Obama’s “Compromise” On Tax Cuts Signals His Inability To Lead

December 7, 2010


Comments

2 Responses to “Obama’s “Compromise” On Tax Cuts Signals His Inability To Lead”

  1. Old Man Dotes on December 7th, 2010 1:41 pm

    Tony, I have to disagree. Obama did what any successful politician did – he gave a little to get a little. There are millions of unemployed Americans who will be able to continue living indoors and eating because of this (odious) compromise.

    What’s needed is a law to forbid Corporate contributions to political campaigns; the SCOTUS decision to allow them has gutted any illusion of “citizens’ rights” that we may have previously held, because it’s now clearly obvious that the US Chamber of Commerce, funded by China, can buy all the politicians it wants. And that’s also hundreds of millions of dollars that could be used to hire workers, instead of buying Congressmen.

  2. Trupiano on December 7th, 2010 2:44 pm

    I have written about campaign finance reform here as well, but his inability to muscle Republicans and still get what everyone needed is a shame. Real leadership requires one to stand up and fight for those who need help and refuse to give into threats, which is exactly what he did. Had he forced this issue while refusing to extend the tax cuts he would have won, I promise you that is true. He failed. Yes, as I wrote some good things are provided for here but at the end of the day the cost was unnecessary.

Got something to say? **Please Note** - Comments may be edited for clarity or obscenity, and all comments are published at the discretion of ChattahBox.com - Comments are the opinions of the individuals leaving them, and not of ChattahBox.com or its partners. - Please do not spam or submit comments that use copyright materials, hearsay or are based on reports where the supposed fact or quote is not a matter of public knowledge are also not permitted.