Monday, December 27, 2010

Note to Mr. Olbermann 3

Dude, you do know, don't you, that if President Obama had done what you and your brethren over at MSNBC had wanted him to do (i.e., grit his teeth/snarl/pound his chest for 5 weeks to get a better deal on the tax package - a deal that probably wouldn't have even been possible), we probably wouldn't have gotten rid of DADT, ratified the START treaty, or even passed the aid to 9/11 first responders bill? I mean, you do frigging know that, right?

10 comments:

Beach Bum aka Captain Barbossa said...

Very good point! Of course the democrats have always been very good at wanting to cut off their noses to spite their faces.

Marcus said...

Will, I have often said that the art of governing requires an acute sense of balance...I subscribe to Aristotle's ideas about a balance between freedom and democracy, etc. Here is a case of pragmatism winning out over over the urge to stick it to em...IMO the repubs did from the very beginning try to stonewall Obama on just about everything. Here, Obama realized that giving in on the tax issue would be offset by extended unemployment benefits. The Repubs were so giddy over this that they apparently went soft during the rest of the lameduck...I doubt this will continue during the new congress. I note that my liberal bretheren over at Truth101 are distraught over the deal that Obama cut...the overall sense is that Obama sold out. I disagree with the tax deal but hope this proves to be a shrewd move in the long run in that it should put the Rebups on the hot seat if they return to the ways of gridlock...

TRUTH 101 said...

Ah Will.

Even if the deal had come out the same you must remember that the base must be pandered to.

Republicans pander to theirs always. Had Obama made a better show I am quite certain that more of his 2008 supporters would have turned up in 2010 and the losses for the Dems wouldn't have been as large.


DADT would have passed. There are enough republicans that have to act like Democrats sometimes in their blue leaning states that they had no choice but to support this.


Many times the image is more important than the substance.

Marcus said...

Cheer up Truth. In this case, Obama did not have to pander to the base...He got everything passed in the lame duck session except immigration reform. I think Obama/Dems benefited from this...A lot of Republicans think that their leadership caved in by allowing the Dems to get so much done in the lameduck. I think this thing revitalized Obama in many ways. I did not like the Tax deal but the trade off was favorable.

Marcus said...

BTW Will, I checked out Lydia's site...same old stuff, same characters. All I can say is I don't wanna get involved. Why Lydia allows the mayhem is beyond me...

Will "take no prisoners" Hart said...

Gentlemen, let me specify here, I did not particularly like this tax "deal", either. What it does/will do to the deficit (not to mention wealth disparity) is troubling. But like my buddy, Chris Matthews, says, you have to make the distinction between a sellout and a strategic defeat (Mr. Obama's strategy here being significantly more the latter)...........Truth, my point here is that the gridlock that a 5 week stalemate over the budget is something that probably would have preempted a vote on DADT from even being brought up. Yes the repeal would have eventually passed. But when?............Marcus, did you go to Lydia's new site; politicallyhot.blogspot.com? It doesn't look like anybody's even commented there in a while. It's all kind of too bad, huh? Lydia herself seemed like a decent enough egg.

Marcus said...

Why the absolute dichotomy between "sellout" and "political defeat"?? My point is by "selling out", the President got far more done than expected...Like you, I don't like that rift between rich and poor grows wider not to mention the point about the deficit. The President did the pragmatic thing and took the best possible deal and as result got some of the other stuff you mention, done. To me it seems the Prez came out ahead on this one. Here's the rub, will Republicans do budget cutting ACROSS the board or are they going target earmarks and social programs only. History tells me the later but stay tuned...Triangulation anyone??

I was not aware Lydia had two separate sites. Where I went looked totally revamped and seemed focused on womens issues...That did not stop Voltron, Nicholas, Mike, Clif and company from playing hardball. I'll check it out again...I am reticent to get sucked in.

Will "take no prisoners" Hart said...

I'm sorry, dude. I wrote that sentence wrong. The distinction that Matthews made was between a sellout and a strategic RETREAT - not defeat. My bad.

w-dervish said...

Obama and the Democratic Congress should have repealed the bush tax cuts on DAY ONE. We wouldn't be talking about the best deal he could get now if they had.

Remember that Obama will be running for re-election when the tax cuts expire again. I think it's likely they'll be extended again. Or made permanent.

This "deal" is going to lead to more Republican victories. Left leaning voters won't be enthused about turning out for the political party that's sold them out.

The Republicans have always been (for quite some time, at least) the champions of the wealthy. The Democrats were the champions of the middle class and working poor.

With Obama freezing government workers salaries (an effective pay CUT), appointing members to a deficit comission who recommend raising the SS retirement age and cutting benefits, and breaking his campaign promise to let the bush tax cuts expire... I doubt people will be as enthusiastic in 2012.

Will "take no prisoners" Hart said...

I agree with you that the tax situation should have been addressed MUCH earlier. But it wasn't. And, because it wasn't, it was what it was when they "dealt". Thankfully, we got some decent legislation passed during the lame-duck session.