Pardon my interruption of the Daily DU Outrage Session ...

[1StrongBlackMan]

Last edited Wed Apr 10, 2013, 10:41 PM - Edit history (1)

but please allow me to provide my prediction, as a seasoned negotiator, of President Obama (and his more seasoned team's) next move in these "negotiations":

President Obama (or maybe a Democratic legislator):

Okay, Mr./Ms. gop Legislator ... Here's what we can do ... I'll drop the Chained CPI, no one seems to like that approach, even apparently the gop that is demanding cuts to "entitlements" (a win for the American people) and I will reduce my revenue ask by half what the CCPI would have realized (a win for the you, the gop).

Now ... where does the gop go ... and not cement their "unwillingness to compromise" monicker with the solid plurarity of gop and independent voters (a solid majority when taken as a whole) that poll as having the gop being unwilling to compromise and President Obama (and Democrats being willing to compromise).

In order to flip the House (because of gerrymandering as a result of 2010), we need those groups to either stay home, vote 3rd-Party, or vote Democratic. In my estimation ... It 's all about 2014.

[NYC_SKP]

1. I hope you are right. Happily, the chained CPI lasts only 6 months.

I hope there's an endgame.

;;;

[1StrongBlackMan]

5. Has President Obama ...

(and his team) NOT had an end-game?

Granted, he may not get all that he wants; but (in my estimation) he has always gotten the better deal for the American people that is available.

[NYC_SKP]

7. I'm well pleased with the outcomes, thus far, given the opposition.

But signalling that SS is on the table, even with an endgame, is troubling.

Let's hope it works out well!

[1StrongBlackMan]

11. Again ...

In my estimation, there really was no great threat ... the gop was going to say "No" and the Left (and seniors) was gonna stop it from going through.

[Warpy]

2. I sincerely hope you're correct about that

but I know the Wall Street wing of the party has wanted the chained CPI as long as the Republicans have wanted to do away with SS completely. It's going to be hard for him to give up.

[1StrongBlackMan]

6. That's why ...

the liberal (and now, the gop's) response is so helpful.

The "wall-street wing" cannot get it, without damaging their brand.

[patrice]

56. And that's "their brand" for which PO has already PAID a great deal of financial & political capital

SO it's our turn NOW.

[freshwest]

3. The GOP can only survive by dropping their hatred of the social safety net.

Can they actually do it in time to save themselves, considering the firestorm Obama unleashed on everyone?

PBO told people to call since election day for what they want and they are now finally doing it.

It's no skin off his nose. He wanted the people to rise up in this manner, and not the fickle love of the crowd.

The ball is in the GOP's court. It's amusing to see them playing at being moderates again. The Koch brothers must be fuming.

See below, as I knew they would, they are getting heat for attacking the cuts to save their congressional seats from the outraged electorate:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/1014450542



Couldn't happen to a nicer group of destroyers. Keep it up, guys. Here's your farewell orchestra:

[1StrongBlackMan]

9. In the words of my 17 yr old Daughter ...

"I know, huh!"

[freshwest]

12. I learned from an advocate who demanded I read 'The Art of War' by Sun Tzu.

Sometimes to win you must lose what others believe you want, but don't. It means appearing mortally wounded at times in order to let them save face.

If your sense of self can handle that, your goals will be met but you will get no credit for it. Too many fall for the ego game, fame and the win, not realizing you were not playing the same game and defeat them.

I was always looking for plain speaking and simplicity, so I didn't want to go that route. But I knew I had to think about what really, really mattered. And it was not me. Just as this is not about PBO.

Weird, huh.

[1StrongBlackMan]

16. That was all the rage ...

in the 80s, after the movie "Wallstreet."

It was the negotiating Bible for years.

In my estimation, this is what makes MY President a great President ... He really believes it's not about him; it's bigger than him.

[freshwest]

20. Actually I learned it this century from a Vietnam era army scout. He didn't take prisoners

defending the forgotten, often abused vulnerable people in this country.

He specialized in 'drawing down fire from on high' from unexpected sources to get the job done.

While he appeared to lose minor battles, he always won the long war. Some people cannot grasp that.

It's invigorating to raise your sights above yourself. I found strengths within myself I never knew existed.

Focusing your life solely on making a buck shows a certain poverty of ambition. It asks too little of yourself. Because it's only when you hitch your wagon to something larger than yourself that you realize your true potential. ~Barack Obama.

It's like the saying about having to lose yourself to gain the world. It takes the pressure off, too. Odd, isn't it.

