Do you believe the President when he says he wants a deal to cut 4 trillion from the deficit?

[Tom Rinaldo]

I do. I believe Obama is telling the truth about wanting to use these debt ceiling negotiations as an opportunity to reach agreement with Republicans on ambitious plans to trim our deficit and keep entitlement programs solvent further into the future. Frankly, I don't think that he's bluffing. He will accept yes for an answer.

It is a no lose proposition for Obama now. If Republicans continue to refuse the big deal Obama wins political points and hopefully Independent votes by outflanking Republicans on debt reduction. If Republicans come around to accepting, he believes the deal is ultimately in the best interests of our nation. I take him at his word on that

I simply don't believe Obama would have placed Social Security, Medicare, and Medicaid back onto the table if he wasn't ready and willing to honor the deal he proposed. I can't see him using those programs as mere props for a game of political showmanship. I believe he is dead serious about the offer.

Obama may have always thought it highly unlikely Republicans would accept his terms for a 4 Trillion dollar deficit cutting deal, but no one could ever say that with absolute certainty. The terms Obama has offered are better than anything the Republicans could have expected. Obama has to stand ready to honor them now until the negotiations end. I have no doubt he'll try to do so if that deal is made, regardless of how unlikely that deal may now seem to be

To me that's far more plausible than calling all this five dimensional chess, or a bluff that Obama was positive that he would never be called on..

[pnwmom]

1. Yes, and also that at least a trillion has to come from tax increases.

Which is what has made this almost impossible.

[skepticscott]

4. Well, it would have helped

if Obama had exerted any effort at all towards ensuring that the Bush tax cuts had been allowed to expire, and if he hadn't pushed the ridiculous cut in Social Security tax that no one asked for, no one expected, that has done no political or economic good, and that we are now stuck with forever.

[pnwmom]

8. He did. The reason those tax cuts didn't expire is because millions of unemployed

people needed to have their UI benefits extended, and that's the only way Obama could get that to happen -- by making a trade with the Rethugs.

And the temporary cut in the Social Security tax was part of the stimulus package, which DID help the economy, although we needed a larger stimulus to get all the growth we needed.

[skepticscott]

12. Obama gave in to blackmail

as he always does, instead of calling the Republican's bluff or letting them take the heat for the consequences of their actions.

And you're deluding yourself if you think that the SS tax cut is any more "temporary" than the Bush tax cuts. It's here to stay, whether we can afford it or not.

[pnwmom]

14. The unemployed would have been the one taking the heat for that decision.

And Obama wasn't willing to throw them into the oven.

[bornskeptic]

20. Not just the unemployed. We all would have taken the heat forit.

It would have been a $600 billion tax increase on the middle class and a $150 billion tax increase on the wealthy, at a time when unemployment was pushing 10%,something no sane economist would recommend, and of course there would have no DADT repeal if Obama hadn't made the deal. I find the arguments for rejecting it coming from people claiming to be liberals totally incomprehensible.

[FrenchieCat]

21. Folks see what they want to see.......

Those who are willing to close one eye to see the point that favors their view.....
that's what the Republicans do; only believe their own side of their story
while working as hard as possible to make sure Pres. Obama fails. However,
they are not the only ones, unfortunately for us.

[Tom Rinaldo]

6. That would have to be part of it true - though some of it could be called

closing loopholes instead. And the Republicans (fortunately for us in my opinion) are still choking on that - even though it isn't that large a number given where the tax codes now sit.

[bbinacan]

2. Nope. n/t

[skepticscott]

3. I believe him, but

I'm not sure what the heck good it will do. We're already running a 1.5 trillion a year deficit, so if you cut 400 B a year from that over 10 years, in 2021, the national debt will be a mere 25 trillion instead of 29 trillion. How in the world is that a solution to anything??

[AtomicKitten]

5. I see it as quintessential rope-a-dope. nt

[Tom Rinaldo]

7. Yes, but what does that actually mean?

When Obama makes the case to the American people through the press why this deal is what he would like to see happen, do you think he actually believes the opposite of what he is saying?

Do you believe there never was a chance in Hell Republicans would take him up on this and that he never would have offered it if he thought there even was a remote chance that they would?

Was he just playing the odds and if so do you approve of taking that gamble?

Do you believe Obama would have scrambled to find some excuse to back away from the offer he made if the Republicans, so to speak, called his bluff?

[AtomicKitten]

10. 99% of the GOP are tethered by GNorquist's no tax increase pledge.

The teabaggers in the House are true believers and will not yield. There is no way in hell the GOP leaders will budge them off that oath.

Pres Obama called their bluff by throwing all the Democratic sacred cows on the table, and the GOP blinked. He's proving a point, that the GOP serve the interests of the corporations and the wealthy, that they are not interested in doing what's good and right for the country, not now, not ever, no matter what.

Now the GOP leadership is backing off in a hurry, trying to put the debt ceiling vote behind them, yielding to superior strategy. The end result may be precisely what Pres Obama wanted in the first place, what he asked for, a vote on the debt ceiling not tethered to anything else.

This is my opinion. I could be wrong but at this point I don't think so.

[kenny blankenship]

9. Yes I do. And that pisses me off.

I also worry that the Republicans are the side we're hearing first from concerning Obama walking out of the circular debt ceiling negotiations. Either they Pukes cave in now, or this is the result they've been working for. We really shouldn't be hearing about this at all. Since we are, it makes me worry that this is the stepping off point for the Republicans, and after this turn of events they'll all say Obama was intransigent, arrogant, dictatorial and uppity. And there won't be any debt ceiling extension before checks start bouncing. There won't have been any timely resolution because the Republicans intended to crash everything all along, if Obama wouldn't cave 100%. They will then blame Obama and the Democrats, and try to profit from the chaos. That is a well established behavior with them. But this would be Republican vandalism on a whole new scale.

