So, let me see if I have this right.

Obama circumvents both Houses of a duly elected Congress, makes a backdoor deal with republicans that he KNOWS will enrage Dems, announces the deal on national tv, gets upset when they don't support his actions. Then he goes on to announce that it's a "done deal" that can't be changed and that if they don't pass it, they're putting the country in danger of falling back into a recession.

Doesn't that make him just another "Decider-in-Chief" or a Dictator that has adopted the Unitary Executive Theory of the Neocons?

What was that old "joke" of Dubya's? Oh, yeah, "It would be easier if this were a dictatorship, as long as I was the dictator".

What's wrong with this picture?

:shrug:

17th level pan-dimensional clusterfuck chess.

And I am relentlessly reminded about his popularity numbers, and the overwhelming majorities of the sacred American people who support getting an extra five bucks for themselves while the wealthy each walk off with hundreds of thousands, if not millions more, so what's all this worry over the silly deficit? But any extension of unemployment benefits (and certainly no more benefits for those whose benefits have already run out) must be paid for.

:crazy:

'cause he sucks at Monopoly. Borrowing money from China to buy Boardwalk and Park Place while foreclosing on all the little houses in Marvin Gardens, and letting the railroads and utilities fall into disrepair is an epic fail.

That's an excellent description!

:thumbsup:

If you've posted it before, I've missed it

Somebody said that President Obama was playing patty-cake while the GOP were playing tackle football.

I'm going to save my arm flailing until then.

"House Democrats defy Obama on tax deal"
<http://www.cnn.com/2010/POLITICS/12/09/tax.plan/index.html?hpt=T1>

When these cuts all expire.

flailing won't serve much purpose after it's passed.

He should have spent more time in the feeder corp (legislature) before trying to become a Dictator.

Even Dictators need support of those around him.

Its actually worse, as his surrender blunts any fight on our side that may want to put a stop to this.

Or maybe Invasion of the Body Snatchers.

Whatever it is, he's not speaking for Democrats on this one.

He's a New Democrat.

Oh, wait....

:shrug:

He's saying that its time for the president to come and speak to the caucus to tell them "what he's doing".

Cummings asserts that the Republicans will come back and demand a cut in social programs because of the deficit created.

eta: Cummings just said - Obama should come speak "to the people who carried his water".

Thanks for posting that.

I wondered if anyone would bring up the bogus 'tax holiday' trojan horse

Too bad Obama doesn't listen to him. Of course, Cummings is a Dem, so I guess I shouldn't expect Obama to listen to him.

So now when stands up and takes charge you dont like it but he is the worst of all presidents cause he wont stand up and take charge its amazing how anything thisa guy does is wrong.

Nice try, though. He couldn't stand up and take charge on any issue of interest to Democrats: like Don't Ask Don't Tell or the Environment or a Pro-Union stance or against the war. But he'll be a unitary exec on issues that favor Republicans? Yeah, no way I'm voting for this guy. No way. I'd be punched in the face before voting for him again.

You might actually learn something from this eh?

If he walked across the Potomac today, tomorrow's headlines would read: "The President Can't Swim!"

LBJ:

http://www.workinghumor.com/quotes/lyndon_johnson.shtml

Really? Really?

I don't know about anyone else, but I want him to work WITH his party, you know, the DEMS, NOT capitulate to the Repubs BEFORE the negotiations even begin.

Gawd, I'd love to get him in a poker game. He'd fold before the cards were even dealt.

a privilege that GWB never extended to Democrats

that both branches must work together. Or to get more people at large (read: outside DU et al.) fired up enough to take a more active role in government.

Just guessing...not trying to apologize one way or the other.

and not in a good way(for him), but it could work for us if the House holds the line on this.

See? It works! Ross Perot? Never heard of him. Move to the right!

Way too many people on this site fail to understand politics.

He is a politician, not a dictator, and after the past election must now govern from the middle.

Failure to do so will mean total republican control in 2012.

because according to the Dems in the House & the Senate, he by-passed them completely to cut a deal with the opposition. Since they are co-equal branches, circumventing them is, to say the least, ill-advised. To say the worst, he's setting himself up as the "decider", something that was met with great derision,disgust, and ridicule when his predecessor tried it.

