Like The Bush Tax Cuts Extension Never Happened

By Big Tent Democrat, Section Media
Posted on Fri Jul 29, 2011 at 11:34:32 AM EST
Tags: (all tags)

Share This: Digg!

Sorry to beat a dead horse, but this from Kevin Drum annoyed me:

If Obama had negotiated with nerves of steel, would he have gotten better deals throughout his presidency? I don't think so. Unlike labor bosses and Soviet bosses, who could be pressured because there were things they wanted that a president could provide, Republicans — and especially tea party Republicans — can't be. If Obama had been tough as nails, they would followed a path of total obstruction and nihilism anyway. Maybe some details here and there would have changed, but on the whole it just wouldn't have made any difference.

(Emphasis supplied.) In December, the President had his biggest bargaining chip - the Bush tax cuts. To pretend he did not is either wilful blindness or ignorance. Now you can argue for The Deal the President made, but don't pretend it was not a moment of maximum bargaining leverage. The debt ceiling increase is a moment of maximum bargaining leverage for Republicans. They are wringing out as much as they can from it (that the Tea Party is genuinely insane does not change that fact.) See my posts The Debt Ceiling Battle Was Lost Last December and Seeking Maximum Leverage In Political Bargaining. See also the Madman Theory of Political Bargaining.

Speaking for me only

< GDP Growth Reports: 2nd Qtr 1.3%; 1st Qtr Revised Downward to 0.4% | How Would Failure On Raising The Debt Ceiling Play Politically? >

Legal

Nothing on this site should be construed as legal advice. TalkLeft does not give legal advice.

TalkLeft is not responsible for and often disagrees with material posted in the comments section. Read at your own risk.

Like The Bush Tax Cuts Extension Never Happened | 55 comments (55 topical)

Readers Must Login or Create an Account to Comment

Wilfull blind ignorance? (5.00 / 1) (#1)
by Dadler on Fri Jul 29, 2011 at 11:53:47 AM EST

These cats really have no excuse for their lack of understanding.

None.

Nothing works like fear (5.00 / 2) (#3)
by NYShooter on Fri Jul 29, 2011 at 11:56:56 AM EST

New Hampshire, 1980: When Ronald Reagan shouted out, "I am paying for this microphone!" nobody questioned who was the Alpha male in the room.

Nobody fears Barack Obama.

At some point (5.00 / 2) (#4)
by TeresaInSnow2 on Fri Jul 29, 2011 at 12:10:21 PM EST

everyone in the room will admit that Obama is a Moderate Conservative. That's why he snoozed on the Bush Tax Cuts...aka now as The Obama Tax Cuts. He wants what the Republicans want.

But even if Obama favored (5.00 / 1) (#8)
by Warren Terrer on Fri Jul 29, 2011 at 12:20:36 PM EST

the extension of the Bush tax cuts, that's not a good reason to just give them to the GOP for next to nothing in return. A good negotiator would have recognized that tax cuts is the one and only thing the GOP really cares about, and would have held out for something good in return. This is true even if the negotiator really wants the same thing too. Obama does understand this at times, because look at how he is attempting to get something in the debt ceiling negotiations, i.e. revenue increases, even though he and (most of) the GOP both want to raise the debt ceiling.

I deeply suspect Geithner's hand in all this. He convinced Obama that discontinuing the Bush tax cuts would be bad for the economy so it was better to continue them rather than negotiate hard over them, and that when the debt ceiling issue came up the GOP wouldn't create too much trouble because they want the debt ceiling raised too.

But it was folly not to realize that the GOP would have no problem going to the brink over the debt ceiling and that a number of GOP members genuinely believe that raising the debt ceiling is a bad idea and will not vote for it. Obama should have recognized this given that he himself opposed raising the debt ceiling in 2006.


But (5.00 / 2) (#14)
by TeresaInSnow2 on Fri Jul 29, 2011 at 12:37:26 PM EST

But he also wanted the debt ceiling negotiations as another way to deliver more Republican policies.


How's that (none / 0) (#16)
by Warren Terrer on Fri Jul 29, 2011 at 12:43:28 PM EST

worked out for him so far?


: We are only in the second act (none / 0) (#35)
by MO Blue on Fri Jul 29, 2011 at 03:37:23 PM EST

of a three act play. IMO elements of the final deal will set the stage for the final act - cuts to the safety net programs and more tax cuts for corporation and the wealth.

