Posted by Rojas @ 8:54 pm on July 25th 2011

Obama Saves America liveblog

Because why not?

18 Comments »

  1. Obama has already won the media spin war on the issue. All of the talk of a credit rating downgrade is now centered on the debt ceiling question–it has apparently beyond possibility that our debt might be becoming less appealing as an investment because we have so damned much of it.

    Comment by Rojas — 7/25/2011 @ 9:01 pm

  2. Opening gambit is all about blaming the Republicans for the deficit–Obama provides a specific dollar figure for the deficit upon his entry into office, portrays his spending as an attempt to save police jobs, and the actual dollar figure for the increase is nowhere to be mentioned. Then follows on with “no one party is responsible…”

    Comment by Rojas — 7/25/2011 @ 9:04 pm

  3. Obama wants everyone to give a little “without anyone having to sacrifice too much.” Portrays his plan as bipartisan–I’d like to know who its Republican cosponsors might be.

    Comment by Rojas — 7/25/2011 @ 9:05 pm

  4. Mean Republicans want cuts only–wealthy and corporations don’t have to contribute anything at all. Because neither of the above take advantage of any of the services being reduced. Corporate jet owners and oil barons and hedge fund managers who pay taxes at a lower rate than their secretaries.

    Comment by Rojas — 7/25/2011 @ 9:06 pm

  5. Once again there’s “the balanced approach” as the tagline for the Obama plan. There’s “shared sacrifice”. In short: we are not looking at a speech which is oriented in any way towards making a deal possible; this is a national address in a time of alleged crisis for the single purpose of scoring partisan political points. Not shocking.

    Comment by Rojas — 7/25/2011 @ 9:08 pm

  6. “The debt ceiling–a term most people working outside of Washington have probably never heard before.”

    Comment by Rojas — 7/25/2011 @ 9:09 pm

  7. Obama treats default as a given in the event that we don’t renew the ceiling. Debatable point at best.

    Comment by Rojas — 7/25/2011 @ 9:10 pm

  8. Boehner’s approach only kicks the can down the road; interest rates will rise; and six months from now, the House Republicans will play the same game, which is stupid.

    The speech strikes me as patronizing, but I suppose I’m not the target audience.

    Comment by Rojas — 7/25/2011 @ 9:12 pm

  9. Weirdly, Obama does NOT indicate that he won’t vote for the kick-the-can approach if it’s placed in front of him. No ultimatums here of any kind. Just “I’m reasonable; they hate poor people”. Purely political–a speech with no apparent policy purpose whatsoever.

    Comment by Rojas — 7/25/2011 @ 9:14 pm

  10. Purpose emerges–he wants the viewer to contact his or her Congressperson. Oh…kay. One wonders what happens if Obama’s summons doesn’t result in a groundswell and an increase in email/phone traffic in Congressional offices–will that tell Congress that the President has no leverage with the voters? I guess if you take it seriously as a purpose, it’s something of a gamble.

    Comment by Rojas — 7/25/2011 @ 9:16 pm

  11. I learn nothing new from the speech except that the President apparently is not willing to rule out signing any extension that comes before him. He just wants to exact the maximum political price for whatever he ends up signing.

    Comment by Rojas — 7/25/2011 @ 9:18 pm

  12. Boehner looking marginally less orange than usual; must be the lighting. Boehner wants to be seen as an outsider and a small businessman trying to change the ways of Washington. Fails to mention how one stays an outsider after something like ten terms.

    Comment by Rojas — 7/25/2011 @ 9:20 pm

  13. Boehner rolling out ALL the old Republican complaints from the Obama first term–health care, etc.

    Comment by Rojas — 7/25/2011 @ 9:20 pm

  14. Boehner still stuck on Cut, Cap, and Balance; goes out of his way to mention Obama’s veto threat. It’s all about how Obama’s been sabotaging hardworking Congressional attempts to compromise. Two different damned worlds.

    Comment by Rojas — 7/25/2011 @ 9:21 pm

  15. “Bipartisan” makes its third appearance in two minutes. Claims he can roll the “Super Congress” plan through the Senate and provide it to the President to sign.

    Comment by Rojas — 7/25/2011 @ 9:23 pm

  16. “The President says he wants a balanced approach, which in Washington means ‘we spend more, and you pay more’.” Disingenuous interpretation of what Obama’s proposing, given that he advocates cuts.

    Comment by Rojas — 7/25/2011 @ 9:24 pm

  17. So I just spent 25 minutes watching two politicians do everything in their power to look like reasonable negotiators to a public with which they are not in negotiation.

    I think I come away from this kind of baffled and disgusted by the idea that such an approach is seen as newsworthy.

    Comment by Rojas — 7/25/2011 @ 9:26 pm

  18. >Opening gambit is all about blaming the Republicans for the deficit–Obama provides a specific dollar figure for the deficit upon his entry into office, portrays his spending as an attempt to save police jobs, and the actual dollar figure for the increase is nowhere to be mentioned. Then follows on with “no one party is responsible…”<

    I'm curious if you think that this comes off as blaming the Republicans to the average voter. He didn't specifically mention President Bush. I'm sure the average Democratic hack knows all of the talking points about Bush taking a record surplus and turning it into a record deficit. But I don't think the average viewer knows his or her political history enough. So I saw this more as "Hey Guys I didn't do all of this!" instead of "Bush sucks."

    OTOH, you could call me out for trying to have my cake and eat it too. I think most voters are partisans who already have their minds made up. So there is no meaningful "average voter." Was Obama trying to shore up his base with references to the Bush years, in hopes that his Democratic base would get the allusions and cheer him on?

    I think Boehner's address was clearly a double down pitch to the GOP base. I think Obama's was frustrated by his need to both shore up the Democratic base but also try to appear somewhat moderate and results oriented for swing voters. This doesn't make me confident about the next few weeks.

    Comment by VALiberaltarian — 7/25/2011 @ 10:31 pm

RSS feed for comments on this post.

Leave a comment

You must be logged in to post a comment.