Capitulation Is Not Compromise - 'Obama legacy will be viewed as one of sheer ineptitude'

[Ykcutnek]

The price for the "cromnibus", this strange hybrid of continuing resolution and omnibus spending bill that will keep government funded in the short-term is entirely too high. By reopening old wounds that would allow financial institutions to engage in the same practices that led to the financial collapse in 2008 and by encouraging even greater opportunities for large donors to corrupt our political system the Obama Administration has sold out the progressive agenda. No deal at all would have been a better deal than this one.

Compromise for the sake of compromise is capitulation, and if this is a precursor for the way this administration intends to operate over the remaining two years the Obama legacy will succeed in being viewed as one of sheer ineptitude. From the very beginning the Obama crowd has shown a rather dismal grasp of the art of negotiating. The stimulus was too small, health care reform was marginalized because the White House took the public option off the table, and an all of the above energy policy refuses to acknowledge the tough choices that need to be made in moving from a fossil-fuel economy to a renewable energy future.

While I have been a strong supporter of the President since the earliest primaries in 2008 and given the lack of anything approaching a viable alternative on the other side of the aisle have given him and his administration the benefit of the doubt on most issues, his ability to negotiate acceptable compromises in a very difficult political environment has always been suspect. By exposing weakness in this very important area of expertise early on he allowed the opposition to be emboldened and reckless.

There was a glimmer of hope that after the pounding Democrats experienced last month finally the administration would proverbially take off the gloves do the right thing so as to at least maximize the potential for achieving good compromises. But this is a very bad compromise and once again it makes the White House and the President appear to be a patsy for the bare knuckles bargaining that will most assuredly commence when a solidly Republican legislature takes the gavel in January.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/lance-simmens/capitulation-is-not-compr_b_6335332.html

[belzabubba333]

1. people may have been correct when they said he was too "green" for the job

[Man from Pickens]

76. depends on the definition of the job

There appears to be an unwritten yet highly binding description to the job that says the President must do what our corporate masters demand.

[yurbud]

90. Only in the sense that he was beholden too much on Wall Street

[Octafish]

2. Sad to write, but 'Capitulation' has been the Order of the Day.

"Why?" is open to question.

[Fred Sanders]

3. So the solution would be not to vote for Obama for a third term? All righty then.....

[freshwest]

66. A government shut down and default would have been wiser. Just wait, the GOP will do it in 2016.

[rhett o rick]

67. I get the feeling that you are ok with the status quo. Always with the clever(?) comments while

in 2012 17.6 million American households were food insecure. That's the status quo that you are ok with. Pres Obama is soft-selling torture and championing the TPP. And you are glib. Wall Street profits are at an all time high and sure to go higher with another Wall Street puppet if HRC becomes president. There are two sides to this class war, which side are you on?

[Fred Sanders]

78. I know for certain that you are not sure what I am sure about.....you got a problem with clever?

[rhett o rick]

80. You are right of course. I don't know what you are about because you cleverly don't

tell us. But we get hints and it looks like you are ok with the status quo.

As far as clever, I do appreciate it, when I see it.

[kentuck]

4. I bet he was bullied as a child?

Instant surrender.

[AZ Progressive]

5. Hillary's supporters have been proven right that Obama was untested, too inexperienced for the job

Or maybe it was just that Obama was a sellout all along that skillfully used smoke and mirrors to convince Americans that he was the messiah. He was certainly better than McCain but Americans don't deserve to be conned like this. Millenials already have a bad view of politics, which could further suppress voter turnout.

[Ykcutnek]

8. It's starting to feel as if his only goal is to satisfy his own ambitions.

And a month ago, I would have cursed at someone for saying that.

[SammyWinstonJack]

14. I've thought that for a while now.

It's starting to feel like his only goal was to satisfy his own ambitions.

[sendero]

56. Yes..

... he'll get to join the Clintons and the Bushes in $250K per speech appearances and all kinds of lavishly paid "consultancies" and such but only if he plays ball with the bankers.

