AP Analysis: Dems Punt hard choices on Obama budget

[populistdriven]

WASHINGTON (AP) — President Barack Obama's Democratic allies in Congress are taking only baby steps with his budget, putting off crucial decisions on his ambitious plans to expand health care, curb global warming and raise taxes on the wealthy.

Presidents Ronald Reagan, Bill Clinton and both Bushes all got far stronger assists from Congress on their first budgets. Nonetheless, Obama, is counting on votes approving budget outlines this week to give him some semblance of momentum.

"If we don't pass the budget, it will empower those critics who don't want to see anything getting done," Obama told House Democrats Monday, according to a House aide who required anonymity to reveal what was said at the closed-door meeting.

Risk-averse Democrats, however, are merely kicking the can down the road rather than using the budget to give a real push to the president's agenda. On health care, global warming and even Obama's signature "Making Work Pay" tax cut, the pending House and Senate budget plans offer no clues as to how those big ideas might advance.

more http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5gO_smkZKLjB9DEIWaGyFmzveZVTgD979NAIO0

[redqueen]

1. So they've completely abandoned the pretense of pretending to be unbiased.

Gotta love the AP.

*waits for DUers to agree with the spin*

[ej510]

3. There are alot of democrats in the senate that are afraid of being branded a tax and spend liberal.

[redqueen]

6. Sorry, but no.

Shit like this:

"Presidents Ronald Reagan, Bill Clinton and both Bushes all got far stronger assists from Congress on their first budgets"

Why... I suppose you think that it's just an honest mistake for them to forget all about the fact that this is the worst economic crisis since the Depression... and that we're in uncharted territory now, with global banks and esoteric financial instruments.

Or do you think that's a fair criticism?

[populistdriven]

10. Even though this article is entirely about Democrats they end with a Repuke Lobbyist quote

"They're not putting their cards on the table," said GOP lobbyist Rich Meade. He knows how this works; he's a former staff director of the House Budget Committee.

If that isn't enough of a tell then what is?

[redqueen]

12. People here still treat their crap like actual news...

so I guess we need something even more obvious.

[ej510]

2. As usual democrats give power to the repukes.

[AtomicKitten]

4. If having a huge majority doesn't motivate & inspire these Dems, nothing will.

The Blue Dogs need to be neutered.

[Triana]

5. I'm tellin ya - they got a damn MANDATE and and they shrivel

NO EXCUSE for it.

Bunch of pantywaist ninnies.

:mad:

[AtomicKitten]

9. word

[Enrique]

7. they don't want a repeat of 1994

they stuck their necks out for Clinton, which was good for the country in that the budget reduced the deficit and led to prosperity, but they lost Congress and Clinton moved to the right. Playing safer and building their congressional majority might lead to more sustained progress.

[stillcool]

8. AP Analysis...

I appreciate the effort, but I think I'll pass.

[populistdriven]

11. reading between the lines: Its all GOP lobbyist sour grapes

[stillcool]

13. This was posted by Miss Authoritiva

back in December. I bookmarked it and read it every now and then..

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=109&topic_id=35801

What, if anything: How to deconstruct an AP story


Incredibly, this AP story about White House Chief of Staff designate Rahm Emanuel and alleged attempts by Illinois Gov. Rod Blogojevich to “sell” Barack Obama’s vacant Senate seat took two professional reporters plus an additional contributor to produce. Let’s see what we get for all that effort.


Headline: Senate-for-Sale Case Threatens New Chief of Staff

Motivating factors for story: silence* has “prompted questions”; any “hint of scandal” damages Obama and potentially could destroy his presidency before it even begins

Unique sources: 2 tangential people and an indeterminate number of anonymous aides, sources, and supporters not authorized to speak on anyone's behalf

Main rhetorical hedges: "believed to be"; "what, if anything"

Adjectives of note: troubling, friendly

Nouns of note: ties, liability

Phrases of note: troubling liability, close ties, perception of wrongdoing

First astonishing fact: A lot of people live in Chicago and a good many of them are politically active

Second astonishing fact: “a friendly rapport” or “a friendly relationship” might not constitute “a close friendship”

Moment of inscrutability: “It was not clear whether Blagojevich inferred Emanuel's motive for advocating (Valerie) Jarrett….”

Wasted-space (we have to file something) acknowledgement: "The coming days will offer the first answers about Emanuel's recent interaction with Blagojevich and discussions about filling Obama's Senate seat."

Tidy moralistic conclusion useful even if Emanuel did nothing wrong but which damns him anyway: "We're not going to end corruption in Illinois by arrests and indictments alone," the prosecutor (US Attorney Patrick Fitzgerald) said. "What's going to make the difference is when people who are approached to 'pay to play' first say no, and, second, report it."

*Prosecutor-requested silence


Well, that’s it. What, if anything, did you learn that you didn’t already know before this article was even written?

By Grace Nearing @ Scriptoids

[Teaser]

14. Apparently AP is already wrong on the healthcare aspect of things

let's see how wrong they can be.