I have a really bad idea; demonstrably bad. It's unpopular, too

[gratuitous]

Now what will you do to put that idea into practice, Mr. President? Because otherwise I'll throw a tantrum and say mean things about you. I'll get my buddies in the popular media to say bad things, too. Take it or take it further, those are your options.

Actually, no matter what you do, I'll throw a tantrum and say mean things, and encourage my buddies in the popular media to do the same.

I was sort of incommunicado this weekend; does that about sum up where we are?

[bushisanidiot]

1. Hard to tell. Are you talking about the left or the right?

.

[baldguy]

6. It only seems to work with the Right.

Obama had deleted the Left's phone number from his Blackberry & took them off the WH Christmas card list.

[phantom power]

2. That about sums it up

:(

[G_j]

3. yes

that would sum it up..

and threats that not doing what the Rs want will bring disaster..

[MindandSoul]

4. I'm getting awfully tired of the "let's bash Obama" threads. ..

We're not pleased with his compromise. . .I agree with that!

So what? Are we going to help Republicans accomplish their "main" goal of making Obama fail? Are we going to actually realize their goal for them?
Are we going to vote for Palin, Romney or Huckaby next time?

We have had our tantrum. . .now let's get back to being reasonable, and stop seeing the "half-empty" glass and look at the "half-full" glass.

Okay, obviously this is ONLY a personal opinion. So glad I still have the right to have an opinion!

[gratuitous]

7. So, in order to "succeed"

We have to enact the demonstrably bad idea, which will not only negate, but overwhelm anything positive that might be accomplished by this accommodation? I'm not sure I'd call that "success."

There were four letters in this morning's paper, and the Oregonian is not a notably left-wing publication. But each and every letter laid out the budget-busting proclivities of continuing the artificially low tax rates for the wealthy. A couple of them noted that the proposed cuts to social security funding wouldn't touch the deficit, which rumor has it is The Most Important Issue Ever. But the tax bite will go up for the lowest wage earners.

Again, not what I would call "success." I daresay most people would be okay with all of the tax cuts expiring, especially if it meant the government could resume providing the social safety, badly torn by 10 years of ruinously low taxes while waging two elective wars and occupations halfway around the globe.

[NV Whino]

8. That might work if the glass were actually half full.

But it seems to be only a quarter full, and is evaporating at a very fast rate.

[Donnachaidh]

5. bingo! and the mean things continue today

To the levels of a dog whistle. :shrug:

[meow mix]

9. considering all his "ideas" come out of the right this must be a blast to the left

please tell me which of the ideas you mention are "bad"

[Recursion]

10. Do you have enough votes in the Senate to hold up all business?

If so, I'm sure he'd talk to you.

[Romulox]

Depends. Does this bad idea transfer billions from workers to the rich?

If so, I'm listening!

[tavalon]

11. Wow, for being incommunicado, you seem to be spot on

Wish we could get you a one on one with the Pres.

[HopeHoops]

12. I thought you were going to say "Tax Cuts for the Rich". That's demonstrably bad and unpopular.

[ljm2002]

13. Unrec for BS post...

...saying that there are "demonstrably bad" ideas being proposed without demonstrating a SINGLE ONE of said ideas, accusing some undefined group of people of throwing tantrums and saying mean things, and generally calling out groups without actually defining one single solitary actual position of disagreement.

To answer your question "does that about sum up where we are?" -- er, no, it doesn't.

[gratuitous]

14. Then let me be more specific

The proposal to extend upper income tax cuts for two years (or two months or two days) is horrible. The wealthy have not pulled their fair share of the expense of our society in the last 30 years, and particularly not in the last 10 years. When one factors in the unaccounted cost of not one, but two, foreign invasions/occupations, the budgetary shortfall is badly exacerbated, and any benefit that accrues from this military adventurism has gone almost wholly to the upper income stratum, which has been notably absent from actually doing any fighting or dying in Iraq or Afghanistan.

Next, the public expressions of concern over the federal budget deficit, and its anointment as The Most Important Issue Facing Washington, is completely ignored when the cost of extending upper income tax cuts, which seems highly hypocritical. To me, at least. The persons doing most of the yammering for high end tax cuts are multi-millionaires in Congress (particularly on the Republican side of the aisle, such as Eric Cantor, John Boehner, and Mitch McConnell), and at least until the next Congress convenes, about all they have to oppose any proposals is a threat to say mean things. Conversely, and against their own logic, these same Republicans demand that any extension of unemployment benefits must be paid for before they'll even agree to consider it.

I submit that regardless of what the Democrats do or don't do, Republicans will continue to say mean things, and they will enlist their pals in the popular media (do I really need to identify them by name, too, or can you figure that out for yourself?). So if they're going to say mean things about Democrats anyway, why shouldn't Democrats do the right thing? In this instance, extending unemployement benefits and reinstating unemployment benefits for those who have had their benefits run out will have the stimulative effect that everyone says they want to see. The unemployed take those benefits and spend them right away, and they have a multiplier effect in the economy. Whereas additional money in the pockets of the wealthy is simply sent haring off around the world in search of the absolute best return on investment; it generally doesn't get spent.

So, instead of following a responsible economic course, our Democratic political leaders seem to have locked themselves into an unfunded major tax giveaway to the overclass (who would still benefit from a cut to their first $250,000 of income), and telling dissenters in their own party to like it or lump it, it's going through anyway.

Sorry to have been so obtuse.