The President has only been in office 20 months, not two years

[ProSense]

A lot can happen in four months.

Still, only in today's America can a President save the country from a depression, enact health reform after 100 years of attempts, enact histortic student loan reform, enact the strongest financial reforms since FDR, including a first-ever Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, do it all in his first 18 months, only to have people pushing the meme that he hasn't done enough and nothing has changed. Worse, blue dog Democrats voted against these changes and are now running from his record.

<...>

I have sympathy for Democrats in red districts. There's a lot they shouldn't be asked to do. Some people had to vote against health-care reform. Fine. Some are running against it. I guess that's fine too, although as I said the other day, kicking in this week are the good and non-controversial provisions. But I guess you can't tout them if you voted against it. Whatever.

But this? A black guy with an alien name who was called a Muslim and a terrorist got elected president of the US by saying that he would raise taxes on people above $250,000. To which a Blue Dog would say, well, he lost my district by 15 points. To which I say, well, you're not black with an alien name who's being called a Muslim. Get out there and show some guts for a change.

So they're going to punt on a vote entirely, probably, failing to put Republicans on the spot over middle-class tax cuts, which they could have done if they'd held together, all because 35 or so of them (many of whom are probably going to lose anyway) are afraid of some attack ads. Honestly. What is this party?

<...>

link

[Jeff In Milwaukee]

1. The first nine months of his administration....

He was working from the budget passed during the last year of the Bush Administration.

[zipplewrath]

3. Which included TARP

And they did pass a stimulus bill in there as well.

[zipplewrath]

2. What do you mean "only"?

He's 40% of the way through his term. I'm not sure that qualifies as an "only". If he doesn't hurry up, that's all he's gonna get. And if you think the conservatives in congress are obstructionist now, wait until you see what they can do if they smell blood in the water. Diddly will get done for the next 2 years.

[ProSense]

4. "If he doesn't hurry up, that's all he's gonna get. " Hmmm?

Repeat:

Still, only in today's America can a President save the country from a depression, enact health reform after 100 years of attempts, enact histortic student loan reform, enact the strongest financial reforms since FDR, including a first-ever Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, do it all in his first 18 months, only to have people pushing the meme that he hasn't done enough and nothing has changed...

Also, the President has two years and four months remaining in his first term.

Oh, I should also add that within the next two years and four month, he'll have ended one war.

[obxhead]

5. A year and a half of that 2.33 years will be spent here excusing

Obama from not getting anything done as well because he's campaigning for reelection.

[ProSense]

8. You want to

argue based on speculation. The OP is about what he has already accomplished.

Campaigning isn't going to stop progress. Bush was campaigning when his Medicare drug plan passed.

[obxhead]

13. No, I'm arguing based on a proven history.

The second half of Obama's first term will depend on how this November turns out. All the Pubs need is a few seats to make their stall even more effective. I also use the proven effect of Obama's refusal to use the bully pulpit to force Pubs to answer for their firm no stance.

Then again, I know your stance on our 'can do no wrong and pony distributing' President as well. I guess it was silly of me to even post in your thread knowing that.

[ProSense]

14. Hmmm?

"The second half of Obama's first term will depend on how this November turns out."

How can you be arguing on a "proven history" based on an unknown?

[obxhead]

15. The proven history of campaigning by Presidents seeking reelection

is readily available. Obviously you think Obama will be different than any other President in that respect. That's par for your posting though, I wouldn't expect anything less.

[ProSense]

16. "Obviously you think Obama will be different than any other President in that respect. " Actually,

No, I don't. As I pointed out, Bush was campaigning when his Medicare drug plan passed. He also got his housing, unborn victims and two trade agreements. He tried to set up privatization of Social Security, but Democrats made a concerted and excellent effort to kill it in early 2005.

The climate may or may not make progress a little more difficult, but it will not be impossible, and President Obama is not Bush.

[obxhead]

22. Where in these posts did I say Obama is Bush?

Campaign history goes back a lot further back than Bush and his reelection campaign.

Go ahead, bookmark this thread. I'm guessing by May or June of next year excuses will be made here that Obama can't do this or that because he's in the most important reelection campaign of our lifetimes. Hell, I see it going on for one reason or another every single day here already.

