Featuring fresh takes and real-time analysis from HuffPost's signature lineup of contributors
Earl Ofari Hutchinson

Earl Ofari Hutchinson

Posted: December 9, 2010 11:28 AM

Progressives and liberal Democrats are blowing hot air on President Obama's tax cut deal. They include saber rattling of a Senate filibuster, screams for everyone from defeated Wisconsin Senator Russ Feingold to Hillary Clinton to challenge Obama in the Democratic primary, polls on left blogs and websites running heavily against him seeking re-election, and mountains of sworn promises that progressives will not spend a second of time working for Obama's reelection or contribute a dime to his reelection bid.

This is pure bluster. The political reality that Obama faced and that progressives and liberal Democrats are loathe to admit but must face nonetheless is that Obama had no choice but to hold his nose and make the deal. The reasons were simple. The GOP held all the cards. It's nice to engage in feel good rhetoric about Democratic majorities in the House and Senate, and to say that the president should have used those majorities, and the bully pulpit of the Oval Office to do a Harry Truman and FDR and give the GOP hell as hypocrites, obstructionists, and the party of big wealth. And then defiantly tell the American people why he'd stand tall and veto any tax cut bill that kept the cuts for the rich in there. He would have drawn wild cheers and back-patting from liberals and progressives but come January and beyond when the paychecks of tens of millions of workers shrunk, and tens of thousands of small and medium sized businesses screamed bloody murder about tax hikes, more forced payroll slashes and reduction in equipment buying, and millions of unemployed were hung out to dry with not a nickel of income coming in, guess whose head the wrath of the nation would come down on.

Then there's the reaction of GOP hard liners. They froth at GOP leaders for giving up more than they should have given up on the unemployed and social security benefits that do help far more workers and needy then the tax giveaway to the rich.

The shouts that Obama should just turn the tables on the GOP and dump the blame back on them also ignores too much. He's tried to do that all along and the message has been deliberately and skillfully twisted, ignored, and used to hector him by the GOP echo chamber. The fight that liberal Democrats are screaming that he should have made all along, one could just as easily asked why didn't most of them launch their own national campaign to back Obama and educate their constituents that if the GOP let the rich get their way on taxes after January it was their fault. But they didn't and because of a mix of timidity, fear, and in some cases flat out believe that the GOP was right and the tax cuts for the fat cats weren't a totally bad thing, they dumped the heavy lifting to do this on Obama's shoulders. In other words, many Democrats through cowardice or belief in the phony and totally discredited trickle down line that giving the rich more cash will somehow magically translate into more investment, more jobs, and more economic growth sat on their haunches.

It's odious to give money to those who don't need it, will hoard it, and not create one job, or save one foreclosed home, or help sustain one small business. But it would have been even more odious to watch the GOP noise machine trot out nightly a homeless laid off worker, or family pushed over the edge after losing their child tax or earned income credit weeping on national TV about how Obama (not the GOP which rightly should be fingered) pushed them into the breadlines.

The conventional wisdom from progressive and liberal Democrats is that Obama left himself wide open for the beating he's getting for making the deal with the devil because he promised so long and so vehemently on the campaign trail to nail the Bush tax cuts for the wealthy to the wall and that he lied, or that he's just to weak too do anything but cave to the GOP bullying, badgering and hectoring. That's even more asinine. Candidate Obama could make any promise he wanted including be a tough guy and torpedo the Bush tax cuts for the rich. But presidential candidate Obama didn't face the loss in November of sixty Democratic House seats, seven Senate seats, and a slew of suddenly GOP controlled state legislatures in the must win states of Ohio and Florida in 2012.

Candidate Obama did not face a GOP that will stop at nothing to hack up or do away with any aid to the poor, working class and unemployed, and that has the power to do it. That's called hardnosed realpolitik. This has and always will trump symbolic protests, or unwinnable line in the sand stands. Obama got the best deal he could have gotten given the impossible political odds he faced, and any other Democrat that sat in the same seat he does would have done the same.

