Front Office Football Central

Front Office Football Central (https://forums.operationsports.com/fofc//index.php)
-   Off Topic (https://forums.operationsports.com/fofc//forumdisplay.php?f=6)
-   -   The Obama Presidency - 2008 & 2012 (https://forums.operationsports.com/fofc//showthread.php?t=69042)

stevew 11-21-2011 09:22 PM

This idea of cutting the military by a ton is a good thing. I have a feeling these 10% cuts will primarily come from salary and other things that affect the "little guys". The large scale defense contractors are protected I bet

RainMaker 11-21-2011 09:31 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by panerd (Post 2570868)
I'm with you on even bigger defense budget cuts but couldn't your above statement be said about any federal program? Private, municipal, and state employees are all suffering cutbacks here in Missouri what makes working for the federal government immune from salary freeze or god forbid a 10% salary reduction? (Besides spineless politicians that are worried about re-election I should add)

EDIT: I'm not going to say it's as easy as the movie "Dave" but something tells me they could cut 10% of pork and bureaucracy from any program and still not affect its recipients.


Not all Federal programs are alike. Some have been on the blunt end of cutbacks for years since they don't have the lobbying interests to support them.

Julio Riddols 11-21-2011 10:21 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by sterlingice (Post 2570914)
"Wait? Higher taxes on everyone but professional wrestlers? Who let Ric Flair in the room?"

SI


The only way Flair would win is if he snuck in some brass knucks in his tights. He'd have to get his ass beat for about 20 minutes first though, then he would lay em all out and figure four their asses one by one while they all rolled around pretending they were exhausted all of a sudden.

SirFozzie 11-21-2011 10:31 PM

Come on.. these are senators we're talking about. THey'd be sucking wind after two minutes. But that's ok, cuz Flair's the sixty minute man.... WHOOO!

stevew 11-21-2011 10:33 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by sterlingice (Post 2570914)
"Wait? Higher taxes on everyone but professional wrestlers? Who let Ric Flair in the room?"

SI


This is even funnier if you didn't read the Grantland piece from a few months ago detailing Flair's financial problems with people and paying taxes.

sterlingice 11-22-2011 05:29 AM

I was trying to go with a wrestler about the age of most Senators ;)

And, no, didn't know he had financial issues so that does make it even funnier :D

SI

flounder 11-22-2011 06:04 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by RainMaker (Post 2570960)
Not all Federal programs are alike. Some have been on the blunt end of cutbacks for years since they don't have the lobbying interests to support them.


Can you give an example of a program that has been on the blunt end of cutbacks for years?

JPhillips 11-22-2011 06:23 AM

I'll go with the aforementioned food inspectors. I don't know if there have been cuts, but they certainly haven't grown at the rate food producers have over the past three decades.

panerd 11-22-2011 06:36 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by JPhillips (Post 2571057)
I'll go with the aforementioned food inspectors. I don't know if there have been cuts, but they certainly haven't grown at the rate food producers have over the past three decades.


Officer I was only going 80, at least I wasn't going 100!

Edward64 11-22-2011 08:28 AM

I'm good with this. Haven't seen any polls yet but suspect Obama comes out of this looking better than Congress.

Obama To Veto Any Attempt To Roll Back Automatic Cuts After Committee's Inability To Reach Debt Deal | Fox News
Quote:

President Obama said he would veto any effort by lawmakers to repeal a requirement for $1 trillion in automatic spending cuts to be triggered after the Super Committee failed to agree on terms to save the country $1.2 trillion over a 10-year span.

“There will be no easy off ramps on this one,” Obama said at an afternoon press conference where he laid blame squarely on Republicans who refused to bend in their defense of tax cuts for the wealthy during debt talks. “We need to keep the pressure up to compromise, not turn off the pressure.”

He went on to promise that the deficit will be reduced by at least $2.2 trillion in the next decade “one way or another.” He included the roughly $1 trillion in cuts approved in August.

"The only way these spending cuts will not take place is if Congress gets back to work to reduce the deficit by at least $1.2 trillion," he said. "They've still got a year to figure it out."

These automatic spending cuts are designed to fall evenly on the military and domestic government programs beginning in 2013.

gstelmack 11-22-2011 09:33 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by article
He went on to promise that the deficit will be reduced by at least $2.2 trillion in the next decade “one way or another.”