[1StrongBlackMan]

21. Nope ...

It's like the saying about having to lose yourself to gain the world. It takes the pressure off, too. Odd, isn't it.

Not weird ... just a discoverable, universal truth ... for those that are willing to listen to the universe.

[freshwest]

22. For some, yes. Not much listening or thinking when the lynch mob takes over.

[sheshe2]

24. "MY President a great President ... He really believes it's not about him; it's bigger than him."

Well said!

sheshe

[sheshe2]

14. You just made my day, freshwest!

thank you, I needed that, badly.

[Lifelong Protester]

4. I truly hope you are right.

I like your analysis, and hope it is correct in the end.

[1StrongBlackMan]

8. While I am not privy to anything ...

I'm drawing on what I used to do for a living ... and I ate pretty well ... every day!

[carolinayellowdog]

10. thoughtful, constructive post with a nasty offputting header

why?

[1StrongBlackMan]

13. For Directed Effect ...

and views. I, like the media, understand that controversy sells.

Sorry if it can off as inappropriate.

[sheshe2]

15. Kick and Rec!

and thank you, 1StrongBlackMan!

[1StrongBlackMan]

17. Unfortunately ...

your Kick will have little effect ... this thread will sink like a stone.

[sheshe2]

18. The good ones always do, will see what I can do!

[1StrongBlackMan]

19. I'm gonna be cutting and pasting all night ...

well ... until I get bored or angry.

[sheshe2]

23. Hang in there, 1StrongBlackMan.

I had a bad day yesterday, so angry and depressed. HA no sleep again.

Still here to fight the fight , another day.

[Shanti Mama]

37. K&R so it doesn't sink.

I'm completely in agreement with this analysis.
Obama is many things, but he is not this big a sell-out. It's the end game, stupid.

[Flashmann]

42. your Kick will have little effect ... this thread will sink like a stone.

Not sure how much my little kick will help,given that I found this thread at the bottom of page 2.
This OP,this thread,deserves some life!

[Wednesdays]

25. Wow, an actual thread defending Obama

Are you sure you're at the right site?

[1StrongBlackMan]

26. LOL ...

it's a lonely place these days.

But I'm not so much defending my Democratic President ... President Obama ... but rather the efficacy of the strategy.

[just1voice]

27. Threatening retirees is about threatening retirees, not about 2014

Threatening to take people's lifetimes of benefits away from them isn't what you've branded as "the Daily DU Outrage Session", it's reality. It's part of the bigger picture of austerity measures, criminal banks and our era of corruption.

Trying to say it's something else is "the Daily DU Apologist Session" that is in my experienced estimation nothing but a propaganda recital.

[1StrongBlackMan]

28. Okay ...

your cogent argument has convinced me that my analysis is incorrect because there is clearly one thing going on here ... the Democratic President that has consistently out manuevered his gop opposition to gain the best available deal for the American people, given the current political realities, has suddenly and, to believe this board, finally gotten the chance to do what he has wanted to do all along ... destroy SS.

Right?

[freshwest]

30. Since his childhood in Indonesia. I mean, Kenya. And since he always got coal in his stockings for

Christmas, this is his revenge.

[1StrongBlackMan]

31. LOL ...

it's the socialist, corporatist, muslim, liberations theologist christian in him.

[freshwest]

34. Warning, I have the video if you need the laugh...

[longship]

29. Hear, hear. R&K nt

[defacto7]

32. K&R

[dtom67]

33. I'm sorry, but....

The fact that people here look at this as a game ( "all about 2014&quot iis the real problem here. We are talking about peoples' lives. Public service ought to be about serving the best interests of the People. If Dems are only interested in getting elected, then their best bet would be to go where the Money is.
That may well be "what it is all about", but shouldit be?

[SunSeeker]

35. 2014 is all about flipping the House; flipping the House is all about passing laws to help people.

As long as the Republicans are in charge of the House (and Dems don't have a filibuster-proof majority in the Senate), we cannot get anything done to help anybody.

Reid was afraid to get rid of the filibuster as long as the Republicans were in charge of the House, since God knows what might come out of the teapublican House these days, and he wanted to be able to block it. If we flip the House, then Reid will not be afraid to get some serious filibuster rules changes come the new congress.

Once the House is Democratic and the Senate is no longer filibuster hell, progressive legislation can finally get passed, like it did for the brief 2-month span in Obama's first term when we had a Dem House and 60 votes in the Senate.