[ProSense]

23. Where did I say you did?

I made a point: "...it will not be impossible, and President Obama is not Bush."

He's not Bush, meaning he is likely to be more effective.

[obxhead]

24. Well, a pet rock missing its glued on eyes would be more effective.

Saying Obama is more effective than Bush is hardly an argument towards the quality of Obama's accomplishments.

[ProSense]

27. What exactly are you arguing?

You stray from the point of the OP, which is how the President's accomplishments are being framed, to say, "Obama from not getting anything done as well because he's campaigning for reelection."

I point out that Bush, while campaigning, was able to pass his Medicare drugn plan, unborn victims and two trade agreements. He tried to set up privatization of Social Security, but Democrats made a concerted and excellent effort to kill it in early 2005.

Now you claim "Saying Obama is more effective than Bush is hardly an argument towards the quality of Obama's accomplishments."

Either he's going to get something done or not!

Bush did, and quality is subjective. Some people don't put stock in the quality of President Obama's accomplishments thus far.

[Name removed]

36. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[ProSense]

39. His re-election campaign has nothing to do with the OP. n/t

[obxhead]

57. It does have to do with our conversation.

You claim he has 2 years 4 months left in his first term.

I claim at least a year and a half of that term will be spent focused on reelection rather than passing effective legislation.

Thread bookmarked for future reference.

:hi:

[zipplewrath]

6. And he has almost an impossible job

He's got to get the economy turned around sufficiently to get re-elected. That's his job. It doesn't have to be completely fixed. But if he doesn't have unemployment below about 6% by about January of 2012, maybe June, he's gonna be in real trouble.

[impik]

7. These people really think that if Obama goes home in 2012

it will be his loss.

[young but wise]

10. Exactly. We are the ones that's going to suffer with repubs in charge.

[ProSense]

17. I guess the point of the OP should be repeated

Still, only in today's America can a President save the country from a depression, enact health reform after 100 years of attempts, enact histortic student loan reform, enact the strongest financial reforms since FDR, including a first-ever Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, do it all in his first 18 months, only to have people pushing the meme that he hasn't done enough and nothing has changed. Worse, blue dog Democrats voted against these changes and are now running from his record.

[CakeGrrl]

41. Yes, the willful ignorance on that point is baffling. n/t

[Bluenorthwest]

11. Ended is ended.

A member of our family just deployed to Iraq. That is what it is. He's there, not here. His mother loses sleep, it is still a dangerous place, and he is still heavily armed. In Iraq. So ended is apparently a term of art. Like equality.
Splitting hairs and forcing definitions will not really work. Facts are just facts. Deployed is deployed. Armed is armed. Iraq is Iraq. Home is home. Over is over, not just a change of mission names.
I'll let our cousin know he can come home now, that you said the war has ended. He'll be shocked.

[ProSense]

12. "Over is over, not just a change of mission names." Let me repeat my statement:

"Oh, I should also add that within the next two years and four month, he'll have ended one war."

[CakeGrrl]

30. "Wait until you see what they can do"

To him?

Or to US?

Why people think (or in some twisted cases, hope) that Republican obstruction is going to be harder on the President than on the average person on the street is beyond me. He'll have an income. He'll have healthcare. He'll walk away with a pension. But some of us already understand that.

[ProSense]

31. It's thick

Just keep repeating:

Obama better do something or he's a one-term President

Obama is a failure

Obama is a conservative

Obama isn't a good communicator

Obama isn't a leader

Obama isn't a progressive

Repeating these often makes them true.

If the President said "the sky is blue," the responses would be:

Pftt, it's raining in my neighborhood.

Blue skies aren't a good thing when people are experiencing a drought.

Notice that he didn't say what shade of blue?

:rofl:

[treestar]

54. Do you judge everyone else this harshly?

I'd hate to have that attitude from any boss, coach, parent, human being.

[golfguru]

9. Amazing what can happen in 20 months

My parents had made 2 kids in first 20 months of their marriage!

[Milo_Bloom]

18. As long as you are willing to pass legislation that has no real effect

... you can get alot "done".

health care with no real cost controls and so many loopholes it has become a joke.

financial "reform" that doesn't address the real problem.

credit card reform that has 0 practical effect.

a stimulus package in which the administration so woefully under-estimated the problem and over-estimated the effect of the legislation that has been labeled a failure only because of their unrealistic expectations.

we did get student loan reform that is practical and makes sense.

