Friday, January 23, 2009

Obama: I Could Lose Re-election....

President Barack Obama met today in a private meeting with Democrats and Republicans to discuss the economic stimulus package and planned tax increases on the rich. After a debate over tax policy, President Obama announced that his plan would triumph because as he puts it, "I won."

President Obama as well as Harry Reid gave the impression after the meeting that in fact both parties were closer on the issue than the public realizes. (Now, that 's a scary thought.) Obama told participants that it was time to rise above typical partisan differences and warned of the dangers if the White House and Congress don't work together.

According to Fox News Major Garrett, President Obama also showed concern about how failure to pass his stimulus bill may impact future Congressional races and even his own re-election possibilities.

"We're all political animals, we've all got political bases," the president is reported to have said. "If we don't get this done we (the Democrats) could lose seats and I could lose re-election. But we can't let people like Rush Limbaugh stall this. That's how things don't get done in this town."

If there was any doubt that the decisions President Obama is making are politically motivated, this is proof-positive he will be a poll-driven President. It took the President four days in office to mention concern for his own re-election. In the same breath, he informs Republicans to no longer follow the advice of talk radio host, Rush Limbaugh.

The most concerning information for conservatives that has come from this meeting is the fact that Senate Minority Leader, Mitch McConnell, stated that the package should pass by mid-February. With his statement, McConnell signaled that Republicans will not seek a filibuster to block the bill guaranteeing that they will cave to the President's plans.

The campaign for 2012 has begun. Democrats 1 Republicans 0.


An American Liberal said...


I guess I am a bit perplexed by your post? If I understand this correctly, you are upset with President Obama because he feels that if he, and Congress do not do what the people want and reasonably expect the he and they will all get fired by the voters? Furthermore, he should be villified for having the backbone and integrity to drive to fruition his campaign promises?

I am not happy with everything that POTUS Obama is doing (that Abortion thing bothers me terribly), but geez, having him actually care about what his constituents want is kind of refreshing imho.

Warmest Regards!
An American Liberal

Stacy said...

Come on American Liberal. If he was actually listening to the American people he would stop this bailout crap. Most Americans are against it.

The fact that he is worried about his own longevity in office is ludicrous, but apparently you have your liberal lenses on today.

lonestar said...

So, is responding to the concerns of Republicans with "I won" considered bipartisan leadership?

So much for working together and listening to all viewpoints.

Becky Sue said...

As each day passes I am losing the ability to speak about Bam Bam with finesse. Ok, maybe I never did. But yee gads now it's all gone to his head. It's hard to stomach what I read just in his first week.
God help us for the next 4 years.

An American Liberal said...


I will have to read the latest updates, but Obama was planning on not repealing any of the Bush tax cuts (for the wealthy). His position was successfully changed by the Republican theory that you should not increase taxes in a recession (the Dems are not happy about it).

While the verbage, "I won" is a bit disappointing, it should be noted that he went in with a hybrid solution that included the desires of both parties (obviously not all of either party's desires).


As for the bailout mess, no way you pin that nonsense on the current POTUS (nationalization of the banks is a Bush legacy). That snowball has been kicked, and at this point, Obama is trying hard to reign in that avalanche as best he can.

And to be honest, since the Democratic majority were forced to sit down with the Republicans and modify their policies to reflect some of their concerns: repubs 1 dems 1 (Rush 0).

Becky Sue,

I had the same feeling with Bush for eight years, and honestly, it is a "yucky" feeling all the way around. Hopefully, some of the policies will strike a positive chord with you down the road (higly unlikely, but my thoughts are sincere).

Warmest Regards,
An American Liberal

Kelley said...

I'm not happy about Bush's actions in the last days in regards to his handling of the economy and the semi-nationalization of banks. Frankly, I would have fired Chris Cox and Henry Paulson, and I would have repealed Sarbanes Oxley and mark to market accounting.

But what nobody seems to understand is the old adage "two wrongs don't make a right." And this started with some elected Democrats like Barney Frank and Chris Dodd and others igoring the problems with Fannie and Freddie.

Spending a trillion dollars to grow the government even further by having the majority of jobs be related to government is no way to restore the economy. The government consumes, it doesn't produce.

Plus, I hear the bill has loads of pork and earmarks that will have nothing to do with creating jobs. If the so-called stimulus won't put any real money into the system until 2010 or later, quite possibly after we've recovered from this recession, then what good is it, really?

And common sense tells us we really can't borrow our way out of debt and expect it not to catch up to us eventually. China already owns too much of our debt, and if they decide the US is no longer worth supporting, what happens to our dollar? Then we'll really be in a world of hurt if our currency is devalued to nothing because the government funding our debt decides we're not longer economically viable. Do we really want to become Zimbabwe? Maybe that's hyperbole, but reckless spending by our government has got to stop!

T. LaDuke said...

"We remain a young nation, but in the words of Scripture, the time has come to set aside childish things"

President Obama Jan 20, 2009

I guess the childish behavior that the Bush administration was called out for is now called decisive leadership?

The people threw the republicans out in 2006 because of the way Congress was spending money like drunken sailors. ( All apologies to drunken sailors) and for the mis handling of the war.

Now that Iraq is moving in the right direction we shall focus more on the economy.

President Obama ran on TAX CUTS and reducing the deficit spending of the last 7 yrs. And his first proposal is to spend 1 trillion dollars over and above our regular budget. Not gonna fly, this aint Chicago Mr President!!

You tell people with Ego's just slightly smaller than yours that " I won" and "But we can't let people like Rush Limbaugh stall this. That's how things don't get done in this town."

The liberal democrats let alone blue dog dem's won't put up with that shtick for long.

He would be best to stick to what Rahm Emanuel did in running the democrats congressional races in the 2006 elections, which was tell Pelosi and Reed to SHUT up and let the moderates of the party take over. That's how they won last time

If not 2010 is shaping up to be a lot like 1994

John said...

didn't he win the election?

Smart Girl Politics ©Template Blogger Green by Dicas Blogger.