Obama points to CT massacre as reason why GOP should cave on his economic proposal
Political ThreadsThis section is for Political Threads - Enter at your own risk. If you say you don't want to see what someone posts - don't read it :hihi:
Obama points to CT massacre as reason why GOP should cave on his economic proposal
It's late, so tell me if I'm wrong...is Obama (you know, the uniter) saying that if we care about the dead kids at Sandy Hook, that conservatives should stop resisting his economic policies? Did he really do that? So the GOP isn't willing to compromise, even though they are now putting tax hikes on the table?
Sandy Hook and the school tragedy are not reasons for compromise. He's just demagoguing. Typical. Amazing that he doesn't seem to be aware that HIS tactics fit the being twisted up in ideological jibberish that just don't seem to make any sense.
Tax policies should not be determined by tragedies. Determining policy while in a high state of emotion is exactly the wrong time and reason to do so.
He knows very well what he is doing. And it is ugly.
Read the entire transcript and yes. You're taking his comment somewhat out of context...
I'd note its interesting you just happened to have a perfectly edited snippet. Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device
Spence, can you please put this in the proper context for me? In what context is it not repugnant for a President to refer to a recent tragedy like this, in order to garner support for his personal agenda?
Spence, can you please put this in the proper context for me? In what context is it not repugnant for a President to refer to a recent tragedy like this, in order to garner support for his personal agenda?
"You might be a progressive ideologue if:
1. You find that common sense makes no sense at all.
2. You know that there is no such thing as unintended consequences from your actions or proposed solutions.
3. You are a master at projecting or "transferring" what could be your problem or attitude (but not really) on to others.
4. You find that people who don't agree with you are idiots or racists or mean-spirited...or mean-spirited racist idiots.
5. You do not include the word "grateful" in your vocabulary.
6. You consider your thinking based on emotion, and you express it through emotion -- even to the point of shameful antics. And you think that's perfectly okay.
7. You echo the accusation that those with opinions opposite yours obviously originated said opinion from some "echo chamber."
8. You bluster about your personal trials and tribulations as a tactic to get others to think you truly emphasize with their plights.
9. You blame others if it appears (and obviously only appears) that you may have made a mistake.
10. You are certain that you never ever operate from an ideological position.""
Spence, can you please put this in the proper context for me? In what context is it not repugnant for a President to refer to a recent tragedy like this, in order to garner support for his personal agenda?
Obama was simply citing recent events that have shaken some people from absolute positions. This is plain fact. They are so close on a deal and the Speaker is still lacking support from those that will oppose Obama at all costs.
His statement was clear, I've come to the middle, look at the bigger picture...it's time for others to as well and do what's right for the people.
Certainly there's a fine line to tow when citing sensitive issues, but I think Obama is being mindful of that while simply stating the obvious. This is not demagoguery in the typical sense...
Obama was simply citing recent events that have shaken some people from absolute positions. This is plain fact. They are so close on a deal and the Speaker is still lacking support from those that will oppose Obama at all costs.
His statement was clear, I've come to the middle, look at the bigger picture...it's time for others to as well and do what's right for the people.
Certainly there's a fine line to tow when citing sensitive issues, but I think Obama is being mindful of that while simply stating the obvious. This is not demagoguery in the typical sense...
-spence
"His statement was clear, I've come to the middle"
Oh, he has? So please tell me, Spence. What specific entitlement cuts and spending cuts has he proposed?
Obama has said that he's willing to discuss curtailing cost of living increases to social security. Boehner has conceded tax hikes on the wealthy. They have both moved toward the middle. Not just Obama, but both of them.
In the clip I posted, Obama questions the validity of political policies that "don't make any sense". Spence, what is he referring to that "doesn't make any sense"?
Every single rational person knows that tax hikes are meaningless, that shoring up the debt will require deep cuts. Obama's response to that was tax hikes, and another stimulus plan?
And Obama says that Boehner's plan makes no sense?
I believe the last Obama proposal was only a few hundred billion away from Boehner in cuts...it's still very substantial.
-spence
What's a few hundred billion????!
His proposal accomplished nothing except increase taxes on the people that create jobs. Did nothing to fix the problem. Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device
What's a few hundred billion????!
His proposal accomplished nothing except increase taxes on the people that create jobs. Did nothing to fix the problem. Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device
Buckman, why squibble over a few hundred billion? Will you quit being such a fanatic? Can't you see Obama is brilliant, plus he's black, so how dare you question him?
Linear Mode
