Search






Jeff's Amazon.com Wish List

Archive Calendar

November 2024
M T W T F S S
 123
45678910
11121314151617
18192021222324
252627282930  

Archives

“Obama vows to fight Republicans — next year”

Gee. If only we could have seen this strategy coming:

“Republicans are going to have to explain to the American people over the next two years how making those tax cuts for the high end permanent squares with their stated desire to start reducing deficits and debt,” Obama said.

Leaving aside the rank silliness of the suggestion that leaving tax rates where they’d been for a decade COSTS anything (were that the case we should be outraged that the “rich” have been stealing from the government for ten years, because that money the government wasn’t collecting while the tax rates were what they were rightfully belonged to the government, before Bush came and helped the “rich” steal it), what is important to recognize here is that the Obama “tax cut compromise” sets up a narrative framework for his re-election message, one that I’ve been arguing he’d most certainly (and cynically) use: namely, that these “tax cuts for the rich” that the GOP insisted upon haven’t grown the economy much, haven’t decreased the deficit, and haven’t created a significant number of jobs.

To assure this outcome, Obama crafted his “compromise” to fail on all three accounts — particularly when he couples the compromise with either a House CR (which will keep control of spending with the Dems through the next fiscal year) or with the omnibus bill Harry Reid is ramming through the Senate, that will increase spending by 20% over the last fiscal year.

By making the tax rates temporary — and by making public his notice to fight to cut rates on “the rich” again in two years — Obama has sewn uncertainty into the market yet again, and given himself a campaign issue with which to rally his base and win back independents. To his base, he can say that he was willing to compromise with the GOP to show the nation the ineffectiveness of their economic policies, then point to the failure of the economy to significantly rally. To independents, he can argue that he gave the GOP what they wanted and voted overwhelmingly for, only to see no progress. He can point to a further ballooning deficit, which he can count on as a result of a still uncertain investor class and all the additional deficit spending — from the $200 billion unfunded spending in extended “unemployment relief” and “tax credits” for those who don’t even pay federal income tax, to the 20% spending increase in the omnibus bill should it pass; the relative stagnation of unemployment rates, which will remain high as investors continue to keep money on the sidelines as a result of the temporary nature of the tax rates.

In short, Obama has boxed the GOP in. And he will force them to fight the class-warfare battle over again during the next presidential election, this time having shown an ostensible willingness to give the GOP an opportunity to prove to the American people that their way — tax cuts for “the rich” — works (while stacking the fiscal deck so that they fail: there were no “tax cuts”; and spending will increase.)

But hey. Best deal we could get, right?

Rejoice! We got the status quo, some additional spending, and a tax hike on certain estates! The GOP rocks!

48 Replies to ““Obama vows to fight Republicans — next year””

  1. Joe says:

    I am not for raising taxes, but the GOP could show some balls. Maybe this deal will fall apart in the House. Obama is claiming he is doomed if it does not pass. Why is that?

  2. Obstreperous Infidel says:

    The repubs really are the party of stupid. It doesn’t take a genius Jeff Goldstein to see this strategy, either. I’m almost embarrased for them.

  3. JD says:

    I do not like this Obama person.

  4. pdbuttons says:

    aside-story-funny bits
    when i say to peoples, not to toot my own horn..
    i’m not a commentator-cuz every body says things better than I..
    but i understand
    and I say to my friends,who know my political leanings,more or less
    ‘ ya gotta check out protein wisdom..we hate republicans!'[ may i say we?]

  5. Squid says:

    From my cow-orkers in the Milwaukee office, here’s a little ray of sunshine to brighten our day:

    Labor contracts stall in state Senate

    You magnificent, cheese-eating bastards!

  6. sdferr says:

    The lie in plain sight:

    “When they expire in two years, I will fight to end them,” Obama said. “Just as I suspect the Republican Party may fight to end the middle-class tax cuts that I’ve championed and that they’ve opposed.”

  7. Bob Reed says:

    We’ll see Jeff.

    What you outline could very well come to pass. But I also think that there’s many other possible outcomes.

    Who’s to say what will happen when the House starts sending weekly budget cuts to the Senate, and perhaps on to the won; one’s where he won’t be able to vote “present. Or if/when Paul Ryan starts trotting out tax reform legislation. It’s all very fluid, IMHO, and I personally don’t think folks should let the death throes of the lame-duck-zilla take the wind out of their sails.

