.Andrew Sullivan gets it: The Tory President

[jaxx]

The Tory President
19 Dec 2010 09:32 pm

I think of Frank Rich and Paul Krugman as brilliant men, but profoundly resistant to the core rationale of the Obama presidency (and the underlying dynamic of its accumulating success). That rationale is an attempt to move past the paradigms of the boomer years to a pragmatic, liberal reformism that takes America as it is, while trying to make it more of what it can be. Now, there's little doubt that in contrast to recent decades, Obama has nudged the direction leftward - re-regulating Wall Street after the catastrophe, setting up universal health insurance through the private sector, recalibrating America's role in the world from preachy bully to hegemonic facilitator. But throughout he has tried, as his partisan critics have complained, not to be a partisan president, to recall, as he put it in that recent press conference, that this is a diverse country, that is is time we had a president who does not repel or disparage or ignore those who voted against him or those who have grown to despise him.

This is particularly important since so many of his opponents are white and disproportionately affected by this long recession. Trying to get them to see him accurately through the haze of Fox propaganda and cultural panic is not easy. But he seems to understand that persistence and steadiness are better tools in this than grand statements, sudden moves or grandstanding attempts to please his own base. He really is trying to be what he promised: president of the red states as well as the blue states. And a president who gets shit done.

<..> I agree. If the next two years are as productive as the last two, and if Obama resists the Rich-Krugman-Maddow chorus to be Michael Moore in chief, then the promise of the Goodbye To All That presidency is very much alive. From the perspective of this Christmas, after the many bewildering twists and turns of the last two years, Obama is looking good because he kept his nerve and retained his restraint. That's a tough combo: nerve and restraint. It takes a cold-bloodedness to pull this off, and there are times when ice seems to run through the man's veins.

I occasionally used to day-dream about a 'one-nation' Tory U.S. president, a second Eisenhower of a sort. Little did I know he would be a black man with a funny name.

http://andrewsullivan.theatlantic.com/the_daily_dish/2010/12/the-tory-president.html

[dennis4868]

1. The Obama can't do anything right....

haters will not like this....but thanks for posting....I agree with Andrew 100%!

[vaberella]

3. Well most haters don't like Sullivan either. So it's whatever. n/t

[Recursion]

14. He got me into Burke

I'm not a Burkean, I don't think, but I like a lot of those ideas.

[jaxx]

10. I liked it because Sullivan

can look and see that President Obama is not what the pundits portray him to be. The big picture escapes most of them, they want the instant gratification they got used to in the bushie years....those days are over. This country went through a profound change when the bottom finally fell out in 2008, and the times now call for careful planning and goals that reach into the decades to come. Most of them don't get it and they never will.

Instead they'll verbally beat up the President daily, spread ugly rumors daily, and look like total asses daily. Meanwhile President Obama will be working for the good of all the people....even them.

[dennis4868]

17. The big picture escapes most of them, they want the instant gratification

you can say the same thing about liberals and alot of people here on DU....

[Cosmocat]

22. This is a good, sober and honest evaluation from Sullivan ...

I hate the tax deal with a passion, and I am REAL squimish with his allowing the flanks on SS to be bridged ...

But, overall, I agree ...

I got and supported the best HCR that could get done, and I agree strongly that his modus operendi is to be very zen, not be up or down, wait things out, and just generally "get shit done ..."

VERY disappointed over the tax deal, but other than that, I think he has been exactly what he campaigned on ...

[Citizen Worker]

48. Obama will be working for all of us when he cuts Social Security too. I can't wait.

[Hello_Kitty]

63. Oh yeah. I predict DU will be full of born again deficit hawks soon

Delivering stern and sober lectures about the need for all of us to make sacrifices.

[politicasista]

56. +1 n/t

[vaberella]

2. I need to get more books on Eisenhower. Any recommendation?! n/t

[TBF]

5. Yes, Eisenhower was a much better republican than Obama,

I will admit that, at least he substantially increased the amount of folks eligible for social security rather than attacking it as an unnecessary entitlement.

[Name removed]

7. Deleted message

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

[Name removed]

8. Deleted message

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

[bornskeptic]

24. The idea of a payroll tax holiday has long been supported by liberal economists such as

James Galbraith and Robert Reich.

Galbraith: Tax relief for workers. The American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (ARRA) offset payroll taxes through the income tax. This policy should be extended, expanded, or even altogether replaced by a full payroll tax holiday, granting all working families an increase in after-tax incomes of over eight percent up to the limit of the FICA. To keep the Social Security Trust Fund whole, let the federal government credit it for the taxes — and add the revenues of the estate tax for good measure. The policy of tax relief for workers should remain in place until unemployment falls below six percent, at which time it can be gradually phased out. Tax relief for the wealthy is a failed strategy that should end now; a higher personal tax rate will induce companies to retain and invest their earnings, as they used to do.
http://demandsideblog.blogspot.com/2010/09/james-k-galbraith-asks-what-can-be-done.html

Reich: And don't stop there. Do tax jujitsu. In addition to ending the Bush tax cut for the rich, put forward another proposal for growing the economy that cuts taxes on lower-income Americans.