So he plays ball. His personal fortune is more important than the bottom 20% of Americans being able to kep a roof over their head and food on the table.

[Rosa Luxemburg]

69. I don't think so

I think everyone should 'have a go' at being president and then they will see what it's like.

It's probably not as easy as you think?

I think he has done a good job except for the war thing.

[TBF]

75. "Except for the war thing" -

that "war thing" has cost us how much money? Tax dollars are limited. You spend them on bombs or butter. This is not a difficult concept and it's been around a long time.

All along this president has given pretty speeches and then completely caved when bullied. It's no way to negotiate - the only question is whether it's naivety or intentional.

[Robbins]

9. and Hillary would have been even more a sellout than obama

anyone like me who supported him in primarys over clintons on iraq were fools.

[leftofcool]

52. No, Hillary supporters were wrong then and wrong now about that.

I do think they were right in that Obama was such a good guy that he would spend too much time worrying about how to reach across the aisle. He has tried really hard to do that and should be commended for it. Hillary knew exactly what the GOP was like and would probably have told them to STFU.

[DonCoquixote]

53. have been proven right?

So when Hillary capitulates to the TPP, i suppose this means we will be able to say we were proven right that she was a sellout all along, then again, we alreayd got a taste of that with Bill.

Again I say, if she wants to put back Glass-Steagall, the fairness doctrine, roll back welfare 'reform' or any of the policies that Bill "you got a team with Hillary" Clinton put in place as blatant capitulation to the GOP, she can say so. She has the microphone. Until she does, she is just one more person I hope gets crushed in the primary.

[Marr]

86. Not at all. Obama just turned out to be as bought-and-paid-for as she is. /nt

[AZ Progressive]

6. Teddy Roosevelt had a history of being a fighter and FDR's hero was Teddy

Both of them reshaped American politics for the better but both clearly were fighters. FDR didn't accept being crippled and defied the odds of Polio victims and Teddy made a career out of regulation enforcement.


Obama didn't have a history of being a fighter like FDR and Teddy.

[SMC22307]

51. Can you imagine Obama threatening to nationalize the mines?

Or Teddy or FDR letting Jamie Dimon, et al. walk all over them?

President Obama and Congress Just Gave Your Savings Account to JPMorgan

[wilsonbooks]

7. It is not inept if you accomplish your goals.

obama is a third way corporatist. He has done what the banksters wanted him to do and he will be well rewarded for it.

[Fuddnik]

11. Thread winner.

[sulphurdunn]

24. Yep

[bvar22]

43. Exactly.

It is not "capitulation" when you get exactly what you want.

[Zorra]

57. 2008 was the only Dem Presidential primary in 4 decades that I

did not vote in.

The only choice was no real choice at all.

I voted for him in the general election, because I had no real choice.

[99Forever]

10. Agree 1,000,000%

[dissentient]

12. Good article

[Andy823]

13. Total Bull

That's all I have to say.

[CatWoman]

15. I don't know this place anymore

am I in BashObama24 Land????

[Maedhros]

18. Covering our eyes and ears and shouting "LA LA LA LA LA"

doesn't make Obama's policies any better.

[CatWoman]

22. being a world class jerk doesn't help very much either

[Maedhros]

23. Well, I guess you'd know. [n/t]

[Cha]

63. Obviously, Cat definitely knows when she encounters one.

[liberal_at_heart]

21. If you consider criticising the President for supporting a bill that cuts pensions, Pell grants,

and WIC while authorizing another 2008 meltdown then sure call it what you want. You do realize that Obama will own the next financial meltdown. We blamed Bush for the first one, but the next one will be on Obama's watch and he supported the bill that will have caused the second crash.

[sulphurdunn]

25. Denial

is not a river in Egypt.

[Nuclear Unicorn]

29. I won't blast you like the other respondents but I would be interested in seeing your

explanation of any virtue in the just-passed CRomnibus in particular and in general why this does not add to the President's seeming penchant to abandon settled Progressive principles.

