O'Donnell explains Obama's approach to the debt negotiations and why he's winning the fight. ~ MSNBC

[mzmolly]

"Step-by-step, Lawrence explains President Obama's approach to the debt negotiations and why he's masterfully winning the fight."

Even if you disagree with O'Donnell, this video is well worth the watch. :hi:

http://thelastword.msnbc.msn.com/

Hopefully the end result of the theatrics surrounding the so called negotiations, will be a clean debt limit vote.

[patrice]

1. Surprise, surprise! High stakes negotiations are NOT normal conversation, that is, unless you're

under-informed and have preconceived agendas and scenarios based on the assumption that you know enough about everything and that all verbiage means, and ONLY means, what YOU say it means and that anything that you don't understand is flawed/bad/wrong/dishonest. Then you might think that bargaining between hostile entities about the future of the country and trillions of dollars and people's lives proceeds pretty much like talking about sports or the weather.

[Whisp]

20. :)

right on.

[bluestateguy]

2. Sometimes Obama's 14 dimensional chess works, other times it fails and results in capitulation

It certainly worked with repealing DADT, where Obama's approach appears now to be vindicated.

It certainly worked with the budget deal earlier this year, where I think Obama got the better deal, and seemed to "punk" Boehner.

On the other hand, the tax deal last December was a net defeat for Obama and his 14 dimensional chess was just a convoluted failure in the end.

So we shall see.

[mzmolly]

3. I agree.

We'll have to see how it all plays out. :hi:

[mzmolly]

4. From the greatest to zero recs in about ten minutes.

My how things change. ;)

[slay]

5. Lawrence is a Clinton insider who I do not fully trust or believe

i think he means well - but he also still serves the Dems and sells their propaganda.

[craigmatic]

6. That whole segment last night was a massive reach. Obama cames accross yesterday as a guy who'd do

anything to make a deal not a guy who's pushing the republicans into a corner.

[Vattel]

22. That was my take too, but I'm not sure.

[Vinca]

7. I flipped over from Keith and listened to that.

It struck me that Lawrence was trying to make himself . . . and us . . . feel better. The notion he put forward had also occurred to me, but any benefit from raising the ante to $4 trillion is offset by the proposed damage to social programs.

[mzmolly]

12. Keith clarified his statements by saying IF the President is

serious about ...

I held on to that if.

[jimlup]

8. Yes, but how much has he given up here? Boehner can turn around and say

OK... and then we lose the firm line on SS and medicare.

[scheming daemons]

9. Boehner won't say "OK". The Tea Party has him in a box.

Obama knows it.

[A Simple Game]

18. Boehner doesn't need the Tea Party if

he can get the Democrats to go along with their own President.
He then only needs the "sane" Republicans.

[jimlup]

19. Yeah, I would say that we've lost Social Security as it current stands and ...

Medicare is going to start at 67. Obama has already signaled concession on this thus they are done for. Thanks Repubs for being evil and thanks Obama for not sufficiently fighting them not that you really wanted to apparently.

[mzmolly]

13. My hope is that Republicans will become staunch defenders of

SS and Medicare after what (crossing fingers) is a faux willingness to compromise. ;)

[John Agar]

10. I like Lawrence, but on this one he's just wrong.

Proposing cuts in Medicare et al does nothing but threaten and (potentially) betray the very people the president was elected to serve.

Olbermann was the the better "watch" last night, he spoke with moral and ethical clarity.

[woo me with science]

11. "Moral and ethical clarity."

Thank you. I am disgusted when a Democratic President publicly validates the right wing memes that are destroying this country, whether O'Donnell thinks it is merely a clever ruse or part of a brazillion-dimensional chess game or not.

Validating the right-wing lies that the poor must be offered up as a sacrifice to strengthen this economy is morally and ethically wrong. Doing so weakens and sickens this country, which desperately needs a dose of moral and ethical clarity.

[mzmolly]

14. I wonder if he's validating these memes or calling their

bluff and hoping they'll be so against HIM that they'll start defending certain entitlements. I hope it's the later.

[John Agar]

24. Either way, it's not a good thing.

These unkind and unnecessary cuts should NEVER be offered up. either as part of some cynical scheme, or as intentional policy.

It's just wrong, and damages us all.

[Vattel]

23. Validating right-wing memes is the downside of the alleged bluff.

I doubt that he is bluffing, though. I hope he is.

[bvar22]

15. I watched it, step by step, with fascination.

But I can reduce O'Donnell's lengthy explanation to just ONE Step:
Obama is "winning" by adopting the Republican's positions,
leaving them no place to go.
:woohoo:

That might be good for a political "WIN",
but it is very BAD for the Working Class and The Poor.




Who will STAND and FIGHT for THIS American Majority?
You will know them by their WORKS,
not by their excuses.

[Safetykitten]

16. Losing is winning. War is peace.

[mzmolly]

17. Winning is winning,

if there is a clean debt vote.

[John Agar]

25. Winning is losing if the Repubs get what they want.

[Fire1]

21. People would much rather stick to their own "interpretation." n/t