No compromise on Tax Package may have cost us START, DADT Repeal, Food Safety, 9/11 Responders

[Still a Democrat]

We could still be wrestling over the tax package and not have accomplished any of this.

[Aristus]

1. President Obama, as usual, is 15 moves ahead in this game of 3-D Chess.

:thumbsup:

[dennis4868]

3. That's why Obama always...

talks about the LONG GAME....

[Unvanguard]

2. The Democrats should not have waited until after the midterms, then.

They should have passed a middle-class tax bill in the House a few weeks prior to the midterms, and then held up Senate business continually, making the Republicans repeatedly filibuster middle-class tax cuts to protect benefits for the rich.

[ClassWarrior]

5. +1

NGU.

[gateley]

14. I'll agree with that. nt

[dennis4868]

4. Of course none of that would have happened....

the repubs did not keep it a secret that none of this stuff would have happened without a deal on tax cuts....Even now you have liberal people on Lawrence O'Donnell's show saying that he should have NOT compromised....what is it about the fillubuster they do not understand?

[Name removed]

6. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Hello_Kitty]

13. The Professional Centrists

Cannot understand Overton's Window. Maybe the ignorance is deliberate.

[Still a Democrat]

25. Or the Professional Downtrodden?

When victories are just a reason to look for a rational explaining why they aren't, I honestly wonder why you bother.

[Hello_Kitty]

26. Again, you don't get negotiating.

The GOP cleaned our clocks, but they're acting like they lost.

[Still a Democrat]

30. Okay, explain what we lost

Look at everything that happened over the past few weeks, and explain how it comes up as a loss to you. The only think to really object to is the tax cuts for the wealthy, which are a far smaller part of the tax deal.

Just claiming the Republicans are using reverse psychology doesn't make it so - you need to demonstrate, by item, where we lost.

[Angry Dragon]

7. Time will tell how much that tax package will really cost us

I just hope you are willing to pay the price

[WhaTHellsgoingonhere]

15. +1

[thunder rising]

8. F*ck this...The wealthy keep increasing their accounts with $Bs and we get DADT. Don't prosecute

the guilty ... black President. (that turns out to be at best a blue tick dem)

Meanwhile, the trade isn't tit for tat ... they get to share in the benefits, so it's more like 2/3 to the wealthy and we get scraps.

Where else does you logic lead.

I just got my Employer Provided Health insurance with a letter that says I'm withheld for a year because of a prior condition ... I'm 55, no f*cking shit. If you ain't dead at 55 you sure as hell have a prior condition.

Get a clue.

[Still a Democrat]

21. HCR will outlaw denial for prior conditions

You might want to drop the knife and put your nose back on your face.

[aquart]

9. Yeah, that's the ticket.

We let ourselves get blackmailed over a cold war treaty? A Republican wet dream treaty? PLEASE.

Food Safety? DAMN! I was so hoping for two hundred puking multimillionaire fundraisers after a $2000 a plate banquet. No billionaire wants to die because he had a hot dog in his sky box.

DADT repeal wasn't half as much ours as it was the Log Cabin Republicans. It was THEIR lawsuit that pushed everything forward.

And after using 9/11 as the Republican mantra, denying medical care to the first responders was a guaranteed loss of the House in two years.

They could not hold up those bills and win elections. Period.

And we let them get away with it.

Now continue rejoicing.

[OhioBlue]

10. Except that they did hold up the bills and won elections.

and..... the Log Cabin Republicans while an ally on this issue... essentially had little affect on the outcome. The President had a plan - the Congress asked for a study - the Obama Administration completed the study - showed there to be no ill affects for the military... the Congress passed the repeal. This happened exactly to plan with or without the LCRs.

[aquart]

19. They won elections because the Democrats were in charge.

But it kept looking like Republicans were in charge. Gutlessness does not get votes.

Why would anyone cast a ballot for a spineless weakling?

[Still a Democrat]

22. Because Democrats were in charge and the economy was still bad

The GOP was successful in tying their deficits to the bad economy and painting the Democrats as fiscally irresponsible and the fall guys.

[dkf]

16. The 9/11 bill has been unfulfilled since 9/11.

What makes you think they would suffer this time?

[NashVegas]

29. And We Didn't Need the Food Safety /Mod Act

We needed the current laws to be enforced.

[Hello_Kitty]

11. Negotiation 101 is to act like you got screwed, even if you got most of what you wanted.

The Republicans understand this. "They ate our lunch!" Sort of a reverse "don't throw us in the briar patch!" Democrats don't get this.



They ate our lunch and you're acting like we got a gourmet banquet.

[zeemike]

12. Ether they don't get it or

They get it just fine but know that playing good cop bad cop has it's rewards....And one of them is financial.
Face it....how realistic would it seem if they all agreed on things...people would start to wonder.
Nope Dem's kicking ans screaming make for good theater and keeps it real but the only thing that matters is the final vote....which the right always wins.

[Hannah Bell]

18. that cartoon is perfect: lol on the "win" about rulers having to wipe their boots with toilettes

before they're kissed.

that's it in a nutshell.

[Still a Democrat]

24. What did you not like?

The DADT repeal? 9/11 responders? Other?

Sometimes you just need to look at what happened instead of some reverse psychology explanation to undermine what was clearly some big wins.

[Hello_Kitty]

28. You don't get it.

The GOP got MAJOR wins. The tax compromise was a valentine to them.

[w4rma]

27. Democrats get it, but the DLCers in charge of the party have their sabotour jobs to do. (nt)

[Hannah Bell]

17. only if no one wanted those things very much in the first place.

otoh, someone must want tax cuts for the rich & cuts in SS tax awful bad to put all those other things at risk to get them.

[JackRiddler]

20. If you're going to do counterfactual, why not ask: What if they'd done the tax package 2 years ago?

[justiceischeap]

23. There's a political price for EVERYTHING in politics

I agree that the tax package may have been part of that but it's not a very popular viewpoint. You get accused of naysaying the "good" accomplishments or supporting the bad ones.

[WinkyDink]

31. The destruction of Social Security makes this quite the Pyrhhic victory for most Americans.

[Arkana]

33. What are you even talking about?

If you're referring to that Politico piece that cites "unnamed sources", I have a bridge in Brooklyn to sell you.

[Arkana]

32. There's no "could" about it. We WOULD have lost all those things.