"Obama Gets Real" by PAUL KRUGMAN at the NY Times

[applegrove]

Obama Gets Real

by PAUL KRUGMAN at the NY Times

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/12/06/opinion/krugman-obama-gets-real.html?hp&rref=opinion&_r=1&

"SNIP.....................................


This isn’t entirely new terrain for Mr. Obama. What struck me about this speech, however, was what he had to say about the sources of rising inequality. Much of our political and pundit class remains devoted to the notion that rising inequality, to the extent that it’s an issue at all, is all about workers lacking the right skills and education. But the president now seems to accept progressive arguments that education is at best one of a number of concerns, that America’s growing class inequality largely reflects political choices, like the failure to raise the minimum wage along with inflation and productivity.

And because the president was willing to assign much of the blame for rising inequality to bad policy, he was also more forthcoming than in the past about ways to change the nation’s trajectory, including a rise in the minimum wage, restoring labor’s bargaining power, and strengthening, not weakening, the safety net.

And there was this: “When it comes to our budget, we should not be stuck in a stale debate from two years ago or three years ago. A relentlessly growing deficit of opportunity is a bigger threat to our future than our rapidly shrinking fiscal deficit.” Finally! Our political class has spent years obsessed with a fake problem — worrying about debt and deficits that never posed any threat to the nation’s future — while showing no interest in unemployment and stagnating wages. Mr. Obama, I’m sorry to say, bought into that diversion. Now, however, he’s moving on.




...................................SNIP"

[indepat]

1. Thankfully many of us implored our President not to buy into that right-wing fake diversion

that oozed with inequality.

[Laelth]

2. k&r for exposure. n/t

-Laelth

[dchill]

3. K & R.

[wilsonbooks]

4. Maybe not having his pals timothy and larry

whispering in his ear any longer has allowed his head to clear.

[WowSeriously]

5. Blah, blah, blah.

The Charlie Brown in this political cartoon has never been President Obama. And the GOP has never been Lucy.

Rather, President Obama has played Lucy to a hopeful nation of Charlie Browns, myself included.

Actions. That is the measuring stick now. Not speeches.

[al_liberal]

6. Goddamn right!

This is Obama "tilting at windmills" again because talk is cheap.

[WowSeriously]

33. Talk is cheap but, sadly, the costs are enormous.

[polichick]

7. Yes, the actions have to match the words...

and I just don't see how the inequality message matches the push to sign the TPP.

[BlueStreak]

10. He acts as if we can't see those things

[WowSeriously]

34. Excellent observation. There is no way anyone

Could construe TPP as a vehicle for income equality.

[NuclearDem]

24. TPP, Keystone. Two things that are well within his authority to do something about.

Yet, he hasn't. Speeches about income inequality and the environment, but TPP is still on track to be a thing and Keystone hasn't been shut down.

[MannyGoldstein]

27. He can't stop TPP or Keystone - he's not a dictator, you know

Just because he gets to decide on these, it doesn't mean that he should not take into account the hopes, dreams, and feelings of the wealthiest Americans.

[NuclearDem]

28. Pocketbooks as well.

[WowSeriously]

30. He can do both. HIS State Department has final say on Keystone.

And ONLY the President can negotiate a treaty. Surely you understand this, don't you?

Wait. Upon re-reading I think your comment was snark.

[NuclearDem]

32. Third Way Manny claims another victim.

[WowSeriously]

35. Oh no! Is that bad?

[NuclearDem]

36. No worse than getting fooled by the Onion.

[WowSeriously]

37. Was I fooled by assuming it was snark, or assuming his comments were sincere?

[WowSeriously]

29. Exactly. Certainly there are things that the Teabagging House prevents.

But what you mentioned are not among them. The Presidet could also require that government contractors who pay a decent minimum are the only ones eligable for contracts.

[tecelote]

8. K&R

[BlueStreak]

9. He's moving on, only after he has lost any real power to do anything about it.

And he isn't leading his party in a way to regain power to deal with those real problems. It is an old story, but today's Dems just don't demonstrate much of a difference from the Republican positions in so many cases. Yes, we can find plenty of individuals who try to take progressive steps, but they are almost always undercut by this Clintonesque obsession with acting like junior Republicans.

