Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

JDPriestly

(57,936 posts)
23. How right you are.
Mon Dec 31, 2012, 03:02 PM
Dec 2012

Had I done my job with as little fight, as little determination, as little stubborn feistiness as the Democrats in Congress and the White House, I would not have last a day, not a day.

It's pitiful.

The problem is that the people who rise to the top in politics are people who have not had to struggle all that much really. By the time they are in their late 30s, they are in the limelight, have good incomes and lots of admirers. That kind of rapid, easy success does not make you into a fighter. I don't care how tough your childhood was, if your life goes well when you are in your 30s, if you are not doing without, pinching pennies, trying to get along, making tough choices but rather are going to the houses of the rich and well positioned, eating their caviar and French cheeses, etc., then you are going to identify with and want to please the rich. You will forget your tough childhood. You will congratulate yourself on having had the talent, the charm, the good character to have overcome the difficulties of the past.

So that is why so many of our politicians begin to side with the wealthy and famous, the sons and daughters of the wealthy and famous, what used to be the polo crowd, when they get into national or state-wide offices.

It's a crying shame, but we and our ugly little battles for survival are not even known to them. They think we are doing as well as they are.

So that is why the compassion that politicians show when they hold cute babies does not translate into caring about the lives of the grown-ups who struggle to feed the babies while taking care of their elderly moms and dads. That's not the "reality" of the successful politicians.

President Obama's mother-in-law was living in the White House last I heard. She is not struggling to get by on her Social Security, so what does the President know about the lives of those who are? Absolutely nothing, I assure you. That is why he was so ready to take the 30 pieces of silver offered by the Republicans.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

CSPAN replaying Harkins floor statement now. 12:42p eom Purveyor Dec 2012 #1
Tell that to the unemployed... nt kelliekat44 Jan 2013 #60
I am not seeing the reason to be outrage. No cuts to SS or Medicare and some tax increases on rich stevenleser Dec 2012 #2
It's a tax cut for the rich Report1212 Dec 2012 #3
What the OP says is contradictory on that point. It says taxes on the rich are being raised to 39.6% stevenleser Dec 2012 #5
When did $400,000 a year become "middle class"? Comrade Grumpy Dec 2012 #9
It hasnt. It is a negotiated point. nt stevenleser Dec 2012 #12
it is an abject surrender, is what it is. hfojvt Dec 2012 #15
No, chain CPI would have been an abject surrender. No tax increases on the wealthy would have been stevenleser Dec 2012 #18
It's a surrender versus waiting 10 hours nt Report1212 Dec 2012 #22
Exactly. Owl Dec 2012 #25
Cuts to medicare are on the table JimDandy Dec 2012 #24
well, i call taking $2.5 trillion in automatic tax increases on the rich hfojvt Dec 2012 #26
Another fine "deal" by our entirely bought-and-paid-for American government. Chan790 Dec 2012 #42
So you want taxes to go up for the top 40% ? Sekhmets Daughter Dec 2012 #32
why not? hfojvt Dec 2012 #34
Just asking... Sekhmets Daughter Dec 2012 #44
How many hours do we work a week. JDPriestly Dec 2012 #20
"almost too low" hfojvt Dec 2012 #29
OK, so I barely earned a (on edit, small) fraction of it (in my best years), but . . . . JDPriestly Dec 2012 #55
US Government says the median income in NYC metro area is 80,000 Bluenorthwest Jan 2013 #59
Most people that I know Aerows Dec 2012 #48
True, but it is a good number to work with. JDPriestly Dec 2012 #54
because if there is no deal - taxes aleady go up to 39.6% hfojvt Dec 2012 #10
See hj's point Report1212 Dec 2012 #11
You just don't get it ... 1StrongBlackMan Dec 2012 #56
huge tax cuts for the rich do not bother you? hfojvt Dec 2012 #4
See my #5 nt stevenleser Dec 2012 #6
How about permanent tax cuts for the wealthy and lies from Obama? bowens43 Dec 2012 #30
okay, but is he going to use his power to block the deal? hfojvt Dec 2012 #7
I agree with you.. bama_blue_dot Dec 2012 #16
actually I wonder if his little speech isn't part of the Kabuki hfojvt Dec 2012 #21
Just read the AP story on the deal being worked out... bobclark86 Dec 2012 #8
unfortunately hfojvt Dec 2012 #13
+ 1000 JEB Dec 2012 #17
My sentiments also. Owl Dec 2012 #27
How right you are. JDPriestly Dec 2012 #23
Yep, and you better vote in 2014! Otherwise it's all your fault! Doctor_J Dec 2012 #41
I Agree Billsmile Dec 2012 #49
Yep malz Dec 2012 #14
Yep. Screw the unemployed. NYC Liberal Dec 2012 #19
Obama is screwing us all..... bowens43 Dec 2012 #31
but we NEED to pass these tax cuts for the rich to help the unemployed hfojvt Dec 2012 #39
So a congress with Elizabeth Warren Report1212 Dec 2012 #35
Sure, let the unemployed starve for a month. NYC Liberal Dec 2012 #38
Sources are saying that an extension of unemployment benefits will be a part of this deal. totodeinhere Dec 2012 #51
Senator Tom Harkin is right: No Deal Is Better Than The Deal Being Negotiated Owl Dec 2012 #28
If Obama is stupid enough to think Americans will forgive him for iemitsu Dec 2012 #33
What are we gonna do, vote against him? CranialRectaLoopback Dec 2012 #47
Why does Harkin have to read about it in the paper? Doctor_J Dec 2012 #36
He had to read it in the paper Report1212 Dec 2012 #37
Does anyone know if the president has even met with the progressive caucus about this? Doctor_J Dec 2012 #40
His fist met with our gut. CranialRectaLoopback Dec 2012 #46
we need to start over and have the American people start calling the shots No Compromise Dec 2012 #43
Senator Harkin can stop the deal CranialRectaLoopback Dec 2012 #45
I think it more likely that a Republican such as Rand Paul or Mike Lee might stop it. totodeinhere Dec 2012 #52
Here is what irks me about this kind of deal. airplaneman Dec 2012 #50
let me see daybranch Dec 2012 #53
That's why politicians invented back rooms and "closed door" meetings. Tierra_y_Libertad Dec 2012 #57
WOOOOOOOOOO!!!! Skittles Jan 2013 #58
Latest Discussions»General Discussion»Senator Tom Harkin: No De...»Reply #23