: Great, as far as I can tell (none / 0) (#49)
by gyrfalcon on Sat Jul 30, 2011 at 01:59:43 AM EST

fallacious argument: begging the question (none / 0) (#24)
by The Addams Family on Fri Jul 29, 2011 at 01:26:29 PM EST

He only opposed it (none / 0) (#48)
by gyrfalcon on Sat Jul 30, 2011 at 01:59:17 AM EST

knowing with utter confidence it would pass without him and the handful of others who voted against it.

Totally different scenario today.


It isn't about toughness, or spine (5.00 / 4) (#13)
by Anne on Fri Jul 29, 2011 at 12:35:46 PM EST

or courage or negotiating skill level - it's about ideology and worldview, and whether Obama is on board with a Republican worldview because he actually believes in it, or because he is pathologically driven to be better at what his political opponents do than they are, it doesn't matter: Obama did what he did and is doing what he's doing because that's what he wanted then and wants now.

That he isn't even bothering to use what I would call Democratic rhetoric to discuss the issue should tell everyone that he's not interested in forging that path; the choices were there, a long list of well-known and respected economists could be cited as support for more government spending, there is a lot of history that proves that these Republican ideas just do not work, there is a long history of non-partisan increases of the debt ceiling.

He did not go there. He made a token effort to ask for a clean bill, but when it failed, he bailed.

I wish he would officially bail on his Democratic Party affiliation, and see if he has the balls to prevail over the Cavalcade of Clowns that is the Republican field; two more years of the death of ideological tension at the top is going to lead to a steady diet of bad policy that will make things exponentially worse. And the possibility that he could get four more years? That we could spend the next six years pretending that Obama is not working out of the Republican playbook?

Ugh-on-steroids.

Hilarious via The Onion (5.00 / 1) (#26)
by NYShooter on Fri Jul 29, 2011 at 01:29:54 PM EST

"WASHINGTON--With lawmakers still at an impasse over increasing the debt ceiling, a special team of 40 eighth-grade civics teachers was air-dropped into Washington earlier today in a last-ditch effort to teach congressional leaders how the government's legislative process works. "We started them off with the basics, like the difference between a senator and a representative, and then moved on to more complex concepts, like what a resolution is," Bozeman, MT social studies teacher Heidi Rossmiller told reporters as all 535 members of Congress copied down the definition of "checks and balances" from a whiteboard in the House chamber.

"It's been a bit of an uphill battle, since most of them seemed to have no real sense of how or why a bill is passed, and Sen. [Harry] Reid [D-NV] had to come up to me during a break and ask, `Ms. Rossmiller, what happens if Congress can't reach a compromise?' But hopefully it will all start to sink in soon." At press time, an unruly House Speaker John Boehner (R-OH) had noisily stormed out of a lecture on bipartisan cooperation, claiming it was "too hard."


A little unfair (none / 0) (#50)
by gyrfalcon on Sat Jul 30, 2011 at 02:02:49 AM EST

as far as Reid is concerned, frankly.

But man, I heard a bunch of Tea Party freshmen interviews this evening, and the utter, um, innocence of how this all works, both the economy and congressional procedures, was mind-boggling to me.

There's something to be said for citizen legislators as a concept, but geez.


" A little unfair?" (none / 0) (#53)
by NYShooter on Sat Jul 30, 2011 at 04:39:06 AM EST

Its the Onion.....its a joke, a parody, a spoof...jeesh

but, to the point, "citizen legislators..."

This whole fiasco, the complete paralysis of our government, is just a taste of what "Government by Referendum" looks like.

Our Founding fathers knew that, which is exactly why they chose "representative" government as the guiding principle in running a country.

But, anyway, when you debase the educational system like we've done over the past few decades, what you see is what you get.

So, what's the answer? Why, cut more teachers of course.


: Sure, the Onion (none / 0) (#55)
by gyrfalcon on Sat Jul 30, 2011 at 09:09:54 AM EST

but satire only really works well when its targets are well chosen, IMO.

Titles (5.00 / 1) (#27)
by Big Tent Democrat on Fri Jul 29, 2011 at 01:30:10 PM EST

We Don't Do "Personal" in the titles, other than public figures in the arena.

: Leaving stuff out gets you this: (none / 0) (#32)
by Anne on Fri Jul 29, 2011 at 01:42:21 PM EST

Revisionist History: The Story Lines Are So Much Better.
Not personal, but it makes the point.

so, according to mr. drum, (5.00 / 1) (#39)
by cpinva on Fri Jul 29, 2011 at 04:24:42 PM EST

2009 & 2010 never happened? i seem to recall, for those two years, mr. obama enjoyed a majority of his party in both houses of congress, and still managed to avoid getting a whole lot accomplished, because of his absolute insistence on bipartisanship.

in effect, pres. obama hoist himself on his own petard, over and over and over again.