[ProSense]

19. Hmmm?

health care with no real cost controls and so many loopholes it has become a joke. (Change We Can Believe In that so good Republicans are trying to steal the ideas. Also, health care isn't a joke.)

financial "reform" that doesn't address the real problem. (Remember when the President could redeem himself by appointing Elizabeth Warren to the new consumer bureau?)

credit card reform that has 0 practical effect. (Practical effects here.)

a stimulus package in which the administration so woefully under-estimated the problem and over-estimated the effect of the legislation that has been labeled a failure only because of their unrealistic expectations. (Preventing a depression is a good thing]

we did get student loan reform that is practical and makes sense. ()

As I said in the OP, "only in today's America can a President save the country from a depression, enact health reform after 100 years of attempts, enact histortic student loan reform, enact the strongest financial reforms since FDR, including a first-ever Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, do it all in his first 18 months, only to have people pushing the meme that he hasn't done enough and nothing has changed."

[Milo_Bloom]

20. As I said, as long as your accomplishments have no real impact.

Health care = no real cost controls. Costs are skyrocketing. Children only policies are disappearing. Love the loopholes.

No, appointing Elizabeth Warren alone was never enough to redeem the failures of financial reform.

no practical effects on credit card reform. Have explained many times how easy it is get around all of those rules.

No actual evidence that a depression was avoided. They got their numbers so wrong, they are no more reliable in economic predictions than bush was.

[ProSense]

21. You're right.

Nothing the President has done will have any real impact, not now, not ever.

He's wasting his time, and history will show that (as long as you're writing it).

[golfguru]

26. Actually the impact of his HCR bill is worse, not neutral

My monthly health care premiums were hiked 30% for 2011
per letter just received from my employer. Thank you president!

[ProSense]

28. Vote Republican, they'll repeal it. n/t

[golfguru]

32. Might make sense to many this year n/t

[ProSense]

33. Does it to you? n/t

[golfguru]

35. If you recall, I have posted I might not vote this year

I am discouraged and disgusted at how my fixed income budget
is getting screwed by my health care premiums.

[ProSense]

37. I remember now, no vote, no complaining. n/t

[golfguru]

53. If HCR bill is so good as you say why no democrats are touting it?

I have not seen ONE democratic commercial touting HCR bill signed
into law by president Obama. Why is that? Could it be because it is
highly unpopular amongst large majority of voters?

I stopped starting threads on this abominable HCR law
but I will continue to refute claims of how "good" this bill is.
Overall, it is still a pig, no matter how much lipstick you put on that sow.

[Milo_Bloom]

42. If that was the only issue on the table, I would.

Unfortuantely, if they gain control, Obama is likely is going to break his back bending backwards to appease them.

And of course then people on DU will be telling us how good a job Obama did in helping to overturn Roe v Wade and we should be proud of him for helping it happen.

[Milo_Bloom]

40. He's got student loan reform.

That's about all that was worth doing.

[ProSense]

44. "That's about all that was worth doing."

I agreed with you, but I guess I should have said:

Other than student loan reform, nothing the President has done will have any real impact, not now, not ever.

He's wasting his time, and history will show that (as long as you're writing it).

Better?

[Milo_Bloom]

45. It's reality.

[golfguru]

25. My premiums just went up over 30% for next year (2011) n/t

[ProSense]

29. What does that have to do with the law?

Health insurance companies are greedy, but you knew that.

It's fascinating to see the point of the OP being validated as people unrec this thread and try to prove that the President's accomplishments are insignificant or have made things worse.

[golfguru]

34. I have told you umpteenth times, Prosense

that my biggest beef against HCR is that there are ZERO restrictions
on how high the private insurers can jack up the rates every year.
Yet they were given guaranteed 30 million more paying customers via mandates.
Most of those 30 million will be subsidized by others via higher taxes.

Any one who is for repeal will attract a lot of voters this year.

[ProSense]

38. There are provisions to control rate increases

What people are doing, however, is equating the insurance companies' more exorbitant than normal increases with the effects of the law. They are playing games during the implementation period. No doubt they're trying to create the perception that health care reform needs to be repealed.