[stevenleser]

38. Yep, sad. nt

[greatauntoftriplets]

46. Seems that way, doesn't it?

[Andy823]

48. Seems that way

Some here can't make a post without attacking him, even if the post has nothing at all to do with the president they find way to take a cheap shot at him.

[Hekate]

58. Actually, yes. It's pretty toxic around here, so much so ...

... that it sometimes reminds me of the flip-side of the Tea Party: all emotional outrage and shouting, few facts that will stand up to scrutiny. Gone are the days when we were angry mostly at the GOP and we shared strategies and information to improve the state of our nation; gone are the days when posters researched their posts and provided credible links, and other posters demanded they do so.

The new "community-run" DU is a place where the BushCheney years and their foundational behaviors are blanked out and all blame lays at the feet of the current President and the Democratic Party -- not to mention something called the Third Way, which appears to be an invention of Satan. If you don't like what someone says or does, don't bother with research, just call them a Third-Wayer and everyone else will know they are an apostate damned for all eternity.

Sorry.

[rhett o rick]

68. You must excuse those here that were hoping for change. After 2000 they thought that

a DEmocratic president would fix what the Republican conservatives broke only to find that Conservative Democrats also have the same goals of Wall Street and Neocon domination.

[NaturalHigh]

88. When a president who promised change...

sells out to Wall Street as usual, people who voted for him have every right to be a little miffed. President Obama lost his halo a long time ago.

[Pantagruelsmember]

16. Liberals always do this

Trash their own excellent leaders like BO for not being perfect or giving them every little victory they want despite what that leader is up against. This is how we got Dubya!! We weren't enthused enough about Gore, probably the most qualified candidate ever to run for Prez. What is wrong with you people???

Here's what I like to remind others of, please think about it and pass it along:

The big picture, Obama reality, the obstructionist GOP won't admit is quite simply that
the American people are profoundly better off today than they were before President Obama took office.

The economy has recovered from the Bush/GOP disastrous incompetence.

Obama has been at least as good as Reagan for the economy. In fact, U.S. has now had 64 straight months of job expansion, including 58 consecutive weeks of private sector growth.

Obama’s administration has created more jobs in five years than Bush managed in all eight.
The current period has also been notable for the huge cutbacks in public-sector jobs, which the White House argues makes the private-sector job performance more impressive. (New jobs in the public sector, and the resulting paychecks, obviously help generate additional private-sector jobs.) So the White House argues that the continued private-sector growth, in the face of massive public-sector cutbacks, is especially significant.

The ebullient stock market is a reflection of Obama/Dem leadership.

President George W. Bush ,
served from January 20, 2001, to January 20, 2009.

Federal spending increased nearly 60 percent during his time in office.

When President Bush took office in January 2001, unemployment was just 4.2 percent. However, come 2009 the financial crisis was already having its way with the economy and unemployment had surged to 7.8 percent in his last month in office and was rising rapidly.

Equities fell 46 percent during the Bush Administration.

President Barack Obama,
began his term as president on January 20, 2009, and is still in office.

When President Obama took office, unemployment was 7.8 percent. The headline rate peaked at 10.0 percent in October of 2009, and has come down more or less steadily to 5.8 percent as of October 2014.


There have now been 50 straight months of payroll job growth — which has never happened before in the U.S. economy. 2014 will have them most job growth of any year since 1999.

Job growth is coming from full-time employment, not part-time.

Not all jobs are created equal. The good news, over the last few years, is that employment growth is coming from full-time, not part-time work.

Involuntary part-time work is decreasing

The number of people working part-time for economic reasons declined by 177,000 from October to November.

The DOW and S&P have hit all time highs.
Investors in the S&P 500 have to date essentially tripled their money under Obama.

The Federal Budget Deficit has Shrunk by 2/3 since 2009

The price of gas is dropping. Foreign oil imports are down by about 25 percent since President Obama took office. Note the huge increase in US crude oil production under Obama, from approx. 5.5 m bbl/day to 9 million bbl/day.

The Obama administration is the most honest, scandal free in history , not one high administration official indicted for any crime.

