Skip to main content

That’s right folks; something important is happening in D.C.—a major change in the narrative of the GOP.  I don’t know if it’s the polls, the hostile town halls or the restlessness of the Wall Street Journal Editorial pages, but something is definitely up.  Just take a look at the stories crossing the wires today.  The Hill:

1. Cantor vows no 'hold up' in disaster aid

“House Majority Leader Eric Cantor (R-Va.) said Wednesday there would be “no hold-up” in approving federal disaster aid for localities ravaged by an earthquake and torrential storms. Cantor had come under fire from Democrats for suggesting last month that Republicans would seek to offset new funding for disaster relief with spending cuts elsewhere in the budget.”

Okay, this is good and I don’t know why he was such a drama-queen in the first place.  I’m sure the “whuppings” from his local media helped.  But that’s not all folks check this in a different article from The Hill:

2. Cantor: GOP must emphasize ‘grow’ part of ‘cut and grow’

“House Majority Leader Eric Cantor (R-Va.) sought to strike a tone of civility ahead of President Obama’s jobs speech to both house of Congress, suggesting the GOP and White House needed to come together to grow the economy.

Even as he reiterated that Republicans and Democrats “have very different opinions as to how to grow this economy,” Cantor acknowledged the GOP had emphasized one half of its “cut and grow” agenda more than the other since taking over the House majority in January.

“We’ve been about cut and grow. The fact is for the last eight months plus, we’ve been about cuts,” he said. “That’s why it is imperative that all of us join together, work with the president, to see how we can grow this economy.”

Okay, good—a little weak, a little lame—but quite a different response from a month ago.  I said I believe Obama has them on the run because they’re confused now.  All year it’s been: cut, cut, cut but look at this headline from National Journal:

3. Is $300 Billion Enough for Jobs?

Huh? Seriously?

Okay, great question--in the field in which we need to play.  They even suggests Obama should go hard with this nugget:

“One approach Obama hasn’t tried, but is turning toward, is ruthlessness. If Congress fails to pass the jobs bill, you might see Obama take a single job-creating idea, announce it somewhere outside of Washington, and give Congress three weeks to consider it. Then do it again. And again. and again.”
http://nationaljournal.com/...

Wow? Is the National Journal suggesting Obama get all ruthless on us? I’m not sure—but I like the idea.  In fact, maybe he’s already started.  Check this from Politico:

4. Carney: [Obama] No meeting with GOP

“Carney indicated that President Obama has no plans to meet with leaders in Congress, despite the request by John Boehner and Eric Cantor to do so before the jobs speech on Thursday. But he added that “I have not said that the president will not reach out.”

And then there’s this from Huffpo:

5. Super Congress Democrats Want Panel To Focus On Jobs

“Democrats on the Super Congress will insist that the body's mandate be expanded to include job creation measures, setting up the first major ideological battle a day before the panel is set to meet for the first time.

Sen. Max Baucus (D-Mont.) said on Wednesday that Democrats on the panel are in agreement that the national debt can't be decreased without growing the economy.”

Okay, I don’t mean to appear too hopeful but I haven’t seen headlines like these in over a year.  Check this last one from Fox via Politiwire:

6. Republicans Will Not Give Rebuttal

“Republicans have decided they're not going to give a rebuttal to President Obama's economic speech on Thursday night, Fox News reports.

But Democratic leader Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) said the GOP's "silence" would "speak volumes about their lack of commitment to creating jobs."

Folks seriously, I can’t claim to know what will happen in the next few weeks but it looks like republicans are uncomfortable with playing in "our" jobs field. While I expect Boehner to pull another rabbit out of his hat in the final hours, at least today, the narrative has changed.  Obama is asking for 300-billion in the middle of the debt cut negotiations--that's a good thing.  

Baucus is telling the Super-Committee, folks this is about jobs. Obama is telling Boehner and Cantor he’s not meeting with them and the National Journal is hinting he should get all gangsta (my words) and go “ruthless.” Nancy Pelosi  is antagonizing the lack of response from the GOP and I’m liking all of this.

Yes, I “might” like this long hot, crazy summer after all.

EMAIL TO A FRIEND X
Your Email has been sent.
You must add at least one tag to this diary before publishing it.

Add keywords that describe this diary. Separate multiple keywords with commas.
Tagging tips - Search For Tags - Browse For Tags

?

More Tagging tips:

A tag is a way to search for this diary. If someone is searching for "Barack Obama," is this a diary they'd be trying to find?

Use a person's full name, without any title. Senator Obama may become President Obama, and Michelle Obama might run for office.

If your diary covers an election or elected official, use election tags, which are generally the state abbreviation followed by the office. CA-01 is the first district House seat. CA-Sen covers both senate races. NY-GOV covers the New York governor's race.

Tags do not compound: that is, "education reform" is a completely different tag from "education". A tag like "reform" alone is probably not meaningful.

Consider if one or more of these tags fits your diary: Civil Rights, Community, Congress, Culture, Economy, Education, Elections, Energy, Environment, Health Care, International, Labor, Law, Media, Meta, National Security, Science, Transportation, or White House. If your diary is specific to a state, consider adding the state (California, Texas, etc). Keep in mind, though, that there are many wonderful and important diaries that don't fit in any of these tags. Don't worry if yours doesn't.

You can add a private note to this diary when hotlisting it:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from your hotlist?
Are you sure you want to remove your recommendation? You can only recommend a diary once, so you will not be able to re-recommend it afterwards.
Rescue this diary, and add a note:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from Rescue?
Choose where to republish this diary. The diary will be added to the queue for that group. Publish it from the queue to make it appear.

You must be a member of a group to use this feature.

Add a quick update to your diary without changing the diary itself:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary?
(The diary will be removed from the site and returned to your drafts for further editing.)
(The diary will be removed.)
Are you sure you want to save these changes to the published diary?

Comment Preferences

  •  Tip Jar (204+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    NeuronFlash, Bear, nocynicism, Geekesque, BenderRodriguez, followyourbliss, Polly Syllabic, jmrichardson, chicago minx, doroma, Louisiana 1976, penguins4peace, djMikulec, Southside, blueoldlady, Jerry056, Kitty, revsue, second gen, jennyp, dle2GA, kevinpdx, Eclectablog, mamabigdog, Geriw, atdnext, MrJayTee, Libby Shaw, COwoman, sodalis, RonV, coolbreeze, RhodaA, Wee Mama, AgavePup, Fury, Empower Ink, isabelle hayes, Sophie Amrain, JanG, CherryTheTart, doc2, Robinswing, AnnieR, mskitty, sleipner, Snud, briefer, wader, DaleA, tobendaro, Fe Bongolan, Gowrie Gal, Mike08, sockpuppet, Eman, Delilah, krllos, TomP, elziax, Little Lulu, Proud Mom and Grandma, Livvy5, Russgirl, in2mixin, Laughing Vergil, MKSinSA, TigerMom, Sylv, DEMonrat ankle biter, cville townie, tin woodswoman, smoothnmellow, lol chikinburd, joe from Lowell, Matt Esler, cantelow, science nerd, wasatch, MeMeMeMeMe, Unit Zero, nupstateny, carver, jiffykeen, La Gitane, dewtx, rukidingme, Emerson, AnnetteK, tomjones, Little Flower, Forward is D not R, Quasimodal, hooper, erratic, Mentatmark, sja, MartyM, bubbanomics, MazeDancer, A Citizen, christine20, kerflooey, BarackStarObama, seefleur, arizonablue, arpear, raptavio, KingofSpades, amk for obama, slksfca, nervousnellie, demgem, eeff, sebastianguy99, Thinking Fella, DianeNYS, sawgrass727, surfbird007, gnostradamus, Lawrence, My Left Behind, Dem in the heart of Texas, Nebraskablue, deha, Larsstephens, BYw, highacidity, randallt, millwood, GeorgeXVIII, Hamlets Father, itskevin, SaintC, nirbama, kalmoth, jamess, lastman, smileycreek, dmhlt 66, kjoftherock, bsmechanic, California06, jdmorg, interguru, Mislead, RichterScale, soaglow, indres, Gary Norton, sostos, rantsposition, KayCeSF, NYWheeler, pat bunny, Zutroy, minidriver, Mathazar, royce, MRA NY, DontTaseMeBro, bythesea, ceebee7, virginwoolf, noemie maxwell, cacamp, Pam from Calif, Darnell From LA, Tamar, frsbdg, Loquatrix, OleHippieChick, Dbug, mumtaznepal, RhymesWithUrple, futureliveshere, AspenFern, Jeff Y, fhcec, SoCalSal, DiegoUK, rmonroe, markthshark, Janeo, kestrel9000, Wary, Actbriniel, AreDeutz, angelajean, Matt Z, Cali Techie, kdub, OHdog, qannabbos, Byron from Denver, reginahny, Jimdotz, real world chick, IL clb, Stein, sandrad23, Nica24, avsp, understandinglife
  •  Marc Ambinder suggesting that (49+ / 0-)