Meanwhile (2.00 / 1) (#23)
by AngryBlackGuy on Fri Jul 29, 2011 at 01:25:47 PM EST

at the Weekly Standard:

Part of the insanity here is that both extremes seem to think that they are losing.

One of the "extremes" is right (5.00 / 3) (#25)
by Big Tent Democrat on Fri Jul 29, 2011 at 01:29:14 PM EST

Which one do you think?


They are both wrong (2.00 / 1) (#36)
by AngryBlackGuy on Fri Jul 29, 2011 at 03:59:41 PM EST

I had a liberal Wall Street Type say to me today that the situation stinks because we need stimulus but the ratings agencies aren't really screwing around. They are going to downgrade us unless the debt comes under control and whether we do that through tax hikes or through cuts, it's all going to hurt the economy.

Shorter: There are no winners and whether we raised taxes or decrease spending, it's all not going to be good for the economy. His take is that with the similar dip happening in the EU and Japan, if Obama had pushed through an increase in taxes on the rich, we'd be sitting here with everything we wanted, the economy dipping and the GOP poised to push through real austerity and take over government in 2012.

As someone who has always believed that this latest dip could not be avoided under any circumstances, I agree.

But he did say that Obama could have gotten more in the Deal economically.

He is between you and me on the impact of the Deal, he thinks it was a tactical mistake but thinks that even with a tax increase, huge cuts were inevitable regardless because of the ratings and the politics and everything else.

The only upside: this will likely play out in a way that removes the debt reduction as a powerful election day tool.


Except that (5.00 / 1) (#38)
by Warren Terrer on Fri Jul 29, 2011 at 04:23:57 PM EST

the problem for the economy comes entirely from the spending cuts, not from the downgrade on government bonds.


What?!?!? (5.00 / 1) (#40)
by Yman on Fri Jul 29, 2011 at 04:44:23 PM EST

For the past several months (at least) you've been telling us the economy is improving, and would improve even more by the end of this year into next summer. Now you want to claim you always believed this "latest dip" couldn't be avoided?

Seriously?


The economy has been improving (none / 0) (#42)
by AngryBlackGuy on Fri Jul 29, 2011 at 05:10:55 PM EST

I still think it is. We had some thing last quarter that were unusual. I think if not for Japan and the heat, we'd have had a continued slow climb out of the recession.

Next quarter we should see an above average spike because of pent up demand but that will make things look a little too rosy I think. The reality will be somewhere between these numbers and those.

Just my guess.


: The HEAT?!? (none / 0) (#54)
by Yman on Sat Jul 30, 2011 at 08:18:24 AM EST

Jeeeeeezus ... now you're blaming it on the heat? Yeah ... 'cause that never happens in the summer.
Pffffttttt.
You think the horrible economy we've had is "improving"?!? That's the advantage to setting the bar so low, as you always do with Obama. Point to the slightest bit of evidence of "improvement" (or just say it's improving), ignore all evidence to the contrary, and then say Obama's doing as well as could be expected, ya' know ... under the circumstances. If unemployment isn't in "the 7's" (as you predicted), it'll be because of something "beyond Obama's control" - the budget impasse, a natural disaster, .... maybe even the weather.
Heh.

Just my guess.
Ex-ACT-ly.

No (none / 0) (#41)
by AngryBlackGuy on Fri Jul 29, 2011 at 05:08:39 PM EST

actually the problem on the economy comes from the fact that the entire globe (whether they used austerity or stimulus) is doing pretty badly. I believe only two countries that aren't moving in the wrong direction are Germany and France, and that is because of very unique aspects of their economy, not necessarily their economic tactics.

And even their Q2 slowed.

The issue with your statement is obvious: if the economic downturn were related to our economic policies, it wouldn't be effecting every other economy simultaneously. But every western country on earth had slowdown last quarter. your position makes no logical and economic macro sense.


Um, look (5.00 / 2) (#43)
by Warren Terrer on Fri Jul 29, 2011 at 05:12:59 PM EST

You just argued that the problem is spending cuts and bond downgrades, and how the two can't be reconciled because Obama can't spend more IF the bonds are consequently downgraded.

Now you change your argument to 'it's the entire world economy'. This is BS. The problem for the USA is a lack of aggregate demand which can be remedied via government spending. Please just pi$$ off, ok?