The controversial government program that funded failed solar company Solyndra, and became a lighting rod in the 2012 presidential election, is now officially in the black.

The dollar is KING of the world's currencies and there has been no appreciable inflation.

The U.S. under BO is the envy of the world.

Obamacare is working. Approximately 10 million Americans who didn’t have health insurance before have it now. Rates haven’t gone up across the board as predicted by GOP critics mainly because healthcare costs are now rising slower than they have at any point since 1960 and in many cases going down. The success of Obamacare has extended the projected solvency of Medicare out to 2030. Seniors have saved $Billions on prescriptions and millions of Americans have received refunds from their health insurance companies thanks to provisions of ACA.

The Obama Presidency is going to turn out to be very
significant. Yes the historic nature of the first African-American President is noteworthy but the fact that people now understand the gap between rich and poor, the racism that still exists and the exploitation of working class folks in all spheres means the scales are coming off the eyes. People are getting up off their computers and protesting all three - in more and more numbers across the country.

And don't forget he changed everything for LGBT folks.

Specific actions initiated and completed by BO:
-Passed Health Care Reform
-Passed the Stimulus
-Passed Wall Street Reform
-Ended the War in Iraq
-Ended War in Afghanistan
-Eliminated Osama bin laden
-Turned Around U.S. Auto Industry
-Recapitalized Banks: (In the midst of financial crisis)
-Repealed “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell”:
-Reversed Bush Torture Policies
-Improved America’s Image Abroad
-Kicked Banks Out of Federal Student Loan Program, Expanded Pell Grant Spending
-Created Race to the Top
-Boosted Fuel Efficiency Standards
-Increased Support for Veterans



-Passed Credit Card Reforms
-Eliminated Catch-22 in Pay Equality Laws (Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Act in 2009)
-Improved Food Safety System
-Achieved New START Treaty
-Expanded National Service
-Expanded Wilderness and Watershed Protection
-Gave the FDA Power to Regulate Tobacco
-Pushed Federal Agencies to Be Green Leaders
-Passed Fair Sentencing Act
-Trimmed and Reoriented Missile Defense
-Began Post-Post-9/11 Military Builddown
-Invested Heavily in Renewable Technology
-Cracked Down on Bad For-Profit Colleges
-Improved School Nutrition
-Expanded Hate Crimes Protections
-Brokered Agreement for Speedy Compensation to Victims of Gulf Oil Spill
-Expanded Health Coverage for Children
-Recognized the Dangers of Carbon Dioxide
-Expanded Stem Cell Research
-Provided Payment to Wronged Minority Farmers
-Killed the F-22

*Blogger jeff61b , "14 Facts About The Obama Presidency That Most People Don’t Know" at
hub pages , compiled, meticulously documented and published many of these stats which I'm passing along and suggest you pass along too.

[Maedhros]

19. That's some very weak gruel, there.

/ignore list.

[BobbyBoring]

20. About 80% of Americans would disagree

That they are "Profoundly better off" than they were before. That number will rise when the TTP kicks in. The majority of those that are better off were pretty well off already.

[stevenleser]

40. 50% of Americans think torture is OK too. Argumentum ad populum is a logical fallacy and

there is good reason for that.

[Andy823]

49. Do you have proof

That 80% feel that way. Just asking.

[Pantagruelsmember]

61. Get real

http://politicalration.com/us/america-is-better-off-today-than-six-years-ago/

[dissentient]

27. You lost me

when you said "excellent leader".

[NaturalHigh]

87. That stood out to me too.

[sulphurdunn]

34. Recognized the dangers of carbon dioxide?

Duh!

[stevenleser]

39. Well said. nt

[Doctor_J]

41. The List is back

Race To The Top should be on the "other" list BTW. AS should the ACA. As for Iraq and Afghanistan...

[Albertoo]

47. Agreed. Histor will be kind to Obama.

A fairly good president who averted a meltdown in '08 and got some social progress passed.