    Obama might get ruthless?

    Eh.

    Obama has mused in several private settings that if he loses re-election, it won’t be because a Republican beat him: It will be because the economy was impervious to his attempts to revive it. That may be so. But it might also be true that Obama will be beaten because he allowed himself to be consumed by an impossible goal – changing Washington – instead of focusing on a reasonable one: using the power of the presidency to make Washington work for him.

    At least he realizes what happened.

    "[R]ather high-minded, if not a bit self-referential"--The Washington Post.

    by Geekesque on Wed Sep 07, 2011 at 02:08:39 PM PDT

    •  This quote from Ambinder... (42+ / 0-)

      "...But it might also be true that Obama will be beaten because he allowed himself to be consumed by an impossible goal – changing Washington – instead of focusing on a reasonable one: using the power of the presidency to make Washington work for him".

      ...is what I think is at the heart of Obama's personal struggle, every president has one, and the outcome of that personal battle has more to do with what will be than any advisors or polls.

      Obama came to this office seeing himself as a uniter, not a divider.  Remember, this is a guy who as a pup brought the nation to it's feet at the 2004 democratic convention with his "We are not the red states or the blue states..." speech.

      My biggest concern with Obama isn't what others' concerns are here.  I don't think for a minute he's weak or a caver.  I think he's damn tough and then some.  

      It's his internal struggle to change his own goals, that's the battle---to understand that he WILL have to give up the idea that he can always be just as much a president to those that didn't vote for him---circa his famous election night quote.  Not here, not anymore, not in this place and this time.

      And I think he's on the verge of winning that battle with his ego.  Because I think first and foremost, like any politician, he's a competitor, and a fierce one.  And I think it's taken awhile because we all hold our goals close to our heart and no matter how smart someone is, the last think we see is our own blind spots.  

      Many here will disagree with me, but I say hold on to your hats, Obama is about to put his dukes up, to leave his own ego's battle "to change Washington," behind, and start going for the slam dunk.  Maybe not to the satisfaction of everyone here, but I think you're going to see something different on the wind.  Real soon.  

      •  He has shown no capacity for such (5+ / 0-)

        introspection thus far.  The ozone decision, plus his coming plan to raies the Medicare eligibility age, tend to show that he just doesn't have the stomach for a real fight with the GOP.

        "[R]ather high-minded, if not a bit self-referential"--The Washington Post.

        by Geekesque on Wed Sep 07, 2011 at 04:16:08 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  I think you're wrong. (25+ / 0-)

          I think you knee jerk his every decision and fly it up the flag pole of your agenda, and if it doesn't agree with your ideas, he's weak and has "no capacity for introspection."  I'm not saying he's ever going to please you, and hell, he doesn't please me all the time either.

          But if you think he has no stomach for a real fight with the GOP, I think your memory is a bit like a piece of swiss cheese, holes in all the convenient spots. Like for instance, the last election, when he rolled McCain the first time push really came to shove, in September of 2008.  And oh yeah, that was after he rolled Hillary, heir apparent to the nomination.

          We'll see who's right.  But I already know you're making the weaker bet.  Because your memory is as short as all those who bet against Regan, and GWB, when their ratings were circling the drain.

          You may not like Obama, you may not want him as your president any longer, you may be seriously angry and disappointed in him. But I'm telling you, you have missed taking his measure by a county mile.

          •  I like him fine. (4+ / 0-)

            But, at this point in their Presidencies, Reagan and Bush were each far more popular than Obama is now.

            He beat McCain because of Bush's record, not because he was some kind of bad-ass political bruiser.

            His style of politics is perfectly adapted for a primary, but it is absolutely pathetic as deployed against a disciplined, determined partisan enemy.

            His approach is to assume that everyone is on the same side.  

            His politics of unity and hope lies in a smoldering pile of ashes at his feet.  But he's still dancing.

            "[R]ather high-minded, if not a bit self-referential"--The Washington Post.

            by Geekesque on Wed Sep 07, 2011 at 04:47:47 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

            •  Let's look at the facts. (13+ / 0-)

              Let's start with your quote here:

              "...at this point in their Presidencies, Regan and Bush were each FAR (emphasis mine) more popular than Obama is now.

              Check this out:

              "Now, Obama’s current 43 percent percent approval rating nearly matches former president Ronald Reagan’s Gallup tally in early August 1983 (44 percent), and Reagan of course went on to a landslide victory the following year."

              http://www.washingtonpost.com/...

              As for GWB, you are correct, he had higher approval ratings at the same point in his presidency, post 9/11, pre Iraq and pre Katrina.

              And as for beating McCain, perhaps you were not here or around to hear how EVERYTHING was "good news for John McCain" UNTIL September of 2008, when Obama went the right way, and McCain went the wrong way.  Which is pretty much accepted wisdom, except for you and those who make a fetish of cutting your democratic president less slack than you do the GOP.

              Yeah, he'll be dancing all right, kind of like Ali---"float like a butterfly, sting like a bee."  

              Greekesque, you go your way, I'll go mine.  You keep on riding that negative nellie boat, while many democrats speed past you to claim a victory for our party---not just or first for Obama, but for the democratic party.  

              •  negative nellie boat? (0+ / 0-)

                tax cuts for the rich "delayed" (yeah right, they will be delayed until a repub keeps obama's tax rates the same)....

                delaying the ozone decision because he's either afaid of repubs as best scenario or another bought and paid-for DC hack doing the bidding of his corporate campaign contributors as worst case scenario.

                now the story about worrying about a coup being why he wouldn't throw dick cheney under the jail for war crimes?  when such crimes are admitted to by the goons?

                don't try to sell me this horse shit.  i may be forced to vote for obama because, as his advisers so poignantly pointed out, I HAVE NOWHERE ELSE TO GO.

                GRRRRR......