Considering the fall-out, I'd have to say, it wasn't his best move, but it does seem to be his MO. He's just repeating what he did with the Health Insurance giveaway.

As far as him governing from the middle, I'd be happy if he governed from the middle, but he'd have to move to the left to do that. He'd also have to learn how to govern, imo.

. . . and that they won't do much differently than he did, they just wanted him to be out front absorbing the blame. They'll piggyback their own compromise on top of his and act as if they're acting independently. Problem is, nothing was standing in their way from doing that all year. It would be different if they were just going to take a starkly different course than the President and just let the tax breaks fall. But they're not going to do that and it's hypocritical and phony to complain that the President is doing what they intended all along.

But you knew that.

I hate the thought of having to compromise on the tax cuts just as much as you do, but no compromise is only in your corner when YOU have the upper hand. Right now, the Republicans HAVE the upper hand – more than enough “no” votes in the Senate to keep tax cuts for the wealthy in ANY compromise. If Democratic candidates didn't ignore the President and used the tax cuts for the wealthy issue in their 2010 Campaign messages - like he suggested to them in the first place, perhaps 90% rather than 40% of eligible voters would have came out to vote in the midterms and the Democrats would have the upper hand regarding the tax cut controversy.

Because of the midterm results, Republicans will be in charge of the House and the 60 vote filibuster-proof Senate on the side of Democrats will be out the door come January 1st. At least now a compromise will benefit the middle class, the poor, and the unemployed and small businesses with the extension of unemployment benefits, tax cuts for the middle class, payroll tax cuts, and incentives for small businesses to create jobs. It’s not the best of both worlds, but it’s better than nothing. After January 1st when the Republicans are in charge of the House, you can be guaranteed that those benefits will be ‘gone with the wind’.

WE criticized the President and Democrats when we didn’t get the public option but WE didn’t fight for it. We let the Tea Party and health insurance industry do ALL of the squawking and we didn’t start raising Cain until after the fact. WE must deliver the upper hand. WE must speak out in ONE voice. WE must shame the Republicans into ending those tax cuts THROUGHOUT the next two years. WE must hold local rallies. WE must fight for our rights in local AND national newspapers, internet, radio and media outlets. WE must email, fax and call Republican Congressional offices EVERY DAY. We must let Tea Party-backed Republicans know that if they continue to fight for the wealthy and ignore the middle class, the poor and the unemployed, WE WILL vote them out in 2012 and WE must mean it!

I hate the thought of having to compromise on the tax cuts just as much as you do, but no compromise is only in your corner when YOU have the upper hand. Right now, the Republicans HAVE the upper hand – more than enough “no” votes in the Senate to keep tax cuts for the wealthy in ANY compromise. If Democratic candidates didn’t ignore the President and used the tax cuts for the wealthy issue in their 2010 Campaign messages - like the he suggested to them in the first place, perhaps 90% rather than 40% of eligible voters would have came out to vote in the midterms and the Democrats would have the upper hand regarding the tax cut controversy.

Because of the midterm results, Republicans will be in charge of the House and the 60 vote filibuster-proof Senate on the side of Democrats will be out the door come January 1st. At least now a compromise will benefit the middle class, the poor, and the unemployed and small businesses with the extension of unemployment benefits, tax cuts for the middle class, payroll tax cuts, and incentives for small businesses to create jobs. It’s not the best of both worlds, but it’s better than nothing. After January 1st when the Republicans are in charge of the House, you can be guaranteed that those benefits will be ‘gone with the wind’.

WE criticized the President and Democrats when we didn’t get the public option but WE didn’t fight for it. We let the Tea Party and health insurance industry do ALL of the squawking and we didn’t start raising Cain until after the fact. WE must deliver the upper hand. WE must speak out in ONE voice. WE must shame the Republicans into ending those tax cuts THROUGHOUT the next two years. WE must hold local rallies. WE must fight for our rights in local AND national newspapers, internet, radio and media outlets. WE must email, fax and call Republican Congressional offices EVERY DAY. We must let Tea Party-backed Republicans know that if they continue to fight for the wealthy and ignore the middle class, the poor and the unemployed, WE WILL vote them out in 2012 and WE must mean it!