[NaturalHigh]

89. History will remember him as mediocre.

[stevenleser]

93. No, it won't. History is always good to leaders who lead out of economic malaise. Nt

[Stellar]

59. Ignore ' the ready for Hillary clan', they 're still pissed off that Hillary didn't win.

Or, Obama wasn't perfect enough.

[SMC22307]

60. "... there has been no appreciable inflation."

Is that such a good thing?

The perils of falling inflation

NYT Says Economists Still Don't Understand Inflation/Deflation

Why Paul Krugman thinks inflation fears are baloney

Growth is more important than inflation: Joseph Stiglitz

And I imagine those making less than $10 couldn't care less about the soaring stock market. Awareness was raised by Occupy, not Obama. But I'll give him credit for acknowledging that not everyone is being well-served by the economy.

[helpmetohelpyou]

17. The writter assumes Obama didn't want to help Wall Street and the future

people who will make him wealthier than he could have ever imagined just a few short years ago.

Obama and Michelle are going to be one of , if not thee richest former President and former first lady in history

[stupidicus]

26. is capitulation synonymous with complicity?

the reason I ask is because the latter is what I thought he was trying to hide with the timidity that leads to neddless capitulation.

[1StrongBlackMan]

28. So we just ignore the explanation? ...

http://www.vox.com/2014/12/12/7381393/cromnibus-pelosi-warren

Other than to just say B.S.?

[Nuclear Unicorn]

32. vox is little more than the WH's remote press office.

[1StrongBlackMan]

33. Like I said, ignore the explanation ...

other than to say, "that's B.S."

[Nuclear Unicorn]

35. I read it. It notes the center of the controversy is the preception the President capitulated.

And then offers the explanation that it was necessary to give the GOP whatever it wanted before the new Congress is seated otherwise we would have to give the GOP whatever it wanted.

Yeah, it'd be a shame if they had to propose the bill on their own letterhead.

[1StrongBlackMan]

36. Even with all the bad stuff in it ...

does the spending bill fund government operation until September (e.g., fund social safety net programming, prevent federal furloughs, fund veteran programming, i.e., the poor that we claim most important)?

Does it fund the ACA through September (i.e., take defunding off the table)?

Does it set up a winnable fight on immigration reform (i.e., no comprehensive reform, no DHS funding)?

Does it accomplish this and short circuit the gop's obvious move that would have got all the bad stuff AND none of the above?

[Nuclear Unicorn]

37. Of those listed points which ones would you keep in exchange for

another derivatives meltdown and its attending economic devastation? What other private profit boondoggles are you willing to fund with taxpayer money? Who cares if it costs us another $3 trillion (enough to fund the ACA for 3 decades)? Who cares if another 30 million jobs are lost; people can stand on the side of the road with our new immigrant friends looking for day labor as they wonder how they're going to pay for their government-mandated corporate profit token (er -- I meant to write: insurance policy).

WINNING, BABY!

[1StrongBlackMan]

42. ALL OF THEM!!! ...

Last edited Wed Dec 17, 2014, 11:55 AM - Edit history (1)

Because since we're playing "What If" ... What if Democrats, that have been silent on the roll back of Dodd-Frank, took advantage of the conservative objections to the roll back, introduced legislation to re-establish the push out rules (and all the other bad stuff)?. The Democrats can do it with a stuck of the pen and pull back the cover the spending bill provided republicans. Right? There is not a single one of the bad stuff that can survive individual legislation.

Yeah ... Winning Baby!

[Nuclear Unicorn]

44. And the absolute surrender buys you, what? A year?

We've surrendered to corporate bailouts. On what basis do you plan on opposing them in the future? Or will you even bother to oppose it and other travesties if the GOP need only threaten to delay funding something?

Let's not forget that funding the ACA will be back on the table in a few months and immigration reform is only an EO and that can be undone by another EO. Meanwhile the taxpayers are back on the hook to guarantee private profits and the corporatists are deeper in bed with the pols.

I'd wager if you walked into the boardroom of Goldman Sachs and said, "I absolutely will NOT fund your next multi-trillion dollar bailout unless and until you agree to immigration reform!" they would look at each other up and down the table at each other before coyly replying, "Sure. Okay. Whatever you say."

