess you have nothing to live for but your liberalism.

Never heard of the Revolutionary War? Why am I not surprised?

[epicSocialism4tw]

Never heard of the Revolutionary War? Why am I not surprised?

I'm a Son of the Revolution. 1776, baby. Those were my people.

You and your whiny liberal communist wannabe revolutionaries arent worthy to shine their shoes with your tongues.

[cutthemdown]

GOP blocks legislation to award seniors $250 (AP) (http://us.lrd.yahoo.com/_ylc=X3oDMTJhN2RwNm1uBF9TAzM5ODMwMTA0MQRnc3RhdGUDM QRwb3MDNgRzZWMDbndfdG9wc3RvcmllcwRzbGsDdGl0bGUEdGF yA25ld3MueWFob28uY29t/SIG=142fmrf8n/**http%3A//us.rd.yahoo.com/dailynews/rss/topstories/*http%3A//news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20101209/ap_on_bi_ge/us_social_security_no_cola)

And these are the slime bags Obama wants to compromise with?

He might as well just switch parties.

Ghastly

[Requiem]

Only with your pretzel logic can either of these things be arguments against myself.

No, not really.

They illustrate the case on governance I suggested and a move towards the middle as POTUS.

Read the article on education yet?

You should.

[cutthemdown]

Well liberals are pissed now so Obama must be doing something right.

[JJJ]

fair enough, what about the wars?

Rightie view on Afghanistan.

Leftie view on Iraq. Another Gitmo there. His mind and mouth say one thing but the cold hard realities of life force him to accept something else entirely. Another "whoops it really is that hard?" moment. Lets see how he does now that a few more foreign fighters are coming back into country.

[JJJ]

Some millionaires say, 'Tax me, please!'

http://lifeinc.todayshow.com/_news/2010/12/08/5613910-some-millionaires-say-tax-me-please

Anyone can volunteer more taxes to the government. I am sure they would gladly accept any contribution above the required level.

The biggest land baron in the country claims he is down to his last few millions. Funny stuff. This is the warped view of the world living with Jane Fonda can cause.

Why didn't Teddy donate his money to the government instead of charity?

Probably because if it goes to charity it is much more effective? I think yes.

[JJJ]

No, not really.

They illustrate the case on governance I suggested and a move towards the middle as POTUS.

Read the article on education yet?

You should.

They actually illustrate nothing of the sort.

That article took longer to get to the point than even you do. That is quite a feat.

And when the author finally got to the point, he had no point. This rather random assembly of sentences provides no lucid arguments to say he is a centrist.

He is a centrist because he actually wants to test kids in a consistent way and hold them back if they don't pass? Oh, the horror.

[Requiem]

Sure they do and you clearly didn't grasp the article. Sorry it wasn't an engineering handbook.

[mhgaffney]

Olbermann nails Obama to the mast...

Don't miss this impeccable diatribe

<object width="640" height="505"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/-G0dIKy3d2s?fs=1&amp;hl=en_US"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/-G0dIKy3d2s?fs=1&amp;hl=en_US" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="640" height="505"></embed></object>

[Rohirrim]

Get it? By agreeing to another round of massive tax cuts for the wealthy, the president confirms the Republican story. Cutting taxes on the rich while freezing discretionary spending (which he's also agreed to do) affirms that the underlying problem is big government, and the solution is to shrink government and expect the extra wealth at the top to trickle down to everyone else.

Obama's new tax compromise is not only bad economics; it's also disastrous from the standpoint of educating the public about what has happened and what needs to happen in the future. It reinforces the Republican story and makes mincemeat out of the truthful one Democrats should be telling.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/robert-reich/post_1408_b_794177.html

[TonyR]

One of the stories some conservatives told themselves in 2010 was that the Tea Party movement had succeeded in getting the Republican Party “out from under Bush.” ...Fresh off of a significant electoral victory aided in part by the Tea Party movement, what has been the first and most pressing priority of the Republican leadership? To make sure that the deficit-expanding tax cuts they failed to pay for in the Bush years continue to increase the deficit in the future, and to make sure that they don’t pay for them now.

