2016 Postmortem

DonViejo

(60,536 posts) Wed Jan 16, 2013, 10:32 AM Jan 2013

Obama Gets Tough - by David Frum

Jan 16, 2013 4:45 AM EST

In his first term, the president reached out to his opponents. Now, says David Frum, he seems intent on steamrolling them.

In 2012 tens of millions of anti-Obama dollars were raised from a small group of wealthy businessmen with a strong commitment to the state of Israel: men like casino mogul Sheldon Adelson and hedge-fund director Paul Singer. They lost. Obama won. And what did the reelected president do? He chose as defense secretary the candidate these men found maximally obnoxious, former senator Chuck Hagel.

In his first term, President Obama reached out to political opponents. He praised Republicans, shaped his stimulus program to please Republicans, based his health plan on Republican ideas—even showed up at the Republican congressional retreat in January 2010.

The reelected Obama, however, has struck out on a very different path. In the two months since November, he has played much rougher than in all the four previous years.

Reelected Obama played rough on the fiscal cliff. The president’s liberal supporters complain that the president retreated from his stated goal: raise taxes on those individuals earning more than $200,000 a year. In the end, the Bush tax rates were retained for individuals earning up to $400,000. Big retreat? Not if you appreciate that the president’s real goal was to compel as many Republicans as possible to vote for some tax increase, any tax increase.

-snip-

read more:
http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2013/01/16/obama-gets-tough.html

4 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

Obama Gets Tough - by David Frum (Original Post) DonViejo Jan 2013 OP

Oh, puh-leese. Frum is usually better than that. BlueStreak Jan 2013 #1

Yes, offering up SS cuts was VERY tough! On seniors. forestpath Jan 2013 #2

The Rs obstructed from the get go. They gambled on the president NOT being re-elected and Filibuster Harry Jan 2013 #3

Pretty weak zipplewrath Jan 2013 #4

BlueStreak

(8,377 posts)

1. Oh, puh-leese. Frum is usually better than that.

Reply to DonViejo (Original post)

Wed Jan 16, 2013, 10:51 AM

Jan 2013

Enough with Hagel the anti-Semite already.

How about Hagel, the man who is committed to America's best interests instead of reflexively doing what AIPAC tells him to do every time?

forestpath

(3,102 posts)

2. Yes, offering up SS cuts was VERY tough! On seniors.

Reply to DonViejo (Original post)

Wed Jan 16, 2013, 11:33 AM

Jan 2013

Filibuster Harry

(666 posts)

3. The Rs obstructed from the get go. They gambled on the president NOT being re-elected and

Reply to DonViejo (Original post)

Wed Jan 16, 2013, 12:25 PM

Jan 2013

they lost. Now they can either keep obstructing which I believe will continue to hurt them and their party or they can swallow their pride and be part of a bigger, better picture that will put people back to work, reduce the debt, and get this country going again.

zipplewrath

(16,646 posts)

4. Pretty weak

Reply to DonViejo (Original post)

Wed Jan 16, 2013, 06:00 PM

Jan 2013

In the end, the Bush tax rates were retained for individuals earning up to $400,000. Big retreat? Not if you appreciate that the president’s real goal was to compel as many Republicans as possible to vote for some tax increase, any tax increase.

Frum had to move the goal posts in mid paragraph just to make his point. Obama had to move off of his position. He was forced to in order to get the bill passed. Did he move as far as a minority of republicans? No. But he did have to move (as did virtually all of the democrats). And a majority of the republicans got to hold their positions (while losing the vote).

The blue dogs are winning again, even from the minority. Obama needs all the democrats, even the Blue Dogs, and some of the republicans. Better than the GOP running things, but it's not exactly "getting exactly what he wants", unless you think his goals align with the Blue Dogs.

I suspect he'll "win" on the debt ceiling, only because a minority of EVERYONE in congress wants to see it actually fail. Where we go from there will potentially hang heavily upon what the conservative democrats want. They don't get it, they vote with the GOP, they do, they'll vote with the democrats. ACA, mandates, and no public option all over again. Doesn't exactly make me look forward to the next 4 years. Cause even if we take the House in two years, the Blue Dogs will still rule.

Reply to this discussion