Obama will meet with the democrats, but will not meet with the republicans.

Yep, that ought to go a long way towards solving the problems.

Hey Feisty - looks like Cali just took a page from Ill. Taxed Amazon Internet business. Amazon said pound sand, and just like in ill, Cali just lost a butt load of jobs.

Are Dems awesome? Super good at creating jobs, and dealing with the private sector.

It worked when the Democrats had large majorities in both Houses of Congress, Spanky.

Maybe he's disoriented.

Probably the shock of Mark Halperin's remark.

Mitch played his card publicly like the fool he is... there's NO amount of walking back what the true objective of these obstructionists is!

Those of us with a backbone love that McConnell "told it like it is", why would you want someone to beat around the bush about their position? Obama's economic policies (or lack there of) are atrocious, so of course he should be a one term president.

on the other hand...

Republicans may be slowing the recovery on purpose to hurt President Obama's reelection chances in 2012, Democratic Sen. Chuck Schumer said in a speech on Thursday.

You have Schumer who tows the traditional party line...accuse someone else of your own shortcomings, deflect the pressure to put out a plan of your own onto someone else, and act like a child.

If that's your definition of a leader....this country really is in trouble! I did happen to notice that you hail from Illinois which has had 4 of it's last 7 Governors convicted of a crime. How many of them did you vote for?

From the article above:

...the Kentucky senator [McConnell] would "invite President Obama to the Capitol today to speak with Senate Republicans and explain his plans to hike taxes by hundreds of billions."

This is why the president isn't meeting with Republicans. The very term "to hike taxes" shows continued lack of intellectual honesty and childish game playing. Like Alan Simpson (former Republican from Wyoming on the debt commission) said yesterday, calling an end to loopholes and subsidies "tax hikes" is "ludicrous." Simpson went on to say that if anything loopholes are "tax spending" and subsidies are "ear marks."

Reid (and the president) were waiting for Biden and the "gang of six" to work out a proposal. With these efforts stalled by Republicans, Democrats will preempt a last minute deal like the last one (extending Bush's tax cuts for and extension of unemployment benefits), by getting behind the Conrad plan.

Democrats have become exasperated at Republican leaders’ staunch refusal to even consider ending special tax breaks to reduce the deficit.

Republicans are threatening to block the debt-limit increase unless Democrats agree to massive spending cuts, and have insisted on cuts to Medicare.

Economists including Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke have warned that failure to increase national borrowing authority could crash the economy, but those warnings have done little to shape public opinion. Polling still shows more Americans oppose raising the debt limit than support doing so...

...The collapse of the deficit-reduction talks led by Vice President Biden has instilled a new sense of urgency and unity among Democratic lawmakers. They say Republicans are prepared to take the standoff to the brink of a national default and must coalesce to put up effective opposition...

...“Right now we’re marshaling our forces,” said Sen. Ben Cardin (D-Md.). “Clearly the bipartisan negotiations have not produced...

...“Let’s be very clear on our priorities. It starts, No. 1, with a credible plan to deal with the deficit. No. 2, it’s fairness, it has to include all the elements. No. 3, we need to protect our most vulnerable and our economic job growth,” Cardin said. “There are the principles. Let us now show the American public what type of deficit plan would accomplish those three objectives. - - http://thehill.com/homenews/senate/169151-sen-conrad-says-budget-ready-to-go

Last night in an interview, Conrad said the plan will cut spending without cutting Social Security and Medicare, which proves the budget can be balanced without destroying these programs. Go Dems!

The White House, through Biden, WAS meeting with the Republicans. The Republicans walked out of the meeting. Why should the President assume that anything will be different if he meets with the Republicans himself? They have already stated their refusal to negotiate.

Good point feilden. Cantor was not only unprofessional, but friggin' rude. And Republicans talk about "diminishing" a political office. As long as the other Party is trying to work with you, especially in a time of real crisis, it's unacceptable to walk out.

Note that Spanky wrote above, "Obama will meet with the democrats, but will not meet with the republicans".

Surely he doesn't believe what he's written. The President has met with both caucuses and leaders from both sides recently & many times and will continue to do so until it is done.

1. Republicans focus on their 'maximalist' positions.

2. They repeat their maximalist positions.

3. While they're not expected to agree on issues, they're expected to come to an agreement.

4. While Spanky is expected to lie, the rest of us aren't expected to ignore it every time.

DAVID BROOKS: When McConnell and Cantor and those guys and Boehner are talking, that's part of the show. We're in the middle of show season.

And the -- Cantor walked out of this Biden commission.

JIM LEHRER: Yes.

DAVID BROOKS: That was part of the show. It was part of the show to get -- to get Obama to come forward with a plan and have some meetings, which he's doing.

http://www.pbs.org/newshour/bb/politics/jan-june11/sandb_06-24.html

It really is all part of the show...

Well then, dangerfield, that would explain why the President was so obviously annoyed and aggrieved yesterday.

To have been flushed-out by McConnell, Cantor, and Boehner...no wonder he was petulant.

MB-

You're assuming that the president isn't in on (and an active participant in) the show...I don't think you can be cynical enough when it comes to our esteemed leaders...

The excuse that the Republicans are giving out for not compromising on the reduce spending/increase revenue balance is that they don't have the votes? Are they serious?

So am I to understand that they think the fact that the Republicans refuse to vote to close tax loopholes is a legitimate reason that we should just give it up and say "Oh sure, We'll just eliminate anything that helps the middle class and the poor and reduce the deficit that way. No need for any contribution to saving the economy from the rich guys, they need every penny they can squeeze out."?

It's no wonder the country is going down the tubes. "We won't" is considered a valid reason, now.

