Obama makes his case to the left

[Enrique]

and its a doozy:


http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/plum-line/post/obama-makes-his-case-to-the-left/2011/03/03/gIQAW75LGI_blog.html

“If you are a progressive, you should be concerned about debt and deficit just as much as if you’re a conservative. And the reason is because if the only thing we’re talking about over the next year, two years, five years is debt and deficits, then it’s very hard to start talking about how do we make investments in community colleges so that our kids are trained. How do we actually rebuild $2 trillion worth of crumbling infrastructure.

If you care about making investments in our kids, and making investments in our infrastructure, and making investments in basic research, then you should want our fiscal house in order so that every time we propose a new initiative, somebody doesn’t just throw up their hands and say “more big spending, more government.”

It would be very helpful for us to be able to say to the American people: “Our fiscal house is in order. So, now the question is, what should we be doing to win the future, and make ourselves more competitive, and create more jobs, and what aspects of what government’s doing are a waste, and we should eliminate.” And that’s the kind of debate that I’d like to have.“

[Jackpine Radical]

1. …to all of which I have one simple response:

[fascisthunter]

2. I'd buy what he is saying but he allowed the Bush Tax Cuts to be Extended

and now wants the neediest to pay for it. Yeah, it's a doozy alright.

"then you should want our fiscal house in order so that every time we propose a new initiative, somebody doesn’t just throw up their hands and say “more big spending, more government.”

here's a fucking clue: THEY WILL SAY IT ANYWAY!!! Jesus, get out of whatever bubble you live in for Christ's sake!!!! Fuck it... he isn't in any bubble, he's a straight up fraud.

[Ikonoklast]

13. And what about the Unemployment Benefits that were traded for those taxes?

Who paid for those?

The tax cuts were extended because the Republicans held millions of unemployed Americans hostage, seems that people ranting about it always forget that little fact.

[fascisthunter]

16. great... look where it's brought us now... the lower classes are still being blackmailed!

what he has given the people is PEANUTS compared to what the wealthy fuck heads have gotten from him!!!

[tekisui]

28. The Dems has full control for two years. They should have dealt

with the unemployment benefits before the repukes had a chance to hold them hostage.

[Ikonoklast]

54. Reid and Pelosi punted.

Can't blame Obama for their political cowardice before the last election...afraid of being tagged as
tax raisers', they punted, hoping to fix it after the election.

[polmaven]

58. Ever hear of

Filibuster? The Democrats did not have enough of a control to overcome it.

[tekisui]

60. LOL!

[frylock]

53. the so-called 99ers payed..

why do you hate the 99ers?

[Ikonoklast]

55. Show me how they would have got their extrension,

without tha tax cuts being continued.

Real life answers, not hypotheticals, as the Republicans would have voted it down.

Go.

[dflprincess]

67. 99ers did not get their UI benefits extended

and remember, Obama traded 1 year of unemployement benefits for 2 years of tax cuts. - Who got the better deal?

[polmaven]

59. And why do you hate

the "26ers"? Oh...and the word is paid.

[Kahuna]

57. "Principle" is more important than people going hungry or homeless..

That seems to be the message to me. :eyes:

[phleshdef]

15. He is calling for an end to those for the top 2% as part of it.

Thats not asking the neediest to pay for it if you are no longer paying for it.

[fascisthunter]

17. WOW... gee... isn't that just Grand

it took him this long to finally do what he should have done LONG AGO! The rich are sucking this country dry and you offer this as a retort. Are ya serious????

Do I need to also mention his own Trade policies have destroyed the working classes job market?

[phleshdef]

24. Just because you willfully chose to ignore his 100% consistent position on getting rid of those cuts

...doesn't mean it didn't happen. He has never once advocated continuing them. He was very clear when he extended them that it was only as a trade off to protect as many unemployed people as he could get Congress to protect and to avoid steep middle class tax increases while unemployment is still high. He said when he extended them that the extension would not generate one job.

Its ok to criticize him for putting unemployment benefits and middle class tax relief as priorities above raising taxes on the wealthy. But don't fucking lie and act like that hasn't been his position all along. It has. And anyone that says otherwise has either not paid attention or they are lying.