Democrats should propose eliminating payroll taxes on the first $20,000 of income, and making up the revenue loss by applying payroll taxes to incomes above $250,000.

This would give the economy an immediate boost by adding to the paychecks of just about every working American. 80 percent of Americans pay more in payroll taxes than they do in income taxes. And because lower-income people would get most of the benefit, it's likely to be spent.

It would also give employers an extra incentive to hire because they'd save on their share of the payroll tax. And most of the incentive would be directed toward hiring lower-income workers -- who have taken the biggest hit on jobs and pay during the recession.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/robert-reich/tax-jujitsu-why-democrats_b_693046.html

So do the DU progressives think Galbraith and Reich are also plotting to kill Social Security? Notice that Reich goes beyond making up for the cut from the general fund, to doing it specifically at the exspense of high income tax payers. The best explanation of why the liberal paranoia over the payroll tax holiday is nonsense is probably this, from Randall Wray and Marshall Auerback:
One of the highlights of the president’s compromise on the tax bill is a temporary payroll tax “holiday” — something we have long advocated for along with others such as James K. Galbraith and Warren Mosler. The proposed deal would cut the tax by two percentage points from the current 6.2% applied on employment income up to $106,800. The beauty is that it can take effect immediately, raising weekly take-home pay and totaling about $112 billion in fiscal stimulus annually. Since the vast majority of Americans pay more in payroll taxes than in federal income taxes, it provides broad-based tax relief (unlike the original Bush tax cuts that were skewed to high income earners in part because they pay most of the federal income tax). The payroll tax itself is regressive because high income earners escape FICA taxes on most of their employment income, so reducing the federal government’s reliance on it should be celebrated. In other words, this holiday is a progressive’s dream come true.

Instead of cheers, however, the liberal left is worried about this plan. For example, Heidi Hartmann argues that it puts Social Security at risk because it will be difficult to end the “holiday” by restoring the two percentage points later. She also offers an alternative that would achieve essentially the same tax relief through tax rebate checks, thereby leaving the payroll tax alone. This is offered as a lower risk alternative because it is easier to stop the rebates than to restore payroll taxes, which will be seen as a tax hike. But her defense of the payroll tax is fundamentally misguided.

and much more, well worth reading.
http://www.newdeal20.org/2010/12/16/cut-the-payroll-tax-to-save-social-security-30278/

[TBF]

25. Read what you just posted - Obama didn't do that.

We all agree with these sorts of ideas:" Democrats should propose eliminating payroll taxes on the first $20,000 of income, and making up the revenue loss by applying payroll taxes to incomes above $250,000. This would give the economy an immediate boost by adding to the paychecks of just about every working American. 80 percent of Americans pay more in payroll taxes than they do in income taxes. And because lower-income people would get most of the benefit, it's likely to be spent."

That is exactly what SHOULD happen, and DOESN'T under Obama's "deal" with the republicans.

[bornskeptic]

32. The objection of the left seems to be to the idea of a payroll tax holiday.

Certainly Galbraith and Reich would prefer a larger and more progressive than that in the compromise, and I suspect that President Obama would as well. He could only get what the Republicans would agree to. But if the progressive fear about financing Social Security from sources other than payroll taxes were grounded, they would apply even more seriously to what Galbraith and Reich would advocate.

[TBF]

33. You did not respond to what I said. Obama DID NOT do what you claim.

What "the left" objects to or does not object to (especially from your distorted perspective) is completely irrelevant.

[bornskeptic]

45. You said it wasn't the same as Reich's plan. Of course it's not.

You just haven't said what your objection is to the payroll tax holiday as passed. It certainly puts money immediately in the hands of people who wil spend it, and leaves the Social Security Trust Fund exactly the same as it would otherwise be. So what do you object to?

[TBF]

46. Objection is that it is not targeted to the folks who need it most -

it is a give-away to the wealthy. Not to mention the fact that the remainder of the payment for social security will come out of the "general fund", thus set it up to be cut like any other entitlement program. I've said that numerous times.

[bornskeptic]

49. I agree that it could be a lot better,

but the fact that the money comes out of the general fund has no effect beyond next year. The payroll tax holiday could just as wellhave been defined as a refundable income tax credit of 2% of earned income up to $107,000. By April 15, 2012, the situation would be exactly the same, and it would be obvious that Social Security was not affected. The advantage of defining it as a payroll tax holiday is that low income taxpayers who have little or no withholding receive the money faster.