                Stop Prohibition, Start Harm Reduction

                by gnostradamus on Wed Sep 07, 2011 at 06:11:47 PM PDT

                [ Parent ]

              •  Geekesque is right... (1+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:
                pat bunny

                Obama thinks everyone wants the same thing--improving the country, for example--when they don't. He keeps reaching out his hand to the right (definitely not to the left, god forbid!), only to have it bitten off, and people are getting tired of it. It's not being anti-obama to speak the truth of the matter, and thus far, Obama has shown little stomach for "getting dirty" Washington style. Debt crisis? First major test, really, and he got his hat handed to him, and our country almost defaulted on its debt by the zombies that he completely miscalculated.

                And you failed to address a key point:

                His style of politics is perfectly adapted for a primary, but it is absolutely pathetic as deployed against a disciplined, determined partisan enemy.

                Very well stated. Obama is a great campaigner--one of the best ever, period. But this is different. This is governance. And frankly, he has ignored the base and has charged forth with a very republican agenda under the guise of "reaching out" to the other side. He's also a terrible negotiator: he gave up the smog regs, just like he proposed oil drilling off the Atlantic coast last year, two weeks before the Gulf oil disaster, and for what? He didn't even get anything in return.

                As for the great Democratic party riding off into the sunset, well, we're hurting, and we need someone to heal us. We're not at war, internally, but if we were a ship? We'd be listing heavily to one side. That's not being negative, that's being realistic.

                That said, I keep hoping he has some master plan up his sleeve that none of us lesser mortals can see. I just don't think that's going to happen, but I still hold out some glimmer of hope that, say, he wins another term and then goes full throttle to shift policy to the left. I mean, hell, Michele Bachmann complimented him tonight in the debate for the smog debacle--that was surprising. So who knows?

                Last thing? Some of us do research, extensive research, to back up our views. Gut feelings? I'd prefer to leave those to the "other" side...

                Questioning the direction of our country, the wisdom of our leaders, and ways to improve both, are not only our right, but our duty, as U.S. citizens.

                by groobiecat on Wed Sep 07, 2011 at 07:58:57 PM PDT

                [ Parent ]

                •  I SO RELEASE YOU, (11+ / 0-)

                  to your battle against Obama. Have at it, man!

                  I've already accepted that the democrats' greatest liability is from within---like throughout history, it always is.

                  OK.  OK.  OK.  Do you understand that I don't want to fight the likes of you anymore?  And it isn't because I'm an Obamanot, or anything else you've got to sling at me.

                  It's because our PRIORITIES differ.  That is the sum total of the sux/rox battle here.  Period.

                  And btw, don't tell me about your "extensive research" without one link to back your bragging up.

                  Bottom line, I'm sick to puke of fighting the likes of you harder than I would have to fight on ANY republican site.  If you really believe that Obama is your enemy, if you INSIST on holding him to a higher ground than you do the GOP, then again, have at it.

                  But, at least, have the balls to label yourself as against Obama first, the GOP second.  And don't YOU DARE TELL ME, I'm trying to close down your voice, like so many ninnies here have.

                  You want to make Obama public enemy #1, then speak up for yourself.  Put it on record. NO ONE is stopping you.

                  So, you're disappointed.  Whoas me, imagine that happening to anyone besides the glorious and entitled to better, you.

                  •  This. This. This. (11+ / 0-)
                    But, at least, have the balls to label yourself as against Obama first, the GOP second.

                    This is what is driving me crazy.  Jebus, the GOP is completely insane.  Where are the priorities?  

                    •  Exactly. (9+ / 0-)

                      There are those here who think they're entitled to it ALL.  God knows, we've all heard about how hard they worked for Obama, only to be disappointed. You'd think they were lashed a thousand times for their efforts, and that they were the first to ever put their beliefs on the block, and not get everything they wanted.

                      I DON'T tread lightly on anyone's disappointment.  Been around in this world a long time, and my disappointments are the hardest thing for me to come to terms with. But, I've had to come to terms with the fact that I AM NOT SPECIAL ENOUGH, to avoid disappointments.

                      virginwoolf, I gotta tell you, there is no waste of time greater than trying to convince those here to drop their desire to flog Obama first.

                      Leave their "priorities" up to them. Let them be responsible for such.  I continue to comment here because of people like you.  People concerned with "priorities" I can get behind.

                      On this site, if we both remain here, we're going to have to accept that there will be those here who have decided NOTHING is worse than Obama.

                      You and me, we have a voice here too.  We needn't be intimidated by those here who , without ANY OTHER SOLUTION, want to diss our belief  in our party.

                      Cheers dear, we'll just have to stand up for the democratic party, without as much hope and support on this "democratic site" as we might have wished for.

                      Still, there are MANY here who support out battle. Let's go with them.  
                       

                  •  Not true. (1+ / 0-)
                    Recommended by:
                    jts327
                    I've already accepted that the democrats' greatest liability is from within---like throughout history, it always is.

                    Not true.  Don't take DailyKos so seriously that you forget that almost all of us are just bozos.  If any of us have negative opinions of Obama, it's not us or our opinions that are hurting Obama.

                    The right has made its decision to cater to the right to the extent that it makes many in the left and center think they are crazy.  The president has chosen to cater to the right thinking it will make him more popular with the center and that he can't possibly lose the left.  So is he right?  If he's right, then none of this matters, does it?  And if he's wrong, well, then the fault is with his strategy, not with us and our opinions.  Our dismay is a natural outcome of his strategy.

                  •  Sorry that you're upset... (1+ / 0-)
                    Recommended by:
                    StellaRay

                    Your points, one at a time:

                    First, "release me"? What does that even mean?

                    I've already accepted that the democrats' greatest liability is from within---like throughout history, it always is.

                    Okay, I tend to agree with this, but probably for different reasons. Democrats are their own worst enemies because they have no idea how to drive a narrative, no idea how to use current history in explaining the insanity of the far right, and frankly, they're weak. Yes, weak. We tend to want to compromise with the bully taking our lunch money when, in fact, we need to occasionally haul off and hit the bully square in the face (as I blogged recently, using the "McFly" analogy).

                    OK.  OK.  OK.  Do you understand that I don't want to fight the likes of you anymore?  And it isn't because I'm an Obamanot, or anything else you've got to sling at me.

                    LOL, dude, drink some decaf, okay? I don't want to fight with you, either, but perhaps have a civil conversation. It's okay for there to be difference--as it turns out, it's something that the democrats excel at, and the right doesn't. Also, I didn't sling anything at you--including whether or not your an "Obamanot" (and wouldn't it be "Obamanaut" anyway?)

                    It's because our PRIORITIES differ.  That is the sum total of the sux/rox battle here.  Period.

                    Um, no, on priorities for policy: I'm guessing you believe in healthcare for all, social security, sane gun control' laws, green energy programs, etc.? I do too.

                    Um, yes, on the discourse that needs to be had to move Obama back to the left where I (and a lot of others) think he needs to move. I believe that Obama has only reached out his hand for compromise to the right--but he hasn't reached out his hand to the left at all. I don't think that's right. We should have a say in his policy priorities, not just the republican party. I think a lot of people thought he was going to do things that republicans would never do, including shutting down the nuclear power plant that's six miles from my house and that definitely needs to close, rather than having his political appointees rubber stamp its relicensing.

                    And btw, don't tell me about your "extensive research" without one link to back your bragging up.

