Republicans Claim That Obama’s Long Time Economic Proposal Represents A ‘Classic Bait-And-Switch’
By Igor Volsky on Dec 1, 2012 at 11:47 am
Sen. Orrin Hatch (R-UT) ripped into President Obama’s opening offer on a package to avert the so-called fiscal cliff, during the GOP’s weekly address on Saturday, characterizing the proposal as “radical” and a “classic bait-and-switch.” “Maybe I missed it but I don’t recall him asking for any of that during the presidential campaign,” Hatch said. “These ideas are so radical that they have already been rejected on a bipartisan basis by Congress.”
Watch it:
Obama’s proposal — which includes $1.6 trillion in increased taxes on the rich over the next decade, $400 billion in savings in Medicare and other social programs, $50 billion in stimulus spending to begin next year, and an end to current debt ceiling rules — is not new or radical: it reflects the very same same policies Obama advanced for years and promoted extensively on the campaign trail.
For instance, Obama’s FY 2013 budget — released in February 2012 — raised “an additional $1.7 trillion in revenue” and proposed $360 billion in savings from entitlement programs, including Medicare and Medicaid. (Comparatively, Simpson-Bowles called for $2.7 trillion revenue over 10 years, more than what Obama requested). Obama advocated for additional stimulative spending throughout the campaign, calling for a path “forward” that will “continue investing in education and infrastructure.”
Republicans are feigning shock that Obama is proposing to implement the very same policies that Americans voted for in November, as they seek to define his second term agenda and bolster their own negotiating position. Meanwhile, they have yet to offer their own detailed proposal to avert the cliff.
http://thinkprogress.org/politics/2012/12/01/1268371/republicans-claim-that-obamas-long-time-economic-proposal-represents-a-classic-bait-and-switch/
= new reply since forum marked as read
his tough negotiating is not what they're used to; i can see why they think this was not as advertised.
so sorry, republicans.
No wonder these cretins lost. They didn't even bother to try to figure out what Obama was running on!
like cutting Social Security/Medicare. If he wants to talk "bait-and-switch" or just general "WTF moments" when it comes to newly re-elected Presidents, why don't we spend a few minutes talking about how George W. Bush campaigned in 2004 on his *credentials* on fighting terrorism ( 
) and how we were all going to be vaporized if we voted for Kerry and then his first policy proposal out of the gate was privatizing Social Security whereas President Obama is, well, promoting policies that he actually campaigned on but I guess, as usual, Republicans are choosing to be oblivious to those things called.............facts.
Republicans: If you want to cut Social Security and Medicare, YOU propose the policies and we'll have a vigorous debate about them. Don't expect Democrats (real ones, anyway) to do your dirty work for you!