[freshwest]

38. From you signature line, you have already decided what the 'game' is:

We must either convince the Elites to change,

Either means you have only two choices you consider - beg them to change or convince to play nicely, thus surrendering, or leave the system, which is also surrender.

First choice:

As far as convincing the Elites, who have always been on this planet as well as in this country, what would we convince them with?

With our willingness to kill the good that we have voted in, but not perfect since we have not cleaned house, and thus cede the field to them?

The game you are criticizing and accusing others has been seized upon here, after having been played by the media owned by them, and a public that apparently believes that Obama can rule by fiat. The GOP has proven he has no such power, since by the Constitution they DO control the power of the purse and the law making process in this country while everyone fell for their games to divide us and stop us from balancing power.

You expect to change the Elites? Is really their government? Is there, or has there ever been in your mind, a WeThePeople who create their own government?

What indication has there ever been that the Elites would ever change? Is our future dependent on their mercy or on the united will of the majority, refusing to buy the propaganda of the Elites and their media?

Second choice:

...or turn our backs on the whole System.

Isn't that what they want us to do, to disengage and let them continue to keep us at each other throats while shredding anyone with any solutions, and let them own more than they already do?

There is no leaving the system, for there will always be a system of some type to replace whatever falls. The Koch brothers and Libertarians want the government to go away. Will that led to freedom and prosperity for those that are screaming now about social services?

No, it will not. They want all of that eliminated and to go back to the system before our American social democracy. While some believe the New Deal is gone, it is not. Do over a hundred million payments that redistribute the wealth to the poor, elderly, disabled and every service being provided every month, sound like the New Deal is gone?

Wait for the Elites to show mercy, or waste time trying to convince them to do so, or walking away is the same as leaving the system and not going forward to do the work. No, this is not funny and not a game, except for the Elites who have demonized the most progressive President since Clinton. The work is far from done; but so many want to throw up their hands.

The reason 2014 is being brought up is because of demoralization; and that is the only way that the GOP can stop the measures now in line to take place to provide more healthcare, more disability payments, more food and housing to those who need them. It was written into law, but the GOP can and will strike down that if they get the Democrats to buy every piece of half-truth and misinformation they can put out. Right now, that's what is happening.

I don't mean to sound overbearing, but check out my Journal. Go back to many pieces, and of course if you cannot bear, like a Teabagger could not bear without puking at those posts that are about Obama directly, that I have saved for those who are simply triyng to rejoice after all these dark years under Bush, skip and go through them. I get tired of this.

Thanks for not being abusive. Good night for now.

[SunSeeker]

36. K&R

[DeSwiss]

39. "A nation of sheep will beget a government of wolves." ~Edward R. Murrow n/t

[lunatica]

40. I've learned to withhold judgement on current events

Not all is what it seems to be. The Republicans have ended up with egg on their faces too many times for it to be a coincidence. I'm willing to accept the facts, no matter how much they may hurt, but they have to be facts.

[Armstead]

41. You don't get it. You assjume that negotiation and compromise are GOP goals.

yes you might be correct if you had two parties negotiating in good faith.

But that is not the case. The GOP is not interested in any "deals" unless they get 100 percent of what they want. Otherwise they are happy to do nothing and just bluster.

Therefore, Obama ends up looking like a chump as he gives away more and more in a futile effort to win them over.

In this situation the only way out is to fight for real liberal principles, and politick on them and try to win over enough of the public that the GOP is weakened enough to not be able to obstruct.

Basically, that's what happened in the last election. The GOP still holds the House because of gerrymandering and the very localized nature of that body.

Now it's not Obama's job to negotiate a deal with someone who doesn't want to make a deal. Its the job of he and the democrats to actually stand for something, and fight the bastids on their own terms.

[hue]

43. 1StrongBlackMan I am with You on this!!

[Yavin4]

44. The President Has to Govern within the Parameters of Our Political System

He has to protect and enhance his party's electoral chances in order to move forward any progressive legislation. The political tactic of Chained CPI is designed to help his party gain support with moderate/independent voters for the mid-term elections. In order to re-take the House in 2014, the Dems need to win seats in districts without a lot of Dem voters.

[Jackal87]

46. Re:

Spot on, there are way too many purists around here complaining that compromise is a dirty word, which was the same thing that happened when the republicans started appealing only to the far right. Some people keep forgetting that he haven't had control of the house for nearly five years and think that we must be 100% liberal on everything.