I love these commitments. He may only be in office for another year or so, but by golly he can promise what's going to happen 10 years from now. Presidents love to pull this garbage, from both sides of the aisle.

molson 11-22-2011 09:39 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by gstelmack (Post 2571089)
I love these commitments. He may only be in office for another year or so, but by golly he can promise what's going to happen 10 years from now. Presidents love to pull this garbage, from both sides of the aisle.


You just have to translate his "promises" into "vague statements of preference that will happen if there is zero opposition from anyone." The latter phrasing is more honest, but not very useful in a campaign.

JediKooter 11-22-2011 10:31 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by sterlingice (Post 2570914)
"Wait? Higher taxes on everyone but professional wrestlers? Who let Ric Flair in the room?"

SI


If it comes down to the last two standing are Ric Flair and Roddy Piper...oh man! I'd pay to see that.

Mizzou B-ball fan 11-22-2011 11:17 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by molson (Post 2571091)
You just have to translate his "promises" into "vague statements of preference that will happen if there is zero opposition from anyone." The latter phrasing is more honest, but not very useful in a campaign.


Yeah, that's pretty accurate. He's honestly taking the easier of two roads by not vetoing. If he vetoes, he'd look silly.

panerd 11-22-2011 11:28 AM

My favorite Presidential montage was on the Daily Show where they showed every President since Nixon promising to get off foreign oil in the next 10 years. (The perfect number to not happen at any time during their presidency) Its hilarious watching Nixon, Ford, Carter, Bush I, Clinton, W Bush, and Obama all make almost the exact same empty promise.

Edward64 11-22-2011 08:17 PM

Possibly too good to be true but interesting read.

Al-Qaeda targets dwindle as group shrinks - The Washington Post
Quote:

The leadership ranks of the main al-Qaeda terrorist network, once expansive enough to supervise the plot for Sept. 11, 2001, have been reduced to just two figures whose demise would mean the group’s defeat, U.S. counterterrorism and intelligence officials said.

Aymen al-Zawahiri and his second in command, Abu Yahya al-Libi, are the last remaining “high-value” targets of the CIA’s drone campaign against al-Qaeda in Pakistan, U.S. officials said, although lower-level fighters and other insurgent groups remain a focus of Predator surveillance and strikes.

Al-Qaeda’s contraction comes amid indications that the group has considered relocating in recent years but that it ruled out other destinations as either unreachable or offering no greater security than their missile-pocked territory in Pakistan, U.S. officials said.

Quote:

Still, U.S. officials who described al-Qaeda as being on the verge of defeat after Osama bin Laden’s was killed said they have been surprised by the pace and extent of the group’s contraction in the six months since then.

“We have rendered the organization that brought us 9/11 operationally ineffective,” a senior U.S. counterterrorism official said. Asked what exists of al-Qaeda’s leadership group beyond the top two positions, the official said: “Not very much. Not any of the world-class terrorists they once had.”


Edward64 11-23-2011 05:00 PM

Some fact checking on the GOP candidates/accusations on Obama.

NBC Politics - FACT CHECK: Hyperbole on terror interrogations
Quote:

Michele Bachmann did not intend to be taken literally when she told the Republican presidential debate Tuesday that civil-liberties activists have taken over the interrogation of terrorists from the CIA. But even as a rhetorical point, it didn't hold water.

Her hyperbole on the American Civil Liberties Union was one of the more notable stretches in the national security and foreign policy debate. A look at some of the claims and how they compare with the facts:


Dutch 11-23-2011 05:14 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Edward64 (Post 2571650)
Some fact checking on the GOP candidates/accusations on Obama.

NBC Politics - FACT CHECK: Hyperbole on terror interrogations


Right, if I'm running for President, I don't try and convince anybody that Obama isn't willing to kick some foreign ass for the safety of our country.

SirFozzie 11-23-2011 06:45 PM

Because all he has to do is point at Bin Laden and the other members of Al-Qeda killed and you look like an idiot. Not that it's unusual for Bachmann to look like one, mind you!

Dutch 11-23-2011 06:58 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SirFozzie (Post 2571682)
Because all he has to do is point at Bin Laden and the other members of Al-Qeda killed and you look like an idiot. Not that it's unusual for Bachmann to look like one, mind you!


Not to mention his successful continuation of our nation building efforts in Iraq, his strong determination to keep Gitmo open and away from here, and the continuation of the Patriot Act. He's done much better than expected. I've no idea what she's talking about.

