Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

What the left doesn't understand about Obama

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » General Discussion Donate to DU
 
Maraya1969 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Sep-04-11 08:08 AM
Original message
What the left doesn't understand about Obama
Edited on Sun Sep-04-11 01:33 PM by Maraya1969
http://www.nytimes.com/2011/09/04/magazine/what-the-lef...

<snip>

The most common hallmark of the lefts magical thinking is a failure to recognize that Congress is a separate, coequal branch of government consisting of members whose goals may differ from the presidents. Congressional Republicans pursued a strategy of denying Obama support for any major element of his agenda, on the correct assumption that this would make it less popular and help the party win the 2010 elections. Only for roughly four months during Obamas term did Democrats have the 60 Senate votes they needed to overcome a filibuster. Moreover, Republican opposition has proved immune even to persistent and successful attempts by Obama to mobilize public opinion. Americans overwhelmingly favor deficit reduction that includes both spending and taxes and favor higher taxes on the rich in particular. Obama even made a series of crusading speeches on this theme. The result? Nada.

<snip>

Yes, Bush passed his tax cuts by using a method called reconciliation, which can avoid a filibuster but can be used only on budget issues. On No Child Left Behind and Medicare, he cut deals expanding government, which the right-wing equivalents of Greenwald denounced as a massive sellout. Bush did have one episode where he tried to force through a major domestic reform against a Senate filibuster: his crusade to privatize Social Security. Just as liberals urge Obama to do today, Bush barnstormed the country, pounding his message and pressuring Democrats, whom he cast as obstructionists. The result? Nada, beyond the collapse of Bushs popularity.

Perhaps the oddest feature of the liberal indictment of Obama is its conclusion that Obama should have focused all his political capital on economic recovery. He could likely have passed many small follow-up stimulative laws in 2009, Jon Walker of the popular blog Firedoglake wrote last month. Instead, he pivoted away from the economic crisis because he wrongly ignored those who warned the crisis was going to get worse.


<snip>
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
Fumesucker Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Sep-04-11 08:15 AM
Response to Original message
1. TARP: Proposed on Sept 19, 2008, enacted Oct 3, 2008
The NY Times needs to go blow smoke up someone else's butt..

When the owners want something done it gets done and there's essentially zero fucking around on Capitol Hill by either party.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
LWolf Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Sep-04-11 08:19 AM
Response to Reply #1
2. +1
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MannyGoldstein Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Sep-04-11 08:20 AM
Response to Original message
3. Going to war against Social Security is the Liberal thing to do, I guess?
First Obama's Catfood Commission, then http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.ph...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Maraya1969 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Sep-04-11 01:34 PM
Response to Reply #3
4. Has Obama done anything about Social Security?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
sabrina 1 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Sep-04-11 01:51 PM
Response to Reply #4
5. Yes, he offered it up as a bargaining chip in the 'Grand Bargain'
without the Republicans even asking for that, according to John Conyers and others. Fortunately the Tea-baggers forced Boehner to turn down that offer.

However, it is on the agenda of the Super Congress and if you can explain WHY that is, many people would like to know the answer. SS has nothing to do with the defiicit/debt and never should have even been mentioned in any conversation regarding the Deficit. Yet, the President mentions it in connection with those conversations all the time.

Eg, at the G8 Conference in 2010, why did he say there were 'problems with SS, medicaire and medicaid' that had to be addressed in these deficit discussions?

Sorry, but that was and is an outright, rightwing lie. SS has no problems, the Fed Govt has problems and when they fix their problems, SS will be fine. And what's with him promoting a 'tax holiday' that cannot do anything other than negatively affect SS?

He is going along with the Neo-liberal attack on Social programs.

This article is silly. It assumes we are all stupid. The propaganda against the American people who are concerned about the direction of this country continues. No surprise to see it in the NYT. They really ought to give it up and just address the legitimate issues people are concerned about. This kind of propaganda is not working which should be obvious even the morons who think bashing your supporters is good strategy.