Earl Ofari Hutchinson is an author and political analyst. He hosts nationally broadcast political affairs radio talk shows on Pacifica and KTYM Radio Los Angeles.

 

Follow Earl Ofari Hutchinson on Twitter: www.twitter.com/earlhutchinson

 
 
  • Comments
  • 39
  • Pending Comments
  • 0
  • View FAQ
Comments are closed for this entry
View All
Favorites
Recency  | 
Popularity
Page: 1 2  Next ›  Last »  (2 total)
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
take10
04:55 PM on 12/13/2010
Earl, it has been ten years since the Bush tax cuts for the wealthy began. Yet, they are not touting any examples of how lucrative for our economy or job creation those tax cuts have been. That's because they don't have any, and we are being sold the same old BS, with the current and previous democratic presidents standing with republican­s who caused the damn near destruction­ of our economy and democracy. Obama will cave to anything republican­s demand so long as he gets a chance to put his signature on whatever they wish to pass. I wouldn't vote for another democrat for as long as I live. As a senior citizen, I don't have anyone in public office resenting my interests, so why should I bother to vote at all. It does absolutely no good!
03:47 PM on 12/13/2010
excuse me, but the original tax cuts were put thru by Bush thru reconciliation, so we had the votes to push thru the middle class tax cuts and let the rest lapse. and this is the hand we should be playing. if they want to further hand over our treasury to the top 2%, thru estate tax and income tax cuts for the uber rich, they got the new congress to do it. let them raise the debt ceiling. and put a vote to the floor on unemployment, Now! -- make them filibuster and show the world the Scrooge that they are at Christmas. but the truth is, politics has no place in this conversation. we should do what's right and good for the country. we should fight this transfer of wealth and do the right thing for those caught in this mess --the unemployed. we cannot afford any tax cut or give back, including payroll tax, benefiting anyone who doesn't truly need it.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
biznesschic
04:29 PM on 12/13/2010
You did not have the votes. Even Russ Finegold voted against extending unemployment insurance.
07:07 PM on 12/13/2010
i disagree. we had the votes for reconciliation for the middle class tax cuts. and if we had put forth a bill just for the funding of unemployment, we would not have the 60 votes to overcome the filibuster. but then, let them filibuster...make them stand up there on Christmas Eve and deny unemployment....let their constituencies see them up close and most venal....Ross Feingold as well, if for some reason he lost all sense of what's right.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
take10
02:06 PM on 12/13/2010
Earl, it has been ten years since the Bush tax cits for the wealthy began. Yet, they are not touting any examples of how lucrative for our economy or job creation they have been. That's because they don't have any, and we are being sodl the same old BS, with the current and previous democratic presidents standing with republicans who caused the damn near destruction of our economy and democracy. Obama will cave to anything republicans demand so long as he gets a chance to put his signature on whatever they wish to pass. I wouldn't vote for another democrat for as long as I live. As a senior citizen, I don't have anyone in public office resenting my interests, so why should I bother to vote at all. It does absolutely no good!
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
biznesschic
04:31 PM on 12/13/2010
Not the argument. We know that tax cuts to the rich were bad for the economy, but letting the tax cuts expire for the middle class would have been worse.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
take10
05:27 PM on 12/13/2010
You can't be serious! Would you be willing to sacrifice thousands in your savings account for a few dollars remaining in your checking account because it's the weekend and you need to immediately write a check for a BigMac? No wonder this country is on its way to the abyss! Too many of you have bought into the fear game, and never question the 'heads they win, tales you lose' flip of the coin. It's like the double theology of religion. Telling the have-nots to hold out, live on handouts and pray until they get to heaven, to justify that those who have everything in this life will burn in hell, like they've been to either place and that's the way God planned it. Then the same preacher tells you that you must pay 10% of your handouts to him for the trip, affording him a kings lifestyle here on earth. What nonsense!
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Libb Cabal
12:39 PM on 12/13/2010
I admire Mr. Hutchinson, but I disagree with him on the issue of Obama's well-rehearsed dance with the GOP.

