Blogs » Politcs Plus » Sanctimonious Liberals?

Subscribe


Image

The talking heads and the printed news media are taking every vote that Congress makes in this lame duck session and applying their spin on the final outcome. It's as if I'm reading the sports section to hear sports analysis Of New York Giant’s punter, Matt Dodge’s line drive punt to Philadelphia Eagles, Desean Jackson, which led to yesterday's winning touchdown. In the sports analogy, it might have been a good punt because Jackson initially dropped the punt but he scored the winning touchdown, so all the Monday morning quarterbacks will have the final results supporting their reasoning. The passage of the recent tax cut package had its share of Monday morning quarterbacks. The media, including our local editorial board, picked the sanctimonious liberals as the losers because they had the audacity to stand up for their principles instead of compromising for what most think is the common good. To the media's credit, a majority of the American people agreed with the compromise. Then again, if I took up a clipboard and pencil and asked people if they wanted a tax cut; I wouldn't be surprised that 99.9% would say” YES.” As a pundit said this morning, everyone agrees we need to cut spending but not on Social Security, Medicare, and defense spending. They usually will cite what they've heard from Washington politicians; go back to 2008 spending, freeze government hiring, cut waste fraud, abuse and earmarks. When you tell them it that's just a very small percentage of the budget; they say well" that's a start."

I won't pretend to speak for all liberals but I've heard some good arguments as to why they were angry about this compromise. The liberal democrats in the house felt they were left out of the negotiations between the White House and the republican leaders. The president and his followers ran against the Bush tax cuts. The president claims that he will run against the tax cut for the top 2% and the estate tax cut but the liberals think he has weakened his argument with this compromise. The White House thinks they will have a better argument when the economy comes around but everyone knows what the GOP talking points will be. If the economy recovers; they will say it was because of the passing of the Bush tax cuts in its entirety; if it fails; they will then say that you cannot raise taxes on any one when the economy is weak. Most liberal democrats admit they made a mistake by not voting on a middle class tax cut only, prior to the previous election. I've heard the liberals acknowledge that they got some goodies in the package and their chances would have been dimmer in the next Congress. I was against the tax cut package, even though a lot of economists say it will add a couple points to the GDP by reducing unemployment. I still say it will add $858 billion to the debt. Next year will begin the battle of budget cuts. In order to afford the tax cuts, the GOP house majority will vigorously go after the safety net programs. The democrats still have a majority in the senate and the president's veto pen; will it be enough? That's why the house democrats think the president should have fought harder using the bully pulpit or at least waived the threat of the veto pen. It's all water under the bridge now, and I don't think liberals will hold a grudge because where else would they turn to; certainly not the GOP. Life is full of ups and downs and there will always be a tomorrow.

This morning on MSNBC's "Morning Joe" the panel of Harold Ford,Jr., Peggy Noonan, Andrew Ross Sorkin, Micah Brzezinski and Joe Scarborough we're discussing whether president Obama should hold a press conference this week to tout his accomplishments, like the passage of the tax cut package and " don't ask don't tell" and possibly the passage of the START arms treaty and aid for the 9/11 first responders. That's a tough one because what you say in December might come back to haunt you in the coming months.

It's relatively easy lecturing liberals in a libertarian/ conservative county, so I will not be surprised when nothing is made of the republicans who voted against DADT, and are now stalling the START treaty, and $7 billion relief for the 9/11 first responders, who have either run out of medical benefits or were put on Workmen's Compensation . Senator John Kye said “we cannot afford the $7 billion."... The house bill paid for the 9/11 relief package by eliminating some corporate loopholes. Priorities; $60 billion tax cut to the top 2% or $7 billion for the first responders? Our hometown newspaper's editorial board has been fair with their assessments, it is their viewpoint and I respect that