Endorse gay marriage, then pal around with the rich & powerful – what a perfect rendition of today’s whoring neolib “Democratic” party. They’ll go left on trendy boutique social issues because that doesn’t cost them money. But economic justice can go shove it, ’cause that comes with a price tag.

Spot-on, Kafka, thank you. Obama uses social issues to appease the left. It is shocking that people do not see that. It is like “What’s Wrong with Kansas City,” but applied to the “left.”

We know neoliberals are social liberals and economic conservatives. While he is so wonderfully liberal on SOCIAL issues, we know Obama does not and will not budge meaningfully on critical ECONOMIC issues, such as:

tax cuts for the rich, public option, Republican radical restructuring of the tax code away from progressive income taxes to regressive sales tax (watch, while radically and permanently cutting the top income tax rate, Obama is going to implement a VAT tax in his second term to make up for his reduction of the income tax rate), meaningful cuts in wars, Big Food vs. small farmers,’ and anything that is key for the biggest lobbyists, etc. He (Obama) is so reprehensible.

He is preferred by many Repubs because he will implement Republican economic policies more effectively–the Democrats will go along with those policies when it is Obama who implements those policies. Because Obama will be more EFFECTIVE in implementing Republican economic policies, Romney is to be preferred to Obama. And Obama’s winning will only push the DEmocratic party further to the right. Many reasons why the left should wish for a defeat of this radical neoliberal (as radical as Bush II on economic issues), Obama.

A lot of comments seem to miss the point that this is deregulation and privatization under a Democratic President–President False-Hope Obama.

Obama is privatizing and deregulating.

Another in a long list of proofs that Obama is not a Democrat, but a DINO Republican. With Democrats like this, who needs Republicans.

This payroll tax cut is a 30% reduction in contributions to social security, correct?

So why, Mr. Dayen, do you say the Republicans “caved” on this, when in fact, that is what the Repubs want?

So if ss was not in trouble, the reduction of funding to ss will speed its demise? The reduction in contributions to ss and tying ss to the federal budget was the Repubs’ dream. Not even GWB got this into legislation, but Obama did, Obama aggressively moved to implement it.

I think Dayen is clearly an Obama operative. He hypes the Obama propaganda often exactly as Obama’s press releases would present them.

To #1 johdeconker. #3 mswinkle etc.– As I have said often, I think the evidence repeatedly suggests Dayen is an Obama operative or supporter, though he tries sometimes to hide it. Dayen’s articles appear to relentlessly frame issues, MSM-like, as Republicans vs. Democrats, or Republicans vs. Obama etc. This article is yet another piece of evidence. It seems like obvious bs and propaganda. Surprising such writing is to be found on on this web site.

I suspect Dayen is an Obama operative and promoter, but he tries to hide it. This article is a good example.

In any case, with Obama, if it seems too good to be true, it is. It does not matter what Obama SAYS when Obama is in campaign mode. Base on three years’ experience we have had with Obama, we know that what Obama actively pushes for is often the OPPOSITE to what he SAYS, as far as on the key points most important to his constituents (ie. Wall Street, Big corporation, etc.).

Based on Obama’s record, and despite Obama’s pronouncements to the contrary, I think we can predict that Obama is promoting a wholesale revamping of the tax code because (drum roll)—Obama wants to implement the regressive flat tax in the U.S. for the first time in history and thereby cut the taxes for the rich further.

At the end, after all the Congressional maneuverings, Obama will say the Republicans in Congress or the Blue Dogs or whatever prevented him from pushing through most of these progressive tax reforms he mentioned in his state of the union. And, Obama will say he needs to give the Republicans a flat tax across the board in return for a (relatively neglible) tax benefit, such as giving companies tax breaks for moving some factories back to US. That will be Obama’s “tax reform.” Mark our words, Obama is a true neoliberal!

That has been Obama’s model for action these three years on the most important items, one of the reasons why many people who pay attention think that he is dishonest and reprehensible.

So, prediction: Obama will aggressively push for and institute the FLAT TAX if he is re-elected (much as he aggressively pushed for the extension of the Bush tax cuts, unnecessary exclusion of the public option, sold out small farmers on the farm bill, etc. etc.) I believe there are many other things he will do, eg. seriously curtail Internet freedoms, if re-elected.

Juliania, Don’t you think so yet? Dayen seems to be an official, establishment, Obama promoter. So be careful about reading Dayen. He is subtle about it, though. For example, he always frames issues in terms of Republicans vs. Obama (or vs. an issue that Obama supports as though that is a good position).

The fact that Dayen, like Mainstream Media, mentions the “payroll tax cut” without pointing out that the “payroll tax cut” is in fact “a reduction in contributions to social security” is a dead giveaway whose side Dayen is on.

(Obama actually actively lobbies to cut contributions to social security, thus fulfilling the prophesy that the program will not have enough funding, when that was not the case. It leads you to believe that Obama is totally unacceptable to be voted for. To scheme to bring down social security is unacceptable for a Democrat.)

Notice how he disses Congress — not Republicans in Congress — the whole Congress.
Dipshit.

I agree. Obama always does that. Multitude of behaviour like this that lead people to despise him, and think that fundamentally, he is no real morals. That is the problem with O.

dayen writes:

Brian Beutler reports on the House GOP’s next trick. Their plan is to find the two worst parts of the President’s jobs bill and deficit plan

Why does Dayen always write as though the President is legit and is genuinely trying to make worthwhile difference? I thought Obama has long lost his credibility–cf. his behaviour during BP oil spill; his pushing to extend the bush tax cuts and holding the unemployed hostage to that; his selecting chairmen for the social security commission who recommended cutting top tax rate further from 34 to 24% as a means to cut the deficit; his cutting contibutions to social security by 30% and his pushing for that (yes, Obama did that); and his picking as his chief of staff an executive of Goldman Sachs etc. etc. (ie. Obama, yes Obama did these things.)

Be careful. One suspects, based on his writing, that Dayen is an Obama operative.

Dayen and Susskind appear to be surreptitious apologists for Obama.

Susskind/Dayen are suggesting Obama’s beliefs are wrong. The implication is, give Obama the right advisors and give Obama the right arguments, and Obama will act rightly. No, all this has nothing to do with Obama’s beliefs–Obama has no beliefs–it has to do with where the money is.

It’s not the beliefs. It is the person.

Yes, here is the link to a similar Huffington Post article I saw today making the same point. I think it is coordinated Obama Propaganda, saying people will not voulunteer for Obama, but they will vote for him. No, the real damage is if people do NOT vote for Obama. if Obama wins in 2012, it will prove he can pursue his agenda to take down ss with impunity.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/08/19/obama-liberals-unions-latinos_n_931667.html