[fascisthunter]

27. I'm the liar? It wasn't his position the whole time? Wow, because it's looking like it has been

all along! His efforts during these negotiations have been PATHETIC... so which is it? Was he too weak or was it just all theater, because neither at this point look good? And you don't appoint losers into your own Admin, losers who helped deregulate and screw this economy for the middle class and then expect people to "believe" he has their back! Tell us how many progressives he has listened to or what progressive policies he campaigned on, followed through with? His trade policies alone screwed the working class along with the GOP. What measures has he inacted to offset the loss of jobs... there isn't one! So why did he go ahead and expand free-trade before making sure the middleclass wasn't left unemployed? If he really cared, he woukld not put the middleclass in this position from the begiing.

[phleshdef]

35. I'll just go with your first question and ignore your attempts to convolute the debate.

And the answer is, yes, if you claim that Obama has ever actually supported/wanted to continue the top tier Bush tax cuts, then that would be lying. Apart from that, the rest of what you are going on about is a bunch of hyperbole aimed at a guy thats a lot smarter than you and a lot better at this kind of stuff than you are. You people who try to belittle Barack Obama are attacking upwards.

[Armstead]

37. You can say people are wrong -- But don't use that crap

President Obama is very smart. However many peopke who disagree with him are also very smart.

To pretend that the President has some mysterious supernatural insight denied to us mere mortals is hogwash, and is simply a cop out.

[phleshdef]

40. I'll use whatever crap I feel like using. Especially when I'm pretty certain its true.

I would bet that Obama is keener than 95% of anonymous people talking shit on the internet, myself included. And when I see people like the poster I was responding to going on a foamy mouthed rant filled with personal attacks, talking down to the President as if the President is a stupid child, thats when I feel inclined to point out that they are attacking upwards.

[Armstead]

44. I could name any number of progressives who just as intelligent

Bernie Sanders, Paul Krugman, Robert Reich, Rachel Maddow...and numerous others.

IT also depends on the definition of intelligence, which takes many different forms. President Obama is very politically astute, no doubt..But for econimic expertise, I think Krugman is equal to or much smarter than he.

[phleshdef]

46. Yea, but those people aren't anonymous assholes talking shit on the internet.

And when any of those people criticize the President, they do it with class, they do it with a valid argument and they do it without trying to personally talk down to him.

I never said that he was the smartest person that ever lived.

[Armstead]

50. Despite the heated tone, The person you were arguing with...

Was making valud points.

You might disagree with them, but they are not uninformed or unintelligent.

[fascisthunter]

51. sorry about my tone

[Cherchez la Femme]

73. Well, at least you admit it's crap

that's a start, at least

[Enrique]

18. cant do it

theyre the job creators. Progressives should worship the job creators as much as the conservatives. Until the conservatives stop calling us anti-business. THen we can win the future. This is Obamalogic.

[harun]

64. And started more wars. Always money for that.

[RBInMaine]

68. Don't tell me, you want to dance cheek to cheek with Jane Hamsher, right?

[closeupready]

3. Somebody will ALWAYS throw up their hands and say, "more big spending," even if it's a cure for canc

cancer that needs taxpayer revenue to distribute, for free, to every American.

Obama had a mandate from voters to implement a progressive agenda, and he folded, on most occasions. I do not appreciate being lectured about why we should agree to fold, once again.

[Name removed]

4. Deleted message

Sub-thread removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Zorra]

5. The Blessed St. Ronald himself could not have said it any better. Meanwhile:

Total Cost of Wars Since 2001
$1,221,149,059,416

http://costofwar.com/en/

[Raine1967]

6. And what, Exactly, is wrong with this?

Is it the new position from progressives that we should not give a shit about the debt and the deficit?

If so, I didn't get the memo.

[fascisthunter]

7. You are right... Obama should cut Military Spending, and Tax the RICH!

[Raine1967]

30. I heard him say that today --

Sometimes I just don't understand how I can see him say one thing and here that other people heard something else.

My question to the OP stands. I was meant sincerely.

[highprincipleswork]

14. All the above say it clearly

Just wrote another of a myriad of letters myself. I care about the deficit, though do not think it is responsible for our financial woes right now.

Lack of jobs, lack of money circulation, banks and corporations sitting on huge amounts of cash, while sending jobs overseas, these are the problems.

None of which will stealing more of my or grandma's Social Security, Medicare, or Medicaid is ever going to fix. You simply cannot wring enough blood out of that stone anyway, and it's disgusting to even try. The less well-off and the middle class have already contributed more than their fair share towards this struggle.

No, because Democrats, and particularly this President, cannot explain that taxes are necessary, because they cannot get taxes back to levels they were just under Reagan, that's why we are most probably going to be asked to swallow another shit sandwich. And he's going to ask us to enjoy it going down.