                    First, I'm not bragging. Second, the research I do is all linked and cross-referenced in all of my posts (including this reply) and my blog here and at http://groobiecat.blogspot.com. You may not agree with my sources, but I didn't actually see any of yours or links. I haven't checked out your posts here; maybe you've included links to sources there. I'll take a look.

                    Bottom line, I'm sick to puke of fighting the likes of you harder than I would have to fight on ANY republican site.  If you really believe that Obama is your enemy, if you INSIST on holding him to a higher ground than you do the GOP, then again, have at it.

                    Sorry that you don't feel well, but I'm also sorry that you use similar, ad hominem methods of attacking your opponents that the hard right uses, to wit: "the likes" of me.  

                    I don't believe Obama is my enemy, I just don't believe I should have a de facto republican president, when I voted for a democrat. It's not only my right to be upset about it, I think there's something a little bit wrong if you're not upset by it and trying to do something about it with online or other activism (like the folks, like Naomi Klein, who were arrested protesting the pipeline deal in front of the White House) are they Obama haters too???. You have to admit that Obama has pursued / continued many policies championed by the right, but why? In some cases, like the smog regs and oil drilling off the east coast, it just makes no sense. They were, at a minimum, bargaining chips that he gave away. I dont' think that's okay, and I don't think it's the Democratic way to just ignore it. I think we should let Obama know that it's not okay; that's actually one thing that separates democrats from the tea party: we can disagree without being threatened with banishment.

                    As for insisting that he be held to "a higher ground than republicans" well, I never did that. I have railed against the right-wing machine throughout my life, and in my blog posts. But your point is fallacious reasoning: just because I'm disappointed in Obama, doesn't mean that I give the right a pass. Go to any of my posts and you'll see what I mean. In fact, I take great pride in using facts to undo the insanity of the right. In fact, I strongly defended the dems as being infinitely more reasonable at the bargaining table in my post "Throw the bums out, sure, but let's be clear about who the bums are."

                    No way you'd know about that post, of course, but you can't assume that "we" are all "anti-Obama" when many of "us" are infinitely more anti-crazy party.

                    But, at least, have the balls to label yourself as against Obama first, the GOP second.  And don't YOU DARE TELL ME, I'm trying to close down your voice, like so many ninnies here have.

                    Okay, now, this is just wrong. I never labeled myself as against Obama, that's what you did. In fact, as I recall, I stated that I hoped that he had some sort of secret weapon that none of us lesser mortals knew about. Second, please, stop shouting. I can "hear" you just fine. I feel like you're trying to shout me down, rather than address my arguments--which I've noticed a lot of angry people here don't actually do (much like the republican party).

                    I'm against some of what Obama as done, I use valid facts and sources to explain why, and frankly, I think I'm well within my rights to do so. Okay, so, he's a centrist president. I get that. That's not how he passed himself off during the campaign. And that's why I (and many others) are upset.  I think he has some explaining to do to his base. When has he reached out to us, other than through auto-emails? He'll probably reach out to me when he realizes he needs my vote. I won't ever vote for a republican, and I'll continue to work my tail off as an activist to prevent them from taking office, but that doesn't I agree with how Obama has comported himself since he took office. I don't.

                    You want to make Obama public enemy #1, then speak up for yourself.  Put it on record. NO ONE is stopping you.

                    No, again, I do not. Read any of my posts and see for yourself what "I want." But you ignore an important issue here in all your writing, to wit: It's not incumbent upon us to just accept what our elected leader does, blindly and without question. Part of the point of this system is to let him know when we think he's straying from the path. To tell him, "Hey, wait just a goddam minute. All the evidence points to the fact that the smog regs will not freakin' help the economy, they'll just hurt it--and young and old alike. So cut that shit out!!"

                    In my view, that's part of our job--part of the responsibility of a thinking, questioning electorate. To give feedback to our elected leaders--including B. Obama, using facts and history and defined ideals. And btw, it's definitely something that separates us from authoritarianism. And there's no earthly reason to fear it.

                    So, you're disappointed.  Whoas me, imagine that happening to anyone besides the glorious and entitled to better, you.

                    See above. It's not just about being disappointed and accepting whatever Obama does. It's also about exercising your rights as a citizen--which, BTW, is more important than party. I believe it's our job to help guide the president with feedback--and Keith Olbermann, Paul Krugman, Al Gore, and a whooooole lot more powerful democrats than I--including Kos himself, agree should be done. As Kos (who must be anti-Obama, right??) stated in a recent post:

                    Let's just stipulate up front that the date of President Barack Obama's latest speech is irrelevant. No one really gives a shit about whether it's on Tuesday or Thursday or next year. To be frank, Obama's ability to drive any narrative is just about zero. They have been in reactive mode for the last several years, and there's no indication that's going to change.

                    BTW, I've never attacked you personally, I just questioned your methods. Be passionate, sure, but don't attack people personally with snark for their views; it implies that you know less than you obviously do. Leave that to another group that does that really well. They're called the republican party.

                    One last thing: I agree that we shouldn't mindlessly cannibalize ourselves, which would help the republican party.  I'd like to see pressure from me and others get Obama to change some of what he does that's more in line with progressive ideals, but yes, I'll eventually support the president, even though I disagree with how he's marginalized me and a large part of his base. Because I don't think he's insane. I do think he's a disappointment, and that there's a lot of data to back me up on that. But he's not insane, and I think in general he's a decent man.

                    PS. The phrase is "woe is me," not "whoas me."

                    Questioning the direction of our country, the wisdom of our leaders, and ways to improve both, are not only our right, but our duty, as U.S. citizens.

                    by groobiecat on Thu Sep 08, 2011 at 11:03:53 AM PDT

                    [ Parent ]

                    •  Thank you for taking the time (0+ / 0-)

                      to put your thoughts down.  You put a lot of effort into your post here, and I want you to know, I appreciate that.  I also want to apologize for my sharp tone last night.  Hell of a bad day, frustrations mount, should probably stay off line on days like that.  

                      I have read your entire post a couple of times.  There's places where we agree, and places where we don't. When it comes to policies, we mostly agree, as do most on this site.  Where we fall out on is the process of fighting for what we want, which is also what the pie fights on this site are about.

                      I have a problem with the amount of hyperbole here.  An example for me would be Kos saying "Obama's ability to drive any narrative is just about zero."  This is a ridiculous statement to me when talking about a man who managed to fight his way up to being the first black president of the United States.

                      I also, like Rachel Maddow BTW, don't think Obama got "rolled" on the debt ceiling deal as your original comment to which I responded to stated as fact.  I find that NO ONE believes John Boehner's "I got 98% of what I wanted" more than progressives here. Many a right wing republican thinks Boehner got rolled. And I DON'T agree with your assessment that the major problem in the debt ceiling debacle was Obama.

                      Just a couple of examples to highlight that while we fight for the same things, we see the process differently.  Yeah, I've got my gripes with Obama, but why bother voicing them here---whine, rinse and repeat ad nauseum---when I can write the president and my reps about my gripes, and I do, couple of times a week.  I am also an active member of a couple of progressive groups who are about ACTING, not whining.

                      And yes, I see the endless sux/rox wars here as about as useless as they can be, and one of my goals is to not get sucked into them, but it's tough, as almost everything here ends up there.  

                      No one changes their mind till they decide to for themselves and their own reasons.  Furthermore, I've transitioned into campaign mode.  I'm a party first gal, and not one to get over exercised with the cult of leadership.  That doesn't make me right, it just makes me who I am.  