    We all need to keep the Congressional types feet to the fire. Everyone should have their Senators and Representative’s number and e-mail address in a place where they can readily use it, and do so often.

    As Crawford said in a thread yesterday, we can’t blame the 112th congress for stuff the 111th does. Let’s see what happens.

  8. pdbuttons says:

    so sorry-hate might be too strong of a word..
    but when i say to my friends,romans and country men..
    when i say i..dislike.. them repubs..
    i get a tiny giggle/smile in my mouth
    so sorry again
    i be all analogy
    when it’s 4th and one..on the 50..
    do u punt,pass or kick?
    belichicky dick went for it against indy one year, cost them a superbowl

  9. Bob Reed says:

    sdferr’s quote serves to remind us just how willing and easy the lie comes to Obama. It’s something that needs to be remembered, for when the hair-pulling starts.

  10. Jeff G. says:

    Wake up, Bob.

    You can bet your ass the 112th will be blamed for what the 111th leaves them here at the end. Every gain progressives make never gets rolled back. Ever.

    The media is already polling the failures of a Congress that has yet to be seated.

    When will you people get it?

  11. Slartibartfast says:

    cow-orkers

    cow-orkers (n): People who gag when eating beef.

  12. motionview says:

    The architect of the measure, Senate Appropriations Committee Chairman Inouye, has been working with senior Republicans on the panel — Thad Cochran of Mississippi, Robert Bennett of Utah and Christopher Bond of Missouri — to line up the 60 votes needed to repel a filibuster promised by GOP Sen. Jim DeMint of South Carolina and other conservatives.

    Thad Cochran must go. The Senate Republicans need to remove him from the Appropriations committee completely, now. Defeating him (in 2014 unfortunately) should be a top priority for the Tea Party. Primary challenge him, and if he still gets the nomination the The Party needs to run a 3rd party candidate against him. Even if that elects a Democrat. Or a socialist. Or a martian, for that matter.

    Cochran is worse than a RINO, he completely undercuts any credibility the Republicans might have. No-one who considers themselves a Republican, conservative, classical liberal, Tea Partier should support this POS.

    Bond and Bennett have already been right-sized.

    Please call your Republican Senator(s) and tell them to remove Cochran from Appropriations.

  13. bh says:

    “Cow-orkers”, Squid? Well played. How awesome is that news? Super awesome, I’d say.

  14. Bob Reed says:

    No, I get what you’re saying Jeff, and perhaps I’m being pollyanish; but not simply contrarian, cheerleading, nor wilfully blind. I really do think that things may not go like the left always has enjoyed it this time around. Nor the right, if we all do our jobs and keep their feet to the fire.

    I saw your post yesterday on the dishonestly reproted WaPo poll, as well as Dana Milbanks stuff; I was too busy to comment much.

    But I’m encouraged by the fact that Malcom called them out on it in the L.A.Times, which might not have even happened just a few years ago.

    What will go along way towards making this time different is sites like this, and guys like you, Levin, Beck, and a host of others.

    But it means that we all also have stuff to do. Like rebut this tripe when it’s repeated in our social circles with the facts. And it also means keeping the pressure up on the congressional types, so that the Rethugs! neither backslide nor lose their backbone.

    I may be wrong, but if these things occur it mightn’t be the same monkey-business as usual.

  15. happyfeet says:

    It would have been better for our little country to just let the rates go up on everybody and not to have gone along with all the failshit nonsense in the rest of the bill. Team R did NOT affirm a commitment to fiscal discipline, and however astonishingly hypocritical it might be it’s fair game for bumblefuck to call them out on it.

    Somebody has to.

    by making the tax rates temporary — and by making public his notice to fight to cut rates on “the rich” again in two years — Obama has sewn uncertainty into the market yet again

    Team R signed onto this policy enthusiastically – and threw in a temporary FICA tax tweak to boot.

  16. Crawford says:

    The media is already polling the failures of a Congress that has yet to be seated.

    Well, then, let’s all just suck off our Remingtons, then!

  17. Pablo says:

    “Republicans are going to have to explain to the American people over the next two years how making those tax cuts for the high end permanent squares with their stated desire to start reducing deficits and debt,” Obama said.

    That’s pretty easy if you’ve got major spending cuts under your belt.

  18. Pablo says:

    You can bet your ass the 112th will be blamed for what the 111th leaves them here at the end. Every gain progressives make never gets rolled back. Ever.

    The media is already polling the failures of a Congress that has yet to be seated.

    When will you people get it?

