The recent Dredd Blog post "Obama: The Republican Candidate in 2012?" will seem less far fetched today after President Obama caved in to rich republicans and agreed to tax extensions for two years for the daddy warbucks 2% over us.What everyone seems to be forgetting at the moment is that the House of Representatives is still controlled by the democrats.
The House is still led by Nancy Pelosi, and thus, the House members are the deciders as to whether to give the tax cuts to the rich or not to.
In fact, they have already voted against it, voting instead to extend only the tax cuts for those making less than $250G a year.
So Obama may call it "bi-partisan", but since the House Democrats aren't part of that "bi", he must be calling the Senate Republicans & the House Republicans a "bi-partisan" group.
More than that, the democrats who lost their seats will cast a vote on whether or not to continue to lower the taxes of the rich, and they have nothing to loose.
They may have a little pay back for Mr. Obama in mind.
That is as it should be, since he seems to be going masochistic and needs to get it from both sides one would guess.
Sometimes the politicians are blown off course by their own bloviating so they forget their civics 101, forget that the congress is bi-cameral, and forget that budget bills must originate in the House of Representatives according to our Constitution (last time I checked anyway).
Thus, the President is dissing the House of Representatives, and specifically those of "his own party", by doing the bidding of the Republicans.
Call your representatives and tell them to shut down Obama's Stockholm Syndrome suffering with some good old fashioned House medicine.
Yes we should.
It'll be a very interesting vote. If House dems stand up to their "president" and Senate yellow-stripers, it will indeed signal a radical departure from business as usual, and just perhaps the end of NoBama, as he's obviously staked a lot of his remaining credibility on the deal he struck with the Repubes. House dems would also risk being cast as the ones who cost the unemployed their benefits. I personally don't think they'll risk it, but we'll see soon enough.
ReplyDeleteIf I were a dem politician I would immediately begin distancing myself from NoBama - calling out his policies and votes, referring to him (correctly) as a GOP shill, etc. - and generally positioning myself completely free and clear of his disastrous administration well prior to 2012. NoBama's gonna have coattails alright - universally bad ones!
In retrospect, we all should have known better. The guy had very few bonofides and all the BS rhetoric he spouted during the campaign just had to be too good to be true. I'll take the crappy predictability of W over the reverse crappy predictability (say one thing, then sell out and do the exact opposite) of NoBama anyday. It really is true what they say about the dems: they're great in an opposition role, but give the stupid bastards power, and they fall all over themselves screwing it up. They can't even come together on basic core issues such as economic or military policy, probably because their big donors are the same ones who give to the GOP. They're sellouts, every last one of them.
NoBama reminds me of the nerdy kid at a new school who wants so badly to be liked by the "cool crowd" that he's willing to say or do anything. He's truly an "empty suit," a non-person, a shill, no "there, there," etc. The worst decision of my adult life was voting for this guy. Yes, McCain would have worked out better, as the Congressional dems would have at least worked overtime to oppose his loony policies, and the GOP would have paid the political price for putting such an obvioulsy deranged old codger into the WH in the first place. And as we all know now, his actual policies would have likely differed very little from what we're getting from NoBama.
In addition to House resistance, Daily Kos mentions that Senator Sanders has vowed to filibuster any such bill if it comes to the Senate.
ReplyDeleteHere is the petition I signed at Daily Kos.
"I'll take the crappy predictability of W over the reverse crappy predictability (say one thing, then sell out and do the exact opposite) of NoBama anyday."
ReplyDeleteThat is a sicko choice, and so long as that is all there is I won't take either. They can take their evil empire and shove it.
Let's not forget that voting AGAINST the bushies is not the same as voting FOR Obama.
ReplyDeleteRemember the post in March of 2009: "What Was Rejected In The Election" for example.
That is a sicko choice, and so long as that is all there is I won't take either. They can take their evil empire and shove it.
ReplyDeleteI agree, and my hypothetical "vote" for McCain would have been to simply not vote at all. Which is what I intend to do again in 2012, just as I did in 2010. Matter of fact, I'm not voting again PERIOD unless the choice is one I actually approve of, and not merely the lesser of two evils. Right now, it doesn't look like I'll have to worry about voting again for a long time to come.
What do you call a centrist democrat? A Republican.
What do you call a liberal democrat? Normally, that's a trick question, they don't actually exist. But in the rare case where you actually find one, it's unelectable.
What do you call a centrist Republican? Extinct.