                      I'm all about getting Barack Obama re-elected, as well as his down ticket.  And no apologies for it.  So, to be bogged down with the same old same old sux/rox shit here just gets in my way.  But that doesn't mean I don't have critiques of the president---working on a letter to the White House right now regarding tonight's speech.  Where I cheered, where I jeered.

                      I can do both.  Work to get him re-elected, and find a way to have my voice be heard about what I don't like.  That's what I mean about the "process."  

                      We all choose that path individually, and you are certainly entitled to your path and your priorities.  But for me, I'm eager to cut to the chase and help defeat the GOP wherever I can. That's my number one priority.

                      I wish us both luck in helping our country find it's way out of this mess.    

                      •  Well, that was refreshing. Thank you... (0+ / 0-)

                        for that. Well constructed and appreciated sentiment. And I'll return the favor: If I've offended you, apologies. To paraphrase the thing that a very zen friend of mine told me recently: "I can appreciate your clever words, but perhaps you should open your hand at the end of your words, and let the 'other side' know that you accept them and love them. Because at the end of it all, we're the same."  Great ideas. Great sentiment. And I need to follow it more often than I do.

                        Thanks again for your thoughtful response. I wish you luck in your approach to moving the needle to the left...

                        [groobiecat]

                        Questioning the direction of our country, the wisdom of our leaders, and ways to improve both, are not only our right, but our duty, as U.S. citizens.

                        by groobiecat on Fri Sep 09, 2011 at 09:44:13 PM PDT

                        [ Parent ]

        •  a frickin men (0+ / 0-)

          it makes me sick.  bill clinton wouldn't have done this shit.  and he's supposedly a triangulating centrist!!!

          Stop Prohibition, Start Harm Reduction

          by gnostradamus on Wed Sep 07, 2011 at 06:06:28 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  Are you freaking kidding me? (15+ / 0-)

            "Bill clinton wouldn't have done this shit."  

            Oh. My. God.  You are another one of those democrats who are fair weather friends.  You cheer Clinton because you did not suffer under Clinton.  Few people did.  In fact, the 90's were second only to the roaring 20's.  Are you really that kind of economic lady of the night?

            Before you answer let me remind you of a couple of things, and I EXPECT you to answer to them.  

            #1. NAFTA.  Signed with a big bubba Clinton grin and probably more responsible for the exportation of American jobs than anything else.  TELL ME WHY this isn't true.

            #2. The Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act, also signed with a big shit eating grin by bubba, and which UNDID the Glass Stegall Act, enacted by those who understood the errors that allowed for the Great Depression.

            #3.  Welfare.  Maybe you should read up on how Clinton believed "we ended welfare, together."

            http://www.nytimes.com/...

            Gosh darn it gnostradamus, protect your back flank with at least the ILLUSION that you know what you're talking about.

            Rachel Maddow said a long time ago that Bill Clinton was the best republican president we've ever had.  She HAS NOT said this about Obama.

            What REALLY BUGS ME, sir or ma'am, is your IGNORANCE of what went on under Clinton.  You were fat and happy in a good economy, and you, like many other democrats, diefy Clinton to this day---to thank him for your comfort in those years, without thought as to how his policies haunt us to this day.

            Meanwhile, after 8 years of GWB, you're STILL WILLING to award Obama the number one place as your enemy.  Well, you just have at it.  I'm sick to puke of your lack of perspective.

            And, I'm pretty sure, you're sick to puke of the likes of me.
            So fucking be it.  You want to enter this presidential season divided?  Bring it on.  

            Because there's no F'ing way I'm going to place my hope and belief in the likes of you who don't even understand how much more to the right Clinton was to what Obama could ever get away with, in this place and time.

            But Clinton got away with it all, because it turns out, democrats and progressives like you aren't any different from the right wing you claim to hate. As long as your belly is full and your job isn't threatened, you're all about it.

            •  I say Obama (0+ / 0-)

              is definitely trying to unseat Clinton as the best Republican President we've ever had.

              I certainly don't deify Clinton. Far from it. Clinton caved to the GOP almost as much as Obama has. The only thing he didn't do was try to hand Social Security and Medicare to the Republicans on a silver platter. Obama is.

              When the power of love overcomes the love of power the world will know peace. -Jimi Hendrix -6.0 -5.33

              by Cali Techie on Thu Sep 08, 2011 at 04:00:20 AM PDT

              [ Parent ]

      •  I agree (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        fhcec

        with your analysis of Obama's motivations and the reason he has made the choices he has. I haven't liked it one bit, but I do think it's about this core value and goal he came to Washington with and not about weakness.  The problem, at this point, is it will be hard not to see whatever he does as campaigning and have any faith that it will continue after the election, should he be re-elected.

        •  If re-elected, Obama will go Left (9+ / 0-)

          Maybe not as farrrr Left as some would like though.

          GOP 2012 campaign ad - "Tax the working poor!"

          by MartyM on Wed Sep 07, 2011 at 04:44:29 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  I seriously doubt that (0+ / 0-)

            My theory is he doesn't really care if he gets re-elected or not given his history. He and his children are set for life as long as he isn't impeached and removed from office.

            I really do think he's just trying to survive so he can make the even bigger bucks being a former president.

            When the power of love overcomes the love of power the world will know peace. -Jimi Hendrix -6.0 -5.33

            by Cali Techie on Thu Sep 08, 2011 at 04:02:47 AM PDT

            [ Parent ]

          •  No he won't he can't (0+ / 0-)

            The country will literally be paralyzed if he did that. Because whether we here like it or not or want to admit it or not it is highly likely the Republicans will control both houses in Congress. If Obama goes left, he'll simply veto everything they pass.

            And anyone he nominates will be declined, and the country will literally lose at least 2 if not 4 years.

            I don't think he'd do that.

            "I am a socialist, and we regard liberals as dangerous compromisers."~ Christopher Hitchens

            by Moon Mop on Thu Sep 08, 2011 at 08:45:08 AM PDT

            [ Parent ]

        •  a big part of your problem, imo (17+ / 0-)

          is the problem of many here who subscribe to the cult of leadership.  As surely as do those who I am writing as I watch this, in the republican debates, place their religion in Regan. As surely as those who are FORCED, to call their leader, "the dear one."  I deeply resent those on this site who refer to those of us who support this democratic president when push comes to shove, as being the same.  What foolishness.  What an awful showing from progressives who ought to know the difference between this country and North Korea.

          I place my political religion in the democratic party.  Presidents come and go, some on both sides better than others.  I personally think in his second term, Obama will be one of the greatest.  We'll only know that if we do for Obama what democrats did for FDR, despite an even worse economy than we know now---keep him in office.  But even if Obama's not one of the greatest, I think he'll be a whole lot better than what the GOP has to offer, as I think this country would have been far better off if democrats had stood up for Jimmy Carter.  Imagine a world without a President Regan.  OMG, are you watching the republican debate?

          So finally, no matter what your lack of faith is in a second term of Obama, what's the state of your faith in Romney or Perry to get you closer to your goals?

          I know. I know.  Many here will tell you it's wrong to make your best choice out of two imperfects.  Many here will tell you it's better to be ideologically pure and take the blow of another republican administration.  

          That's for you to decide, as it is for all of us.