The WH lost the 2010 election and no amount of revisionist history is going to change that fact.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Maraya1969 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Sep-05-11 09:20 PM
Response to Reply #5
14. There is no way, no how that Social security will be touched under Obama
You should know that. What he says as a tactic to those bastard rupublicons should not be taken literally. You make vast sweeping judgements from something the man said.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
sabrina 1 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Sep-06-11 02:10 AM
Response to Reply #14
17. John Conyers took him seriously. And he knows way more about
what has been going on than any of us do. And Conyers is not the only one.

(CNSNews.com) The Ranking Member of the House Judiciary Committee John Conyers (D-Mich.) said that President Barack Obama proposed cuts to Social Security in the debt limit negotiations, not congressional Republicans.


The President also mentioned it in the G8 Conference in 2010. No need to mention it if you don't intend to do it. A Democrat should be fiercely opposed, publicly and privately to any meddling with the New Deal programs. S/he should be so clear about it that no Republican will even bother to bring it up knowing it would be futile. Sorry, this meme that he's just pretending is silly. Every word the POTUS utters is a signal to Republican of what he is willing to compromise on. The only reason it was not accepted was because the Teaparty would not accept tax cuts, the Grand Bargain Obama was offering. Cuts to SS in return for tax increases.

Conyers is livid as are several other Democrats because they know what this would mean to their own reelection chances as well as the President's. To most Democrats I know, young and old alike, that will be the line in the sand. I hope he was kidding, but if so, it's a pretty awful strategy and whoever advised him to do it should be fired.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
defendandprotect Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Sep-06-11 02:41 AM
Response to Reply #14
19. Are you in a coma? Obama has stopped COLA payments ... and full funding of Social Security -- !!!
Edited on Tue Sep-06-11 02:46 AM by defendandprotect
PLUS offering up Social Security and Medicare/Medicaid -- putting them "on the table" --

and all of those actions -- especially his putting the Cat Food Commision in place --

has moved us to the new "Super Congress" -- which, imo, is treason.


Obama has accelerated the movement of issues into back rooms -- or what they call the

"immaculate conception" arena --

We have a Congress because we can elect and unelect those members -- and decisions should

be made on a simple majority basis --

Not either by a private Federal Reserve Bank -- our Congress should be debating and setting

goals for our economy and making these economic decisions -- especially re jobs.


And the public should be hearing all of this -- that's democracy -

Democracy doesn't take place in back rooms between a president and GOP leaders -- with

Congressional leadership being kept in the dark as to what's going on --

or between a president and private health care industry!



Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
TheWraith Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Sep-04-11 01:58 PM
Response to Reply #3
8. How long are you going to continue repeating this outright lie?
President Obama does not support cutting Social Security. He has never supported cutting Social Security. He has explicitly made deals which protect Social Security. And yet you continually insist the opposite. It's reminiscent of the birthers in terms of denial of reality and all obvious facts.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
robdogbucky Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Sep-04-11 02:42 PM
Response to Reply #8
11. Get real for once
Obama did offer cuts to SS, Medicare, etc.

On the other hand, what fact or proof do you have that he hasn't?

To misrepresent obvious facts like this gives rise to questions about your motives.

Is this some 12 dimensional chess strategy?

Really, lying and projection is such a Rovian thing, don't you agree?



Obama puts Medicare, Social Security cuts on the table

The Obama administration, in seeking $4 trillion in spending cuts in a debt limit deal, has put major changes to Social Security and Medicare on the table if Republicans agree to increased tax revenues.

The offer caters to both sides in the debt limit negotiations and according to the Washington Post, President Obama will urge congressional leaders on Thursday to seize the opportunity to act. The compromise, however, still puts both Republicans and Democrats in tough spots.

Democrats have vowed to protect Medicare and Social Security, while Republicans still argue that tax increases are not realistic legislative proposals. If leadership from both parties agree to the Obamas compromise, the next move will be to sell the plan to their respective bases and to members of Congress.