What do you call a hard right-wing demagogue with delusional fantasies and major character deficiencies? A run of the mill Republican politician. Add in their own TV show and/or major consulting/speaking gig? A Presidential contender.
From Matt Taibbi's blog at Rolling Stone: Matt Bai's Post-Partisanship. Best blog post/column I've read in a long, long time!
ReplyDeleteNoBama absolutely clearly STILL doesn't get it!
ReplyDeleteFrom today's political spin briefing:
My "number one priority is to do what's right for the American people," he said at a hastily scheduled news conference at the White House. "Because of this agreement, middle class Americans won't see their taxes go up on January 1."
Let's see, a two year (24 months) extension on tax cuts for the plutocrats (cost $700B to be paid for by SS/MC and other cuts later) in return for a 13 month extension on unemployment benefits (cost $60B) for those who are now jobless. Umm... just what part of this is GOOD for the American people?
Obama blasted the Republicans for clinging to a rigid ideology that, in his opinion, has blinded the GOP to the needs and concerns of average Americans.
Actually, the only "rigid ideology" they're clinging to is taking advantage of a weak-kneed pussy in the WH who won't stand up for anything!
"I've said before that I felt that the middle class tax cuts were being held hostage to the high-end tax cuts," he said. "I think it's tempting not to negotiate with hostage takers, unless the hostage gets harmed. ... In this case, the hostage was the American people. And I was not willing to see them get harmed."
Listen you stupid bastard, tax hikes on the middle class will hurt a lot less in the medium term than continued tax cuts (let's call them what they are) for the wealthy. Not to mention that they will be not only politically defensible, but they will actually be politically exploitable on your presumed (but certainly not guaranteed!) campaign trail against your Repube "opposition."
PLUS, GET THIS! IF YOU STAND UP TO THEM AND ACTUALLY CALL THEIR BLUFF, THEY MIGHT EVEN ACTUALLY...(wait for it)...BACK DOWN! IMAGINE THAT! THE yellow-stripe dems, THE ALL-TIME POLITICAL PUSSIES, MIGHT ACTUALLY WIN A POLITICAL BATTLE FOR ONCE!
"If there was not collateral damage, if this was just a matter of my politics or being able to persuade the American people to my side, then I would just stick to my guns," he insisted. But "the issue is how do I persuade the Republicans in the Senate. ... I have not been able to budge them."
And how could you? Does a door mat ever command much respect?
Extending tax cuts for the wealthy is the "holy grail" for Republicans, he said. It "seems to be their central economic doctrine," and, he noted, one they can defend by using the Senate filibuster.
No it isn't. See comments above.
Democrats need to "make sure we understand this is a long game, not a short one," he concluded, promising to take the fight to the GOP on the campaign trail in 2012.
Absolutely false! The fight was taken to the GOP in 2008. What in the hell has this sellout loser been doing for the last two years with CLEAR majorities in both houses? Selling out our interests to his plutocrat buddies, that's what. 2012 will be exactly FOUR YEARS too late for NoBama and the dems, and in my opinion, the game is already clearly over, with nary a shot being fired. Way to capitulate NoBama, you skirt-wearing (no offense to legitimate skirt wearers) loser!
Liberals' frustrations with Obama boil over after deal
ReplyDeleteWow! Imagine that! I wonder why?
NoBama=Cooked=Next! as far as presidential politics go. Unfortunately, this shameless opportunist has disgraced liberal politics for a generation or more.
Letter to NoBama:
Here's hoping that you and yours, Mr NoBama, dwell in the same temple of shit you've consigned your followers to. May your days be cursed from here forward by the evil deals you have made, and may you and yours be visited a thousand fold for every dollar you have conspired to rob from the American people.
F*** YOU TRULY Mr NoBama! I never knew you, and in truth, I'm glad I never did!
Nancy Pelosi,
ReplyDeleteYou have already voted the President's capitulation down.
So don't even bring it up for a vote, unless no tax cuts for filthy rich, unemployment insurance extensions for the 99ers, and others who don't have jobs because of what the warsters and banksters have done to America.
Hold the fort Nancy!
The argument Joe Scarborough parroted this morning on his show was that tax cuts for the rich stimulate jobs and the economy.
ReplyDeleteHe implied that they would bring unemployment down to 7% from the current 9.8% rate.
Those tax cuts have been in effect for a decade, the jobs market is a disaster, and so is the economy, so let's face it, those tax cuts did zilch.
So how is that theory working out for you Jo Jo?
It is the most ridiculous theory (The Graphs of Wrath) going these daze.