          •  Not to worry (2+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            Cali Techie, Geekesque

            I plan to vote for him.  People on this site tend to assume that if you're critical of or unhappy with Obama, that means you aren't going to vote for him. I'm not stupid.  It's why I posted my fears that my friend, who is lower information than I am, has decided not to vote for Obama.  Though we live in a very blue state,so it's probably not a big deal if she doesn't.  I think those of us on this blog who are strong critics of Obama may be MORE likely to vote for him in the end, than the average low information voter who reaches a breaking point over things like the recent environment decision, or the pipeline decision, or freezing Federal wages while extending tax cuts for the wealthy (that one directly affected me).  We know, in a way others don't, what the alternative is.  There are times when I fantasize about primarying him but I know this isn't the time for that.  I'll vote for him.  I just don't really believe he's going to move to the left if re-elected. I think he'll campaign that way and then go on doing what he does. And I think our Dems in congress and the Senate will mostly do the same.  I just don't have much faith in any of them or that things are going to get better before they get a whole lot worse.  and I plan to put any of my resources, financial or time, into people who act like true progressive Dems. Obama will get my vote but not my money.  That's all.

          •  You are on a roll. (1+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            SwedishJewfish
            ... this country would have been far better off if democrats had stood up for Jimmy Carter.  Imagine a world without a President Regan.

            Jimmy Cater told America the truth about our energy situation instead of saying, "The American way of life is not negotiable." American didn't want to hear it and elected Reagan to ditch CAFE standards and blow smoke up our ass with, "It morning in America!"

            Reaganomics: The belief that: 1) Unregulated capitalism can produce unlimited goods for unlimited people on a planet with finite resources; 2) We can increase revenue by decreasing revenue.

            by FrY10cK on Thu Sep 08, 2011 at 06:08:44 AM PDT

            [ Parent ]

      •  Oh I hope. (5+ / 0-)
        Obama is about to put his dukes up, to leave his own ego's battle "to change Washington," behind, and start going for the slam dunk.

        From your keyboard to reality and beyond, StellaRay!  :)

        I am going to be so nervous while listening to his speech tomorrow night.  ==:O

        Sometimes it's just enough to listen and learn.

        by KayCeSF on Wed Sep 07, 2011 at 08:39:33 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

      •  Took the words right out of my mouth. (11+ / 0-)
        My biggest concern with Obama isn't what others' concerns are here.  I don't think for a minute he's weak or a caver.  I think he's damn tough and then some.  

        It's his internal struggle to change his own goals, that's the battle---to understand that he WILL have to give up the idea that he can always be just as much a president to those that didn't vote for him---circa his famous election night quote.  Not here, not anymore, not in this place and this time. (my bold)

        I agree 100% and I believe every decision he has made that I think is wrong (and there are more than a few) was made based on his belief that one could be a president for 'red America and blue America.' But, as you wrote, not here, not anymore.

        I hope you are correct about the outcome of his struggle.

        In this world of sin and sorrow there is always something to be thankful for; as for me, I rejoice that I am not a Republican. ~ Mencken

        by royce on Wed Sep 07, 2011 at 08:39:36 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

      •  You hit the nail square on the head... (5+ / 0-)

        with this part.

        It's his internal struggle to change his own goals, that's the battle---to understand that he WILL have to give up the idea that he can always be just as much a president to those that didn't vote for him---circa his famous election night quote.  Not here, not anymore, not in this place and this time.

        George Bush discovered this right from the start. (actually, it was Karl Rove who figured it out for him) That's why he was so successful in passing his agenda, as unconstitutional and detrimental to the country as it was. He simply didn't give a rat's ass what the Democrats wanted.

        Every time they got in his way he pulled imaginary political capital outta his butt, snorted, stamped his feet and held his breath, and then blew 'em over with it.

        Obama should learn a valuable short-term history lesson from Shrub. (just this one lesson, please)

      •  This resonates with me. (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        SwedishJewfish

        I hope that is because it's true, not because it reads like a novel. A good one. I'd pay to see the movie.

        Reaganomics: The belief that: 1) Unregulated capitalism can produce unlimited goods for unlimited people on a planet with finite resources; 2) We can increase revenue by decreasing revenue.

        by FrY10cK on Thu Sep 08, 2011 at 05:48:09 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

    •  eh is my response as well (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Geekesque

      but i recommended this diary because it makes a compelling point.  my eyebrows also raised a bit after hearing the no response on jobs speech story and repubs' little game with wanting a meeting before the speech.  

      canter flip-flopping on demanding cuts to pay for disaster aid is news to me.... pretty amazing turn of events considering their terrorizing techniques with debt ceiling.

      now why eh... because obama and democrats have shown such weakness to repub tactics.  i have no confidence in them at this point.  maybe it's rope a dope but it's almost too late to work at this point... how do you rope a dope out of that obama worrying about a coup story... if he upheld the rule of law in relation to war crimes.  even die hard obama supporters need to admit that the coup story is absolutely devastating if true.

      I don't believe the changing washington bit at all.  sounds like more washington spin to me.

      Stop Prohibition, Start Harm Reduction

      by gnostradamus on Wed Sep 07, 2011 at 06:02:18 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  It might also be true that Obama will not be (3+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      SoCalSal, AreDeutz, JohnB47

      beaten at all.  Can't wait to see the sadface on Marc Ambinder & his ilk when that happens!

    •  Focusing on the reasonable... (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      JohnB47, Geekesque
      But it might also be true that Obama will be beaten because he allowed himself to be consumed by an impossible goal – changing Washington – instead of focusing on a reasonable one....

      Another way of saying the same thing is that Obama hasn't been pragmatic enough.

      Who woulda thunk it!

      Well, I tell you, when the only thing you have left going for you is that you're a pragmatist, and then they take THAT away from you... Well, that's just pitiful!

    •  if obama loses... (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Geekesque

      it will because that he failed to produce anything of note for the american people. instead he's acted like a geshia serving tea to the republicans. i don't know what's worse watching the idiots that debated last night being taken seriously, or obama's inability to act like a democratic president pursuing a democratic agenda.
      tung sol

      There is a fine line between genius and insanity. I have erased this line.--Oscar Levant

      by tung sol on Thu Sep 08, 2011 at 05:29:18 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  Knight to (5+ / 0-)

    d-4-C-vii-Charlie-γ-IV-五-010-Δ-ℵ

    Check.

    (It's awfully hard to transcribe a board coordinate in 11-dimensional chess...)

  •  there will be NO surprises. (3+ / 0-)

    /If a man does not keep pace with his companions, perhaps it is because he hears a different drummer/. Thoreau

    by hron on Wed Sep 07, 2011 at 02:36:49 PM PDT

  •  Okay, what is Cantor's growth formula? (8+ / 0-)

    Well, it's more tax cuts for super rich; and yes, he's looking for a deal with Obama to restructure taxes across the board. Also, the deal will include "broadening the tax base," which means the poor and middle class will pay higher taxes.

    Friends, we're back to the Cat Food Commission's recommendations, calling for a lowering of the maximum tax rate to below 25%.

  •  Thank you for a positive diary (43+ / 0-)

    Obama is tough.  He showed it by dissing Ryan's budget right to his face and by making a laughing stock out of Trump (also to his face).  We won't even talk about Somalia pirates and Osama Bin Laden.  He is plenty tough enough.  It's time to lay the hammer down on the Republicans.  

     I hope that he listens to the right people and not to Daley. Daley is too much in love with big business.

    •  No doubt he can be tough. (8+ / 0-)

      He needs to chose to be tough with Rs and to stop doing things like gutting the ozone regs.

      Some of this seems good and some, not here, seems more of the same.   We will see.