If Obama tells these Thugs to fuck themselves, I am 100% in support of his decision. It will be a tense time in America and he will come in for a shitstorm of attacks. And I will be bound to defend him against those attacks, seeing as he was defending the govt from being ruled by extortion, BUT-
But, this really sucks to think about at the same time, but I DO think he really does want Republicans to join him in cutting our New Deal/Great Society programs by some 3 TRILLION fucking dollars (if they would just agree to 1 Trillion in tax cut expirations and loophole closures). And THAT attack on the historical achievements of Democratic Party and the minimal social safety net which still exists for Americans is something I must 100% oppose.

If Republicans carry their criminal threats out to the hilt, and Obama opposes them adamantly like we hope he would, then I am spared having to think about how I oppose and hate the President's neoliberal, 3rd way designs concerning Medicare, SocSec, and the health of America's citizens. But while I will have a much easier time metering loyalty and dividing the world into Good Guys and Bad Guys, it's not going to be any luxury cruise. If the Pukes crash the government, there will be hell to pay.

[FrenchieCat]

11. I look at results, not so much the strategy to get to the results.....

especially when I'm certain I don't really know what the President is thinking...
and plus, we ain't there yet.....As the Debt Ceiling raised is still an ongoing issue....

But I will say that your "I believe", "I simply don't believe", "Obama may have always thought", "I can't see him using", "he believes the deal...", and "to me that's far more plausible", doesn't really add up to anything other than pure speculation of what you think, not necessarily what has happened or what the President thinks.

If you aren't willing to give the President any credit for any strategy whatsoever, and you don't want to call what is happening chess or a bluff, you are welcome to that thought.....
and if you want to believe that Pres. Obama is somehow more politically naive than you or I are,
or is willing to bargain away our safety net just cause he can, you are welcome to believing that too...cause that's your right...but certainly nothing that you have said about getting there are established facts, and even your reasoning relies very much on making assumptions that all paint this President in a negative light. I don't know why you'd want to do that, but I guess you have your reasons. :shrug:

[Tom Rinaldo]

13. I think the President plays "chess". No douvbt he plays it well

or he never could have reached his position. I said I don't believe in 5 dimensional chess, as a way of asserting that our guy can run multiple circles around their guys when it comes to strategy. Partially because of their looser alliegience to the truth, National Republicans have a pretty good record of their own at political strategy. Yes I believe Obama can get the best of them, but i reject references to him playing chess while everyone else is playing checkers, or Obama playing chess in dimensions the Republicans don't even know about and the like.

Yeah I used phrases like "I believe" and "I can't see him doing" but that is precisely because I am directly owning all of this as my own opinions and nothing else. I do not assert them as unasssailable facts that I brought down on tablets from Mt Olympusa. Furthermore I solicited other opinions also aand haven't trashed any opinion that anyone has offered.

As to me believing falsely that Obama would ever "bargain AWAY our safety net", I don't. I think possibly he might agree to some modifications that falal far short of the Ryan plan becasue that is what he has started saying is needed to protect those programs into the future. I'm asking people what they think the things that Obama is actually saying means, I'm not putting words or thoughts into his head or mouth.

[FrenchieCat]

15. Well, that's good.......

Than speculate away. Perhaps I'm so tired of folks always speculating the worse,
and unlike you, talking as though all that they have gathered are facts,
until I no longer bother with all that.

[Tom Rinaldo]

16. P.S. As to my reasons...

They really are straightfoward Frenchie. I honestly believe Obama means what he is saying about those programs. And if he means what he is saying that worries me because I think that would be the wrong choice to make. Those are my honest opinions. It's not that I somehow am motivated to aattack Obama over anything i can dig up. There are plenty of solid Democrats out there with decades of high level experience who share my specific concerns in this case, who believe Obama would do what he says he wants to do as part of a larger deal.

Clearl;y not everyone feels the same about all this, but we aqre on a discussion board here and I asked what others make of this.

[FrenchieCat]

17. Now we get down to the nutshell....

"if he means what he is saying that worries me because I think that would be the wrong choice to make."



Initially, your reasons weren't as straightfoward in your initial post as you professed, but I've always been able to read between the line somehow. You are giving the President no credit, and are indeed thinking the worse of him....but of course, you can discuss what you will. That is certain. :)

[Tom Rinaldo]

19. What is the credit I am failing to give him?

Is it wrong to say "if he means what he is sayhing" when he says one thing and we want to assume that he acutally feels contrary to that? Usually when Obama slips into what I think of as his "teaher mode" - which is something that I love about him, his ability to do that so well, Obama excells at that because of the sincerity of his convictions that what he is saying is right, even when parts of it might not be what people woule like to hear him say. He does that about our needing to remain in Afghanistan for now also. He doesn't always say what we want to hear and yet he is sincere in what he is saying. I give Obama credit now and always for doing what he believes is in the best interests of our nation. That doesn't mean I have to always agree with him on that.

It is at the very least plausible to me that Obama believes some of the costs have to be reigned in on some entitlement programs to keep them viable for the future - he would not by far be the only Democrat who believes that. And I haven't heard anyone make the case that those rising costs can all be offset by cutting fraud and inefficiencies - which I am confident Obama would trry first. Bottom line, I think the bargain he offered Republicans was a real one. Others of course are dfree to disagree with that.

[Lil Missy]

18. Yes and no. He would, but also knows the goopers will never negotiate in good faith.

They'd also have to agree to allowing the bush tax cuts to expire, and terminate subsidies to big oil and corporations that pay no tax.