Playing losing ball, always defense, on our side of the court. If that's how one likes to play, or the kind of team one likes to root for, this must be a great day. For someone who believes that simply standing on solid, reasonable, humane, sensible, well-proven principles wins the game every time, this is a disastrous period in American history, with very few heroes. Oh, if President Obama would just turn his eloquence to something RIGHTEOUS for a change!!!!!

[Zorra]

25. What is he really saying? Why is he saying this to progressives?

Is it because he wants us to understand that social programs that actually directly help human beings in desperate need must be cut?

Because it's hard to take him seriously when we are involved in 3 wars and the wealthiest people on the planet recently had a destructive huge tax cut extended for them.

The Bush tax cuts had no positive effect on our economy. The wealthy used that money that they did not need to buy yachts and Jaguars. Ending the Bush tax cuts would make no difference in their ability to survive.

Obama should be talking to them about making sacrifices, not to us.

They are the ones with the money.

“Governments don't reduce deficits by raising taxes on the people; governments reduce deficits by controlling spending and stimulating new wealth.”
Ronald Reagan
:puke:

[polichick]

8. "if the only thing we're talking about"??? THAT'S the problem - it shouldn't be...

...the only thing you're talking about, Mr. Prez. You have adopted their narrative. WHY?!?!?

[Enrique]

12. exactly

my head is spinning from this, he really packed a lot into those few sentences.

[Armstead]

38. Bingo

[21st Century FDR]

9. 21st Century FDR makes his case to President Obama

1) End the wars
2) Close the tax loopholes THEN roll back the Chimp AND Reagan tax "cuts" for the tax dodging rich.
3) Remove the Social Security cap
4) Save Medicare by destroying the criminal private health insurance industry. Medicare for all, 40% admin skimming off the top for NONE.

Yes, Mr. President, it really is that simple. You just need the political will to do it. Do so, and the PEOPLE will have your back.

[fascisthunter]

11. and if he was serious, he would do those things

instead of screwing the poor and middleclass more.

[polichick]

23. Good post! Maybe it's not "the people" he's worried about.

[21st Century FDR]

36. And that's when he takes this case to the Teabaggers in Congress

They claim to be populists. Call them out on it. No true populist, regardless of party, could object to the plan I laid out in the post above.

But of course, a Koch brothers funded corporate prostitute would. Force them to take one side or the other. ;)

[Armstead]

39. That SHOULD be the starting point

Instead, President Obama and other centrists always start from the same set of assumptions as corporate conservatives.

[damntexdem]

10. Hey, I've cared about debt and deficit for years, especially after Dubya.

So I am concerned about the reasons for the debt and deficit: tax breaks for the wealthy (in fact, 30 years of shifting of national resources to the wealthy) and out-of-control military spending.

And what I am really concerned and angry about are attempts to blame the debt and deficit on needed programs for the majority of the people. This is particularly disgusting in the case of Social Security, which has not contributed a dime to debt or deficit -- in fact, which has been used to make debt and contribution to deficit appear smaller than it actually was. I am livid about any rhetoric about "winning the future" that forecloses futures for millions of Americans.

[rug]

19. Defining the question is a deflection from his answer.

The solution to the deficit is the reduction of military spending and the increase of taxation of the rich.

The answer to "the deficit is a problem" is No shit, Sherlock.

The argument is over the solution.

[JoePhilly]

20. Obama Bad Obama Bad Obama Bad

Why would we EVER consider what we spend tax money on ... geeze!!!

That's crazy!!

:sarcasm:

[Enrique]

21. you seem to be on the same wavelength as the president

similar thought processes. :toast:

[polichick]

22. Good catch!

[Vattel]

26. Obama is arguing with an imaginary opponent.

Nobody is opposed to debt and deficit reduction, per se. It's the ridiculous Republican approach to debt and deficit reduction that most progressives oppose. And if Obama doesn't want to touch defense spending, if he wants to seriously cut medicare benefits (by raising the eligibility age to 67), if he wants student loans to accrue interest before graduation, etc., then he is too close to that Republican approach. I wish for once he would defend his policies against serious progressive objections rather than adopting the "I'm the adult here" rhetoric and attacking straw men.

[treestar]

47. The Republicans are an "imaginary" opponent?

The whole reason there is a problem is that they control the House.

They aren't imaginary.

[Vattel]

61. He was talking about progressives. Did you read the OP?

[The Straight Story]

29. We are just as concerned - we just think cuts should come from things like military, and more taxes

On the most well to do.