American corruption (5.00 / 1) (#44)
by Dadler on Fri Jul 29, 2011 at 05:20:03 PM EST

That is what is bringing down much of the rest of the west. So much toxic American crap was peddled to other countries, the product of such pervasive criminal activity it boggles the mind, almost as much as the reality that there will never be any day of reckoning for almost all of those criminals. We incarcerate all the small-time hoods and we let the big-time hoods run the country. Just how banana republics roll.


: Yep (none / 0) (#45)
by Warren Terrer on Fri Jul 29, 2011 at 05:27:04 PM EST

It was the US housing bubble that brought down the entire world economy, but there's nothing the US can do about it. So sad.

Funny, that (none / 0) (#51)
by gyrfalcon on Sat Jul 30, 2011 at 02:03:57 AM EST

I guess your buddy hadn't heard that Moody's has announced it ain't doing any downgrading any time soon.


Republicans ALWAYS write that (5.00 / 1) (#28)
by observed on Fri Jul 29, 2011 at 01:31:08 PM EST

they are losing. Didn't you know that?


: Yes! (none / 0) (#52)
by gyrfalcon on Sat Jul 30, 2011 at 02:07:48 AM EST

You got it. The latest GOP talking point tonight, which I've heard from at least three different GOPer types on three different channels, is that in the past, the mean old Dems have always forced the Republicans to the wall and they've ended up caving. But now these brave new conservatives are going to expunge that shame and stand up for themselves for once.
This stuff is really breath-taking. Talk about your audacity of hope.

as someone kindly pointed out to you last night (5.00 / 2) (#30)
by The Addams Family on Fri Jul 29, 2011 at 01:35:30 PM EST

this is a lefty blog - it's a given here that the GOP is b@tsh!t crazy

this being a lefty blog, the focus here tends to be on what our side is up to (& closest thing w/r/t electoral politics tends to be the Democratic Party)

when the Democratic Party is f^cking up, that tends to concern us & we talk about it

only in the world of Obama For America would that constitute an "extreme"

i won't bother to ask you what Obama For America thinks of the 2008 Democratic Party platform - i think we already know

but hey - WTF, right?


Funny how on many issues of the day (5.00 / 2) (#37)
by MO Blue on Fri Jul 29, 2011 at 04:02:07 PM EST

by backing Obama's policies and supporting the position that cuts must be made to safety net programs for the good of Obama, you are a part of the fringe or extreme element you are so often deriding.

With our political leaders foolishly insistent on focusing on the issue of long term deficits at a time of high unemployment, it would be nice if they at least acknowledged that regular Americans basically only support left leaning ideas to bring down the debt. From Pew:
...
The other top four ideas with majority support include two ways of raising taxes on the rich, making corporations pay more in taxes, and reducing military spending/ending our wars.
An the other hand majorities opposing cutting education, Social Security or help to low income Americans. link

When discussing the safety net programs, Obama and subsequently your best fit seems to be in this category.

Wealthier Republicans are much more likely to desire entitlement cuts in order to reduce the deficit. Republicans and Republican-leaners earning $75,000 or more per year overwhelmingly prioritize reducing the deficit over maintaining entitlement benefits (63 percent versus 29 percent). link

When a good compromise is achieved, (none / 0) (#31)
by itscookin on Fri Jul 29, 2011 at 01:38:01 PM EST

all parties walk away feeling like they have won more than they lost. The sign of a bad compromise is no one feeling like they have won anything at all. There may be a few winners politically at the end of the day when what eventually passes is signed by Obama, but the victory may turn out to be pyrrhic.


The tax cuts (none / 0) (#2)
by lilburro on Fri Jul 29, 2011 at 11:56:42 AM EST

The best argument against your position BTD IMO is that we absolutely could not, could not risk any of those tax cuts expiring for economic reasons. I think you can also argue it would be bad politics to do so, but if so, then Obama made a choice to be a wimp, he wasn't forced into it.

The economy is still screwed anyway, so it's hard to say that the WH made a great policy decision with the tax cuts either way.

So the Deal was just a very politically safe thing to do, and I think that deserves some criticism.

Maybe (5.00 / 1) (#34)
by Madeline on Fri Jul 29, 2011 at 02:58:57 PM EST

but isn't it possible that it would have helped improve people's outlook, given them hope that at least the government wasn't abandoning them for the wealthy?