    When will we stop listening to the media’s bullshit? I think we’re making progress on that front.

  19. Ernst Schreiber says:

    Leaving aside the rank silliness of the suggestion that leaving tax rates where they’d been for a decade COSTS anything (were that the case we should be outraged that the “rich” have been stealing from the government for ten years, because that money the government wasn’t collecting while the tax rates were what they were rightfully belonged to the government[bolding mine -E.S.], before Bush came and helped the “rich” steal it), ….

    For the love of all that’s meet and just Jeff, STOP GIVING THEM IDEAS!

    Oh wait, they already think like that. Carry on sir.

  20. SDN says:

    motion, this is precisely why voting for Mike Castle would have been a colossal mistake. But you’ll never convince squishes like Allah and Ace of that.

    “How will this end?”
    “In fire.”

  21. Squid says:

    Every gain progressives make never gets rolled back. Ever. The media is already polling the failures of a Congress that has yet to be seated. When will you people get it?

    I get it, Jeff, I just don’t accept it. Or rather, I don’t accept that it needs to stay that way.

    I honestly believe that the pendulum is slowing. It’s gone about as far as it’s going to, and it’ll start swinging back towards sanity just as soon as we finish training our elected representatives to stop crapping on the carpet. At least, ideally that’s what happens. The alternative is for the whole works to come crashing down, forcing us to pick up the pieces and try to start over (which, incidentally, is a big part of the reason why I rejoice at the gains made at the state level).

    Either way, I just don’t see anything the Proggs have accomplished in the last several years having any sort of permanence. Even if they’re able to bribe, browbeat and bully the electorate into providing popular support, it won’t matter, because there’s simply no way to sustain the spending.

  22. dicentra says:

    May have already been mentioned in the last 24 hours, but Hugh Hewitt has the best idea of all:

    Pay every critter $10 million to go home NOW. Would be the best $535 million this country ever spent.

  23. Obstreperous Infidel says:

    That’s pretty easy if you’ve got major spending cuts under your belt.

    Pablo, as I know you’re aware, but Obama is betting the repubs won’t cut shit. It’s a pretty good gamble on his part as recent history is on his side.

  24. Obstreperous Infidel says:

    You mean 1 million, di? Because even at 5.35 billion, it may still be a deal.

  25. cranky-d says:

    When will you people get it?

    I’m pretty sure that was another DEATH THREAT!

  26. Pablo says:

    Pablo, as I know you’re aware, but Obama is betting the repubs won’t cut shit. It’s a pretty good gamble on his part as recent history is on his side.

    If they don’t they’re toast.

  27. Obstreperous Infidel says:

    We’ve already pretty much established that they are dumb, so I wouldn’t hold my breath. I’m just hoping the new party (not to be confused with Obama’s socialists mind you) does get it.

  28. Big Bang Hunter says:

    A) Bummblefuck: “Significant progress in Afghanistan.”

    B) Red Cross: “Afghanistan at its worst.”

    C) Joe the plumber: “Water is wet.”

    – One of these ledes does not belong. Press hard, the answer sheet is in triplicate.

  29. mojo says:

    The Ruptured Ducks in the House seem to be playing with the idea of NOT passing the tax-rate extension bill, pork and all.

    That’s fine. Me, I’d kinda like to see the reaction of millions of working stiffs when the Clinton rates go back into effect, faces red and eyes bugging out at the increase in witholding.

    Meh. It’s only until the new Congress convenes, kids. TYhen playtime is over. Or, at least, it damn well better be.

    As for the spendalicious Frankenbill that the Senate grunted mightily over and finally shat out yesterday, nuke it. Shut down the Federal Gubbmint. See if I give a crap, go on. I dare ya.

  30. sdferr says:

    Dennis Kucinich was reelected. Russ Feingold was not. California hardly budged. Mass. elected a Republican to replace Ted Kennedy. Minnesota decided to reelect a number of numbnuts progressives and put an imbecile in as Governor. Clearing out the deadwood takes time.

    Many observers have noted the Democrat rank and file has been slow to understand the implications of the last election, so unique and quick was the breadth and depth of the shift in popular opinion. This may well also be true of the Republican establishment types, taking them some time to adjust to these changes, changes they have never seen before.

    In the meantime, if we can readily predict Obama’s strategic course, can’t we then also devise a dynamic counter-strategy to defeat him?

  31. cranky-d says:

    I think congress doing absolutely nothing at this point would be a huge improvement over what they are attempting to do. Shut it down, let the tax rates go up, whatevs.

