Devastating secondary punchline.
Tag: obama
…I don’t think there’s a single Democrat out there, who if they looked at where we started when I came into office and look at where we are now, would say that somehow we have not moved in the direction that I promised. Take a tally, look at what I promised during the campaign. There’s not a single thing that I said that I would do that I have not either done or tried to do. And if I have not gotten it done yet, I’m still trying to do it.
Barack Obama, perhaps being a bit testy on the reaction of the left to his strategy and overall leadership style thus far.
And, basically, he’s right. The key issue, though, is the pervasive perception that when the GOP is in charge, they get the policy they want to the letter, often with Democratic help. Alternatively, when the Democrats are in charge, they rarely achieve that standard, and more often slump across the finish line with badly compromised legislation that is, as a result, more difficult to talk about and more difficult to defend, all the while presented in a manner best described as: “shut up, you smelly hippies; why can’t you just be happy with whatever shit sandwich it is we’re giving you today.”
Take tax cuts: most of America (wrongly) believes their taxes went up under Obama. Likewise the widespread but utterly misplaced belief in the increasing size of government under Obama (it’s gotten smaller). These and other issues like them are the direct product of a messy, painful compromise and triangulation-prone legislative output that can’t easily be described, much less described in two word, rhyming catch-phrases and, in the case of healthcare reform, isn’t even really in effect yet, and won’t be until 2015…nearly the end of a theoretical second term.
So: you’re supposed to be a communicator, Obama. Get out there and communicate, passionately, about something. Anything. Forcefully explain what you’ve done. And, more importantly, what you would have seen done if not for rampant obstructionism and demonstrable lies. Call out, by name, lies and the liars propagating them, be that House, Senate, or most popular broadcast news network employees. Repeatedly. Every day. Every hour. Every time a microphone is switched on, we want to see you fight. That is all. We will then shut up and sit quietly in the corner with our drugs that we are all on. Thanks in advance.
And, basically, he’s right. The key issue, though, is the pervasive perception that when the GOP is in charge, they get the policy they want to the letter, often with Democratic help. Alternatively, when the Democrats are in charge, they rarely achieve that standard, and more often slump across the finish line with badly compromised legislation that is, as a result, more difficult to talk about and more difficult to defend, all the while presented in a manner best described as: “shut up, you smelly hippies; why can’t you just be happy with whatever shit sandwich it is we’re giving you today.”
Take tax cuts: most of America (wrongly) believes their taxes went up under Obama. Likewise the widespread but utterly misplaced belief in the increasing size of government under Obama (it’s gotten smaller). These and other issues like them are the direct product of a messy, painful compromise and triangulation-prone legislative output that can’t easily be described, much less described in two word, rhyming catch-phrases and, in the case of healthcare reform, isn’t even really in effect yet, and won’t be until 2015…nearly the end of a theoretical second term.
So: you’re supposed to be a communicator, Obama. Get out there and communicate, passionately, about something. Anything. Forcefully explain what you’ve done. And, more importantly, what you would have seen done if not for rampant obstructionism and demonstrable lies. Call out, by name, lies and the liars propagating them, be that House, Senate, or most popular broadcast news network employees. Repeatedly. Every day. Every hour. Every time a microphone is switched on, we want to see you fight. That is all. We will then shut up and sit quietly in the corner with our drugs that we are all on. Thanks in advance.
Quiet Down, We’re Playing the Inside Game
Good roundup of the Bush tax cut extension negotiations by Ezra Klein:
When the deal was cut, the president took an oblique shot at their preferences, saying “the American people didn’t send us here to wage symbolic battles or win symbolic victories.” And this came a mere week or two after the White House announced a federal pay freeze. The pattern, for progressives, seems clear: The White House uses them during elections, but doesn’t listen to, or consult them, while governing. In fact, it insults them, and then tells them to quiet down, they got the best bargain possible, even if it wasn’t the one they’d asked for, or been promised.
