Deconstructing Axelrod's HuffPo statement and what about signing statements?

[TomClash]

Here's what he was really saying. Appropriations bills originate in the House. We just lost the House badly. The House is not going to pass a budget bill without tax cuts for the rich. The Administration isn't going to be able to retain middle class tax cuts without giving in to the tax cuts for the wealthy that the House wants.

If middle class tax cuts expire, Obama will lose the Presidency in 2012 because most people will care that they are paying more in taxes but won't care that the rich are paying more in taxes.

The guy wants to get re-elected. If he raises taxes on the middle class he will surely lose.

Signing statements are written statements made by the President indicating he disagrees with part of a law he is signing. They are an affront to the Constitution but perhaps he can use them to indicate he will not enforce tax cuts on income over $250,000 and direct Treasury to try to collect that money. By doing so he reframes the issue as the rich trying to get away with not paying their fair share of taxes. He would also demonstrate principle and resolve to the voters and simultaneously keep the middle class tax cuts they so richly deserve.

[Larkspur]

1. How about Obama using his gifted rhetoric to rally the People against the Republicans

on giving the uber-wealthy a humongous tax cut that hurts our nation?

For all his intellect and gift of speech, are you saying that Obama can't rally the People to make the oligarchs and their RepubliCON minions do what is right for this nation?

[TomClash]

7. Rally the People?

They just spoke and they didn't exactly express a desire to send the oligarchs to the guillotine, much to my chagrin.

[earthside]

2. What?

Democrats have a very big majority in the House -- right now, when the tax cut extensions are being considered.

[TomClash]

8. Yes but I should have added

and no tax cut bill sans wealthy tax cuts is passing the Senate in this Congress because it won't get 60 votes. So your point is moot.

[Kurt_and_Hunter]

3. That would be an impeachable offense (on merit)

[TomClash]

9. An impeachable offense?

Really? Clinton, Bush and Obama have issued signing statements. None was ever impeached for it.

[benlurkin]

4. He knew he was going w/ the cuts all along

he had to throw a fit and give the impression that he would stand strong until he came under pressure from other Democrats. Why do you think they left DC without an extension before the elections?

Now he will tell us, once again, to stop our whining and all will be forgiven and forgotten.

[UTUSN]

5. "affront to the Constitution" = definition of Shrub. Such statements have no standing whatsoever.

If a President or a pResident disagrees with a bill, he's got the ballsy option of vetoing it.

[TomClash]

10. Yeah, except that's not happening

for the reasons stated in the OP.

[kentuck]

6. One Party thinks it is governing and one Party thinks it is all a game.

The game is to destroy government. Everything else is meaningless.

[laughingliberal]

11. Gonna need a little Dramamine after that one. nt

[TomClash]

12. Don't OD on it now nt

[Angry Dragon]

13. Question for you

When did it become fashionable for a president or an elected official
to worry more about his job than to grow a spine and do what is right
for the country?? I thought these people gave an oath to work for
the betterment of this country.

Why do we need Obama to run for another term if he is only to give the
right what is not best for this country??

[TomClash]

14. Because he doesn't always just give to the right

And often does what is best for the country. The laundry list of good policy choices is impressive for two years of a Presidency. Having said that, I'm still pretty disappointed.

I'd love to tax the rich more. I think extending tax cuts for rich people and the upper middle class are economically stupid. But I'm not the Great Dictator.

It became fashionable in 1980 and 2000. In those years third party candidates ran "to the left" and that is part of the reason we got Reagan and Bush.

I see a lot of progressive complaining but I don't see anyone coming up with concrete solutions.