I think we are getting ready to royally screw the neocon wing of the 'thugs.

[kristopher]

Obama proposes more troops for Afghanistan, and either challenges Congress to pay for it up front, or Congress follows up on the threats by Obay and Levin to require it be paid for.

The Republicans will then face a choice to either vote against taxes, or vote against sending the troops.

A new round of public discussion ensues that centers on the issue of the *costs* and the benefits of the troop deployment, and keeps moving public opinion away from our maintaining troops there.

The Republicans are wedded to the "no new taxes" stance and it has become a prerequisite for them to sign pledges promising same. Their entire case against Obama centers (not just with health care either) around his supposed fiscal irresponsibility.

I don't think he can pull the troops without this stage of the debate.

I don't know how he will capitalize on the outcome of the public discussion, but I keep seeing all the usual suspects on talk shows trying to explain how they either want to put the war on credit or how raising taxes to pay for it is really Obama's fault.

I can't help but chuckle when I think of it.


P.S. I still believe the Congress will put a health care bill with a strong public option on the president's desk for his signature.

[budkin]

1. If only I could believe this was the case...

[arcadian]

2. 3D Romulan Chess?

Again?

[kristopher]

5. Yep.

It wont take long to confirm.

[Fire_Medic_Dave]

3. And you believe people will blame the minority party for the tax increases instead of the President

and the majority party.

[kristopher]

6. The people who matter to the Republicans will.

I live in a Republican congressional district and they are ready to crucify him for not adhering to all elements of their agenda. They are going to go crazy trying to reconcile this.

The rest of the people will see it as a rational choice.

[Fire_Medic_Dave]

7. I'm sure they are going to defect to Nader. LOL. They'll blame Obama and the Democrats.

As will the moderates in both parties.

[kristopher]

9. We'll see.

Feel free to bookmark this and rub my nose in it if I'm wrong.

[Fire_Medic_Dave]

10. We won't see they won't do it.

[kristopher]

12. Ah, you just want to be a contrarian...

If they don't do it, then we will have the evidence to falsify my hypothesis and in fact we will have seen.

[Chan790]

14. They'll do precisely what they did in NY...

they'll push any GOPer that doesn't hew to whichever agenda point they want off the ballot and end up with nominees who can't win. (Except it'll cut both ways...hawks will push fiscals off tickets and fiscals will push hawks off tickets.)

I'll bet my trust fund on that...I have 0% chance of being wrong...if we put the GOP Congressional minority on this spot. It's their SOP...they're not going to change tactics just because you and I can see they're dumb.

We might just getting ready for a new round of Obama White House capitulations.

[Skittles]

4. it's the troops who are getting screwed

[kristopher]

8. I can see how you'd say that.

But in the larger context the goal is to get them out of there without penalizing the rest of the country by allowing the republicans to maintain the momentum they've been developing by whipping their base into a killing frenzy.

If he give in to the military and the neocons, the troops are screwed.

If he pulls the troops by fiat the rest of the country is screwed.

This could be a narrow path out of the swamp.

[Skittles]

11. WHO GIVES A FUCK WHAT REPUKES THINK OR DO?

THEY'VE BEEN WRONG ABOUT EVERYTHING

[kristopher]

13. So your position is that the opposition simply doesn't exist and cannot regain power?

[jobycom]

16. The opposition WILL regain power. The question is what will we do while we have it?

And the bigger question is why are we continuing wars when we can't afford to take care of our own economy? This isn't WWII where the enemy is clear, this is Viet Nam, where the enemy is an abstract concept that we strengthen every time we try to fight it. They can't even define winning, but they swear we are going to keep going until we win.

[Skittles]

17. THANK YOU JOBYCOM

[kristopher]

19. Apparently you didn't read the OP

And you have no recollection of the reality of how political tides hold our forces hostage. An open public debate where the administration is committed to actually listening and following the will of the public is the only way to force the political support needed to get them out.

[jobycom]

20. Wrong on all three.

I read it, I disagreed, I understand politics very, very well, and Obama could easily craft a speech to shape the will of the public--he's done that before, that's how politicians win office in the first place.

Easy peasy. It just takes the courage and wisdom and experience to override those telling you you can't.

[kristopher]

22. A lot of people refer to that

as "magic hand waving".

Anytime you hear "all you have to do is" or "he could easily" as the beginning of a solution to a complex problem, what follows is probably just magical hand waving.

[jobycom]

15. To which the Republicans will yawn and say "You are collecting enough taxes already, cut spending."

And all the networks will trumpet them the wise saviors of the world and radio will proclaim Obama a "tax and spend traitor" and the bumper stickers will flourish and Obama will be left staring at his chess board wondering why no one even cares what he's doing.

If that's Obama's plan, he's playing chess while his opponents are playing football.

[anonymous171]

18. No. The democrats don't do strategy. They are not planning anything.

It's all just a bunch of hot air.

[LWolf]

21. Let's screw the neolib wing here at home first. nt