[TBF]

40. My research re the DLC attack on social security -

http://journals.democraticunderground.com/TBF/26

[TBF]

4. Your pragmatic, liberal reformism is killing people.

Expensive wars, exorbitant cost of tax breaks for the billionaires of the US, attempting to defund social security by cutting the payroll tax. This is not "liberal reformism" - it is Ronald Reagan on speed.

[stray cat]

9. Not getting the flu vaccine kills people too - so do hospitals

But DU is really picky about whose death or imprisonment they care about

[TBF]

11. Damned those progressives for caring about the deaths of working class folks

so a few more billionaires can benefit. They are so damned selfish.

:sarcasm:

[jaxx]

12. Reagan is dead. Get over it.

Living in yesterday is something this country can't do, it has to move forward. We have the man in the Oval Office who is getting it done.

[Recursion]

13. +1

Sick of fighting the same fight.

[TBF]

39. Guess what - we're going to fight whether you like it or not. I know you'd rather us lie down and

die. It would be so much easier for Mr. Obama to push through his supply-side ideas. But, no, those of us on the left are not going anywhere and we are not going to assist you in ripping off the working class.

[progressoid]

15. Wow, that post is just dripping with gooey irony.

You do realize your OP refences a much longer dead president right?

[TBF]

16. "Getting IT done" is not positive when it is a supply-side agenda. Unless you're a billionaire -

maybe you are. The gap between rich and poor is getting wider under Obama. If that does not cause alarm for you, you are not working class and/or do not care about the majority of people in this country.

[earthside]

18. Reaganomics lives.

It was signed into law last week as official policy of the Obama administration.

Tax cuts for all!

[ibegurpard]

21. not as long as Democrats vote to keep his policies going

[enough]

6. I'm reccing this not because I agree with it, but it's an interesting point of view.

However, I see the un-recs have it at this point.

[Phx_Dem]

19. K&R

[Pisces]

20. K &R

[Bluenorthwest]

23. Sullivan was a leading Iraq invasion cheerleader

as well as a strident critic of those who spoke against the invasion. At the time, he says he was comforted by the presence of Dick Cheney in the administration. When he later found the need to recant his pro-Bush positions, he claimed to feel so much guilt for his role in the Iraq disaster that he'd 'never stop apologizing'. Instead, he remounted the podium of self righteousness almost instantly, and launched back into devotion to his own opinion, always coupled for Andy with characterizations of others with whom he does not agree. He can not merely state his own case, ever, he has to frame the case of others, as he did when he framed the anti-war demonstrators and writers as foolish, dangerous, and utterly wrong.
To agree with Sully is to agree with a man who drew comfort from Cheney being in charge. He was and is a Republican, I am not. I opposed the war. Sullivan promoted it, pushed it, and was a basic monger for an illegal war of aggression.
It is possible to be so wrong about important things that your future opinions are forever tainted. For me, Sullivan was that wrong about Iraq. And Bush. And Cheney. And Rumsfeld. And Rice. And so on...

[jaxx]

27. Once in awhile a pub gets it right, and Sullivan did on this.

Except for the Tory bit, but as you say he is a republican. The idea of being President of all the people is what President Obama has always said, and he looks out for the middle class whether some would admit it, or not.

[Vinnie From Indy]

28. Thank you for this post!

Well written and dead on!

I hope all DU'ers take a moment to reflect on Sully's past and especially his views on Dick Cheney. He is still a right-winger.

Cheers!

[Pisces]

30. He has also publicly stated he was wrong and regrets supporting the war. He has also been a strong

Cheney critic. I guess no one is allowed to make a mistake? He doesn't even consider himself Republican anymore. The right wing, tea party takeover has pushed so many fiscal conservatives out of the
party that there will only be religious loons left.

Sullivan is now opposed to the wars. Maybe you should read some of his posts before commenting.

[TheKentuckian]

43. "Fiscal conservatives" are the most Republican Republicans you can find.

Those greedy fuckheads are who unleashed the social regressives on us to add manpower to their strip mining of America and the world.

Sullivan is a worthless greedhead, whose greatest strength is that if his nose is rubbed in the shit hard enough that he will retreat from his demonstrated to be absurd position but without the intelligence to cross the lessons learned into other areas, even the deeply related ones.

[treestar]

31. About the writer, not about what he said.

[Bluenorthwest]

42. About a proven, glaring lack of insight and long view on the

part of the writer. About putting into perspective a Republican writer who has often been extremely wrong about extremely important issues about which others were very correct. He dreams of a Tory President. I don't. We had one, his name was Reagan.

