James Carville's Advice to the President...Panic!

[Gregg]

Well LC, we've made it this far by agreeing to disagree. There actually is one very important point that I will readily concede. The Republicans in Washington, the so called conservatives, have for the most part become assholes. I have never had a party affiliation, but am completely disenfranchised by the Republicans now because of their obstructionist ways. That is simply my view, there are others in the conservative ranks that applaud the hard line stand that has been taken, but it ain't workin' for me.

I actually do give Mr. Obama credit where credit's due for attempts to compromise. I do not think he and his administration have us on a good path. Economically speaking I am diametrically opposed to most of his policy and I don't think he has the what it takes to propose what its really going to take to fix this country. I am fully aware that the Republicans will likely work to shoot down any proposals he makes, but we at least need to start getting some REAL ideas on the table. What we really need is someone with the guts to tell our country that we are in serious trouble and that its going to hurt for a while to get out of it. There are very few on either side of the aisle with that kind of fortitude.

BTW, Mr. Obama did propose a jobs bill. I haven't read the whole thing, but even I'm opposed to what I have seen so far. More of the same trying to spend our way out of trouble in ways that are destined to produce little, if any, long term benefit. IMO, that's not the kind of action we need any more.

[loosechickens]

No problem, Gregg......disagreeing with the President's policies is both reasonable and to be expected from those who do not share his particular vision as to which direction we should be traveling. I only reacted to the idea that somehow, he was on a "high horse" and making no efforts toward compromise, where most Democrats would say that he's done nothing BUT compromise, often far, far more than even reasonable people in his party think reasonable.

I agree that this country is in a huge mess....heck, the entire world economy is in a mess, with a hugely unsustainable model that depends on constant growth in a world with dimishing resources and ever increasing pollution. And with the incredible drumbeat of devisiveness that has been fanned by those with money and power to be gained by fanning those flames of difference rather than looking for ways to find common ground, I really do not have a lot of faith in how we're going to do, no matter what.

What do you think would be the best path for the President? Given what actual power he has, and that does not involve Congress, which is locked in gridlock at the moment, with the Republicans absolutely determined not to give an inch, so that they can bring down his Presidency, so useless to him as a cooperator in actually solving problems.....the old, "burn the village down to save it" mentality, to me. If you were advising him, what would be your advice?

The Democrats say he is selling out to big business and the polluters.....the Republicans try to paint him as a socialist who is trying to take over the country and turn it into a Marxist state......my feeling is that if both sides are against his policies, he's probably right in the "sweet zone".... ;-)

[loosechickens]

This is kind of what I mean, Gregg, about feeling as though the President has bent over backwards trying to find common ground, and trying to accomodate Republican viewpoints as well as Democratic ones. Yet, to hear conservatives tell it, Obama is all about raising taxes, and anti-business.....go figure. From www.americablog.com

"All told, the Recovery Act included $243 billion worth of tax cuts through 2012.

Nearly two years after signing his first big tax cut bill into law, President Obama completely outdid himself by signing the Tax Relief, Unemployment Insurance Reauthorization, and Job Creation Act of 2010, commonly known as the December 2010 tax deal. The biggest element of the December deal was the extension, for two additional years, of all the Bush tax cuts and alternative minimum tax relief, at a two-year combined cost of more than $400 billion.

In addition, the deal extended a variety of business tax cuts and incentives, which reduced revenues by some $150 billion, and it cut the estate tax—a tax paid by only a very few super-wealthy, massive estates—by $65 billion. The December tax bill also cut the payroll tax paid by employees by 2 percentage points, delivering more than $110 billion in tax cuts to working Americans.

Put it all together, and in one fell swoop, President Obama cut taxes by $654 billion in 2011 and 2012 alone. In other words, with this bill President Obama cut taxes by more, in raw dollar amounts, in just half of his term than George W. Bush did over his full first term.

With the huge Recovery Act tax cuts and the enormous December 2010 tax cuts combined, President Obama has already signed into law tax cuts amounting to more than $900 billion from 2009 through 2012. Even after accounting for legislation that the president signed that increased revenue during that period, President Obama has cut taxes by more than $850 billion in his first term, or approximately 1.5 percent of GDP.