We have traded very temporary and shallow gains for very permanent and far-reaching liabilities and a complete surrender of the ability to argue against future abuses.

Not that you would ever read that at vox.

[1StrongBlackMan]

45. Did you read what I wrote? ...

You know ... the legislation part?

[BeyondGeography]

77. Once again, you ruined a good bashfest with detailed questions supported by facts

[Nuclear Unicorn]

82. The argument presumes the certainty of the Dodd-Frank roll-back will be superceded by

a hypothetical coming together of Progressives and Tea Partiers against the entrenched establishment types in the Democratic and Republican parties -- BEFORE the cronies at Goldman Sachs and Citi can lead us into another disaster.

That's one heckuva refutation. I'm not sure where the facts are, but whatevs.

[BeyondGeography]

91. Today Mr. Ineptitude normalized relations with Cuba

Last edited Wed Dec 17, 2014, 03:59 PM - Edit history (1)

Instead of explaining why not quite getting the full half of a loaf in CRomnibus was worth shutting the government down, he is moving forward when and where he can. This comes on the heels, of course, his EO on immigration which put the Republicans in a box and solidified our party's position with Hispanics at least for 2016.

I am not always thrilled with how he handles the GOP, and he'll spend the rest of his life answering the question of whether he could have been tougher on Wall Street (where he and Eric Holder are hated, btw). But, the linked OP article is a piece of unbalanced hackery, and "unbalanced" is commonplace among his critics here.

[rhett o rick]

71. The explanation to give up a whole lot because it could be worse is crap.

That kind of crap over the last 30 years got us where we are. In other words we will agree to give the terrorists 5 prisoners to execute because if we don't they may demand 20. When people talk about Democrats having no backbones, this is exactly what they are talking about.

[1StrongBlackMan]

74. Okay ...

But, not COULD be worse;WOULD be worse.

In other words we will agree to give the terrorists 5 prisoners to execute because if we don't they may demand 20.

And when those 20 prisoners ARE executed? ... I know ... It's the price of having a backbone. But at least the terrorists know we mean business.

No the better strategy is (to use your analogy) once the 15 prisoners are released, you work like hell to get back the 5.

In this case, the spending bill funds government through September, funds the ACA and puts Democrats in s great spot for an immigration fight (no immigration bill/no funding for DHS). Now, the rescue plan is Democrats taking advantage of the swell of republican/conservative/teaparty opposition to the derivative push-out roll-back and write individual legislation re-establishing the rule (and removing all the other horrible stuff the spending bill contains; but could only pass as part of the must pass spending bill. All (most) Democrats (and a significant number of republicans) will support the individual legislation, as who, without the cover/lack of transparency of the spending bill, will come out against it?

[rhett o rick]

79. Wow that's some predictions. There are a lot of if's in there.

The Democrats you describe are not the same ones we've seen up to this point.

"But, not COULD be worse;WOULD be worse. " I appreciate your confidence, but sometimes certainty gets in the way of objectiveness.

You'll have to forgive my skepticism. It seems that each and every piece we lose is accompanied by rationalizations.

[1StrongBlackMan]

83. Really? ...

No there is only one if ... Democrats (Pelosi?/Warren?/Sanders?) offering up legislation to re-establish the push-out rule (and re-establish all the other stuff we find objectionable). And it'll work because name one Democratic congress person that would go on record supporting the elimination of the push-out rule.

The Democrats you describe are not the same ones we've seen up to this point.

Name one/some Democrat(s) that did not vote for individual populous legislation ... Name one/some Democrats that have voted against individual populous legislation.

"But, not COULD be worse;WOULD be worse. " I appreciate your confidence, but sometimes certainty gets in the way of objectiveness.

Are you kidding? ... you couldn't predict the gop's Plan B, if the spending bill had failed?

You'll have to forgive my skepticism. It seems that each and every piece we lose is accompanied by rationalizations.