Edward64 11-24-2011 06:28 AM

This came out of the blue for me. Didn't know we were still working on star wars missile defense - not sure if ground, satellite or combo. I remember reading about alot of failures in the 90's ... hopefully its more robust now.

Medvedev: Russia may target US missile shield - World news - Europe - msnbc.com
Quote:

MOSCOW — Russia's president threatened on Wednesday to deploy missiles to target the U.S. missile shield in Europe if Washington fails to assuage Moscow's concerns about its plans, a harsh warning that reflected deep cracks in U.S.-Russian ties despite President Barack Obama's efforts to "reset" relations with the Kremlin.

Dmitry Medvedev said he still hopes for a deal with the U.S. on missile defense, but he strongly accused Washington and its NATO allies of ignoring Russia's worries. He said that Russia will have to take military countermeasures if the U.S. continues to build the shield without legal guarantees that it will not be aimed against Russia.

The U.S. has repeatedly assured Russia that its proposed missile defense system wouldn't be directed against Russia's nuclear forces, and it did that again Wednesday.

"I do think it's worth reiterating that the European missile defense system that we've been working very hard on with our allies and with Russia over the last few years is not aimed at Russia," said Capt. John Kirby, a Pentagon spokesman. "It is ... designed to help deter and defeat the ballistic missile threat to Europe and to our allies from Iran."


Edward64 11-24-2011 06:33 AM

Government website on missile defense. No lasers used that I saw, too bad.

The Ballistic Missile Defense System

Edward64 11-28-2011 09:19 PM

This is the most interesting GOP primary I can recall.

Georgia Woman Claims 13-Year Affair With Cain, As Candidate Denies Latest Allegations | Fox News
Quote:

A new woman has come forward with allegations against Republican presidential candidate Herman Cain, this time claiming the two had a 13-year extramarital affair, but Cain and his advisers deny the claims, just as they have denied the sexual harassment claims that have set back his campaign.

Cain, in an apparent effort to get ahead of the story, appeared Monday afternoon in a cable news interview before the Georgia woman's story aired and said she is "someone who I know, who is an acquaintance, who I thought was a friend," though he denied an affair.

Edward64 12-12-2011 10:56 PM

I think we can quibble on whether all combat troops are out of Iraq but I think Obama has fufilled his promise. Only time will tell if Iraq was worth the price.

Obama and Iraq Leader, Maliki, Mark Shift to Postwar Ties - NYTimes.com
Quote:

In a few weeks, the American military force that invaded almost nine years ago, and still numbered 150,000 when the president took office, will have shriveled to a vestigial presence of military liaison officers and embassy guards. Mr. Obama acknowledged that the embassy in Baghdad would maintain a larger-than-normal security force — a decision that has aroused criticism among some Iraqis. He said that measure was necessary to protect diplomats or American civilians working in the oil sector who might be targeted by militant groups.

Edward64 12-21-2011 07:30 AM

Dangerous game Boehner is playing ... I think this will come back and hurt the GOP but it is good to see a person stand behind their beliefs (if that's really the case).

I did not see any opinions from the GOP candidates.

Obama, Boehner square off in payroll tax fight - CNN.com
Quote:

Washington (CNN) -- The congressional impasse over extending the payroll tax cut became a showdown Tuesday between President Barack Obama and House Speaker John Boehner.

After the Republican-controlled House passed a measure calling for more negotiations, Boehner made public a letter to Obama that urged him to order the Senate back from its holiday break to take part in further talks.

Leaders in the Democratic-controlled Senate reject that idea, and Obama agreed with them, telling reporters in a previously unscheduled appearance that the House must approve a two-month extension passed by an 89-10 vote in the Senate.

"The bipartisan compromise that was reached on Saturday is the only viable way to prevent a tax hike on January 1," Obama said. "It's the only one."

The House motion, passed Tuesday with no Democratic support on a 229-193 vote, expressed the chamber's disagreement with the Senate plan and called for the dispute to be immediately taken up by a House-Senate conference committee -- something already ruled out by Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nevada.

However, Boehner and the Republican leadership prevented a direct vote on the Senate's two-month extension, signaling they may lack enough GOP support to defeat it in the face of unrelenting pressure from the White House, Democrats and some Senate Republicans.