[Milo_Bloom]

43. NOTHING actually controls rate increases.

There are a bunch of no impact rules that are so easy to get around it isn't funny.


How about them children only policies being dropped in CA? Is that another loophole this administration couldn't figure out??

[ProSense]

46. Let's see

"How about them children only policies being dropped in CA? Is that another loophole this administration couldn't figure out??"

Isn't a loophole something in the law?

Insurance companies deciding to stop selling a policy are only hurting their profits. There are other insurance companies. When the exchanges are up and running, those who want to participate will have to comply with the law.

Those that stop selling various types of policies as a means of getting around the law will lose business. It's on them.

[Milo_Bloom]

47. No.

A loophole is a way AROUND the law.

Don't worry about their profits.. they just jacked rates over 30% thanks to the law. Profit problem solved and they don't have to cover those annoying children with pre-existing conditions.

And if joining the exchange isn't profitable for them... then they won't join and there won't be any real options in the exchange so no one will use them anyway.

What a well thought out law!

[ProSense]

48. Deciding not to sell policies is not a loophole

it's a bad business decision, especially when their competitors don't go along.

"And if joining the exchange isn't profitable for them... then they won't join"

So what about the 32 million customers they were so happy to get?

Can't have it both ways.

[Milo_Bloom]

50. It seems they ARE having it both ways thanks to the law.

They don't have to sell policies to people they deem unprofitable (children only)

to make up for any lost profits....

They jack rates on people who are mandated by law to buy their product.

They are laughing all the way to the bank.

[zipplewrath]

49. However, nothing to control the dominate factor

They put in features to limit cost increases that aren't connected to health care expenses. However, even they predict increases of 6% a year. It is health CARE costs that are out of control. Many of the practices that got repealed in this law (pre-existing, life time limits, cancelations, etc.) got that way because the insurance companies couldn't find ways to control health care costs. They tried the whole HMO model and other managed care strategies. But the underlying costs of health care kept eating them up. So the road to greater profits was not to cover "sick" people. That way you don't incurr health CARE costs, merely the costs of maintaining the policy.

HCR will take away that strategy over time. So all they'll be able to do is pass along the cost increases to us. And since they are limited in their ability to concentrate the costs in certain classes of people, they'll have to spread them to everyone. But they won't have much authority to control them, or even define what procedures are "covered". And strangely, they won't have an incentive, because as the cost of health care increases, their profits will increase because they are limited on a percentage basis. So the way to make more actual money is to increase the health care expenditures. (This is a bit of the reason, amongst many, for the "cadillac tax").

As I say, even the White House predicts roughly 6% increases in health care expenditures each year for the forseeable future. Is your salary going up that fast?

[harun]

52. Correct!

[harun]

51. Some of the Credit Card reform was good and real.

So we got a little CC reform and Student Loan reform. Not a complete loss. Those things are both sort of no brainers that should have been done in 1973 though.

There was no Health Care Reform, there was Health Insurance Reform. Which the Health Insurers are the problem, their elimination is the real reform needed.

There was no Finance Reform.

Heck, we were supposed to have Mortgage reform. It started out as that, but even that got so egregiously bastardized that they didn't call it that in the end. It was just a huge bail out for the big banks with no help to borrowers. No one was helped by the program.

Our Congress has, does and will... suck. The South is going to punish us for the Civil War and for Civil Rights legislation by not passing anything of value ever in this dear country of ours. Hope they are happy, we are not.

[Milo_Bloom]

56. I feel like some of everything was good and real...

but winds up getting completely overshadowed by the "unintended consequences". I put that in quotes because I find it hard to believe that with the people in office right now they didn't realize the potentials.

It's great that health care can no longer refuse people for pre-existing conditions... but that has dramatically increased costs for everyone and they have even dropped children only coverage in some states.

It's great that credit card companies can only charge $25 for late charges... but now all balance transfers have 5% "transfer fees" and many cards have "membership fees" and they can still make your APR whatever they want. They have been also sending out millions of "corporate cards", which are excluded from all the rules.

It's great that they have a consumer protection agency as part of financial reform, but they have done NOTHING to address the underlying problem of too big too fail and billions in risky ventures being traded in the dark.

[DCBob]

55. There is only one explanation..

this country is full of idiots.