But Thursdays meetings at the White House will reveal just how many concessions each party is willing to make

http://news.yahoo.com/obama-puts-medicare-social-securi...



Obama Offers to Cut Social Security

This is beyond disappointing:

President Looks for Broader Deal on Deficit Cuts, by Carl Hulse, adn Mark Landler, NYTimes: Heading into a crucial negotiating session on a budget deal on Thursday, President Obama has raised his sights and wants to strike a far-reaching agreement on cutting the federal deficit as Speaker John A. Boehner has signaled new willingness to bargain on revenues. ...

The presidents renewed efforts follow what knowledgeable officials said was an overture from Mr. Boehner, who met secretly with Mr. Obama last weekend, to consider as much as $1 trillion in unspecified new revenues as part of an overhaul of tax laws in exchange for an agreement that made substantial spending cuts, including in such social programs as Medicare and Medicaid.

The intensifying negotiations between the president and the speaker have Congressional Democrats growing anxious, worried they will be asked to accept a deal that is too heavily tilted toward Republican efforts and produces too little new revenue relative to the magnitude of the cuts. Congressional Democrats said they were caught off guard by the weekend White House visit of Mr. Boehner...

Officials said Mr. Boehner suggested that he was open to the possibility of $1 trillion or more in new revenue that would be generated by addressing tax issues already raised in the talks...

http://economistsview.typepad.com/economistsview/2011/0...



Obama pushing for cuts to Social Security, Medicare

July 7, 2011 by Healthcare-NOW!

Filed under Single-Payer News

For months, the standard narrative among progressive commentators was that Republicans were outrageously exploiting the debt ceiling deadline to impose drastic entitlement cuts on a resisting and victimized Democratic President (hes weak in negotiations!), but The Post article makes clear that the driving force behind these cuts is the President himself, who is pushing for even larger spending cuts than the GOP was ready to accept:

President Obama is pressing congressional leaders to consider a far-reaching debt-reduction plan that would force Democrats to accept major changes to Social Security and Medicare in exchange for Republican support for fresh tax revenue. . . . As part of his pitch, Obama is proposing significant reductions in Medicare spending and for the first time is offering to tackle the rising cost of Social Security, according to people in both parties with knowledge of the proposal. The move marks a major shift for the White House and could present a direct challenge to Democratic lawmakers who have vowed to protect health and retirement benefits from the assault on government spending.

This mornings New York Times article similarly makes clear that it is the President who is demanding an even larger deficit reduction package than has previously been discussed. Headlined Obama to Push for Wider Deal With G.O.P. on Deficit Cuts, the article reports that President Obama has raised his sights and wants to strike a far-reaching agreement on cutting the federal deficit and that he wants to move well beyond the $2 trillion in savings sought in earlier negotiations and seek perhaps twice as much over the next decade. This is all in pursuit of an agreement that makes substantial spending cuts, including in such social programs as Medicare and Medicaid and Social Security programs that had been off the table. The President, as part of the package, is reportedly seeking some elimination of modest tax loopholes that benefit wealthy Americans to claim, absurdly, that there is balanced sacrifice...

http://www.healthcare-now.org/obama-pushing-for-cuts-to... /




President Obamas big deal: Cuts for Social Security but no taxes for Wall Street
July 19, 2011

from Dean Baker

The claim of out-of-control spending is simply not true. It is an invention, a fabrication, a falsehood with no basis in reality that politicians are pushing to advance their agenda. And that agenda is not pretty.

According to numerous reports in the media, President Obama wants a big deal, on the budget that will involve cuts to Medicaid, Medicare and Social Security. The last is especially ironic, since Social Security is financed by its own designated tax. Therefore it does not contribute to the deficit. If there is no money in the Social Security trust fund, then benefits will not be paid.

