July 22, 2011


Obama on the debt ceiling: "I was willing to take a lot of heat from my party." But why is he willing to take heat if this isn't an actual crisis since both parties know they must raise it--which makes attaching demands from either party unnecessary? THIS is what makes me think that Obama doesn't mind cutting services, despite his saying in the same speech that we should never take our minds off of the needy. Then why is he offering unpopular cuts to appease nuts if unnecessary? To appear reasonable and attract independent voters in 2012 since he's burned his base? Then switch parties to be an independent if you are no longer a democrat.

Now if this is an elaborate ruse to make everyone see how uncooperative the GOP has become, I'll applaud him. But only if he uses his new-found credibility as the adult in the room to stand strong on the stuff he once campaigned on--ie no cuts to social services and forcing the mega-rich and the corporations to pay their fare share. MSNBC's Lawrence O'Donell, a DC insider turned newscaster, knows the ins and outs of political negotiations. He claims that Obama has the republicans exactly where he wants them by proving them to be unwilling to agree with him on even crucial emergencies like the debt ceiling. And O'Donnell claims that Obama's brilliant negotiating has put him right where he wants to be--which is re-electable. But wait a second--why would I want to re-elect someone who would chop benefits for the needy in a recession while the rich get richer? Of course I'll vote for him over any republican, but it's folly to think that he'll use his second term to enact bold democratic policy which appeals to the people who campaigned for him. With the right so far right, he needs to stop gladly meeting them in the middle. He easily caved on passing the Bush tax cuts and wasn't strong on health care reform. He just dismissed Elizabeth Warren from the consumer protection agency she created--because the GOP hated her. The list goes on and on. He admitted that his "shellacking" in the mid-terms was due to a failure by him and democrats to spell out who they were. So rectify this mistake now and hammer it home that democrats stand for the working man and have compassion for the needy--seniors, the infirm, students, and veterans! Don't tell me that you're keeping the needy in mind while putting their sustenance on the chopping block when you won't dare touch the fat cats' profits. If his only platform is getting re-elected to serve us more of the same, who needs it?