I don't know why this is so hard for the beltway people to understand. If people want conservative policies, they will vote for Republicans who proudly champion those values, not for a Dem who doesn't really stand for anything recognizable.

The whole Obama Presidency has been an exercise in avoiding conflict, and the only way to avoid conflict is to avoid demonstrating any bedrock principles.

[pnwmom]

11. The way to give him back real power is very simple:

Give him working majorities in the Senate and the House. It's not his fault if we fail to do that.

[JDPriestly]

13. Has he asked Americans to do that? Or does he politely accept the status quo?

I'm not sure at this point.

I'm really happy to see this new direction on economics on his part, but he should be out there with the fast-food strikers. They are out on the streets in California these days.

[BlueStreak]

15. Never. The closest he comes to this is something like

"Well if Americans don't like the gridlock in Congress, they need to let their Congressmen and Senators know."

He NEVER, EVER paints a clear picture of who is doing what to the American people. And he never has campaigned vigorously with the message "Give me a Congress I can work with to do X Y and Z."

Damned coward. Newt Gingrich did exactly this. He told Americans what he wanted to accomplish and what it would take (i.e. that they had to elect REPUBLICANS and Make Newt the Speaker. He wasn't bashful about it. And he listed 10 fairly clear things that he promised to enact if he was Speaker.

Guess what? The public took him up on it, even though most people didn't understand 1/4 of the items on his list. They knew that he was promising to do something fairly specific. It wasn't just the usual happy talk you get from their DLCers.

We need a leader that will spell out such a clear agenda for us today. But the big difference is that the Republicans got behind Ringing. Today's Democrats continue to be as spineless as ever. Faced with the clearest possible point of distinction in 2 generations -- health care for all Americans, they go running for cover every time the issue comes up.

[blue14u]

17. JDPriestly, Now that you

mentioned it.. the POTUS isn't out there. Are any of our elected Democrats

out in the streets with the FF strikers, or Wally World workers?

Your right, I have heard a couple of the "elected" speak mildly, (Except Bernie

speaks often and loud) Love him... but other than him, I can't recall

seeing or hearing them speak on this ..

[WowSeriously]

31. You mean like in 2008?

[raindaddy]

16. At least there's an upside to Obama losing power...

It lessens his chances of fast tracking the TTP.

[BlueStreak]

20. I compliment you on your optimism. :)

[JDPriestly]

12. K&R.

[tiredtoo]

14. Interesting thread here

talks of the problems within the party. Keep in mind that all elected officials spend the majority of their time raising money. Where does the money come from? Wall Street. This story regarding Elizabeth and the Thirdway helps explain the problem we are in.
http://www.politicususa.com/2013/12/06/elizabeth-warren-shreds-wing-critics-amazing-sentence.html

[applegrove]

19. +1000 We really could tax more.

[BlancheSplanchnik]

18. K&R. n/t

[Marr]

21. I don't see anything new here. Obama has often demonstrated that he understands

what drives inequality in this country. His campaign speeches were chock full of liberal conventional wisdom on economic issues. That's one of the things that made his repeated selling out of the left so disappointing. He usually *says* the right thing, then maneuvers himself into a position from which he "has no choice" but to accept some corporate approach.

Anyway, call me when he publicly rejects the TPP. Until then, I'll file this under "More of the Same".

[Cha]

22. Boom! Love Love Love

President Obama.. learning on the job and learning well. In spite of unprecedented hate and obstruction.

Mahalo applegrove!

[Cha]

23. Yeah, it's easy to sit back and critique the President

who's gotten so much accomplished in spite of all the obstruction. And, all it really is.. is so much BLAH BLAH BLAH.

[NuclearDem]

25. The phrase "cannot serve two masters" comes to mind.

Pardon us who are confused about which side of the class war he's on. His speeches say 99%, but his administration's involvement in the TPP (among many other things) says 1%.

You can't fight income inequality while you're simultaneously working to further stack the odds in favor of the rich.

[colsohlibgal]

26. Easy to Critique Obama On The TPP

Oh and the fact he got huffy because Elizabeth Warren had the nerve to ask tough questions of one of his Wall Street pals.

He has done some good things but make no mistake, he's mostly neo democratic like Bill and Hillary. And the TPP - nothing blah there.

[Blue Owl]

38. The GOP is real gone

n/t