The Compromiser

BA posted what seems like ages ago, "Disappointed with Obama?" back in December 2009.  I must say that I am disappointed.  Governing IS different, much, much different than campaigning; that much is clear for the Administration.  But all the talk of being bipartisan and bringing the two parties together took his focus away from doing what is good for the country, or rather, doing what HE believes in.

Then again, what does Obama believe in?  Does he not believe in universal healthcare that is not a silly auto insurance version of mandatory purchase from a private insurer?  Does he not believe in regulating the excesses of capitalism?  Does he not believe in a tax code that is progressive and pushing it through Congress?  Does he believe in pushing his agenda through Congress?  He gave too much credit to the Democratic and Republican leadership on Capitol Hill, which led to the 2010 losses in the House.  He did not take full advantage of the Democratic control nor manage to fight off the obstructionist Repub strategy.  Was he unable or unwilling or something else?

Meanwhile, his jobs bill sits at a time when the economy added only 80,000 job in October and the longtime unemployed are starting to lose their benefits.  Are we seriously looking at a Carter "malaise" once again?  I know, Obama didn't create the economic crisis, but he definitely took his left wing base for granted.  But this ain't 1980 all over again, either.  See my Republican presidential field post...

It is said that politics is the art of compromise.  Is it really, and to this extent when the nation needs true leadership?  I cannot help the feeling of disappointment and opportunties lost.  Whither America?

Trickle-down? Really?

Why do the Repubs still back this "tax cuts for the rich few" notion? It is clearly bad for deficit and does nothing for the economy. Still hanging on to the Trickle-down Economics of the Reagan Years? Come on...

Tax Bill to add $857 Billion to Debt

by CalculatedRisk on 12/09/2010 11:10:00 PM

From Bloomberg: Senate Tax-Cut Extension Plan Would Add $857 Billion to Debt

The congressional Joint Committee on Taxation, which estimates the revenue effects of tax legislation, said the provisions would cost the government $801.3 billion in forgone revenue over 10 years. Extending unemployment benefits for 13 months, another feature of the package, would cost $56 billion, the Obama administration has said.

It is important to remember the Joint Committee on Taxation assumed all the provisions will end as scheduled; the payroll tax cut after one year, and the other tax cuts after two years. That seems very unlikely, so the actual cost will be much much higher. As an example, if the tax cut for high income earners stays in place for the next decade that will add $700 billion alone to the debt!

Also, the vast majority of the impact is from extending the Bush tax cuts.

Reps' Bipartisan Lip Service BS

As I suspected but hoped would not be the case, it is quite evident that the Republicans in the House want absolutely no part of this stimulus package. That's a message, to me at least, that the Limbaugh-agreeing mob mentality in the party are herding as a block; i.e. they will bet on this package to fail and don't want any bit of its "stink" hanging on them, hoping to charge a comeback in power in 2010. And that in a word is bullshit, and in three words, bipartisan lip service. What more do the Reps want, tyranny by the minority? Already there's the compromise of about a third of it going to tax cuts, not to mention the $70 billion alternative minimum tax cut that will do virtually nothing to stimulate the economy.

I believe the bill as is does not do enough to help those who really need it, namely the unemployed, the uninsured and the foreclosed. Yes, I will agree with a Nobel Prize-winning economist over some Rep party leader from Ohio.

Get a load of these comments from the Reps:

Originally I was going to link the NYT article but WSJ had a more thoroughly assessed article so here it is: House Passes Stimulus Bill Without Republican Support

Move Over, Greenspan, for Prophet Roubini

Nouriel Roubini seems to be the man generally credited as the first prominent economist/soothsayer to foresee the current Wall Street collapse. An NYT profile article on him: Dr. Doom

And here's the link to his blog full of information:
RGE - Nouriel Roubini's Global EconoMonitor (registration required for full text)

The Motley Fool Explains the Financial Chaos

The Motley Fool always explains matters financial well for people like me who didn't go to business school nor is an investment banker. I haven't gone through all of the links, but they look like great sources and insights to understand the current Wall Street scramble. For your edification:

The Biggest Financial Story of the Past 50 Years

RE: Is Obama Another Jimmy Carter?