Instead, the House approved a separate resolution supporting a yearlong extension of both the payroll tax cut and emergency federal unemployment benefits. House Republicans are also pushing for a new, two-year "doc fix," or delay in significant scheduled pay cuts to Medicare physicians.

All three measures are set to expire December 31.

Meanwhile, House members headed out of town for their holiday break after legislative business ended Tuesday.


Marc Vaughan 12-21-2011 08:00 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Edward64 (Post 2585488)
Dangerous game Boehner is playing ... I think this will come back and hurt the GOP but it is good to see a person stand behind their beliefs (if that's really the case).


I think its more about trying to screw up the economy before the elections tbh than any 'standing behind their beliefs' .... the more they can mess things up before the election the better their chance of getting into power, at the moment things are starting to look like they're improving so expect spanners to be thrown at the works as often as possible imho ...

Dutch 12-21-2011 09:05 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Marc Vaughan (Post 2585509)
I think its more about trying to screw up the economy before the elections tbh than any 'standing behind their beliefs' .... the more they can mess things up before the election the better their chance of getting into power, at the moment things are starting to look like they're improving so expect spanners to be thrown at the works as often as possible imho ...


If that's the case, the Republican Party should be banned.

miked 12-21-2011 10:19 AM

I mean, they've said in the past that their main goal is to get Obama out of office, so I wouldn't put it by them. I agree with Boehner that it sucks to pass a 2-month bill to just start the same negotiations. I don't agree with a 1% surcharge on rich people, but I don't think the Republican party is offering anything on their side to cut (defense, etc), rather just expecting the removal of regulations to somehow spur the economy and equal more revenue.

But it's a stupid game of chicken because the R's think Obama has more to lose in an election year.

Dutch 12-21-2011 10:41 AM

Quote:

I mean, they've said in the past that their main goal is to get Obama out of office, so I wouldn't put it by them.

There are legal ways to do this though. That's my point. If they are actively trying to tank the economy, they should be banned as a party.

JPhillips 12-21-2011 10:57 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by miked (Post 2585634)
I mean, they've said in the past that their main goal is to get Obama out of office, so I wouldn't put it by them. I agree with Boehner that it sucks to pass a 2-month bill to just start the same negotiations. I don't agree with a 1% surcharge on rich people, but I don't think the Republican party is offering anything on their side to cut (defense, etc), rather just expecting the removal of regulations to somehow spur the economy and equal more revenue.

But it's a stupid game of chicken because the R's think Obama has more to lose in an election year.


It's a two month extension because the GOP won't agree to a year extension. The Dems would take a clean year extension if they could get it, but the GOP will only go for a year if a bunch of non-related riders are included.

Of course I don't believe the House freshmen would even agree to that. Obama is for it, so they have to b against it. It would be interesting to see Obama embrace a Tea Party platform just so the freshmen could abandon it entirely.

Edward64 12-22-2011 10:46 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Edward64 (Post 2585488)
Dangerous game Boehner is playing ... I think this will come back and hurt the GOP but it is good to see a person stand behind their beliefs (if that's really the case).

I did not see any opinions from the GOP candidates.

Obama, Boehner square off in payroll tax fight - CNN.com


Well, Boehner blinked.

I was watching Fox News yesterday and they were telling saying for Boehner to move on.

Buccaneer 12-22-2011 10:47 PM

Glad to see so many saying that tax cuts are good for the economy.

RainMaker 12-22-2011 10:49 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dutch (Post 2585571)
If that's the case, the Republican Party should be banned.

Can't ban a party if people want it around and agree with their tactics.

RainMaker 12-22-2011 10:50 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Buccaneer (Post 2586385)
Glad to see so many saying that tax cuts are good for the economy.

It's more people saying lets throw more on the credit card and let our kids figure out how to pay this off.

Jobs are what should be the focal point right now, not these little tax cuts.

sterlingice 12-23-2011 05:42 AM

Yeah, the payroll tax cut is a joke. In the long run, it's just starving Social Security all so everyone can have an election year bribe.

SI

cartman 12-23-2011 10:33 AM

Here's a couple of quotes from Boehner yesterday:

"You know, sometimes, it’s hard to do the right thing. And sometimes it’s politically difficult to do the right thing."

