This thread was about tax cuts, remember ?
Kandahar wrote :
"There is no reason that Obama needed to be so weak on this issue. He was in a stronger position than the Republicans politically (Democrats control half of Congress and the White House...and until January, ALL of Congress and the White House). He was in a stronger position than the Republicans structurally (the bill was going to expire in the absence of action, which would have been less acceptable to the Republicans than the Democrats). And he was even on the side of public opinion (the majority of voters didn't want to see tax cuts for the rich extended).
I can only draw two conclusions: A) Obama is incompetent and doesn't know how to negotiate, or B) he actually agrees with the Republicans about tax cuts for the rich. I'm not sure which conclusion pisses me off more."
Republicans had the high ground. They had nothing to lose. At worst the super rich folks they suck up to (if not are bribed by) would simply not get richer (Boo hoo). Quite tolerable.
Obama, on the other hand, had a lot to lose. The working poor would have gotten tax increases, and the unemployed would have suddenly found themselves with no income in a dead job market. Millions of people would be evicted from homes and other nightmares.
You can't deal effectively when the people you're dealing with (McConnell, Boehner, et al Republicans) are bunch of conscienceless, hostage-taking thugs, with no concern for the American people. They ought to be hung for treason.