[Paladin]

26. And Yet Another Right Wing Pundit Joins The Obama Fan Club.

The line forms over there, Andrew. Just take your place behind David Brooks, Charles Krauthammer and all the rest. And never fear---the Rich-Krugman-Maddow contingent has been ejected from the building.....

[Pisces]

29. Sullivan hasn't considered himself Republican for a while. Where have you been? He also said he

regretted his support of the Iraq war. He could never be called rightwing.

[Mass]

35. But his philosophy has not changed. It is the party that left him.

[Mimosa]

38. ^ Oh, bull, Pisces. Sullivan is a hypocrite who'll do anything to hang out with 'power' n/t

[Paladin]

44. I Stand By My Comments.

Andrew Sullivan is a right wing pundit, just like I said.

[Chan790]

55. What Sullivan considers himself is less relevant than the fact of what he is ideologically.

My on-and-off girlfriend considers herself a moderate Democrat...when I met her she was working for the Ron Paul campaign, she's staunchly anti-tax, wants to kill the Fed and SEC, her favorite book is The Fountainhead, and she wants to decriminalize all controlled substances. She's fairly obviously a libertarian regardless what she calls herself.

Who is Andrew Sullivan again? What does he believe in? What labels fit regardless of what he calls or considers himself?

[Mass]

34. No surprise that Sullivan would envision Obama as a Republican. He is one.

But this is still Democratic Underground, I think. I honestly hope Sullivan is wrong because, while Eisenhower was much better than most Republican nowadays, he is definitively not my model of a president.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

37. Ike Would Definitely Be Considered A RINO Nowadays And Could Never Win The Repub Nomination

.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

36. The Tory Party Was The Predecessor To The Conservative Party In The UK

From what I know they are more Burke than DeMint in their conservatism but I don't think the President believes he is one...

[Dawson Leery]

41. Barebacker still has to give a jab to the liberals,

all the while he cannot let go of the "Tory" (i.e conservative) label.

[jonnyblitz]

47. So being called a fucking Tory is considered complimentary

these days here at DU? wow. :crazy:

and FUCK Bareback Andy.

[jaxx]

50. Nah. It's Sullivan's thing. Read the article and ignore the word.

But it did get people in an uproar...and I'm surprised with all the names President Obama is called here.

[Hello_Kitty]

61. Ignore it? I don't think so.

n., pl., -ries.
A member of a British political party, founded in 1689, that was the opposition party to the Whigs and has been known as the Conservative Party since about 1832.
A member of a Conservative Party, as in Canada.
An American who, during the period of the American Revolution, favored the British side. Also called Loyalist.
often tory A supporter of traditional political and social institutions against the forces of democratization or reform; a political conservative.

[Hell Hath No Fury]

59. Dude, we are --

down the Rabbit Hole. :scared:

[Hello_Kitty]

62. Seriously. Up is now officially down. eom

[craigmatic]

51. I disagree with this phrase in the article

"This is particularly important since so many of his opponents are white and disproportionately affected by this long recession."

Obama's republican opponents maybe majority white but they are not the ones who were hit disproportionately by the recession. Minority employment rates were at or near 10% before the recession and now in some places it's over 20%. The republicans on the other hand represent the rich. Their foot soldiers are the tea party and most of them are retirees or people who still have jobs.

[jaxx]

52. Maybe he means they were not affected much by the recession?

I don't know.

[Honeycombe8]

53. I like Sullivan, but I think he's pushing it here. He's lost his objectivity. nt

[Donnachaidh]

54. you do realize that the Tories were run out of the country, right?

I find it hysterical that a republican should use a term that was interchangeable with traitor during the Revolutionary War and afterwards. Especially telling is the way some here applaud this label as well.

koolaid -- back away from the pitcher. :rofl:

[Hell Hath No Fury]

58. I can barely grok what I am seeing here --

so many cheering on a fucking Tory. :crazy: :wow: :freak:

[Hell Hath No Fury]

57. Yes, Andrew Sullivan DOES get it.

It's too bad so many here don't.

Peas in a Pod




Stop the world, I wanna get off. :crazy:

[Bluenorthwest]

60. Tories in the News! For those who don't get what Sully is saying.

Thatcher was a Tory. He's dreaming of a 'one nation' Republican President when he says 'Tory'.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2010/dec/21/tories-policing-law-order-protests-violence

[truebrit71]

64. Absolute drivel....from a known 'fair-weather' commentator...

..and yes Andrew, there's quite alot of us in the Rich-Krugman-Maddow chorus that DO want a Michael Moore-in-chief...there's a bloody good chance if we'd had one of those instead of your former hero W we wouldn't be in two wars we can't pay for and the banks would have been reigned in...