"If you can get this fixed, why not uh, why not do the right thing for the American people - even though it’s not exactly what we want?"

larrymcg421 12-23-2011 10:54 AM

I like the payroll tax cut because it is targeted at people under the $100,000 level and a large majority of that money is more likely to go back into the economy than with something like the Bush tax cuts. I think taking that 2% of purchasing power out of the economy just as it is starting to recover would be a horrible and devastating mistake.

SteveMax58 12-23-2011 11:01 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by larrymcg421 (Post 2586492)
I like the payroll tax cut because it is targeted at people under the $100,000 level and a large majority of that money is more likely to go back into the economy than with something like the Bush tax cuts. I think taking that 2% of purchasing power out of the economy just as it is starting to recover would be a horrible and devastating mistake.


I actually agree but this is just another example of how both parties deflect real problems in exchange for the focus to be on this little problem.

Lets not talk about corporate welfare, entitlement reform, or tax cuts for the rich...lets talk about payroll taxes so we can play this game instead of the game that would have real substance and require tangible output.

Raiders Army 12-24-2011 10:00 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by larrymcg421 (Post 2586492)
I like the payroll tax cut because it is targeted at people under the $100,000 level and a large majority of that money is more likely to go back into the economy than with something like the Bush tax cuts. I think taking that 2% of purchasing power out of the economy just as it is starting to recover would be a horrible and devastating mistake.


Actually the CBO disagrees with you. The money is more likely to be saved than be put back into the economy.

JPhillips 12-25-2011 08:07 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Raiders Army (Post 2587041)
Actually the CBO disagrees with you. The money is more likely to be saved than be put back into the economy.


I thought that was true if the tax cut came as a rebate, but not true if the cut gets spread out over the year in small amounts.

Edward64 12-27-2011 09:39 PM

Obama on the rebound. I think we all knew it would tighten up some.

Quote:

President Obama has enjoyed a rebound in popularity, putting him in a stronger position to defend his presidency in next year's election campaign.

Of course, there's a long way to go between now and a 2012 vote that's still more than 10 months away.

But for Mr. Obama, the important thing for now is that his job approval ratings are moving generally up rather than down, despite attacks by Republican rivals and a still-weak economy.

The latest sign: Gallup polling shows the president garnering 46 percent approval from American adults, the highest level since July and a big run-up after starting the month of December at 41 percent.

Various polls of Obama's job approval, averaged by the website RealClearPolitics, show the same recovery over the past month.

Why the reversal of fortunes, after a summer downdraft in public support?

One big factor is that presidential ratings can be, in part, a mirror of how people feel about the economy and their own prospects. And on that front, the consumer outlook is that the economy is weak but improving.

On Tuesday, a widely watched index of consumer confidence, released by the Conference Board in New York, rose for December to 64.5, up from 55.2 a month earlier. (A reading of 100 on the index would equal the optimism seen in 1985.)

"After two months of considerable gains, the Consumer Confidence Index is now back to levels seen last spring," said Lynn Franco, director of research at the Conference Board. "It is too soon to tell if this is a rebound from earlier declines or a sustainable shift in attitudes."

The revival of consumer confidence, in turn, has come as the job market has shown signs of progress, the stock market stabilized, and European nations have made progress toward quieting a financial crisis.

Another reason the Obama brand name has gained ground, political analysts say, is the partisan fight over renewing a payroll tax cut for US workers. Amid a partisan stand-off, the president appears to have successfully cast himself as standing for middle-class interests.


Edward64 12-28-2011 08:03 PM

Haven't thought much about it but my first impression is this will be a good combination assuming Biden steps away gracefully.

ROBERT REICH: Get Ready For A Obama-Clinton Presidential Ticket
Quote:

My political prediction for 2012 (based on absolutely no inside information): Hillary Clinton and Joe Biden swap places. Biden becomes Secretary of State — a position he’s apparently coveted for years. And Hillary Clinton, Vice President.

So the Democratic ticket for 2012 is Obama-Clinton.

Why do I say this? Because Obama needs to stir the passions and enthusiasms of a Democratic base that’s been disillusioned with his cave-ins to regressive Republicans. Hillary Clinton on the ticket can do that.

Moreover, the economy won’t be in superb shape in the months leading up to Election Day. Indeed, if the European debt crisis grows worse and if China’s economy continues to slow, there’s a better than even chance we’ll be back in a recession. Clinton would help deflect attention from the bad economy and put it on foreign policy, where she and Obama have shined.