  32. Obstreperous Infidel says:

    In the meantime, if we can readily predict Obama’s strategic course, can’t we then also devise a dynamic counter-strategy to defeat him?

    Jeff, you and some of the other erudite commenters on this here joint could, but I’m not so sure about republican leadership. That’s the rub.

  33. sdferr says:

    I’m not sure about the entirety of the r’s leadership either OI, though I think some of them are far better at their business than I’d be. Still, the Tea Partiers are the driving political force in the nation today, and we count ourselves among them. So we k-noodle ‘mongst ourselves, passing ideas good and bad back and forth, winnowing and passing, passing and winnowing, etc., keeping our shoulders to the wheel and pressing forward. Eventually, we can hope, we get a good enough idea to pass on to the leadership early enough to get out ahead of Obama’s designs. Pressing is the deal though.

  34. George Orwell says:

    Oh dear, an attitude like Jeff’s will make rough, steady men like Ed Morrissey cry.

    It’s the Bestest Deal Evar!

  35. bh says:

    Take a look at this, guys.

  36. Joe says:

    I hear that the quickest way to a man’s heart is a punch to the chest from Jeff.

    Yes, another death threat.

  37. Silver Whistle says:

    From bh’s link:

    The House Rules Committee is meeting to construct a new rule that will allow liberals to offer more amendments to register their displeasure. But the actual passage of such amendments, as opposed to their symbolic consideration, would be a huge problem, as the Senate would almost certainly reject any changes.

    Those chaps are jolly handy with the new rule contructing. I wonder if they could construct a sense of shame?

  38. sdferr says:

    Next year, Obama may be fighting with someone else:

    The coming year will put this political calculation to the test. Obama’s left flank is increasingly agitated with loose talk about primary challenges, yet he has few opportunities to appease them on domestic policy. Only moderate policies have a chance of passing the Republican House, so anything done on the domestic side will likely further antagonize Obama’s left-wing base. They will naturally turn to national security, where Obama enjoys more freedom of action, for compensation.

    Come August, the contradictions in White House messaging about the Afghanistan timeline will be unspinnable. Either the timeline will start a rapid rush to the exit as the left base wants or it will be the gradual, conditions-based withdrawal inching towards a distant 2014 deadline (followed by a long-term strategic partnership) that General Petraeus and moderates in the war cabinet have indicated.

    If Obama opts for the former, then Republican support for the war will likely quickly diminish. People who supported a war they thought they could win will not want to be caught as the last one supporting a losing effort. If Obama opts for the latter, then any remaining left-leaning props undergirding public support for the Afghanistan war will likely collapse altogether. The timeline straddle bought muted Democratic criticism, but the mutes will be off once the straddle is abandoned.

    But what are they gonna do, work against, campaign against, vote against their savior?

  39. happyfeet says:

    Julie Andrews is single!

  40. newrouter says:

    bush’s pelosi’s fault for next two years. and she’s minority leader too.

  41. newrouter says:

    oh major html fail

    bush’s pelosi’s fault for next two years. and she’s minority leader too.

  42. newrouter says:

    Multiple Alaska Native groups combined to form a PAC that spent $1.7 million to assist Senator Lisa Murkowski in her bid for reelection last month. Now we find out that in earmarks alone in the pending omnibus bill Senator Murkowski has paid her supporters back over to 10 to 1.

    Specific earmarks totaling over 26 million dollars:

    link

  43. geoffb says:

    The House Rules Committee is meeting to construct a new rule that will allow liberals to offer more amendments to register their displeasure. But the actual passage of such amendments, as opposed to their symbolic consideration, would be a huge problem, as the Senate would almost certainly reject any changes.

    Ok. Have an up or down vote on all the amendments. Then a vote on the original bill under the following rule. If the tax bill passes all amendments are deemed to have failed to pass. If the tax bill fails then all the amendments are deemed to have passed but now have no bill to amend. Call it the “Having a meeting with Major Major” rule.

  44. gregorbo says:

    Rahm: “Never let a crisis go to waste.”

    Obama: “Hey, if I don’t break it, I can’t fix it.”

  45. serr8d says:

    A crowded field for 2012. Let’s hope it’s not as crowded with McCain sorts as like 2008, when we saw the best candidate ‘unchosen’ by the NYT.

    (Nice photo there, very nicely composed. Tip of cap to Eric Thayer.)

Comments are closed.