The leadership has made clear that it is quite happy to add significantly to the debt through tax cut extensions, payroll tax cuts, and continued spending. Bush-era habits of spend-and-borrow have resumed within weeks of the midterms that supposedly represented the repudiation of these habits. Will the new members of the House and Senate rebel against this rapid return to the old ways? If Tea Partiers and conservatives are at all serious about reducing the debt, they need to make sure that they do.

http://www.amconmag.com/larison/2010/12/07/bushism-endures/

[Rigs11]

So its estimated that this whole bill will end up costing us around 900 billion.some are calling it a second stimulus. Funny how the rightards were so outraged at the stimulus for its cost., yet know are on board on this? Where is the outrage? Where are the teabaggers?

[cutthemdown]

LOL tea baggers will never complain when govt lets Americans keep there money. The country is sick of being stuck without growth and this will probably trigger that.

[Rigs11]

ahh yes, so the 900 billion that its going to cost us is free money right?Hilarious!

[cutthemdown]

The 900 billion still exists it's just now the taxpayers get it instead of the govt. It's about who spends the money Riggs us and the private sector, or the govt.

[Rohirrim]

The 900 billion still exists it's just now the taxpayers get it instead of the govt. It's about who spends the money Riggs us and the private sector, or the govt.

That's the problem. Give the rich more tax cuts and they don't spend it. They stash it.

[epicSocialism4tw]

That's the problem. Give the rich more tax cuts and they don't spend it. They stash it.

Yeah...thats how they became rich, right?

[Rigs11]

The 900 billion still exists it's just now the taxpayers get it instead of the govt. It's about who spends the money Riggs us and the private sector, or the govt.

oh that's rich, is that why our countrie's infastructure is in such good shape. keep em coming dude.

[Rigs11]

Yeah...thats how they became rich, right?

yeah but your moronic argument is that they create jobs because of the tax cuts.

[epicSocialism4tw]

yeah but your moronic argument is that they create jobs because of the tax cuts.

People invest. They invest in all sorts of things. Some people invest in more small businesses...chipotle burrito shops, construction outfits, landscaping crews, toy shops, shoe shops, whatever. Some invest in stocks.

People who have money many times have it because they have sought it out. Good or bad, right or wrong. That motivation does not stop when they reach a magic number. That kind of competitive motivation remains, and those people tend to try to multiply their assets. The federal government does not have this capability. That makes our people our best resource. Let our people be the engines of innovation, because they make it happen. Tell me one major innovation that our modern federal bureaucracy has created.

Just because people have money doesnt make them any less a citizen of this country. They certainly need to be responsible, but the fed should not take away their incentive. Thats just flat out stupid.

[cutthemdown]

The notion our infrastructure is so bad is a joke. I haven't heard one story of anyone not being able to drive or ship things to any point in the country.

Just because a bridge gets old and falls down once in awhile doesn't mean much to me. Rebuild them after they fall problem solved.

So funny because Obama is repaving all the roads around my city with stimulus money. But they are doing the nice areas by me that didn't need it. The crappy hood of long beach still torn up with pot holes and cracked curbs.

[cutthemdown]

Well Pelosi standing up to Obama. They won't pass it!!!!! Wow the fracture of the dems begins. This is a prelude maybe to Bama being ran against in the primary?

I give the liberals in Congress credit though for making a stand.

[epicSocialism4tw]

Well Pelosi standing up to Obama. They won't pass it!!!!! Wow the fracture of the dems begins. This is a prelude maybe to Bama being ran against in the primary?

I give the liberals in Congress credit though for making a stand.

Credit for being morons?

Yeah, theyre morons...but at least they made a moronic stand! Hilarious!

[cutthemdown]

No, credit for at least really believing the are right and sticking to there guns. I hate politicians that just go with the flow because they don't want to create friction.

It's never stupid to stand up for what you believe. Anyone who thinks there ideology is the only way things can be good for the country is shortsighted IMO.

It's about finding the right mix between liberal and conservative. No way I would want to live in a world where conservatives got everything they wanted.

[Rigs11]

The notion our infrastructure is so bad is a joke. I haven't heard one story of anyone not being able to drive or ship things to any point in the country.

Just because a bridge gets old and falls down once in awhile doesn't mean much to me. Rebuild them after they fall problem solved.

So funny because Obama is repaving all the roads around my city with stimulus money. But they are doing the nice areas by me that didn't need it. The crappy hood of long beach still torn up with pot holes and cracked curbs.

ahh yes but like all righties, rather than try to address the problems they wait until something happens.we have one of the oldest electrical grids of any country as well as some of the oldest bridges, dams, and gas pipelines.yet rather than spending money on this that would create jobs, youd rather complain about the unemployment rate.

