Howard Fineman: An introduction to Obamanomics (Fineman says there's not enough change)

[high density]

An introduction to Obamanomics

Candidate's fiscal plans prove less than sweeping

...I just listened to the debut of his newly bulked-up economic team during one of those wonkish conference calls for reporters.

And I have to say, if sweeping change is what Obama is all about, I didn’t hear it on that call.

Obama’s advisors were intent on labeling McCain’s economic ideas as more of the same, rather than touting the newness of their own vision.
...
His plan will likely be paid for out of the same two bowls of stone soup that much of Obama’s current and future proposals will draw from: a wind down of the Iraq war and higher taxes on that infamous “top 1 percent of taxpayers.”

But it’s unlikely that those two sources will prove sufficient, especially as Obama inevitably makes more campaign promises as the season goes on.

Elsewhere, Obama hasn’t asked for any real sacrifice, except from the rich.

Continued: http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/25075338

Fineman raises questions about Obama, but these are all nonsense arguments. No "real sacrifice" asked from anybody but the rich? What in the hell is that supposed to mean? The rest of the country can't afford anything else given our prices are spiraling up sharply while wages remain flat at best.

And a politician that is running for president is making campaign promises! What a surprise there. That's a great line of attack there, Howard.

I think Obama's economic policy is realistic. McCain is running on "keep the tax cuts" and Fineman doesn't seem to get it. Reversing those tax cuts, isn't that enough change to be pushing on people? Kerry ran on the same thing and was slaughtered for it. I have much faith that Obama will be able to present his plan to voters more eloquently than Kerry did.

It's clear the press will try and paint Obama into a corner. Offer not enough change and he's an empty suit. Offer too much change and he's a radical. There will never be a happy medium as long as people like Fineman are paid to write vapid garbage such as this article. In this single article, Fineman is arguing both that we can't afford too much change, but we need more change than what Obama has proposed.

[Captain Hilts]

1. Fineman's an idiot. But Obama's record isn't as progressive as it could be.

Neither he nor Clinton were as progressive as I would have liked at all.

[Mabus]

2. The same Fineman who goes out of his way to give McCain a pass

In his May 23 online column, "The Upside of Anger," Newsweek chief political correspondent Howard Fineman wrote that he "can't blame" Sen. John McCain (R-AZ) for his propensity toward angry outbursts because "his courage forever is being tested by his bad luck." Fineman lauded the 24-year Capitol Hill veteran as an "outsider" and furthered the baseless media narrative that McCain is a different type of candidate, writing that McCain "seems uncomfortable" pandering or "overcompensates by being too enthusiastic."

http://mediamatters.org/items/200705250005

I think he's still smarting over the demise of the "Mainstream Media Party" and "its growing obsession with personalities".