"Democrats have the presidency and big majorities. Instead of hiding behind the spread-the-blame-around tactic, they should announce their vision and run with it."
Agreed. If things don't get better (or at least not worse) in the next 18 months the D's are toast anyway, bipartisan or not.The voters CLEARLY gave them the greenlight to try policy (economic, foreign and defense) their way. But they seem a little unsure in the drivers seat. I think the economic collapse in September threw them off their social agenda game plan as they only expected to have to deal with an 8-12 month recession, of which were were already a quarter of the way through. Like Pauslon O, made a HUGE mistake in picking a number that was simply too small. But he did his out of political expediency and not stupidity (I don't know if that makes him smarter or dumber than Hank, but I digress). He should have followed Krugie's advice and put in for 2T and did it over 3 years. He would have given the D's cover for 2010 and would have forced the markets to have patience. He would have also been positioned to avoid Stimulus 2.0 which will certainly be shot down by a rejuvenated minority in 2 years.Since there is no way he can create 4M jobs in 2 years and the "save" piece can never be validated he has tied his presidency to this bill. The R's know this. So of course they're going to ratchet up the opposition. Told you so sounds real nice in 2012! If I were O I would use this fight to go back and rework the bill to be EVEN MORE MASSIVE and take it right to the American people. It may shock the market (which is why he should have done it right the first time) but as the people know the D's are fighting for them (healthcare, unemployment, make work, etc) they'll be patient. And giving yourself 3-4 years as opposed to 2 only increases the odds that business comes back online - which we all know is the real stimulus.k1 k1ryanculver.blogspot.com
Come Hard Or Not At All!