[Rohirrim]

The notion our infrastructure is so bad is a joke. I haven't heard one story of anyone not being able to drive or ship things to any point in the country.

Just because a bridge gets old and falls down once in awhile doesn't mean much to me. Rebuild them after they fall problem solved.

So funny because Obama is repaving all the roads around my city with stimulus money. But they are doing the nice areas by me that didn't need it. The crappy hood of long beach still torn up with pot holes and cracked curbs.

Your compassion is underwhelming. Tell it to the people who buried their dead.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/I-35W_Mississippi_River_bridge

[Rigs11]

People invest. They invest in all sorts of things. Some people invest in more small businesses...chipotle burrito shops, construction outfits, landscaping crews, toy shops, shoe shops, whatever. Some invest in stocks.

People who have money many times have it because they have sought it out. Good or bad, right or wrong. That motivation does not stop when they reach a magic number. That kind of competitive motivation remains, and those people tend to try to multiply their assets. The federal government does not have this capability. That makes our people our best resource. Let our people be the engines of innovation, because they make it happen. Tell me one major innovation that our modern federal bureaucracy has created.

Just because people have money doesnt make them any less a citizen of this country. They certainly need to be responsible, but the fed should not take away their incentive. Thats just flat out stupid.
yeah those poor poor millionaires. Gasp that they cant afford another car every year,meanwhile those good for nothing middle class folks that can't put food on the table because their unemployment benefits have run out.Screw them right? keep thumping the bible teachings though

[Rigs11]

Your compassion is underwhelming. Tell it to the people who buried their dead.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/I-35W_Mississippi_River_bridge

he's probably a christian

[epicSocialism4tw]

yeah those poor poor millionaires. Gasp that they cant afford another car every year,meanwhile those good for nothing middle class folks that can't put food on the table because their unemployment benefits have run out.Screw them right? keep thumping the bible teachings though

You and I have fundamentally different understanding regarding people in general. Where I believe that the American is generally a benevolent, concerned, community-oriented person, you believe that the American is a treacherous villain hell-bent on stealing everything he can and leaving a wake of destruction behind him.

You believe that you must take things away from people or you wont get what youre after. I think that in due time, with concerted efforts, that people will care for their own out of their own volition. People set up organizations, people donate time and money, etc.

I would highly suggest that you go to your favorite local charity and donate some of your time there over the span of a year. Your opinion will change about people.

There is much more evidence supporting my optimistic view of Americans than your hypercritical view.

[JJJ]

This was going to be a great experiment to perfectly contrast the Keynesian stimulus package of two years ago with a supply side stimulus.

Hope the dems don't ruin this. We could have seen in 2012 which method really works.

[BroncoLifer]

It's good to see that they're handling it well.
http://www.rollcall.com/news/-201347-1.html


The frustration with President Barack Obama over his tax cut compromise was palpable and even profane at Thursday’s House Democratic Caucus meeting.
One unidentified lawmaker went so far as to mutter “f--- the president” while Rep. Shelley Berkley (http://www.orangemane.com/members/335.html) was defending the package the president negotiated with Republicans. Berkley confirmed the incident, although she declined to name the specific lawmaker.
“It wasn’t loud,” the Nevada Democrat said. “It was just expressing frustration from a very frustrated Member.”

Rep. Jerrold Nadler (http://www.orangemane.com/members/346.html) (N.Y.) was also overheard saying that “we can’t trust him” not to cave to Republicans and extend the tax cuts again in two years, according to a Democratic source. The anger aimed at the bill was widespread. As Democrats moved to block the bill from coming up on the floor, chants of “Just say no!” could be heard by reporters outside the room.

[Spider]

The notion our infrastructure is so bad is a joke. I haven't heard one story of anyone not being able to drive or ship things to any point in the country.

Just because a bridge gets old and falls down once in awhile doesn't mean much to me. Rebuild them after they fall problem solved.

So funny because Obama is repaving all the roads around my city with stimulus money. But they are doing the nice areas by me that didn't need it. The crappy hood of long beach still torn up with pot holes and cracked curbs.

you just babble out the first idea that pops into the booze soak ****ing head of youres ?