[…]That the Obama administration has turned out to be fairly good at the inside Washington game of negotiations and legislative compromise and quite bad at communicating to the public and keeping their base excited is not what most would have predicted during the 2008 campaign. But it’s true.
The President’s Last Stand Was No Stand At All
The deal the President struck with Republican leaders is an abomination. It will cost $900 billion over the next two years — larger than the bailout of Wall Street, GM, and Chrysler put together, larger than the stimulus package, larger than anything that’s come out of Washington…
And don’t think for one second that the GOP won’t be out there, probably today, screaming:
This President’s $900 BILLION deficit exploder is going to destroy the country. It’s bigger than all his other giant spending programs in the government takeover department. He’s a profligate socialist of the kind we just can’t afford anymore. We in the GOP delivered you, the wealthy, massive tax cuts and are thus: Serious People.
The media will not lift a finger to connect the $900B to the massive tax cuts for the wealthy. Watch and learn, Democrats. Watch and learn.
Since all the evidence says that elections depend on the rate of change of unemployment, not its level, this is actually bad news for Obama: he’s setting himself up for an economic stall in the months leading into the 2012 election.
Paul Krugman, caught in the act of being exactly right. Couple this with the decision to let these Bush tax cuts expire in an election year again, and you’ve got recipe for disaster.
On what planet do these (so called) Democrats live? Do they expect to learn from the messaging disaster they perpetrated in the ten year leadup to this battle? Nothing I’ve seen from anybody, dog catcher up to President, has shown me that they have any chance of even budging the conversation, much less crafting a winning electoral message on this in the face of a still-stagnant economy and ~10% unemployment come 2012.
Obama’s determination to be the “next Carter” is really remarkably strong. I’d say he’s one killer rabbit away from being little more than a punch-line.
Get out there and fight for something, anything. What is so hard to understand about that? Why is it so terrifying for them? This is why they fail.
On what planet do these (so called) Democrats live? Do they expect to learn from the messaging disaster they perpetrated in the ten year leadup to this battle? Nothing I’ve seen from anybody, dog catcher up to President, has shown me that they have any chance of even budging the conversation, much less crafting a winning electoral message on this in the face of a still-stagnant economy and ~10% unemployment come 2012.
Obama’s determination to be the “next Carter” is really remarkably strong. I’d say he’s one killer rabbit away from being little more than a punch-line.
Get out there and fight for something, anything. What is so hard to understand about that? Why is it so terrifying for them? This is why they fail.
[President Obama] announced a pay freeze for federal workers. This was an announcement that had it all. It was transparently cynical; it was trivial in scale, but misguided in direction; and by making the announcement, Mr. Obama effectively conceded the policy argument to the very people who are seeking — successfully, it seems — to destroy him.
So I guess we are, in fact, seeing what Mr. Obama is made of.
[…]
[He] apparently intended the pay freeze announcement as a peace gesture to Republicans the day before a bipartisan summit. […] There were no comparable gestures from the other side. Instead, Senate Republicans declared that none of the rest of the legislation on the table — legislation that includes such things as a strategic arms treaty that’s vital to national security — would be acted on until the tax-cut issue was resolved, presumably on their terms.
Paul Krugman bringing the shrill. Excellent stuff.
Find me a single MSM story that in any way frames this as a GOP minority temper tantrum and willful, dangerous obstructionism in the face of overwhelming public opinion. This is before you even get to utterly foolish in light of the GOP’s supposed deficit focus. I think you’ll find it being framed systematically and pervasively in quite the opposite direction. Liberal Media.
Find me a single MSM story that in any way frames this as a GOP minority temper tantrum and willful, dangerous obstructionism in the face of overwhelming public opinion. This is before you even get to utterly foolish in light of the GOP’s supposed deficit focus. I think you’ll find it being framed systematically and pervasively in quite the opposite direction. Liberal Media.
Mr. Obama still has immense power, if he chooses to use it. At home, he has the veto pen, control of the Senate and the bully pulpit. He still has substantial executive authority to act on things like mortgage relief — there are billions of dollars not yet spent, not to mention the enormous leverage the government has via its ownership of Fannie and Freddie. Abroad, he still leads the world’s greatest economic power — and one area where he surely would get bipartisan support would be taking a tougher stand on China and other international bad actors.