Mr. Obama doesn't capitulate to the GOP because he is weak or because he has no choice--he does it because his agenda is much the same as the GOP...he simply uses the GOP's chest-pounding buffoonery and threats as an excuse for doing what he planned to do all along.

The victims here are Obama's 2008 voters who believed he would perform on his campaign promises. What we believed to be a man of his word turned out to be a bait-and-switch artist, as he has consistently promised one thing and done another.

As early as August 2009, Pew/LATimes polls started showing Obama's loss of the support of many of his 2008 voting groups, largely because he broke campaign promises. This has progressed, and, in 2010 we saw a large percentage of Democratic voters--far more than usual--demonstrate their apathy by simply not bothering to show up at the polls.

It was Obama who took the "YES WE CAN!!" voters of 2008 and turned them into the "meh" nonvoters of 2010.

This trend will not change unless the reason for the trend changes.

It's too late for Obama to win back his 2008 voters--they will never trust him again. But if we have Obama as a candidate in 2012, we will wake up in 2013 with a GOP Congress and President.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
biznesschic
04:32 PM on 12/13/2010
Progressives can not comprehend any of this article, yet give irrational, emotional rants.
07:10 PM on 12/13/2010
i think he wanted this result....why else alienate your base just before an election....? in fact, every disappointment on our end has been everything he wanted....just the way he wanted it...
scipio2009
Alan Wolfe's "The Future of Liberalism"
12:38 AM on 12/10/2010
Another refreshing read
Genders
Love, Tolerance, Enlightenment
09:11 PM on 12/09/2010
Continuing the tax cuts will force massive spending cuts, which will cause a massive depression. This is lose lose lose. Face it: Obama is DLC Clinton Trickle down conservative.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
TRex86
Enjoying life in West Ohio
09:05 PM on 12/09/2010
The President didn't make the Republicans work for their deal. They gave up nothing. Their deficit rhetoric is hot air. He was bluffed out of the winning hand. Moreover, he neglected his side of the aisle and is only now doing damage control with the Democrats in Congress, not to mention the progressives. This time he blew it. He may fancy himself the Great Compromiser, but all he did was put off the inevitable collison with the Republicans who will renege on the deal when they have the House. They will use the newer, larger deficit as an excuse to gut social programs. The time to stop them is now. Get out your veto pen, Mr. Obama--and plan to use it the next two years.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
biznesschic
04:32 PM on 12/13/2010
No, the republicans worked to take over the house. They had the upper hand.
07:50 PM on 12/09/2010
Please I'm tired of people like you making excuse for this L7 .
07:46 PM on 12/09/2010
The Obama apologists will never acknowledge the President's weakness and ineptitude. For them, blame lies with the media, or the progressives, or the Senate, or whoever. For the apologists, it's our fault, yours and mine, for wanting the President to keep his promises. Everyone is to blame, and as long as the buck doesn't stop at 1600 Pennsylvannia.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Awake-and-Sing
named after a great play written by Clifford Odets
08:13 PM on 12/09/2010
The post of the day. Thank you.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Libb Cabal
12:49 PM on 12/13/2010
He's not weak nor is he inept. A person simply does not advance to the level of president if they are anything but extraordinarily ruthless in getting what they want, brilliant strategists, and masters at deal brokering.

The two terms "weak politician" and "president" are mutually exclusive: if one is true, the other must be false. Obama is president; therefore, he must not be weak.

Obama "capitulates" to the GOP because the GOP's arrogant chest-pounding gives him an excuse to do what he planned, and wanted, to do all along.

I know it's hard to face, but those of us who voted for Obama in 2008 were really swindled. In the quid-pro-quo deal voters make with politicians, where the voters vote the politician into office and, in exchange, the politician does what they promised to do during the campaign, we got taken--but good.

In California, the bait-and-switch sales scheme is illegal. If politicians were included in those to whom the law applies, we could prosecute Obama for what he has done since his campaign.

