Cafepolitico.us Blog

4 responses so far ↓

• 1 tehehehe // Feb 24, 2009 at 8:50 am

  We should remember that Geithner was “at the table” when Paulson was developing the plan for the TARP. And now Geithner is continuing the policy that this same group developed. Is this reallly a surprise?

  The only odd thing is why no one has confidence in Giethner, who, as we remember, was the “only” guy perfectly suited for the job. Could it be that after Madoff and Standford, that the public has little confidence in a tax cheat?

  I agree completely with you. This is NOT a good spokesman for the economy or for Obama. So far, it really thrown a wet blanket over this “historic” Presidency. No one views this as an auspicious start to any Administration.

• 2 stacyb // Feb 24, 2009 at 9:59 am

  I don’t know much about Geithner except what I have been reading after his nomination- apparently it sounds like he’s a very, very smart guy but what is perplexing is that he seems to have been part of the problem for the last 5+ years. Honestly, at this point, his tax problems are the least of it- he seems so intertwined with industry insiders and doesn’t instill much confidence in terms of reigning things in. And why isn’t he out there selling the plan and being positive? Every time he opens his mouth the market tanks, what’s up with that? Not exactly a positive attribute in a Treasury Secretary. I wonder if Larry Summers had anything to do with it? I am not a huge Summers fan.

  I will say this, Obama has inherited so many huge problems that for people to just come out swinging against him is a bit disingenous. And why have the GOP suddenly become so interested in “fiscal responsibility”? Where were they for the past 8 years? Why didn’t they rally around the word “no” then?

• 3 tehehehe // Feb 25, 2009 at 10:50 am

  The Republicans did not simply “come out swinging”. I think they actually wanted to work with Obama on the policies. I think that their response grew out of three things:
  1-The President’s statement, after they had voice their views that “I can trump that. I won.” It was inopportune, as you might say.
  2- The fact that Obama played little role in the House bill, and basically left it up to Pelosi, and she shut the Republicans out.
  3- the “conservative base” that has been critical of overspending for the last 20 years!

  It is absolutely true that you did not hear much from Republicans in Congress about fiscal responsibility. You certainly did not see it with Bush. But there were a whole host of conservatives who have been vocal, but “put in a box” regarding the big deficits over the last 8 years under Bush. These people wanted a smaller budget, and would have accepted less of a tax cut if the budget was balanced. But they were left out in the cold by the mainstream of the Republican Party.

  I know you, and many other, don’t believe it, but Bush was a “moderate”. Only on defense spending, and a bit on “right to life” was he a “rock-ribbed conservative”. You saw that in his NCLBA. you saw it in his aid to Africa on AIDS. You saw it in his comprehensive immigration reform (which the conservatives organized to kill while opposing bush and the majority of Republican pols). And the “right-wing extremists” have been complaining about Bush for virtually the entire 8 years he was in office. And they complained about McCain as well! (one of the reasons he lost, but not the only one).

  Now that the Republicans are “out”, they are seeking to get back in favor with “the base” that gave them legislative victories in the 1990s, and that was the “fiscal conservatives”. Remeber, that was the primary issue Newt pushed when he first won Republican control of Congress in 1994…fiscal conservatism. So the Republicans are “coming home to roost”. they don’t have many other choices as a route to return to power. Merely bowing and scraping and “cooperating” with the Democratic majority gets them no favors, no notice, and no votes. A Dems would do just as well in such a situation. The Republicans have to offer an alternative, which is simply what they are trying to do. And many conservatives don’t trust there recent “conversion” or repentence. Most see it simply as a ploy to get back into favor. You will see many of them challenged in the next election in 2010 by other conservatives.

• 4 stacyb // Feb 26, 2009 at 9:47 am

  I think that Obama has a point when he points out that his victory did provide him with a mandate for some of his policies- Bush and the GOP certainly played that trump card after they won in 2004. Bush talked about changing the tone in washington, but other than ‘No Child Left Behind’ there wasn’t a huge amount of reaching across the aisle (I am not including war votes and things like that), particularly when it came to social and economic issues. Is it possible that the GOP in Congress are being unrealistic about how much Obama should concede to them given his mandate for change?

  I agree that Pelosi and the House Dems set the wrong tone, but Obama certainly didn’t- I think he met more times with GOP leaders than he did with the Democratic leadership about the stimulus. I think some compromise is necessary in a bill like this, but the huge amount of money for the tax breaks still didn’t make republicans less wary and many economists agree that the govt is going to have to spend a lot right now to get the economy moving- there was some nonsense in that bill that didn’t need to be there and Pelosi and the dems should be ashamed and I wish Obama had taken a harder line with them on that, but it seems like Obama and the GOP each had to make some concessions. To hear McCain and the GOP, almost any govt spending is too much.

Leave a Comment