Yeah, what should Obama's group work on first: bringing the worst of this current administration to "justice" (we all know at worst it will be vacations in white-collar prisons) or trying to fix an economy stalled in 20th-century thinking (forget pre-9/11 thinking nonsense) while the rest of the developed world catches us and passes us?

The America of the good old days would seize on a chance to show the world how we can lead on wind and solar power innovations, but this administration (and McCain because he doesn't seem to know any better) whines and stomps its feet when it can't just dig bigger holes in the ground and sea whenever it wants to -- like it used to.

I don't mind more research into safer nuclear power (does that mean this administration wants to finally stop picking on France), but it's beyond time to look for more places to drill for oil and dig for coal and oil shale. Wind, water, and solar power will be around a lot longer than anything else and (IMHO) it doesn't look as bad when we try to build things to take advantage of wind, water, and solar power.

MB

---

> From: briada@hotmail.com
> To: misterb_46@hotmail.com; yhkpenguin@yahoo.com; brian_menard@hotmail.com; b.adamson@comcast.net
> CC: yhkpenguin.amomai@blogger.com
> Subject: RE: Is Obama Another Jimmy Carter?
> Date: Tue, 29 Jul 2008 02:16:27 +0000
>
>
> Michael, Wow! "One reason Obama might be the next Carter is because of the mess left behind by the previous president. There's no way it will get fixed in one term. There should be progress in the right direction if Obama wants another term, but Carter faced the same economic issues (inflation, high gas prices, recession) that Bush would be facing if he was running again." I believe that you really pointed-out our worst fears and perhaps our biggest dilemma. We need a liberal democrat with almost dictatorial powers. We need an FDR for our age. We don't need to compromise on the big issues and we don't need another preacher - - like Jimmy Carter, who asked Americans to sacrifice, turn down the heat and drive slower. Instead, we need a president that will investigate and pursue criminal charges against those neo-cons and others that have broken the law. We need a president that will demand new CAFE standards and implement a new energy policy that goes beyond drilling more wells.
>
> The next Democrat has a mess to clean and worse, most Americans probably have no concept of how big, or bad that mess has become.
>
> George "Hoover" Bush and Family have taking the largest creditor nation on earth and transformed it into the largest debtor nation the world has ever seen. Our stock market is down, our dollar is weak, our trade surplus is non-existent. In fact, we have become what we used to make fun of. The classic definition of a third world nation is one that exports raw material and imports finished "value-added" products. Free trade and neo-con economic policies have made the United States weaker and more vulnerable today than at perhaps any other time in recent memory.
>
> BA
>
________________________________
> From: misterb_46@hotmail.com
> To: briada@hotmail.com; yhkpenguin@yahoo.com; brian_menard@hotmail.com; b.adamson@comcast.net
> CC: yhkpenguin.amomai@blogger.com
> Subject: RE: Is Obama Another Jimmy Carter?
> Date: Mon, 28 Jul 2008 18:19:45 -0700
>
> McCain's ads may be sharp, but he himself, is far from it -- other than repeating the same, tired right-wing and neo-con talking points. That's going to be more widely-known later on than it is now.
>
> One reason Obama might be the next Carter is because of the mess left behind by the previous president. There's no way it will get fixed in one term. There should be progress in the right direction if Obama wants another term, but Carter faced the same economic issues (inflation, high gas prices, recession) that Bush would be facing if he was running again.
>
> Obama is OK, in my opinion, staying above the fray until the debates or the convention. Let McCain dig his own political hole by appearing yet again to sell out the very things that made him so popular across the spectrum in 2000.

It's the economy AND the war, stupid!

America's apathy toward foreign affairs is still alive and well, as her sensitivity toward pocketbook pains is much greater than the lives and money lost in a war of choice. Obama must hit these issues hard and go after McCain. Imagine the economic state that this country would be in had billions of dollars not gotten wasted on the Iraq invasion and occupation. This point must be hammered home to the voters. Can we afford a third-term of Bush? A McBush administration? Now Obama can focus his attention on November.