Did I mention how idiotic it is for Democrats to be negotiating against themselves regarding the porntax stimulus? Josh Marshall thinks so too (italics mine):
It would be far better on many counts to bring in substantial Republican support for this bill. And I don't just mean that in the BS sense in which President Bush usually meant it, which was to say essentially, 'Of course we'd like you to vote for exactly what we want. More the merrier. But if you don't want to vote for our ideal bill, tough luck.' No, I think there's a real logic in not going the 51 votes model President Bush followed. But Obama seems to be telegraphing that to a significant degree the fundamental structure of the legislation is being built around accommodating the concerns of Republicans -- members of a political party that are about as unpopular and weak as you can get at the moment. And that sounds a lot like he's negotiating with himself, something that will embolden opposition and invite Republicans to up the ante even further.
At the very least, make them give away something. The most hapless political party in recorded history.
- Log in to post comments
I'm not saying that it's entirely convincing, but the contrary argument is that Obama has succeeded in setting favorable terms of the debate (i.e., "is it enough" rather than "is it too much"), while delivering on his campaign promise to truly "be a uniter". At the very least, it will be good to have some Republican buy-in, so that if the economy continues to tank because of the lingering effects of the Bush disaster they can't turn it all around and blame the Dems. That is, things may be so effed that no stimulus is "enough". The first shot should be bipartisan, and if that doesn't work then the Dems will still have grounds for bolder "New Deal" style steps. Again, I'm not entirely convinced, but at the very least it's not as obviously stupid as you suggest. And, it must be noted that Obama has proven pretty darn savvy in taking down the Clintons and the GOP so I'm willing to give him some benefit of the doubt on strategery.
I'm not saying that it's entirely convincing, but the contrary argument is that Obama has succeeded in setting favorable terms of the debate (i.e., "is it enough" rather than "is it too much"), while delivering on his campaign promise to truly "be a uniter". At the very least, it will be good to have some Republican buy-in, so that if the economy continues to tank because of the lingering effects of the Bush disaster they can't turn it all around and blame the Dems. That is, things may be so effed that no stimulus is "enough". The first shot should be bipartisan, and if that doesn't work then the Dems will still have grounds for bolder "New Deal" style steps. Again, I'm not entirely convinced, but at the very least it's not as obviously stupid as you suggest. And, it must be noted that Obama has proven pretty darn savvy in taking down the Clintons and the GOP so I'm willing to give him some benefit of the doubt on strategery.