Even a president has to be or pretend to be on the people's side. To see and hear someone fighting for them can be very motivating. That's also leadership. Isn't that one of the reasons he got elected, making people feel safe and help was on the way after the tumultuous Bush years?

It doesn't appear that Obama has much empathy/ insight about the toll his frequently unfiltered statements make nor the public reaction that some of his policy decisions produce. Even with Medicare and Social security, there had to be a better way than announcing (BAM) a commission was being formed to trim entitlements. Or his presentation where he stood in front of AARP members and talked to them about the need for an end of life decision. See how that went? Filters, insight and empathy nada. Sarah Palin was listening.

I know...a pol is a pol, they'll do what's best for self. I think it is also true the detached pol causes more damage than the one who people believe fights the good fight for you and loses sometime.

Then again, maybe we really needed a woman president who could be both; citizen soother and warrior.

: Doesn't have to be female (none / 0) (#47)
by gyrfalcon on Sat Jul 30, 2011 at 01:56:43 AM EST

Bill Clinton was fabulous at it, and there are plenty of top female pols who aren't. Maggie Thatcher anyone?
Otherwise, I agree with you entirely.

According to Ali Velshi on CNN (none / 0) (#46)
by gyrfalcon on Sat Jul 30, 2011 at 01:54:40 AM EST

this evening, this idea that tax cuts create recessions is a myth. He's got facts and figures to back it up. FWIW.


here has to be a better title for this post. (none / 0) (#5)
by oculus on Fri Jul 29, 2011 at 12:15:20 PM EST

Thinking.

Emoticon. Who knew? (5.00 / 1) (#7)
by oculus on Fri Jul 29, 2011 at 12:19:47 PM EST

beating a dead horse


Probably (none / 0) (#6)
by Big Tent Democrat on Fri Jul 29, 2011 at 12:19:21 PM EST

Give me one and I'll change it.


Wailing on Drum (none / 0) (#9)
by oculus on Fri Jul 29, 2011 at 12:21:22 PM EST

: "Drum misses the beat ... (5.00 / 3) (#17)
by Warren Terrer on Fri Jul 29, 2011 at 12:50:54 PM EST

... again"

: Per Wiki, Mr. Drum originated the (none / 0) (#11)
by oculus on Fri Jul 29, 2011 at 12:32:40 PM EST

practice of "Friday cat blogging"

: The wrong Drummer (none / 0) (#12)
by observed on Fri Jul 29, 2011 at 12:35:34 PM EST

: Stretching Credulity - Tight as a Drum (none / 0) (#19)
by Yman on Fri Jul 29, 2011 at 01:01:05 PM EST

: Drum Deluded. (none / 0) (#20)
by oculus on Fri Jul 29, 2011 at 01:07:24 PM EST

: Another drummed down take on (none / 0) (#21)
by observed on Fri Jul 29, 2011 at 01:08:22 PM EST

Obama.

: Drum Circle (jerk) ? (none / 0) (#22)
by ruffian on Fri Jul 29, 2011 at 01:09:36 PM EST

How about (none / 0) (#10)
by Warren Terrer on Fri Jul 29, 2011 at 12:21:47 PM EST

"Kevin Drum wrong", although that could be the title for a thousand posts.


: Dumb and Drummer (5.00 / 2) (#18)
by Buckeye on Fri Jul 29, 2011 at 12:55:00 PM EST

A title for this post (none / 0) (#15)
by TeresaInSnow2 on Fri Jul 29, 2011 at 12:38:32 PM EST

Drum-ing a Dead Horse.

Boehner Plan gaining support (none / 0) (#29)
by jbindc on Fri Jul 29, 2011 at 01:32:14 PM EST

They've added a balanced-budget amendment. This should bring the Tea Partiers on board.

House Republicans will link passage of a balanced-budget amendment to Speaker John Boehner's (R-Ohio) last-ditch debt-ceiling plan, which GOP lawmakers said would move the measure to passage in a high-stakes vote later on Friday.
Republican lawmakers seemed confident after a vital Friday morning conference meeting that the tweaked Boehner proposal would pass muster with a restive conference.
"I'm smiling," Boehner said after perhaps the most crucial conference meeting of his speakership.

SNIP

A GOP leadership source said the vote would take place between 7 p.m. and 8 p.m. Friday.

: "balance" is a good word. (5.00 / 2) (#33)
by KeysDan on Fri Jul 29, 2011 at 02:02:51 PM EST

Anything with balance will work: balanced budget, balanced debt ceiling deal. Even if the people and policy involved are unbalanced. Almost as good as "free", or "new and improved" or "reform".