The deal would also make Clinton the obvious Democratic presidential candidate in 2016 — offering the Democrats a shot at twelve (or more) years in the White House, something the Republicans had with Ronald Reagan and the first George Bush but which the Democrats haven’t had since FDR. Twelve years gives the party in power a chance to reshape the Supreme Court as well as put an indelible stamp on America.

According to the latest Gallup poll, the duo are this year’s most admired man and woman This marks the fourth consecutive win for Obama while Clinton has been the most admired woman in each of the last 10 years. She’a topped the list 16 times since 1993, exceeding the record held by former First Lady Eleanor Roosevelt, who topped the list 13 times.

Obama-Clinton in 2012. It’s a natural.

rowech 12-28-2011 08:47 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Edward64 (Post 2588096)
Haven't thought much about it but my first impression is this will be a good combination assuming Biden steps away gracefully.

ROBERT REICH: Get Ready For A Obama-Clinton Presidential Ticket


Might be better to switch the order of the two.

SportsDino 12-28-2011 09:40 PM

The CBO historically would call a payroll tax cut to boost consumer spending... also the definition of 'save' is a bit complex, it more often means paying down debt than stuffing pennies in the piggy bank. Debt reduction, while maybe not preferred by our finance overlords, will lead to increased consumer spending in the future as dollars spent on interest are instead available for goods and confidence to perform that spending increases as debt burden is perceived smaller.

I wouldn't put it past the CBO to tweak their current song and dance in order to push a limited tax cut pie to some other pet projects over payroll tax cuts, such as employer payroll subsidies of various forms, or other arguments that rich people need those cuts so much more than everyone else. Compare CBO circa 2000 to now (or even earlier, although the explosion of internet archives makes document mining so much easier over the last decade) and you can see how their opinions show a bias to the mood of the times.

Statistically the payroll tax cut is better than most other tax cuts on the table for boosting consumer spending and the average American's pocket book. Considering the amount of capital sitting around and low interest rates the many other giveaways... er tax cuts that target the rich would have little stimulus effects. If low rates, relatively low taxes, and abundant capital are not enough to stimulate investment... even more tax freebies will not do much more.

Given the current economic situation, anything that boosts consumer confidence is good for rich people's stock portfolios, so if they gave up the class warfare and trying to maximize their cut of the pie... maybe the pie they are eating will be a bit larger and sweeter rather than a glorified shit sandwich a second recession would bring us. Let the poor shlubs have an extra 500-2000 this year, they will spend it on iPads and my Apple stock will continue to be highly priced. Win win for all of us.

Edward64 12-31-2011 07:38 AM

Interesting the only 2012 must do is extending the payroll tax cut and not including finding the budget cuts before the automatic across the board sequester to trim the $1T+ over 10 years.

There's going to be so much partisan "messaging" in 2012.

Obama’s 2012 political strategy: Keep attacking unpopular Congress - The Washington Post
Quote:

After taking his lumps during the summer’s bitter debt-ceiling debacle, Obama switched tactics, eschewing an “inside game,” based on direct negotiations with Capitol Hill Republicans, for an “outside game,” focused on harnessing public opinion. It culminated two weeks ago when House Speaker John A. Boehner (Ohio) gave in under enormous public pressure and agreed to an Obama-backed, two-month extension of the payroll tax cut.

Administration aides believe Obama emerged from the showdown with public consensus that he, not Congress, is more willing to rise above Washington’s partisan gridlock. And as he enters his reelection campaign year, Obama intends to “double down” on his outside strategy, pressing the message that he is fighting for the middle class against a Congress beholden to special interests, administration aides said.

Obama will resume his nationwide jobs tour with an appearance in Cleveland on Wednesday, and his State of the Union address on Jan. 24 will echo the populist themes the president laid out in a speech in Osawatomie, Kan., in early December.

“In terms of the president’s relationship with Congress in 2012 . . . the president is no longer tied to Washington,” deputy press secretary Josh Earnest said.

White House aides believe that without being forced to engage Congress in regular partisan brinksmanship — “putting out fires,” as Earnest described it — Obama will have a “larger playing field” to articulate a broader agenda for the nation as he heads into the election. The administration views the looming February fight over how to pay for extending the payroll tax cut through the end of 2012 as the final “must-do” item, and the last potential “cliff-hanger” legislation on Obama’s domestic jobs agenda.

