Skip to main content

View Diary: What's The Goal? What's The Strategy? (196 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  I take the guy at his word (4+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    penguins4peace, Armando, puakev, Yasuragi

    He wanted to submit a budget that looked by making both parties give til it hurt.

    He is not an idiot, he wouldn't be where he is now if he were, he knew it didn't have a snowball's chance of passing but he wanted to throw something out their that screamed compromise.

    Remember this:

    Well, I say to them tonight, there is not a liberal America and a conservative America — there is the United States of America. There is not a black America and a white America and Latino America and Asian America — there's the United States of America. The pundits like to slice-and-dice our country into Red States and Blue States; Red States for Republicans, Blue States for Democrats. But I've got news for them, too: We worship an awesome God in the Blue States, and we don't like federal agents poking around in our libraries in the Red States. We coach Little League in the Blue States, and, yes, we've got some gay friends in the Red States. There are patriots who opposed the war in Iraq and there are patriots who supported the war in Iraq.
    That is from the speech that got him noticed, he has always been ablout compromise from all.

    He knew NONE of that stuff in his budget would ever see the light of day but he put in the sacrifices to make it look like he is willing to go to the mat.

    (imo, he would take that cpi football away from boehner first chance he got, just like the last time and the time before that)

    p.s.-i still think it was a freakin horrible ploy but i thhink that is where he is coming from

    •  So what's Obama's end game? (4+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      citizenx, T Maysle, NearlyNormal, JesseCW

      I mean "throwing it out there" can't be the whole enchilada can it?

      He wants posterity to know "he tried?"

      •  The Budget was its own game (4+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        Armando, lcj98, Yasuragi, Nada Lemming

        The budget was submitted, game over. It's dead.

        It always was dead and will always will be.

        There was never going to be a budget negotiation, might as well chunk something out there that makes you look like the serious player.

        We haven't had a budget since Obama took the oath and we won't get one until he or Boehner is gone. The budget game is over imo.

        •  I guess from his perspective (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          citizenx

          a low cost Hail Mary, or maybe, WARNING - this is 11 Dimensional chessy - a sacrificial lamb to get immigration and/or gun reform.  

          I don't believe that BTW.

          •  Yeah I'm not going to go that far (2+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            Armando, Creosote

            and say that he proposed it so the republicans would take SS cuts off of the table!!?!

            I'm not a mind reader and still think it was a bone headed move but the guy does have to deal with those repubs every day and knows how backstabby and assholic they can be better than anyone.  

            Good post btw, thank you.

        •  Could have proposed 20 million jobs (4+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          Armando, citizenx, JesseCW, emal

          created thru infrastructure spending, that would be just as DOA. No?

          But that would show the Debt, Deficit issues were false.

          By Obama doing it this way, it sounds like it reinforces the falsehood. "Fix The Debt".

          ...... Social Security blogathon March 25th thru March 29th. #HandsOffmySS FDR 9-23-33, "If we cannot do this one way, we will do it another way. But do it we will.

          by Roger Fox on Fri Apr 12, 2013 at 01:13:04 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  He could have but I don't think that is the optics (3+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            Yasuragi, Armando, Creosote

            he was trying to achieve. I would have swung for the fences too and wish he would have but I don't think he wanted to be accused of being that partisan especially since nothing was going to pass anyways.

            I think he was trying to look like the guy who proposed "serious" cuts on both sides as a sign of being a "very serious person" and as giving the appearance of trying to get a deal (which was never going to happen imo).

            I think he failed miserably btw and giving any ammo to the austerity crowd is insane.

          •  And that "one America" would have been (0+ / 0-)

            for that too.

            Bipartisanship! It's here, it's outside the Beltway, and it likes the New Deal.

            if necessary for years; if necessary, alone

            by SouthernLiberalinMD on Sat Apr 13, 2013 at 12:04:35 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

      •  He wants the grand bargain, Armando. (6+ / 0-)

        He's been saying he wants one, for years, and he apparently still believes that there is a possibility of getting one passed, now that he's won a second term. That's why on Wednesday night he met with a group of republican senators (not the leadership) who they think may be receptive. The plan, as I understand it from what I've read, is that they want to reach a compromise/ bipartisan agreement in the senate, which will then pressure the House to vote on it, with hopes that there will be enough bi-partisan support there to pass it. (I highly doubt this will work, but that doesn't mean he doesn't believe it will or at least might. He described himself as "ever the optimist" when questioned shortly after the 2012 election about how this would ever get done.)

        He said in the Des Moines Register interview before the election that he 'was confident' that a grand bargain similar to the one he wanted to make with Boehner in 2011 (which included SS and Medicare cuts) would pass within the first six months of his second term. There is no surprise whatsoever that he is trying to do this now, nor any mystery as to what his goal is. He has been clear and consistent about this goal throughout his entire first term.

        He said before the 2012 election that he would continue to pursue this grand bargain, because essentially he believes that it is the right thing to do for the country in the long run. And he still believes in trying to reach a compromise with enough republicans (and democrats) to make it happen. According to Axelrod, it is about policy, not politics, and he believes that a grand bargain to address the deficit and spending issues is the right policy to pursue. He ran for president the first time promising compromise and getting past partisan gridlock. He has never indicated any thoughts of abandoning that ideal, even though most observers realize it's almost certainly a lost cause.

    •  What happens when the United States of America (0+ / 0-)

      tells him it doesn't want Social Security cuts?  To the tune of 87% of respondents saying that they will pay higher taxes rather than accept Social Security cuts? Including 2/3 of Republicans?

      He wants that bipartisan "one America," it's right out there waiting for him, and it's against cuts to Social Security.

      if necessary for years; if necessary, alone

      by SouthernLiberalinMD on Sat Apr 13, 2013 at 12:03:29 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site