      I hope he fights Rs about jobs.  If he suggests raising the medicare age, as some reports have suggested, he will be being tough with the elderly and that is wrong.  

      The American people must wise up and rise up!

      by TomP on Wed Sep 07, 2011 at 03:30:59 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  I agree, Kitty, (15+ / 0-)

      whether you agree with him or not, many here greatly underestimate the toughness of this president.  I chortle every time I hear a pundit or a commenter here talk about how Obama is weak.  How ridiculous to think such a thing about the first black man to lasso the presidency.  Nothing BUT TOUGH gets you there, man.

    •  He certainly has nerve. To me this was (4+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Kitty, PaDemTerry, fhcec, Matt Z

      exemplified by his performance at the White House Correspondents' Dinner, exactly when he was risking his Presidency and the safety of the Seals Team in Pakistan in the mission to take out bin Laden.  He eviscerated Trump without breaking a sweat, while this was going on.  Compare that to codpiece Bush reading My Pet Goat with blank terror in his eyes.

      I don't think it's fear of the GOP, I think it's a misguided belief that he can bring them along.  His failing may be a messianic streak, thinking he above all others can "change the tone" in Washington.  But that's a fool's errand, and it's time to pull up stumps and move on to jobs.

      Sometimes I wonder whether the world is being run by smart people who are putting us on or by imbeciles who really mean it. --Mark Twain

      by SottoVoce on Wed Sep 07, 2011 at 05:46:33 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  I know Obama has it in him. (30+ / 0-)

    And since it's campaign time again...

    “One approach Obama hasn’t tried, but is turning toward, is ruthlessness. If Congress fails to pass the jobs bill, you might see Obama take a single job-creating idea, announce it somewhere outside of Washington, and give Congress three weeks to consider it. Then do it again. And again. and again.”

    We need to see more of this. We need to see more contrast. People need to know who exactly is obstructing progress and economic recovery.

  •  You're an optimist (6+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    willie2011, Fury, TomP, Sylv, highacidity, Matt Z

    I hope you are right... but we're talking about tea party fanaticals.  They don't back down for anything.

  •  It is September 7................ (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Susan from 29

    and we got to a high of 63 here in Louisville today; the long, hot summer is pretty much over. However I am betting the crazy will go on for months and months if not years.

    The mass of men lead lives of quiet desperation--HDT

    by cazcee on Wed Sep 07, 2011 at 03:32:28 PM PDT

  •  When talking about this please say ONLY $300B. (0+ / 0-)

    It is hardly stimulative, and I can't see how it will do anything to actually create a job. From what I keep reading, the idea is simply to play with taxes to bribe businesses to hire. But it won't work, businesses respond to business issues, like demand for their products and services, if there is demand they'll hire folks. Taxes may induce them to hire a little earlier, but it won't get anyone to hire absent a business reason to do so.

    A business reason maybe the need to hire workers to make concrete for road projects, or to hire ethernet installers to install high-speed internet. The government needs to CREATE DEMAND, and do it NOW, with the FREE MONEY that the world wants to loan to us.

    •  I say again, it's not $300B, more like $50-$100B (0+ / 0-)

      Here's the thing, that $300B is compromised of cost mostly in extending tax beaks, not in brand new spending.

      Brand new spending equates to somewhere between $50B and $100B, of which a portion of that is apparently matching programs "PLUS" which an elongated match program.  

      It's still too easy for people to bail on it, and as new spending goes there isn't a ton.

      The commitment to lower withholding tax for a while is good.. if you're already getting a paycheck.   But it's not much of a stimulus to those who aren't... that is, it won't immediately influence new spending and job creation as a result.

      The commitment to infrastructure expenditures is small.. relatively very small.    It's a work program that doesn't end up putting a lot of people "to work".

      Extending Republican Tax breaks that they want, and then having them demand cuts elsewhere to KEEP THEIR BABY to Compromise with a point you have completely STOLEN FROM THEM is snake eat tail kind of moment.

      Gandhi's Seven Sins: Wealth without work; Pleasure without conscience; Knowledge without character; Commerce without morality; Science without humility; Worship without sacrifice; Politics without principle

      by Chris Reeves on Wed Sep 07, 2011 at 03:40:16 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  I think what has really changed (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Larsstephens, Matt Z

    is that the sleeping giant called the American People have finally awoken the hell up.  

    Polling shows that everyone is to blame -- the President, the Congressional leadership, the House, the Tea Baggers -- everybody.

    Couple that with a wicked hurricane that has added pain to the misery and no one is going to screw around with holding help up for some political gain.  There is no political gain with that anymore, as I'm sure Cantor found out when his ass went home to Wisconsin.  

    If he wants to continue to be a Congressional leader, he too has to get himself re-elected first.

    "The bottom line is, we've got to wake up. We can't allow our disappointment in Obama to lull us into allowing a truly dangerous strain of conservative philosophy to gain any more traction than it already has." --ObamOcala 4/5/11

    by smoothnmellow on Wed Sep 07, 2011 at 03:51:37 PM PDT

  •  It would seem that they are trying to regain a (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    SoCalSal

    reasonable reputation prior to the 2012 elections.  If they had continued on their current course, it would have been too easy for the Dems to blame the state of the economy on them.  So the rhetoric may change, but until we see actual legislation, I will remain skeptical that this is anything but an attempt to muddy the waters.

    •  well, I'm worried that they're switching (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Matt Z

      to social issues now.

      No birth control, because women should not be having sex!

      Absurd on its face.

      "There's nothing serious about a plan that claims to reduce the deficit by spending a trillion dollars on tax cuts for millionaires and billionaires." - President Obama

      by fhcec on Thu Sep 08, 2011 at 12:13:27 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  In some ways, I believe that Obama (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    NyteByrd1954

    is part of the problem.

    He made it clear from the very beginning that he believes that compromise is the way to get things done, but instead of negotiating, he went to the table willing to concede every thing he wanted.  As Boner said about the debt ceiling debacle, we got 99% of what we wanted.


    The religious fanatics didn't buy the republican party because it was virtuous, they bought it because it was for sale

    by nupstateny on Wed Sep 07, 2011 at 04:00:31 PM PDT

    •  do you believe what Boehner says? (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      SoCalSal

      did you look at the agreement? B was bluffing and trying to pacify his minions, as well as trying to make something of nothin' in front of Cantor.

      "There's nothing serious about a plan that claims to reduce the deficit by spending a trillion dollars on tax cuts for millionaires and billionaires." - President Obama

      by fhcec on Thu Sep 08, 2011 at 12:14:50 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  Re disaster relief... (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Matt Z

    ...Cantor is getting serious pushback from Congressional Republikans, particularly freshmen Republikans, about cuts associated with disaster relief - "Now's definitely not the time," they've told him.

    I think, too, the behind the scenes, there's a lot pf pushing back against the Tea Party, with their emphasis on all cuts, all the time, going on, particularly since Congressional Republikans are held in such low esteem by voters right now.  Why is the pushback not that public?  The Republikans are just good at hiding that kind of thing.

    We reach for the stars with shaking hands in bare-knuckle times.

    by TheOrchid on Wed Sep 07, 2011 at 04:03:57 PM PDT

  •  Proves the point (0+ / 0-)

    For whatever reason the people who call the shots have shifted public opinion somewhat against the "Tea Party", the Koch brothers puppets.

  •  Its an improvement (0+ / 0-)

    but it has to be sustained with more progressive proposals to get the economy going again. We know what the president is up against but Obama has to show that he has our back and more voters will have his.