We must immediately come up with a campaign strategy for 2012 that does not include Obama as a candidate, or we will face a Republican Congress and President in 2013. Not only will Obama lose his reelection, he will take down many of the other Democrats up for reelection, as the Obama "meh" nonvoters, once again, see no reason to bother voting.
02:14 PM on 12/13/2010
I have come to the same conclusion that President Obama should not be our nominee in 2012. I just came that that realization from a different perspective. Maybe you're right though. Maybe President Obama's capitulations are all part of a long con.

On top of the fact that Obama is a profound disappointment, I am also frustrated by the progressives that are still carrying water for him. Hopefully a strong progressive challenger will step up soon.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
biznesschic
04:35 PM on 12/13/2010
Right. Try to win without the African American vote, who see progressives as whiny little brats who deserve president Palin. Do you hear African Americans threaten to take their ball and leave? How many of African American issues have become forefront to this, or any other democratic president, yet we remain loyal. No more. I am asking all African Americans to register liberal independent, and make the whiner crowd earn our votes.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
07:36 PM on 12/09/2010
Thank you , Earl....I have been posting on many threads that we are trying to demand a better deal from people that don't need to deal in the first place. The wealthy won't be a bit worse off whether the cuts expire or not. They will continue to enjoy the same lifestyles and experience what amounts to a small inconvenience of having to pay more...Much of which I am sure will never reach the tax man because theire creative accountants will not doubt find ways to evade or avoid much if not all of the additional taxes.
 
Meanwhile, those that only weeks ago assured the jobless we were on their side suddenly now seem just as willing to throw them to the curb as the tormentors that callously, cold heartedly have been insisting we do all along were doing when we were defending the jobless. Do we now ALL suddenly believe that the jobless should be just left in the street to rot and freeze? To accomplish what? Accomplish what amounts to no more than cause some minor irritation to the wealthy, and make ourselves feel good that they didn't get to keep 3.6% of the already obscene amounts of money they make for doing little or nothing more laborous than allowing their money to make them more money. If we think ending the tax cuts will strike some kind of blow for the little guy or demonstrate our resolve not to let the rich get richer, we are sadly mistaken.
 
Our little 3.6% revolt is a laughable amount to the wealthier of our country. Right now, they are laughing at us and our little revolt to try making them pay their fair share. Go ahead, up my rate by you pittance and see how little it really stops me from continuing to live, spend and enjoy the way I already do now. I won't do without anything I want or need no matter which way the deal ends. Meanwhile you are gathering steam to finish the job that was started on the jobless in order to try hurting me with your meaningless revolt. I can still live just as well as I do now. It is YOU, you bunch of fools, that are going to do the hurting. YOUR taxes will go up just to make MINE go up...I can easily afford or evade those taxes...Can YOU? Go ahead and stomp your feet and make yourself feel good about hurting me while you not only hurt yourselves, but do-in all the poor jobless people while you are at it.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Saje3d
07:26 PM on 12/09/2010
This is, again, akin to slapping a band-aid over arterial spray and calling it "good." The whole structure is coming down... and if we refuse to address the issues of rampant outsourcing, lack of spending on education or infrastructure modernization, the complete loss of our manufacturing base, AND the continuing catastrophic trade imbalance, we're whistling past a graveyard.
06:08 PM on 12/09/2010
Mr. Hutchinson, I generally agree with you, but on this one I think you're completely wrong.

Just because it's Pres. Obama doesn't make this deal stink any less.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
pinkladee
luvs all things pink
05:59 PM on 12/09/2010
Well Said.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
wrightthewrong
Medicare for All
05:25 PM on 12/09/2010
It would be easier to swallow if the tax cuts expired at the same time as the 13-month extension of the unemployment benefits and not just in time for the next election; and there is no excuse whatsoever to lower the estate tax percentages and raise the level of qualified estates to 5 million. Now the GOP will blame him for the huge hole blown in the budget and the increased deficit, and they will demand that he cut programs for which progressives have fought hard. This president does not know how to negotiate -- either for fair exchange or for hostages.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
jayevans20
04:18 PM on 12/09/2010
Best article I read today! Every thing you say Earl is spot on!