[peacepipe]

This was going to be a great experiment to perfectly contrast the Keynesian stimulus package of two years ago with a supply side stimulus.
Hope the dems don't ruin this. We could have seen in 2012 which method really works.

What!? where have you've been the last ten years? we're currently debating wether to extend the "supply side stimulus experiment" as we speak. it did not work. We've been doing the supply side experiment since reagon got elected.

[Spider]

This was going to be a great experiment to perfectly contrast the Keynesian stimulus package of two years ago with a supply side stimulus.

Hope the dems don't ruin this. We could have seen in 2012 which method really works.

LOL there is the real world , then the world according to JJJ

[JJJ]

What!? where have you've been the last ten years? we're currently debating wether to extend the "supply side stimulus experiment" as we speak. it did not work. We've been doing the supply side experiment since reagon got elected.

Between 2003 and 2008 it worked very well. The facts are pretty clear there and inarguable.

Then we had a housing crisis which had nothing to do with supply side economics. You will find real estate booms at the core of most major financial crises in the past several decades.

Then we tried a Kenynesian stimulus to get us out of the crisis. Massive fail.

Now there are a couple hundred million in new tax cuts being introduced (payroll taxes and estate taxes) and lets see how it goes.

For you and your type it will seem like magic when the economy begins to recover. When you don't take the time to understand how something works this is a natural reaction. Others will know better.

[mhgaffney]

Notice JJJ does not even mention the bail out.

That's because there's a hole in his world view
big enough to drive a federal reserve bank through.

Hey I'm a poet.

[epicSocialism4tw]

Notice JJJ does not even mention the bail out.

That's because there's a hole in his world view
big enough to drive a federal reserve bank through.

Hey I'm a poet.

I was thinking more like "schizophrenic", but whatever.

[Bronco Yoda]

http://www.citybeat.com/cincinnati/print-article-21315-print.html

You know when the two men many conservatives have most admired on economic issues during the past 30 years say extending the Bush tax cuts would be harmful, it truly must be a dreadful idea.

But that’s exactly what Alan Greenspan and David Stockman believe.

..In a stark repudiation of current Republican policy, both men recently went on record as stating that tax cuts don’t pay for themselves, and that extending the tax cuts for the wealthy approved by President George W. Bush would harm — not help — the U.S. economy.

[peacepipe]

Between 2003 and 2008 it worked very well. The facts are pretty clear there and inarguable.

Then we had a housing crisis which had nothing to do with supply side economics. You will find real estate booms at the core of most major financial crises in the past several decades.

Then we tried a Kenynesian stimulus to get us out of the crisis. Massive fail.

Now there are a couple hundred million in new tax cuts being introduced (payroll taxes and estate taxes) and lets see how it goes.

For you and your type it will seem like magic when the economy begins to recover. When you don't take the time to understand how something works this is a natural reaction. Others will know better.

Facts are not on your side,during this time it was the sluggish job growth since the depression.

http://blogs.wsj.com/economics/2009/01/09/bush-on-jobs-the-worst-track-record-on-record/

[BroncoLifer]

http://www.citybeat.com/cincinnati/print-article-21315-print.html

You know when the two men many conservatives have most admired on economic issues during the past 30 years say extending the Bush tax cuts would be harmful, it truly must be a dreadful idea.

But that’s exactly what Alan Greenspan and David Stockman believe.



What conservatives most admire David Stockman, in particular? You (and the author of that article) are totally reaching with that one.

[epicSocialism4tw]

http://www.citybeat.com/cincinnati/print-article-21315-print.html

You know when the two men many conservatives have most admired on economic issues during the past 30 years say extending the Bush tax cuts would be harmful, it truly must be a dreadful idea.

But that’s exactly what Alan Greenspan and David Stockman believe.

..In a stark repudiation of current Republican policy, both men recently went on record as stating that tax cuts don’t pay for themselves, and that extending the tax cuts for the wealthy approved by President George W. Bush would harm — not help — the U.S. economy.

Of course Keynesians believe that nonsense.

[JJJ]

Facts are not on your side,during this time it was the sluggish job growth since the depression.

http://blogs.wsj.com/economics/2009/01/09/bush-on-jobs-the-worst-track-record-on-record/

We were pretty close to full employment when he started there chief. It was 4.2% unemployment in January of 2001. Tell me how in such a circumstance do you expect to grow tens of millions of jobs? In August of 2008 it was 4.6% and at the end of 2008 it was still at 5%. 5% by any definition is low unemployment.

