Stimulation

So what's your real wish Joe, that all of a sudden your bretheren will abandon the easy path in favor of a more labor intensive model of journalism?

I'm all in favor of middle class tax cuts, in general.
.
The problem is that Obama is tying it to his STIMULUS package. This will water down the actual fiscal stimulus to something in the neighborhood of $300-500, which is less than the amount that most economists say we should be spending. And for what? To get to 80 votes in the Senate? So much for being the "pragmatic" President.
.
BTW, throwing in tax cuts for the middle class won't buy a damn's worth of support from the GOP. The GOP needs the middle class "Lucky Duckies" to resent their tax burden or else they will never go along with the various tax cuts for estates, corporations, and highest 1% of income.
.
This is a short, medium, and long-term political loser for Obama.

Obama pledged to do this, so no, it shouldn't be a surprise. And while it torques me for McConnell to come out and claim this is Obama bowing to Republicans, it now makes it more difficult for the Republicans to vote against it, and that's a good thing.
.
It will take Republicans a few months to get used to the idea that they aren't running things. On the other hand, they have now been consulted in person by the Democratic President-elect more than they ever were by their Republican President.

"....the now-anachronistic policy matrix of the Reagan Era."

Brave words, Mr. Klein. I hope to see you repeat that sentiment often in the future.

Do you really believe your colleagues in the MSM will exercise their brain cells and work out the implications of the stimulus plans by themselves. Thus far they have relied on sound bitism , conventional wisdom and potted junk. The problem is that most MSM types don't understand economics; they understand bogus talking points provided by Grover Norquist.

Tax cuts are easy for journalists to understand. Creative investments are harder. I'm hoping my colleagues--especially the TV folks--will make the effort to understand what the new administration is actually all about instead of continuing to report the familiar: the now-anachronistic policy matrix of the Reagan Era. And I'm hoping for a pony.
.
kathy: It will take Republicans a few months to get used to the idea that they aren't running things. Afraid I have to join the incomparable Bill of Portland Maine in taking a "show me" on this topic:
.
An Open Letter to the 111th Congress
.
Dear Congress, Let's get this out of the way right now: I think you're gonna suck balls.
.
I base my opinion on your performance during the previous administration, and I see no reason to change my mind just because y'all have a bunch of new members and America has a new president. . . .
I know you want me to believe you'll do things differently, but that's like Lucy promising Charlie Brown that she won't pull the football away---for real this time. Uh huh. George Bush may be the worst president ever, but at least he was right when he stammered, "Fool me once shame on you. Fool me...can't get fooled again."
.
I know I'm being a tad negative, but can you blame me? You authorized the Iraq war, legalized warrantless wiretapping to make Bush's illegal wiretapping retroactively legal (that was a neat backflip), agreed that habeas corpus was disposable, wasted floor time condemning MoveOn.org for exercising its freedom of speech, took impeachment off the table, failed to notice the collapsing economy, and wouldn't even allow the government to use its power to negotiate lower drug prices. You failed us and failed us and failed us. Collectively you're a bunch of irresponsible opportunistic whiny ether-sniffing assface sissypants bedwetters until such time that you prove through your deeds that you're not.

Instead of a screed, I should have opened by praising Joe for doing the one thing I always end up talking about in these here threads - the absolute and critical need for real, professional, serious, respected journalists to un-apologetically offer media criticism where it is deserved and challenge their peers to do better.
.
I feel so strongly about this THAT I FEEL THE NEED TO SHOUT A THANK YOU TO JOE FOR SUPPORTING A CULTURE OF PROFESSIONAL RESPONSIBILITY IN JOURNALISM. Now, please continue.

Obama promised it in every single speech
.
One of the things that has astounded me is how much has been written about Obama somehow surprisingly embarking on policies that he said, over and over, that he would implement. WRT Iraq, his plans for a permanent presence of "support" troops. Now here.
.
He said this over and over again. How can it be a surprise, to anybody, that he plans middle class tax cuts?

Obama appears to be some magic mirror. People look at him and see exactly what they want him to be. Savior. Demon. Super Liberal. Terrorist pal. Etc.

Instead, he's a hardworking, intelligent man with great political skills whose largely centrist ideas may, may, lead us out of the wilderness of the past 8 years.

His tax cut promise also included raising taxes on the wealthy to keep the whole package closer to revenue neutral. He has abandoned that part of his promise and that concerns me.

Actually, I respectfully disagree, dave.
.
What I see in Obama -- and trust me, it isn't what I want to see -- is a guy who has tremendous rhetorical gifts and personal charisma (yes, those political skills), but who frankly lacks a track record of actual governance (those other equally if not more important political skills).
.
I give Obama credit for assembling a highly competent campaign team. Unfortunately, electoral politics and the politics of governance are two different beasts. Obama needs to prove himself competent all over again.
.
I don't want to minimize the achievement of getting elected, but I Obama benefited from a tremendous amount of luck and good timing during the campaign. The general election was as easy as it can be. He was facing a reckless, Septuagenarian opponent with a history of cancer, little support from the base, and a wildly unqualified running mate. The economy was in the toilet and getting worse. And Bush had run the GOP's good name into the ground. Obama actually underperformed the generic Democratic candidate in polling.
.
I give credit to Obama for beating Hillary. But, again, Obama had tremendous luck. On one hand, as a front-runner had enough money to push everybody but John Edwards out of running for President (Biden, Richardson, and Dodd were always running for V.P.). On the other hand, Hillary had never ran a seriously competitive election and made a ton of mistakes. And neither Hillary nor Edwards had extensive records that would otherwise make Obama appear as green as he was.
.
Again, this isn't what I want to see in Obama. It is just the facts. Obama ran a competent campaign and deserves praise...but the idea that he was some political, all-knowing genius borders on the ludicrous. As Bill of Portland Maine said, Democrats in Congress, Obama included, will be presumed to suck balls until they prove otherwise. Do I hope Obama proves to be competent? Of course. Should we assume it to be true based on past records? No.

not only did Obama promise middle class tax cuts he also said repeatedly that in light of the economic turn down his team would determine whether the best course of action would be to let the Bush tax cuts expire rather tgabvrepeal them now. Evidently, listening is also labor intensive.

I'm hoping my colleagues--especially the TV folks--will make the effort to understand what the new administration is actually all about instead of continuing to report the familiar
.
Ha! Ha! Ha! Good luck with that, Joe, the sentence you wrote to express this hope takes fifteen seconds longer to read than the average TV journo's attention span lasts.

How can it be a surprise, to anybody, that he plans middle class tax cuts?
.
Because the Republicans convinced themselves that Obama is a shapeshifter and a flipflopper. They saw what they wanted to see during the election.