Unfortunately, you cannot trust any person currently holding federal office.

Don't get too excited, guys. The White House just announced it had rejected a meeting with the republicans.

I guess it is easier for Obama to get a bipartisan agreement when he meets with just Reid and Biden.

Can't fault your cynical view of the governing class, dangerfield.

However, when it comes to the matter of seriously addressing the issues surrounding the debt crisis...that's a show that President Obama clearly wants no further part in. He would prefer to delegate that to his understudy, Joe Biden, who proved not up to the role that our President should have been playing all along.

His biggest role to date in this particular show was the issuing of an executive order creating the debt commission...I believe he's come to regret that.

Since then, he's become a very reluctant cast member.

His trademark detachment hasn't served him well in this instance.

His trademark detachment hasn't served him well in this instance.

About that;

DAVID BROOKS: Yes, I think this has been one of the core weaknesses of his presidency, that he has not gotten out on front of this issue.

If you look at what -- the way Chris Christie governed New Jersey, you may not like the bill he passed into law this week, but he was out there with 30 town hall meeting, with charts, with explaining, here's our situation, and here's my plan.

I think that's the way you lead. And I don't Obama has done this. I don't understand the passivity, except it's become part of a pattern for the administration. But, at some point, he has got to get out and explain, A., here's our debt situation; B., here's the seriousness of the -- if we default.

JIM LEHRER: If we -- yes.

DAVID BROOKS: And no one else can do that. And, hopefully, he will start to do it, but he really hasn't. And he hasn't taken any risks.

And until he takes a risk, the Republicans are really hesitant to take any risks. And just -- so, finally, I'm not too worried about what's happening this week about the walkouts.

JIM LEHRER: Sure.

Can't disagree with that point, but I think circumstances have forces his hand now...all part of the show...:)

So if David Brooks thinks that Obama should channel Christie should he yell at school teachers and rudely answer people trying to participate in this fictional national town hall meeting we are going to have?

At least Ross Perot Jr. took his cue cards and charts to the airwaves to explain himself, he didn't bluster and interrupt people who had differing opinions.

If this is all a show by both parties boy I'm going to start to get cynical.

Yellowdog-Mark D

So if David Brooks thinks that Obama should channel Christie should he yell at school teachers and rudely answer people trying to participate in this fictional national town hall meeting we are going to have?

__________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Gee Mark, I have come to expect better that that from you...

What Brooks means is that Christie took his case to his constituents and explained his policies...Did you attend any of the meetings? There were over 20 of them so far and I don't think they are primarily about being rude to schoolteachers...

I'm really surprised...

While I don't agree with much of Christie's politics, I don't see how you can fault him for actively promoting his policies and facing his constituents. Isn't that what a leader is supposed to do? Do you believe that he should't face his critics or that he shouldn't answer their questions?

I really don't understand and I am surprised...

__________________________________________________________________________________________________

Protesters escorted out of Gov. Chris Christie's town hall event are linked to congressional candidate Diane Sare and are supporters of perennial presidential candidate Lyndon LaRouche.

They were removed today from the event after they refused to stop singing loudly about being sent to Auschwitz.

http://www.nj.com/news/index.ssf/2011/06/protesters_are_escorted_out_of.html

Here are a bunch of news stories on the meetings, many of which involve no youtube worthy outbursts from the Governor or the participants in the meetings.

http://www.google.com/search?q=christie+town+hall&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8&aq=t&rls=org.mozilla:en-US:official&client=firefox-a#sclient=psy&hl=en&client=firefox-a&hs=p1j&rls=org.mozilla:en-US%3Aofficial&source=hp&q=gov+christie+town+hall+meetings&aq=1m&aqi=p-p1g-m3g-bm1&aql=&oq=&pbx=1&bav=on.2,or.r_gc.r_pw.&fp=75eb873209a248f1&biw=1436&bih=660

Dangerfield I am happy you think highly of some of my posts.

As you are from NY obviously you have more coverage of that governor. I never attended or saw any of his conferences. I have seen clips of his outbursts. Of course I do think he should discuss his policies. However, I believe that political discourse even between posters on a blog should be civil.

People should ask questions and expect an answer. The teacher talking about his union and why cuts were being made was bullied by the governor in front of a crowd of GOP supporters. The lady asking if his use of parochial schools limited his understanding of the value of public schools was a valid question. Instead he used his brashness and false outrage at the question to allow him not to answer a question.

Those questioners are voters and they are his boss, they should receive a valid, civil response not burly behavior.

BINGO!!!

I'm starting to think Obama was nothing more than a mediocre Community Organizer... Once again leading from behind or voting present on the issues affecting americans.

JFK-2112,

Get some new material already!

By valuable you of course mean the two fund raisers he had to attend to today?

Obviously not. How can people vote for people like that?

Mark R -

and, based on history, do you really expect that the congress wouldn't just take the additional revenues and spend them? You can't believe that and have a firm grip on reality.

Mitch always looks like he's on the verge of crying, and I hope it's because he actually has a conscience and feels bad about all the lies he spews. (But the best one of all was Forest Grump's comment that Pawlenty looks like a home sick boyscout, and Bachmann looks like the alpha male when standing next to him. I'm still laughing about that one dude.)

Mitch always looks like he's on the verge of crying

Which reminds me, the Weeper of the House always looks like he's trying to stifle a burp! ;o))

"Mitch always looks like he's on the verge of crying, and I hope it's because he actually has a conscience..."

No, unforturnately... it is only because he doesn't have a chin.

"the Weeper of the House always looks like he's trying to stifle a burp!"

And that comes from choking back the bile that spewing lies produces.

don't bet on it