Edward64 01-01-2012 05:27 PM

Sample partisan messaging but I do think Obama needs to run/explain his track record.

GOP’s battle plan against Obama: Use his own words against him - The Washington Post
Quote:

With Republican voters in Iowa set to finally begin picking a nominee to challenge President Obama, GOP officials in Washington are quietly and methodically finishing what operatives are calling “the book” — 500 pages of Obama quotes and video links that will form the backbone of the party’s attack strategy against the president leading up to Election Day 2012.

The document, portions of which were reviewed by The Washington Post, lays out how GOP officials plan to use Obama’s words and voice as they build an argument for his defeat: that he made specific promises and entered office with lofty expectations and has failed to deliver on both.

Republican officials say they will leverage the party’s newly catalogued video library containing every publicly available utterance from Obama since his 2008 campaign.
:
:
The new GOP playbook is designed to take one of Obama’s great assets — the power of his oratory — and turn it into a liability. It details hundreds of potential targets, partially a result of a president who Republican strategists say is unusually prone to making detailed promises.

Quote:

A 2009 Obama statement that his stimulus bill would lift 2 million Americans out of poverty, for example, is paired against census data showing that more than 6 million Americans have fallen into poverty since he took office.

Quote:

A pledge that an administration housing plan would “help between 7 and 9 million families restructure or refinance their mortgages” is paired against news reports showing the government spent far less than promised and aided fewer than 2 million.

Quote:

And his 2008 Democratic nomination acceptance speech vow that a green jobs initiative would create 5 million jobs is matched up against news reports from this year depicting lackluster results and headlines about Solyndra, the failed solar panel maker that received hundreds of millions in federal loan guarantees.

Quote:

One Obama quote will be featured prominently: In 2009 he said on NBC’s “Today” show that if he could not fix the economy in three years, “then there’s going to be a one-term proposition.”

“That’s a clip the American people will hear and see over and over and over again throughout the next year,” said Republican National Committee Chairman Reince Priebus.

Mizzou B-ball fan 01-01-2012 06:43 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Edward64 (Post 2589371)
Sample partisan messaging but I do think Obama needs to run/explain his track record.

GOP’s battle plan against Obama: Use his own words against him - The Washington Post


That's always going to be one of the most effective strategies against an incumbent who has had issues producing what he promised. Don't say what he didn't do, let him say it for you.

Julio Riddols 01-01-2012 07:07 PM

All I know is if SOPA gets passed to go along with the defense bill Obama signed into law on New Years Eve, I'll do anything I can to get the fuck out of America. This shit is getting downright scary.

molson 01-01-2012 07:34 PM

Of course, it's also a little strange to criticize a guy who's acting more in line with your ideals than anyone thought he would.

Edward64 01-05-2012 03:37 PM

I can see both sides of the argument. I didn't see the $ savings or the specific details on programs. Not sure what to think but I do trust Panetta.

Obama unveils plans for pared-down military - CNN.com
Quote:

Washington (CNN) -- President Barack Obama unveiled his administration's plan Thursday for a leaner, cheaper military, a reflection of Washington's fiscal belt tightening and slower national economic growth.

The president insisted the new strategy -- which eliminates the military's ability to actively fight two major wars at once -- will allow U.S. armed forces to effectively combat terrorism while confronting any new threats from countries like China and Iran.

"Over the next 10 years, the growth in the defense budget will slow, but the fact of the matter is this: It will still grow, because we have global responsibilities that demand our leadership," Obama announced during a rare presidential visit to the Pentagon. "I firmly believe, and I think the American people understand, that we can keep our military strong -- and our nation secure -- with a defense budget that continues to be larger than roughly the next 10 countries combined."
Quote:

"The question that this strategy answers is what kind of military will we need after the long wars of the last decade are over," the president told reporters. "Yes, our military will be leaner, but the world must know: The United States is going to maintain our military superiority with armed forces that are agile, flexible and ready for the full range of contingencies and threats."

The president was flanked by an array of top Pentagon brass during his remarks, including Defense Secretary Leon Panetta and Joint Chiefs of Staff Chairman Gen. Martin Dempsey.

Republicans immediately blasted the plan, characterizing it as a retreat from the reality of America's global responsibilities.


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 12:28 AM.

Powered by vBulletin Version 3.6.0
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.