  •  it's getting hot out there n/t (0+ / 0-)

    GOP in Washington and Columbus are not only making war on organized labor but the middle class itself. The battles labor won not only raised the standards for labor but for everyone. - V.P. Joe Biden

    by anyname on Wed Sep 07, 2011 at 05:36:52 PM PDT

  •  Well, overstated headling, but I like (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Larsstephens, Matt Z

    some relatively decent news.

    How The Doctor does redistricting: 'I'm going to need a SWAT team ready to mobilize, street-level maps covering all of Florida, a pot of coffee, twelve jammie dodgers and a fez.'

    by KingofSpades on Wed Sep 07, 2011 at 06:01:40 PM PDT

  •  Not to be a wet blanket... but... (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Dave the Rave, pat bunny

    ... I've seen this over and over again... this is Rethuglican rope-a-dope...

    Tomorrow will be "can't you take a joke... or.. just kidding!" from Cantor...

    The Overton Window has shifted so far to the right that they are beginning to worry everyone will catch on

    Dudehisattva...

    "Generosity, Ethics, Patience, Effort, Concentration, and Wisdom"

    by Dood Abides on Wed Sep 07, 2011 at 06:40:25 PM PDT

  •  great diary (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    fhcec
  •  Obama is either inept (0+ / 0-)

    or not.

    I'm sorry, but your reality simply doesn't fit my economic model.

    by Reframing the Debate on Wed Sep 07, 2011 at 07:24:30 PM PDT

  •  Other than Cantor going back on disaster aid, (0+ / 0-)

    there isn't much there there.

  •  No offense but (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    GeeBee, Matt Z

    I think you are delusional.

  •  Focus on jobs? (0+ / 0-)

    With tax cuts that might make encourage more hiring if businesses had any reason to actually make new hires? If they don't do anything to stimulate demand, the tax cuts will be useless but, at least, they won't actually cost anything if there are no new hires.

    Coming Soon -- to an Internet connection near you: Armisticeproject.org

    by FischFry on Wed Sep 07, 2011 at 07:44:39 PM PDT

  •  Perhaps (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    SoCalSal

    Perhaps the change of heart by Cantor and some Blue Dogs have nothing to do with Obama, but everything to do with their own constituents?  

    At this point, I don't think Obama strikes fear in the hearts of either the tea party, the Blue Dogs or the Republicans.  

    I also thank the one who rearranged deck chairs on the Titanic so those on board ship could get a better view of the iceberg.

    by NyteByrd1954 on Wed Sep 07, 2011 at 07:48:44 PM PDT

  •  Tea Party GOP Freshmen..... (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    fhcec, SoCalSal, Matt Z

    in hurricane & flood zones are challenging Cantor.  Rick Perry, the emerging leader of the Republican candidates, is begging for federal intervention in Texas.  Fires is licking at his heels after he cut $34 MILLION from the Forest Service budget & dumped 75% of his volunteer fire fighters.

    Republican Reps are not willing to be voted out in 2012 by suffering constituents just to go along w/ Cantor.  Cantor was told to shut up.  He shut up.

    In 8 months, Republicans haven't produced a single job.  Finally.....people have noticed.  Boehner's covering his flank now.....that's the only reason they'll cooperate in any way w/ Obama's jobs plan.  That plus the fact that congressional approval rating is l4% w/ 84% of the country disapproving of their Reps & Senators.  

  •  I agree with you 100% as the GOP/TP Cannot (0+ / 0-)

    Ignore job creation and stimulus for the next 1 year and 3 months without sinking themselves down to 0% approval rating, from their present 17% approval rating.

    And you are correct, their language is changing.

    And I also note that Obama has made it clear he has now given them a very, very long rope with respect to fulfilling their constitutional duties in the house, and they have now hung themselves as far as he is concerned.

    They know full well they have backed themselves into a corner and are fully aware that their rhetoric and stance will not go anywhere in this national election cycle.

    I think there is panic in their eyes, and it is showing in their mouths and conduct.  Not to mention that some of their "safe" candidates like Christie are also turning on them.

  •  No response on jobs speech -- (0+ / 0-)

    they really can't stand up there and say: "we are against creating jobs." And the other things they have to say, like let's lay off teachers and federal workers and kill construction projects in order to restart the economy are way too obviously completely insane.

    We have only just begun and none too soon.

    by global citizen on Thu Sep 08, 2011 at 05:38:12 AM PDT

  •  There is always hope I guess (0+ / 0-)
maxomai, Kitty, Sylv, KeithH, tmo, PLS, fcvaguy, surfbird007, Emerson, dengre, Eman, Fabienne, eeff, devtob, Delilah, missLotus, understandinglife, sja, whenwego, djMikulec, Loquatrix, DaleA, rabel, ivote2004, MazeDancer, itskevin, Janeo, jdmorg, sockpuppet, Subversive, Lawrence, kevin22262, Dood Abides, Sophie Amrain, Matt Esler, djtyg, KayCeSF, tomjones, sebastianguy99, Gowrie Gal, A Citizen, wmc418, jiffypop, SherwoodB, bagman, dewtx, TigerMom, teresab, Beetwasher, Pam from Calif, Fury, Ice Blue, Little Lulu, jane123, Southside, noemie maxwell, minidriver, Savvy813, sodalis, coolbreeze, fhcec, golfervet, atdnext, MeMeMeMeMe, SciFiGuy, Russgirl, raptavio, mskitty, Wary, fou, Conceptual Guerilla, TalkieToaster, erratic, bubbanomics, Libby Shaw, real world chick, myrealname, middleagedhousewife, markthshark, OHdog, Thinking Fella, The Knute, hooper, Russ Jarmusch, offgrid, Matt Z, rantsposition, ca democrat, second gen, millwood, Rumarhazzit, crystalboy, spearfish, oxon, TomP, Empower Ink, cville townie, chicago minx, ScottyUrb, NewDealer, bythesea, Laughing Vergil, jamess, royce, hwmnbn, MrJayTee, Jeff Y, dmhlt 66, Robinswing, artmartin, christine20, DontTaseMeBro, ceebee7, bobatkinson, cantelow, Nebraskablue, indres, virginwoolf, followyourbliss, elziax, MKSinSA, lastman, COwoman, kevinpdx, futureliveshere, joe from Lowell, nocynicism, Larsstephens, hablo, smileycreek, tulvania, RhymesWithUrple, Vacationland, Susan Grigsby, amk for obama, kjoftherock, progreen, BenderRodriguez, Polly Syllabic, My Left Behind, anonevent, DiegoUK, nirbama, ericlewis0, science nerd, soaglow, Actbriniel, JanG, weathertom, Mike08, kerflooey, sostos, La Gitane, Eclectablog, Zutroy, California06, AgavePup, Muskegon Critic, dle2GA, BarackStarObama, smoothnmellow, KVoimakas, CherryTheTart, MRA NY, Reinvented Daddy, greenkrete, sound of progress, Dbug, SoCalSal, KingofSpades, Mentatmark, DEMonrat ankle biter, Mathazar, AnnetteK, jacey, RhodaA, isabelle hayes, Citizenpower, AnnieR, AreDeutz, rukidingme, Trotskyrepublican, AspenFern, reginahny, MartyM, doroma, qannabbos, arpear, avsp, arizonablue, mumtaznepal, NeuronFlash, Quasimodal, blueoldlady, Geriw

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site