The plans to cut to Social Security also seem perverse since we know that the vast majority of retirees are not living especially well right now and the benefits already are not especially generous. If we exclude their Social Security income, more than 80 percent of people over the age of 65 get by on less than $20,000 per year.

The average Social Security check is about $1,100 a month. This would be less than an hours pay for many of the Wall Street honchos whose greed and incompetence brought down the economy

http://rwer.wordpress.com/2011/07/19/president-obama%E2... /




Who's lying to whom?





Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
TheWraith Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Sep-05-11 02:24 AM
Response to Reply #11
13. You're posting a bunch of unsourced blog assertions as "proof"?
Again: your only "proof" that Obama wants to kill Social Security is a bunch of lies, spin, and bullshit. You cannot come up with a single statement from the White House, Obama, or anyone else suggesting cuts to Social Security recipients.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
SidDithers Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Sep-04-11 01:52 PM
Response to Original message
6. K&R. Really good article...
thanks for posting. :thumbsup:

Sid
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Tierra_y_Libertad Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Sep-04-11 01:54 PM
Response to Original message
7. What the left understands about Obama is that he's a centrist pol who panders to the right.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
dajoki Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Sep-04-11 02:18 PM
Response to Reply #7
9. Yep n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
defendandprotect Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Sep-06-11 02:47 AM
Response to Reply #7
21. We have one right wing party and one radical right wing party ... both conrolled by corporations ...
The center of that is hardly "centrist" --

Obama is a corporate president -- destroying the principles and ideals that were once

the cornerstone of the Dem Party!

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Scurrilous Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Sep-04-11 02:29 PM
Response to Original message
10. K & R
:thumbsup:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
demwing Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Sep-04-11 02:47 PM
Response to Original message
12. If one man uses a hammer to tear down a house
Should we avoid using the same hammer to rebuild that house?

You seem to blame Bush's popularity plunge on his using the bully pulpit, ignoring the fact that it was his message, not his method, that was insanely unpopular.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Bluebear Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Sep-05-11 10:10 PM
Response to Original message
15. Stopped.at "the lefts magical thinking"....more insults & disdain
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Stinky The Clown Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Sep-05-11 10:14 PM
Response to Original message
16. He. Doesn't. Even. Try.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
defendandprotect Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Sep-06-11 02:40 AM
Response to Original message
18. Let's see ... GOP controls only the House and is running everything ... !!!
but when Dems controlled everything -- the presidency, the Senate and the House --

we were totally impotent!!

:rofl:

and ...

lefts magical thinking is a failure to recognize that Congress is a separate,

:rofl:

Someone from DU writing for the NYT?


Pitiful --
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
FLAprogressive Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Sep-06-11 02:43 AM
Response to Original message
20. Yeah, like we really need some limousine liberal at the NYT spewing lame talking points to defend
this bullshit.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
tsuki Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Sep-06-11 02:53 AM
Response to Original message
22. This is part of the magically thinking of the media. Obama
is the most hapless, helpless President of the United States. What's a President to do?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DrunkenBoat Donating Member (584 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Sep-06-11 02:59 AM
Response to Original message
23. What's the point of the Party if the leader of the Party is powerless to mobilize/
armtwist his membership? If the Party reps are just a collection of individuals voting however they please, there's no point in voting a straight ticket, since you may be voting for Republican or Teabagger votes by pulling the "D" lever.

And I think he should have focused on the economy, because if the economy is OK, much else is forgiven, whereas if it's not, little is.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MadHound Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Sep-06-11 05:34 AM
Response to Original message
24. Condescending horseshit
"The left's magical thinking?" Really now, after such a statement it's hard to take the author seriously. It gets even harder the more one reads.

Rationalizing a weak presidency, that's what the author is doing.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
rucky Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Sep-06-11 05:45 AM
Response to Original message
25. Yeah, I quit reading after "magical thinking" n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Fri Aug 29th 2014, 12:39 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » General Discussion Donate to DU

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


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

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

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

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC