Today was such a good day that it actually led me to watch a little Fox News just so I could gloat a little bit. I was rewarded by seeing Rick Santorum looking shell-shocked and dumbfounded that the president had been able to reel off such a succession of major victories. As for Fox News, they are left arguing that the big winner today was Tom Coburn because he was able to strip two billion dollars away from the emergency responders who fell ill after breathing glass for months while they dug up the remains of the nearly 3,000 people who died in Manhattan on 9/11.
We still got shellacked last November, and we still have a brutal political season coming next year. But we are riding high right now, and I don’t mind crowing about it.
Here’s Lindsey Graham:
“When it’s all going to be said and done, Harry Reid has eaten our lunch. This has been a capitulation in two weeks of dramatic proportions of policies that wouldn’t have passed in the new Congress.”
It wasn’t Harry Reid. It was President Obama. He’s sipping on Mitch McConnell’s juice box right now as Air Force One winds its way to Hawaii for the holidays.
I almost never watch the network news, but last night I watched Brian Williams. And it shocked me to hear him basically lead with what you have been saying for some time; that this Congress and this President have gotten more significant legislation passed that affects more people than almost any Congress in history. I believe he used the word “unprecedented”.
Now some of the analysis as to how it happened was kind of rooted in village-speak, but they did click off a list of the most significant legislation passed.
OT, but has anyone else seen the video of Harry Reid returning Lt. Dan Choi’s West Point ring? What Lt. Choi had to say after the meeting was very moving and heartfelt. And it also reflected the fact that this is only one more step on the road to equality for people like Lt. Choi. Unfortunately, we are not there yet.
Yes. We finally have some good news for Christmas if only because Republicans care more about going home for Christmas that about their ever so precious “conservative principles”. Also, we now know where the rift between the business Republicans and the ideologues is. And Alexander, Isakson, the Maine Twins, post-primary Lisa Murkowski, Lugar, and on some items Corker show up on the business side of the aisle.
And the second good news is that we will have some sort of filibuster (“Senate rules”) reform come January 5.
We will see come time to increase the debt ceiling how well President Obama has eaten the Republicans’ lunch. The obvious thing to do would be to hold harmless those things that are most popular with the American people — Social Security and Medicare — and also the fundamental defense of the continental US. And then put everything else on the table as spending cuts, starting with Congressional, Presidential, and Judicial compensation and Congressional staff head counts. And moving on through withdrawal from Iraq, Afghanistan, and Guantanamo to military base closures, consolidating bases outside Republican districts, and on down the line attacking every Republican sacred cow so that the country gets really clear how interested the Republicans in actually cutting spending.
And we can say that he indeed is eating the Republicans’ lunch if in 2012 he maneuvers the Republicans into begging for tax increases.
My question, was the election of more crazies in Nov, and how it was attempted or carried out (e.g. AK senate) a wake up call for the not-insane republicans? The willingness to sacrifice START and 9/11 first responders health care, for example, in order to damage Obama? interested in your take on this.
I don’t think so. I think they got their tax cuts for the rich and they were keen on getting home for Christmas; the Republicans got held hostage to Christmas. And the presence of 9/11 first responders on Capitol Hill day before yesterday calling out folks like Burr and Coburn put the pressure the Zadroga bill. On START, Lugar broke with the leadership early, every Republican Secretary of State still alive signed a letter asking for ratification. McConnell made the determination that since he got what he wanted on taxes, he could allow his folks to vote their consciences on the last three issues. And they did.
The Republicans who voted with the Democrats have not been asleep, they have been intimidated by the possibility of being primaried. Murkowski’s win and Castle’s loss probably has undercut that tool of leadership some, and the Republicans captured the House.
But DeMint wants to be Majority Leader of the Senate (or President) and has his allies in Coburn, “Good Cop” Graham, Kyl, Cornyn, and the others in the group of 26 who voted against ratifying START. And those 26 are the majority of the caucus. So expect some more hijinks next year and throughout 2012 especially.
Good analysis, Tarheel Dem. I think the key “tell” on taxes and deficit reduction will be if Obama can extract from Republicans an agreement that “everything is on the table”—code for, in this case, increasing taxes on the rich. (Hopefully veteran Washington Dems and tax policy experts are brushing off their files from the Bush I – George Mitchell negotiations in which they cut a deal that benefited the country and split the Republican base.)
I don’t think Obama can get “everything is on the table” until Republicans see their sacred spending cows lined up and heading to the abattoir.
It would be very easy to do that by presenting a balanced budget for FY 2011 in February and having Republicans be the ones who increased spending.
But the task for progressives is to start more aggressively pushing back on the failures of 30 years of neoliberal Reaganomics.
I think the task for progressives is to find even yet more progressive solutions to the things we want. We want social security and a good safety net, but they may be funded or structured in ways that can be upgraded and improved. If so, why not? CHANGE and PROGRESS can include process as well as policy. Be not afraid of change. It’s what you voted for in 2008.
There may be folks out there in the Republican party who are actually interested in doing good things for the American people, but with a different perspective than the Dems. If so, then it’s worth dealing with those people. They will be the ones who get things done and get reelected.
My belief is that the tea party folks will be a lot of noise and not much action. They will be back-benched by and large — and maybe gone in two years.
DeMint is hated in the Senate, I understand. I don’t think he can effectively challenge McConnell, but ol’ Mitch has to loosen up a bit on his grip — and he knows it.
As far as social safety net benefits go, we all have our part to play in educating the citizenry and changing citizen expectations about what gov should provide. the usa vs. europe difference isn’t about the existence or nonexistence of a left in the usa. the expectation of health care, education, public transportation etc. is not something advocated by a progressive group in europe it is an expectation on the part of all the citizens. Here when one university raises college tuitions out of range and the others follow suit, it’s seen as the decision of a private institution, not something that impacts the general good. I’m just saying this in terms of a new year’s resolution type task for 2011 – my alternative to visiting Eeyore’s Gloomy Place.
McConnell cannot loosen his grip as long as DeMint is likely to muster a majority of the caucus, which is what going into 2011? 25 Republican Senators. DeMint is doing the old “Mitch is abandoning our conservative principles” dance. That paints McConnell into a corner.
Or in the words of Daniel Planview in “There Will Be Blood” – He drank your milkshake!!
the President had to be feeling good on AFO.
I don’t want to be the turd in the punchbowl, but is DADT really repealed?
I intiially thought this post by aravosis was sour grapes and splitting hairs:
(italics in original)
But the Times said essentially the same thing on the op-ed page:
Close reading tells you that “Allowing repeal” is not the same as “repealing”. Am i missing something here? this is a serious question.
The bill allows repeal once the President, Gates and Mullen (I think) certify that it won’t hurt troop readiness or some such. Since all three already think that there is not going to be any obstacle in repeal. Obama said it would be a matter of months before implementation. Various admin and logistic things to work out, such as training, what to do about benefits to dependents etc. But, essentially it is repealed.
As of yesterday, the situation seems to be that the President has given the orders, the members of the Joint Chiefs of Staff have saluted and said “Yes, sir” to their Commander in Chief.
The bill “allowed” because the previous bill forbade the President from repealing Don’t Ask Don’t Tell.
Dan Choi certainly thinks something happened.
Racial integration of the US armed forces took about two years from the time Truman ordered it until the time it was implemented. I think Obama indicated in a recent interview that he expects the repeal of DADT to be implemented in “a matter of months”.
thanks everyone, for the explanations.
When it comes to mr. Obama, sadly i have to assume the de fault position of “trust but verify”, with a lot more emphasis on “verify” than “trust”.
I’m not sure I understand the interpretation of events as “Obama ate their lunch.” I mean, yeah, he got a shitload of stuff done in the lame duck session that had been imperilled, but look at what the GOP agreed to: a major national defense treaty (not exactly a pet Democratic issue); health care for heroes; and tax cuts for the rich, which is their raison d’etre.
I don’t mean this as a criticism of Obama; I think it’s more a commentary on the extremity of the current GOP. They agree to vote for stuff for which they would have been certifiably insane to oppose (even on their political/ideological terms), and we call that Eating Their Lunch.
Nuclear non-proliferation is one of my highest priorities. It’s higher than health care. It’s at least as high as addressing climate change. It seems ridiculous to me to say that the START Treaty is not a Democratic priority.
DADT repeal was definitely a priority.
You misunderstood. I wasn’t saying that START isn’t a priority for us — I’m saying that it should’ve been a non-partisan priority for them too. In other words, part of the reason we got so “surprisingly” much done is because they objected to stuff in an insane fashion in the first place. And yes, they object to a lot of insane stuff — like health care for everyone — but that’s on ideological grounds that are consistent (if ludicrous). New START is something they should never have remotely objected to to begin with.