Just recently, President Obama proposed another $250 billion in tax cuts designed to spur job creation, mostly in the form of additional cuts to the payroll tax. In fact, as the Citizens for Tax Justice noted, President Obama’s proposed payroll tax cuts are essentially equal in size to the total cost of the extended Bush tax cuts for 2012. If Congress passes this next set of Obama tax cuts, his total will rise to well more than $1.1 trillion, or nearly 2 percent of GDP—close to double the size of the tax cuts in President Bush’s first term."

[The Storyteller]

James Carville is a political has-been and now just another talking head. I can't believe anyone takes him seriously.

[The Storyteller]

PS: The only two presidents to lose reelection in my l lifetime were uncharismatic, weak, and poor campaigners who ran against more charismatic opponents. Obama is none of the above.

He will win in a cake walk.

[ApatheticNoMore]

Just recently, President Obama proposed another $250 billion in tax cuts designed to spur job creation

Yes most of the job bill was tax cuts. I made a post to "personal finance" about this.

[JaneV2.0]

"High horse?" Is this the new Republican-approved word for "uppity," as some suggest their "arrogant" characterization is? Good God, if he were any more humble, he'd be groveling on his belly. For those of us who wish he'd channel FDR, his "bully pulpit" seems more like a game of "Mother, may I."

Remember "I'm the decider?" Real humble, that one.

[Gregg]

"High horse?" Is this the new Republican-approved word for "uppity," as some suggest their "arrogant" characterization is? Good God, if he were any more humble, he'd be groveling on his belly.

I haven't heard "uppity" since watching Gone With the Wind, but whatever floats your boat. IMO our President appeared extremely arrogant during his first year in office, like the newest (honorary) member of the jet set spreading his wings. That has since been tempered quite a bit. Approval ratings hovering around 40% will do that. Even so, if you listen to his speeches you hear about 20 "I"s for every "we". That used to sound arrogant, now it might just be that no one is standing with the President anymore.

[Gregg]

What do you think would be the best path for the President? Given what actual power he has, and that does not involve Congress, which is locked in gridlock at the moment, with the Republicans absolutely determined not to give an inch, so that they can bring down his Presidency, so useless to him as a cooperator in actually solving problems.....the old, "burn the village down to save it" mentality, to me. If you were advising him, what would be your advice?

That's the real question now, isn't it? I still have the opinion that it is less about how much we are spending and more about what we are spending it on. If you want to talk about cuts there are a few that make sense to me. I'm not an isolationist by any means, but there's a hundred billion or so in the foreign aid budget that seems to carry little benefit. Cut the military back to defending OUR shores rather than everyone else's and we could probably lop off another quarter trillion. Quit subsidizing industries. Period. If we're going to be capitalists there is no such thing as too big to fail.

I've said it a hundred times, but regarding what we spend money on its still guns and butter. Our transportation infrastructure is crumbling. We are overly dependent on foreign oil. The electrical grid is extremely vulnerable. Our public education system is second rate at best. Money spent to develop any or all of those will pay dividends for generations to come. We need to make investments in the future, not bailouts for today. Investing in roads, bridges and rail systems will help keep us competitive. Investing in nuclear, solar, wind, clean coal and natural gas along with developing better delivery systems for the power will help keep us secure. Educating our youth will keep us viable. I do not know how many millions of job would be created with such a program, but would guess several. And none of them would be minimum wage jobs.

Saying that is easier than the President actually selling the idea. The benefits would have to be obvious enough and immediate enough to make any opposition appear insane to oppose it. Work with leading Republicans. Have a closed door and say "this is what I want to do and I will share the credit all the way". To be effective the President will have to do an end around on the Tea Party. Beat them to the punch. Start everyone talking about how much money will be coming in to the coffers if we create 10 million great jobs instead of 2 million crappy ones. It's a politicians wet dream so how hard can it be to get the ball rolling?

[loosechickens]

I don't think we're very far apart on the issues, Gregg....I agree with most of what you are saying. The difference lies, I think, in the fact that I think that is pretty much EXACTLY the direction that President Obama has been trying to move us, yet you seem way less than pleased with him and are not a supporter.

He has been slower than I would like to get us unentangled in Iraq and Afghanistan, but I also understand that wars are much easier entered then they are to extricate oneself.

From what you said above, I'm surprised that you are not an Obama supporter, because that is surely not the prevailing Republican outlook, and is far closer to the vision of the future espoused by this President. You may be closer to being a moderate Democrat/moderate Republican, which is the centrist position where I see this President, than you realize.

thanks for the thoughtful post.....lots of good meat there.