Most dems are math challenged and this is just another example.

[ghwk]

I was thinking more like "schizophrenic", but whatever.

Why the name change McPedophile? Just curious.

[ghwk]

We were pretty close to full employment when he started there chief. It was 4.2% unemployment in January of 2001. Tell me how in such a circumstance do you expect to grow tens of millions of jobs? In August of 2008 it was 4.6% and at the end of 2008 it was still at 5%. 5% by any definition is low unemployment.

Most dems are math challenged and this is just another example.

S**t you are an idiot.

[Popcorn Sutton]

Of course Keynesians believe that nonsense.

What do you believe? Do you believe tax cuts pay for themselves?

Not arguing that they don't provide a jolt to the economy but do they pay for themselves?

[epicSocialism4tw]

What do you believe? Do you believe tax cuts pay for themselves?

Not arguing that they don't provide a jolt to the economy but do they pay for themselves?

Maybe Obama's Czars will have to take a paycut...down to nothing.

Its time to cut back the government so that we do not follow the European collapse. We have to start thinking ahead instead of living for the moment like a meth addict living from theft to theft.

[peacepipe]

We were pretty close to full employment when he started there chief. It was 4.2% unemployment in January of 2001. Tell me how in such a circumstance do you expect to grow tens of millions of jobs? In August of 2008 it was 4.6% and at the end of 2008 it was still at 5%. 5% by any definition is low unemployment.

Most dems are math challenged and this is just another example.
It was 7.2% and rising at the end of 2008. damn your dense.

[JJJ]

It was 7.2% and rising at the end of 2008. damn your dense.

You are right. Meant 2007.

[TonyR]

You righties aren't going to like the way Krauthammer frames what is happening here...


Barack Obama won the great tax-cut showdown of 2010 - and House Democrats don't have a clue that he did. In the deal struck this week, the president negotiated the biggest stimulus in American history, larger than his $814 billion 2009 stimulus package. It will pump a trillion borrowed Chinese dollars into the U.S. economy over the next two years - which just happen to be the two years of the run-up to the next presidential election. This is a defeat?

If Obama had asked for a second stimulus directly, he would have been laughed out of town. Stimulus I was so reviled that the Democrats banished the word from their lexicon throughout the 2010 campaign. And yet, despite a very weak post-election hand, Obama got the Republicans to offer to increase spending and cut taxes by $990 billion over two years. Two-thirds of that is above and beyond extension of the Bush tax cuts but includes such urgent national necessities as windmill subsidies.

No mean achievement. After all, these are the same Republicans who spent 2010 running on limited government and reducing debt. And this budget busting occurs less than a week after the president's deficit commission had supposedly signaled a new national consensus of austerity and frugality.

Some Republicans are crowing that Stimulus II is the Republican way - mostly tax cuts - rather than the Democrats' spending orgy of Stimulus I. That's consolation? This just means that Republicans are two years too late. Stimulus II will still blow another near-$1 trillion hole in the budget.

At great cost that will have to be paid after this newest free lunch, the package will add as much as 1 percent to GDP and lower the unemployment rate by about 1.5 percentage points. That could easily be the difference between victory and defeat in 2012.

Obama is no fool. While getting Republicans to boost his own reelection chances, he gets them to make a mockery of their newfound, second-chance, post-Bush, Tea-Party, this-time-we're-serious persona of debt-averse fiscal responsibility.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/12/09/AR2010120904472.html

[cutthemdown]

If it's such a smart move for the dems why are all of them fighting it? Is Obama the only smart one?

[Cito Pelon]

I'm not sure why a compromise between the two ruling parties is so awful. They have to start working together. The voting populace is routinely split roughly 50-50 between Dems and GOP, so they have to start working together instead of all the posturing.

Isn't politics supposed to be the art of the deal? Make some deals, move forward for god's sake. Just make some movement, get something done that gives both sides SOMETHING instead of just bickering and posturing.

[TonyR]

If it's such a smart move for the dems why are all of them fighting it? Is Obama the only smart one?

Read the article. Krauthammer talks about what a bunch of idiots the Dem congress is being.

[TonyR]

Another good read on the subject, a reaction to Krauthammer's reaction that asks a good question.

