« | »

NYT Applauds Obama’s Refusal To Compromise

From the New York Times:

The Early Word: No Mercy

By JADA F. SMITH | December 3, 2012

President Obama has emerged as a different kind of negotiator in the past week or two, disciplined and unyielding in his argument to raise taxes on the wealthy while offering nothing new to rein in spending and overhaul entitlement programs, Peter Baker reports

In other words, the New York Times is cheering Obama’s refusal to compromise. They love the idea of "no mercy."

And here is the earlier New York Times article they are lauding:

Criticized as Weak in Past Talks, Obama Takes Harder Line

By PETER BAKER | December 2, 2012

WASHINGTON — Amid demands from Republicans that President Obama propose detailed new spending cuts to avert the year-end fiscal crisis, his answer boils down to this: you first.

Mr. Obama, scarred by failed negotiations in his first term and emboldened by a clear if close election to a second, has emerged as a different kind of negotiator in the past week or two, sticking to the liberal line and frustrating Republicans on the other side of the bargaining table.

Disciplined and unyielding, he argues for raising taxes on the wealthy while offering nothing new to rein in spending and overhaul entitlement programs beyond what was on the table last year.

Until Republicans offer their own new plan, Mr. Obama will not alter his. In effect, he is trying to leverage what he claims as an election mandate to force Republicans to take ownership of the difficult choices ahead.

In other words, Obama wants to find a way to be able to blame the Republicans for everything. As usual.

His approach is born of painful experience. In his first four years in office, Mr. Obama has repeatedly offered what he considered compromises on stimulus spending, health care and deficit reduction to Republicans, who either rejected them as inadequate or pocketed them and insisted on more…

What an outrageous lie. Even by the mendacious standards of the New York Times. Obama has never offered any compromises on stimulus spending, health care or deficit reduction. Never.

But The Times is now cheering Obama’s refusal to compromise. They are not making any calls for bi-partisanship. They aren’t telling us how the people want compromise.

The elections are over. Their candidate has been re-elected. They know they can stop pretending.

This article was posted by Steve Gilbert on Monday, December 3rd, 2012. Comments are currently closed.

2 Responses to “NYT Applauds Obama’s Refusal To Compromise”

  1. Petronius

    Nerobama’s proposed 40% tax rate for the much maligned “rich” is purely symbolic.

    Nerobama wants it as a trophy. Another scalp to hang from his belt.

    More of the same back-to-blood, them-versus-us ideology of the Divider-in-Chief.

    More of his same old class warfare formula: poor versus rich, nonwhite versus white, young versus old, immigrant versus citizen, female versus male.

    And “No Mercy!” will be their battle cry for the next phase of the class war.

    Of course it is also a weapon to drive a wedge into the Republican Party. And––with the help of the state-owned media––to transfer blame for the coming depression from himself and his Party to Republicans and wealthy whites.

    The 40% rate will generate little additional revenue for the US Treasury. It will produce no significant reduction to the deficit and debt. It may in fact produce an overall reduction in tax revenues, as he drives America deeper into recession.

    However, at some point the Republicans must publicly acknowledge that the destruction of the American capitalist system is something he very much desires. That the 40% rate is in fact part of the process of dissolution, so long awaited––dare I say, so fervently wished for––is in fact his underlying goal, the top item on his agenda. To Nerobama and the Commiecrats the destruction of capitalism is a victory to be celebrated. The Republicans should be clear about this in their message.

    It will be interesting to see whether the Republican Party abandons its silly old principles like capitalism, private property rights, and national sovereignty.

  2. canary

    If Obama would start out with a simple of step of taxing rich Democrats who are begging to be taxed, everyone would be happy. It could be a temporary 4 year tax, and see how the country responds to it.




« Front Page | To Top
« | »