Is he implying that we are not concerned by telling us that we should be?

[Bluenorthwest]

31. He' s tilting at windmills and stawmen

Of course progressives are concerned about finances, that is why we say stop bleeding money in wars all over the planet, why we say tax the ultra rich a bit more on their most extreme incomes, why we say lift that cap and let every penny fund our future. It is Obama and the right that have the wallet open and draining in every direction on the follies and greed of Wall St and the Beltway Professionals.

[ClarkUSA]

32. All whining aside, "President Obama Takes the GOP to School and (Probably) Wins 2012"

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2011/07/15/994960/-President-Obama-Takes-the-GOP-to-School-and-(Probably)-Wins-2012

[Armstead]

41. SChool isn't out yet. And the GOP are flunking themselves.

[ClarkUSA]

52. No, President Obama is making them eat their peas, every damned day they try to fuck with him.

[Enrique]

56. what does that mean?

what peas are the GOP eating?

[golfguru]

33. Every one pays 10% more tax, every budget item gets 10% cut

across the board...no exceptions, even the military.
Problem solved.

[boppers]

42. So, corporations paying 0% in taxes will pay 10% more... of zero?

I'm sure they'll be fine with that.

:evilgrin:

[golfguru]

62. Corporations are owned 100% by some living individuals

So the owners of corporations will pay more. More you own of the corporation (large stock holders, CEO's etc) more you will pay. Corporations pass on all taxes to their customers. More you tax them, more prices go up. Let individuals who own share of corporation pay the tax in proportion to their earnings from the corporation. Spare the small fry owners such myself who own a few shares in their 401-k accounts.

[blkmusclmachine]

34. Obama can go debate Obama:

He's made crystal clear that he's not interested in anything Democrats/Progressives have to say.

[me b zola]

43. Now thats leadership

Progressives have been concerned about the wrong things and need to think more like conservatives-
Bold leadership there, mr president :eyes:

[Armstead]

45. There's ALWAYS a reason.

Right now it's the deficit...During the Booming 90's it was "We have to keep this going, so we can't tinker."

[Enrique]

48. and when there's a surplus...

"give the money back to the people" :eyes:

[Armstead]

..the rich people

[southernyankeebelle]

49. I am seriously thinking about staying home. Obama has thrown us under the bus. Oh

how I wish we had someone who is a very strong democrat to run. I don't truth Obama anymore. I already emailed him and told him if he touch the programs that are important to poor families I would not vote for him. I just can't do it. It will have to be dire before I would vote for him.

[RBInMaine]

70. Silly fringe response. Good one. Stay home. Make sure you punch that pillow good and hard.

[golfguru]

63. I agree with Obama on this n/t

[quaker bill]

65. The problem is

to quote Norquist: lower taxes = smaller government = more freedom. Our "fiscal house" will never be in "order" sufficient for these teabagger folks to back any proposed new spending, unless it has something to do with bombing people somewhere.

We need to redefine "freedom". Freedom in this reality is actually being able to send you kid to a public school that is well funded and reliable. It includes being able to drive over safe bridges, having clean drinking water, safe streets that are reasonably free of crime, people paid to put out fires close by, affordable and healthy food, reasonable access to healthcare..... Businesses, for all they are worth, dont't do this stuff.

[Fearless]

66. If you care about us... tax the rich and solve our problems. That is all. n/t

[RBInMaine]

69. Review your grade school civics. He is just ONE of our branches of government. Remember that lesson?

[Fearless]

71. You are speaking to a high school social studies teacher with an M.Ed.

I am well aware of the branches of government. This isn't about the literal passing of tax reform laws. This is about the president supporting that passing. He is after all working with Congress on the "debt crisis". He has a seat at the table. I am saying that he needs to use it to advocate for the American people so as to get a bill through Congress that will benefit the middle and working class. Do you believe he shouldn't?

[TheKentuckian]

72. He needs zero votes or court affirmation to champion positions.

What is not politically possible today can be in the center of the debate tomorrow.

Sitting around counting votes is not how one defines their positions.

If Reagan only counted votes, we wouldn't be having these conversations.

[Autumn]

74. Did he mention his wars any where in that?

Until he does I think it's all horse shit.

[latebloomer]

75. Funny thing about that

The wars NEVER get mentioned.

[Autumn]

76. He must think we are too stupid to

notice that.

[Skittles]

77. he is SOOOOOOOO fucking OUT OF TOUCH