We wasted historic advantages to no purpose

[jpgray]

While we held every advantage, the whole aim of our leadership was to avoid forcing a bitter struggle with the GOP and its interests. We chose instead to go after territory that was weakly contested--to claim it, call it success, and pull back from any determined resistance. As a result of this, we face a bitter struggle on their terms, we've lost many of our advantages, their narratives of attack were never confronted while we held them, and our most hallowed ground is open to attack.

The refrain is always the same to excuse this behavior: any determined attack would provide nothing but an opening for the GOP, one they would readily exploit. What no one seems to understand is that the surplus of caution born of this philosophy has given the GOP more to exploit than it could ever have dreamed possible.

"We can't take a stand on tax cuts" will only be heard from one party, ours. We will waste $700 billion on reckless enrichment of the rich in exchange for $80 billion of necessary spending for the unemployed. This is a bad deal on its face. It is a ridiculous deal when you consider we have control of the House, the Senate, and the White House. It looks almost criminal when you realize the public is on our side by a significant majority.

Say we make this deal. What happens, then, when another $80 billion of necessary spending must be passed? What happens when another vital treaty must be ratified? What happens when crucial measures are again held hostage by the GOP? When does the fight come? When they attempt to force cuts to Social Security and Medicare? We will look a bit silly entering that debate after having pissed away $700 billion we can't make up any other way.

What good is avoiding struggle to pass the moment's necessities if the whole country is destroyed piece by piece?

[Skittles]

1. it is embarassing and mortifying

and there are still so many DUers who DO.NOT.GET.IT.

[GSLevel9]

2. yeah, that sums it up...nt

[Subdivisions]

3. Wow! Just WOW! We are totally screwn. n/t

[TexasObserver]

4. It's not the party. It's the president. He speaks to those issues.

When the head Democrat in charge caves in, so does the party's position. We had Democrats who wanted to do the right thing, but they didn't have a leader in the White House willing to fight the GOP the only way they understand. He still thinks he can "beer summit" his way to bipartisanship. He will never learn that for today's GOP, the only bipartisanship is capitulation.

[DonCoquixote]

8. Wrong

If the President acted like Dennis K. the blue dogs would have still stalled, and made him look more foolish. The problem IS THE PARTY, and let's get real specific, the Democrats that lean rightward, most of them in Dixie, but spread throughout the nation. They would have done the same thing to Hillary, Dean or FDR.

[TexasObserver]

9. As I said, it has been a complete lack of leadership at the top.

It's difficult for the congress to be tough when the president isn't.

[DonCoquixote]

11. With all due respect

Do you really think the reason the Blue Dogs were not tough was because Obama was not? I am going to be blunt here, a lot of those Blue Dogs, the Mary Landrieus, the Max Baucuses, the Evan Bayhs, were people who always were Dinos, and who frankly catered to people that hated Obama from day one. I do not just mean because O is black, though to be honest, we cannot discount that either, as some of the ugliest racial shots came from people who are still mad Hillary did not win. To be honest, if Hillary did win, they would have done the same thing to her, why, because a Senator knows that once he or she sets up a gravy train for their state, they are set, and that if they appear more rightwing, they get more support from home. They speak of how Blue Dogs lost so bad, but really, how many of the hardcore liberals were kept? Ask Alan grayson, ask Russ feingold! The fact is, Obama could have been a warrior, but the congress and senate would have clipped his wings, as the constitution allows them to do just that (and yes, that includes Pelosi and Reid, two of the weakest leaders whose weakness was well established long before Obama came into office.)

And for god's sake, do not speak the tired "how come Bush did so much" line. Bush was a figurehead, enabled by DINOS that dared not speak against him for fear of Fox News, which has become the true "fourth estate."

[PurityOfEssence]

5. There is a tide in the affairs of men.

Brutus:
There is a tide in the affairs of men.
Which, taken at the flood, leads on to fortune;
Omitted, all the voyage of their life
Is bound in shallows and in miseries.
On such a full sea are we now afloat,
And we must take the current when it serves,
Or lose our ventures.
Julius Caesar Act 4, scene 3, 218–224

[jpgray]

6. Bipartisan compromise with Antony didn't work out so well.

We don't need to go all Cassius, but we could stand to die less than a thousand times before our death.

[Kablooie]

7. He still seems to think that if he bargains in good faith so will they.

He is apparently incapable of seeing that the GOP laughs at him for this and his base is embarrassed for him.

[FiveGoodMen]

13. You really think he's that dumb?

[dkf]

10. It's $700 Billion over 10 years so $140 billion for two years.

Compare that to the $3.2.trillion over ten years for the "middle class tax cuts"...

[quaker bill]

12. "historic advantages"

Surely you jest. Have you been paying attention? Watered down healthcare passed by exactly 1 vote. The troops you imagine were never there.

[asdjrocky]

14. Or there's purpose.

Plenty of it.

[leftstreet]

15. Maybe this WAS the purpose?

:shrug: