Would DADT and Start have passed if Obama didn't cave on the Tax deal with Republicans?

I say no.

Seems to me that tax compromise appeased the rich and powerful conservatives (momentarily), that combined with the public "shame" that was being placed on the Republicans over the 911 Responder's and Start bills. Add that the Republicans didn't want to spend Christmas and New Years in Washington and we ended up being able to push legislation like DADT etc through.

In my opinion Obama does get credit for starting that ball rolling (taxes), but what he gave away for that is not acceptable. The ends do not justify the means.

We can pass a lot of legislation by giving away the public interest strategically to the Rich, and make a "Darwinian Paradise", which is the direction we are going.

And *exactly* the kind of world the Rich want!

What a win for the elite if they get this world of supracapitalism. The rich are not against having clean air and water, there are gay in the households of the super elite who want to be free from discrimination as well, there are extremely rich who like having a decent environment to live in (but often don't mind trashing the places they do not live). But that model sucks for most of us.

is the sign of a "great mind".

I say no.

I'm gonna have to say yes. Obama is just weak:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V2xajou_lHI

that he failed on everything.

The Republicans were going to stop everything from getting to the floor. He can't sign something that isn't there.

START and DADT are long term. The tax cuts 2 years.

All it would have taken was a threat to keep Congress open (through Christmas, if necessary) and the R's would have caved on all three--START, the UI extension, and DADT.

Obama didn't extend the tax cuts because he had to. He extended them because he wanted to--same for altering the funding mechanism for SS.

-Laelth

-Laelth

I suspect Obama wants to stimulate the economy, and he wants to buy the favor of the wealthy. That's why he wanted the tax cuts--all of them. In order to implement the Catfood Commission's recommendations, Obama will need to argue that SS is a drain on federal revenues--and he can now argue that, given that the funding for SS has been tied to the federal budget.

Again, I have no idea what's in his head and heart. But I seriously question both of these moves. I hope I am wrong.

-Laelth

You are parroting Jane Hamsher. Her M.O. is setting herself on fire waving her arms around over some knucklehead theory she is peddling, is ultimately proved wrong, and then moves on to the next act in her kabuki theater.

"I have no idea what's in his head and heart." -- That's for damn sure, yet you (and she) launch attacks on this president based on the premise that you do.

Despite your efforts, you will not silence me.

-Laelth

LOL, do you honestly expect anyone to take you seriously when you talk like that?

A lack of faith in the President? Yes.

But we'll see.

-Laelth

That statements requires faith, unless you were being sarcastic.

I don't think they would have caved on those things. Their base already votes against their own interests, why would they cave?

They have unemployed people in their districts too. They want peace with Russia as well. Many of them also supported the end of DADT. Keeping them in session and threatening them to make them work through the holidays would have worked, I think, to make them do what they were already inclined to do.

If that's "faith in the Republican Party," then I stand guilty as charged.

-Laelth

get what he wanted. He allowed himself to be walked on. He's the worst I have ever seen when it comes to negotiating. Bush managed to twist a Democratic controlled congresses arm and get the legislation he wanted without compromise.

If Obama is so damn smart, why is it that Bush, the dumbest president ever, could get what he wanted and Obama can't?

Seriously, at what point have these jackals EVER held up their end of a bargain ...

As noted, this happened in great part because Reed FINALLY discovered his backbone and cracked the whip on the scumbags in the Senate having to work going into the holidays ...

And

DADT would not have been repealed
START would not have been passed
The 9-11 First Reponders Bill would not have been passed.

It was the greatest strategic retreat in history...

Im sure other "deals" were made as well.

Most likely sacrificing federal employees first which seems to be the new repub focus.

THE SENATE (remember that???? It was VOTED DOWN ON THE CLOTURE VOTE. IT WOULD NOT AND COULD NOT GET 60 FUCKING VOTES.!!!!) so he did what he is SUPPOSED to do and got the best deal he possibly could by holding the PUKES to mere short-term extensions of those tax cuts AND made THEM "cave" on a whole host of measures. So piss on your meme.

DADT and START passed because the Democrats finally stood up to them. The thought of having to spend a few extra days working was all it took. The whole GOP resistance to everything is pure bluster and falls apart at the slightest calling of their bluff.

-Laelth

Republicans pledged to block everything until the government funding and tax issue was resolved, and they did.

DADT and START would never have passed if we were still spending this week on taxes and funding.

they had filibuster but he screwed them.

The Repubs were content to run out the clock.

No one here should be laboring under the illusion that Republicans voted to repeal DADT or for the START treaty because they were honoring some deal they made with Obama in exchange for the tax bill. History demonstrates that every time the Republicans have the opportunity and the motivation to pull away the football just as we're going in for the kick, they'll do it -- prior deals or not.

The Republicans voted for START and to kill DADT because those votes ultimately served their various interests (even if those interests were as simple as not hanging around Congress during the holiday season). They would have voted the same way on those two separate bills even without Obama giving away the store on the tax bill.