[hrmjustin]

47. Welcone to DU Jackal87!

[1StrongBlackMan]

57. I agreed ...

I've been wondering of late, why people that call themselves "progressives", rather than Democrats, would populate a site named DemocraticUnderground, only to bash Democrats and those that suport Democrats.

I've also wondered the median age of these "progressives."

I was thinking of starting a thread on that topic, but I just don't have the energy.

[HappyMe]

45. A big K&R.

Make a lot of sense to me.

[sheshe2]

48. Kicking again

for exposure!

[treestar]

49. I found some good stuff on this

It's part of an overall strategy, to force the Republicans' hand. During previous negotiations, the GOP demanded a "chained CPI." During the last election cycle, the GOP also said they wanted to get rid of tax loopholes and subsidies, so he put those in there, as well. As anyone who's paying attention could have predicted, Republicans rejected both concepts out of hand. If we're smart, politically speaking, we should be using that against Republicans. Instead, ahead of a crucial election cycle in 2014, where we need to hold the Republican Party "accountable," and replace as many as possible with Democrats, we have a bunch of "progressives" hold OBAMA "accountable." Obama, who will never run again.

This is what killed us in 2010. In the 111th Congress, a Democratic House passed 375 bills -- including many that were very progressive -- that 41-42 Republicans blocked in the Senate, and we held DEMOCRATS "accountable," and we wound up losing control of the House that passed all of those bills. We needed to gain 3-4 seats in the Senate to eliminate the filibuster's effects. Instead lost the House, and lost 5 seats in the Senate. The REPUBLICANS were blocking everything in sight, but we held Democrats "accountable"? How does that make sense, politically speaking?

http://pleasecutthecrap.typepad.com/main/

[1StrongBlackMan]

58. So ...

I guess I'm not the deluded, horse-shit spreading, bull-shitting, ignorant Obama cheerleader; or at least, I'm not the only one.

[treestar]

64. There are some of us

They call us cheerleaders, I call us rational beings in touch with reality.

[Maven]

50. Why would he drop it?

So he can look like he caved to pressure from his party? Why would he drop it when his people say they remain committed to a "grand bargain" that includes the CPI change?

Further, as a seasoned negotiator, I'm sure you realize that making an offer sets a precedent for future negotiations, regardless of whether the present deal is accepted. The White House certainly understands that. From the above link:

The whole point of the CPI change is to give the GOP something in exchange for new tax revenues, which they hate. Liberals criticize the White House for putting the Social Security cut on the table as an opening move, instead of waiting until Republicans force them to concede it, but the senior administration officials say it wouldn’t have made a difference either way — because they had already floated it in their offer to Boehner, and the GOP would hammer them on it either way, if they wanted to.

There is no going back on cutting SS now for this president. He has made it a part of the negotiations, and it is not going away.

BTW, even if this were not true, the counteroffer you proposed isn't a real counteroffer. Why would the GOP still accept some tax increases (something they don't want) and NOT get the the thing they really do want (cuts to SS they can pin on the president)?

[fascisthunter]

62. you already achieved that with your BS op

should I add emoticons for effect?

[MotherPetrie]

52. Obama WANTS the Chained CPI. Don't you get that? HE WANTS IT.

He may or may not drop it this time. But if he drops it this time, it'll be back. He's like Renfield and Chained CPI like Count Dracula. It won't be dead, and he will still be transfixed by it. Just biding its time, waiting patiently, until it will be invited inside again, ready to suck SS recipients dry with Obama's permission.

[1StrongBlackMan]

60. No ...

I don't get that.

[patrice]

53. Result: The GOP is blamed for the Sequester - AND - the loss of those Infrastructure *J*O*B*S*

[bowens43]

54. bullshit.

what obama has done is make himself look weak and foolish. He has given the senate to the GOP , a bigger majority in the house to the GOP and quite possibly the presidency in 2016.

[1StrongBlackMan]

61. Only to ...

the "progressive" that populate the internets ... The polling suggests otherwise on all three of your projections.

[MFrohike]

55. Hahahahahaha

That scenario might fly if not for two problems. First, the president will need everyone to forget that he made the proposal, not Boehner or McConnell. Second, he will look extremely weak if he takes his own harebrained proposal off the table under public pressure. Trying to tamper with Social Security broke Bush because the facade of the iron-willed leader was shattered when he went against overwhelming public opinion and then had to backtrack. Obama would have been well-served to have actually learned from that example rather than trying to repeat it.

[SidDithers]

63. DU rec...

Sid

[In_The_Wind]

65. Yep!

Me too.