I hear people that keep talking like that and wonder which "pieces" those would be? In politics/governance, where there is a divided government, there are very few instances where one gets everything one wants, especially when one of the things one wants is for the other side to get none of what they want.

[Kelvin Mace]

30. He refused to prosecute war crimes

END.OF.STORY.

[zappaman]

31. Can we just impeach him already?

Worst President ever!!!!

Look at these terrible things he has done!!!!

http://pleasecutthecrap.com/obama-accomplishments/

[Andy823]

50. Honestly

I think there are a lot of people here on DU that pretend to be liberals, progressives, or democrats, that would love to see him impeached. They sure as hell don't support him nor the party with all their bashing, day after day after day.

[DonCoquixote]

54. yup and

a lot of them are revving up the Hillary 2016 bus that they will glaldy drive over Liberals.

[PowerToThePeople]

55. Why do I want to rec this?

[BootinUp]

62. "Compromise for the sake of compromise" BULLSHIT

it was compromise to prevent a government shutdown.

[Nuclear Unicorn]

84. If only

the captain of the Titanic had compromised between those who wanted to keep the same course and those who wanted to avoid the iceberg!

[Cha]

64. No it won't.. just because some hack(Lance Simmens) writes it on huffpo and someone

else posts it on DU doesn't mean shite. No, it's not a "a very bad compromise"

Now...if all you care about is sticking it to Wall Street, the current battle among Democrats over this bill might be worth having. But - if you also care about enforcing the critical aspects of Wall Street reform, Obamacare, the President's actions on immigration, early childhood education, climate change, job growth, and national security - all this hysteria is simply a distraction.

http://immasmartypants.blogspot.com/2014/12/did-cromnibus-kill-wall-street-reform.html

[AndyTiedye]

65. Obama Didn't Get Anything Like the Sort of Cooperation an Incoming President Elected by a Landslide…

…usually gets. The reception he got in Washington was a bit more like the opening scene in Blazing Saddles.

[loyalsister]

73. Or even one who does not win the popular vote

W was welcomed and Democrats treated him like a president is traditionally treated. I think they went a little overboard in supporting him. He got almost everything he wanted. The one notable exception was privatizing SS.

[akbacchus_BC]

70. If you were in President Obama's place, what would you have done?

He inherited shit and tried his best to deal with it. Give the President a bit of slack. He tried to work with the rethugs but they were not on his side. Only thing I have to say is that President Obama should have told the rethugs to eff off and he got the majority on his side and pass as much billls as he promised Americans during his campaign. Sad to see that he comprised to the rethugs!

[ucrdem]

72. The world does not revolve around Blanche Lincoln's push-out rule.

But everybody's an expert on a 1,603 page bill.

http://www.scribd.com/doc/249716409/Congressional-spending-compromise#

[tularetom]

81. Actually there are three possible explanations for the President's actions

1. Ineptitude

2. Complicity

3. Umpteen dimensional chess

Naturally we'd all like to think that #3 is the correct one but I'm afraid the truth is more like #1 - ineptitude fueled by naiveté.

Looking back to 2008, I was amazed that he even wanted the job, amazed that any Democrat wanted to be tasked with cleaning up the monumental clusterfuck that bush and cheney had left. If he didn't make some big changes quickly, he was eventually going to get the blame for the whole mess, that's just how short our national attention span is.

He failed to make any bold moves, he tried compromise from the start and he got kicked in the nads for it. Which made him even more cautious and eventually got us where we are today.

Yes, the Dow is up, unemployment is down, but the middle class is arguably no better off than they were at the start of his term. He's a good person and a strategic thinker, but unfortunately he lacks the audacity, the political instinct to take the big steps we need.

[Tatiana]

85. That may be it.

He is either a poor negotiator or complicit in the legislation that gets passed.

I'm not sure which.

Either way, we needed a bit more boldness and fire than what we got. Nevertheless, it was better than the alternative and I'm sure he has done a better job than Hillary would have.

[Drunken Irishman]

92. LOL

Obama will go down as one of the most significant presidents in American history. His actions today just solidified that. But keep your blinders on lol