But none of this will matter unless the president can find it within himself to use his power, to actually take a stand. And the signs aren’t good.
Paul Krugman, shrill as always.
WHY THEY FAIL
[Axelrod said that] separating out different categories of tax cuts now – extending some without extending others – is politically unrealistic and procedurally difficult
God almighty Christ is there a clearer possible enumeration of why this administration is failing in the eyes of the public? This sentence alone should cost Axelrod his job. Period
Procedurally difficult? How? They all expire at the end of the year. You write a law enacting the sub-$250k part. You put it to a vote. It passes or it doesn’t. We’re meant to believe this is too hard? Yes, it’s “politically unrealistic” because Republicans will oppose it. THAT’S WHAT YOU WANT THEM TO DO, YOU FUCKING IMBECILE. You want to force them to a) take a hard position publicly -or- b) genuinely compromise with you and your still giant majorities and continue only the sub-250k cuts. Instead, after the events since 2008, you apparently still believe it’s best to begin negotiations from the GOP position and then see what sensible add-ons they want once this thing hits the floor. And you wonder why the public loses faith and doesn’t turn out to vote you and yours back in?
Do you seriously expect me to believe that you just do not understand politics at any level? That you are that dense? Or are you just suffering from an overtight necktie? Your job is to help us; not to fuck us up. Does that seem clear to you? I know I’m the one out here “on drugs,” but still. Statements like this makes me think maybe life under our Tea Klan theocratic overlords would, if nothing else, at least be more sensible from a beliefs-vs-governing-stance viewpoint than anything I’ve heard emitted from the raging shitspew that’s been coming out the maw of the national Democrat since November 2nd.
Really, really execrable. Just the worst, most defeatist, circular-firing squad shit I’ve seen coming out of this administration ever. Why not just go into the Rose Garden with Biden and abdicate the day Boehner is named Speaker and make him President? For life, if possible.
Honestly, if this is the way you plan to govern in opposition you may as well just cede the whole thing right off the bat.
[END BLOODRAGE]
GOP: Party of Compromise
Greg Sargent talks Bush tax cuts and GOP/Democratic comity and compromise:
There is a way a one-year or two-year temporary extension could represent a compromise of sorts: If Republicans signal a willingness to at least entertain the idea of letting the high end cuts expire after that temporary extension. But many of them aren’t doing that. Their position is that the high-end cuts need to be made permanent. Full stop.
Exactly right. The GOP idea of compromise here is permanent Bush tax cuts. I suspect they might be willing to dump the tax cuts for the bottom 99% of America, but that top 1% isn’t going anywhere and they don’t want some two-year fix, they want it made permanent.
Democrats need to get through their heads that losing the entire Bush tax cuts package is actually the best long-term policy outcome; that this is also the “no deal, time expires” outcome makes it all the more powerful as a bargaining chip. Always be willing to walk away from the entire thing, and always make clear that all blame rests on the GOP by making clear that full-extension is their position, so partial repeal is the compromise position. Yes, walking away means short term harm to everyone making below $250k/yr, but if that’s what it takes to roll back the tax cuts for the richest of the rich: so be it. Only from that position of relative strength do you get the GOP to even approach the table. And, I’ll let you in on a secret: they still won’t.
This is why it’s the perfect issue for the Democrats. It’s important, easy to understand, and directly pits the hyper-rich against the interests of most Americans. Swing for the fences. You’ve got nothing to lose. If you force the GOP to accept short-term, top 1% cuts, it’s a win. If you force the media to face the fact that the GOP has zero interest in compromise on anything, it’s a win, and if you force the true compromise position of time-limited cuts for 99% of Americans and an immediate roll-back to Clinton-era rates for the top 1%: it’s a giant win of the sort that could redefine the terms and dimensions of exactly how policies do or don’t get done over the next two years. So why not try?
Lemkin 