...the key question is this: does Krauthammer oppose the deal? Having declared Obama guilty of a massive swindle, and recalling that he is opposed to all of Obama's sinister purposes, Krauthammer is obliged by his own logic to say what a bad thing the agreement must be. So what exactly did he want to happen? Presumably, raise everybody's taxes next month, with an especially steep rise for $250,000+ households. Has he previously advocated this policy? Maybe he has, and I missed it; if so, I apologize. But if he agrees it makes sense for now to keep taxes where they are, which has been the Republicans' defensible position, what is so bad about what just happened? Krauthammer is left opposing it because Obama was in favour. It is not every day that Krauthammer is backed into an absurd and dishonest position by his own logic.

http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2010/12/charles-krauthammer-is-the-fraud/67867/

[Rohirrim]

Krauthammer is a reptile. Best not to listen to his hissing.

[TonyR]

From the right wing Weekly Standard: http://www.weeklystandard.com/articles/good-deal_522136.html


The rapidity with which the president has been moving to the center-right on fiscal issues is nothing short of amazing. In the aftermath of the midterm election, not only has President Obama frozen nonmilitary federal pay. He’s inked a trade deal with South Korea. He’s welcomed the budget-cutting recommendations of his fiscal commission. He’s negotiated a deal on taxes that would extend current rates for another two years. He’s told reporters that he wants to work on a pro-growth tax reform. At this rate, it won’t be long before Obama endorses Paul Ryan’s Roadmap for America’s Future and starts calling for a return to the gold standard.

Okay, we may be dreaming on that last part. But the larger question is this: Are conservatives and Republicans willing to take yes for an answer?

Consider the deal on current tax rates. The left is howling that Obama has abandoned his principles and capitulated to the right. Outraged House Democrats are demanding changes to the agreement before they hold a vote. The left is angry because President Obama has reversed a long-held position and agreed to a truce in the class war. What’s more, he’s spent the last week fighting with many of his fellow liberals, calling them unrealistic, unserious, and sanctimonious.

Music to our ears. And yet some conservatives seem unable to enjoy the melody.


And of course the reason they can't enjoy the melody is that it may get Obama reelected. Politics before progress, as usual.

[Rohirrim]

From the right wing Weekly Standard: http://www.weeklystandard.com/articles/good-deal_522136.html


The rapidity with which the president has been moving to the center-right on fiscal issues is nothing short of amazing. In the aftermath of the midterm election, not only has President Obama frozen nonmilitary federal pay. He’s inked a trade deal with South Korea. He’s welcomed the budget-cutting recommendations of his fiscal commission. He’s negotiated a deal on taxes that would extend current rates for another two years. He’s told reporters that he wants to work on a pro-growth tax reform. At this rate, it won’t be long before Obama endorses Paul Ryan’s Roadmap for America’s Future and starts calling for a return to the gold standard.

Okay, we may be dreaming on that last part. But the larger question is this: Are conservatives and Republicans willing to take yes for an answer?

Consider the deal on current tax rates. The left is howling that Obama has abandoned his principles and capitulated to the right. Outraged House Democrats are demanding changes to the agreement before they hold a vote. The left is angry because President Obama has reversed a long-held position and agreed to a truce in the class war. What’s more, he’s spent the last week fighting with many of his fellow liberals, calling them unrealistic, unserious, and sanctimonious.

Music to our ears. And yet some conservatives seem unable to enjoy the melody.


And of course the reason they can't enjoy the melody is that it may get Obama reelected. Politics before progress, as usual.

I guess the candidates the Dems put up for election will pretty much follow any banner until the party actually decides to stand for something. "When you ain't got nothing you got nuthin' to lose."

[cutthemdown]

Country ready to hit a bull run people!!! Good times are on the way I can feel it!!!

[cutthemdown]

I for one will dance into the booth to re-elect Obama if the country doing well in 2 yrs. Of course that also means voting for repubs in Congress. I think a slightly left of center president and conservative congress could be a good combo for us right now.

[cutthemdown]

Of course Obama will only be slight to the left if repubs have that power, otherwise he swings to far left.

Sort of like Romney who will swing left sometimes like when he was gov of mass. If Romney was pres and had a conservative congress he would go too far right I think.

[TonyR]

Cut, you know you can put that all in one post, right?

[Play2win]

Cut, you know you can put that all in one post, right?

Yeah, because it would take up 1/3 of the space on my page. EXACTLY 1/3 the space... :)