The Senate democrats and various lefty and center citizen groups are piling on him over his economic plan.

I say they should, personally. 40% of it is in tax cuts when Jared Bernstein and others leading his economic team have admitted a dollar in government spending would do more good than a dollar in tax cuts at this moment.

I've no problem with him keeping to campaign promises on middle class tax cuts (though quite frankly it might be foolish policy), however he has gone way off the deep end with a lot of these cuts, they mirror the stimulus checks Bush repeatedly tried and failed with.

The fact of the matter is people can't spend right now, as Jim Moran, a conservative Democrat pointed out on Hardball two days ago, consumers are already at 120% spending (normal is 70-80%), they really should concentrate almost all of this package on government spending to boost the economy, not on more failed Reagaonomics. I know Obama brought a lot of Reagaonomics folks onboard his team, and he has to pay back his pound of flesh to all the corporate support he got I suppose, but let's think about the economy for once and not just play politics.

Because this topic will quickly turn into Zaid's a communist because he agrees with Kent Conrad and Jim Moran this topic should now be about Elizabeth Hasslebeck's son headbutting President Bush:

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/01/12/elisabeth-hasselbeck-visi_n_157139.html

One point that people miss with the consumer spending and stimulus not getting there immediately...

Getting people back to heads above water sooner will mean they leave the status of maxed out sooner. Which means a return to spending.

Also, this first step by Obama's team (and in other interviews) suggests that they are intent on letting the Senate have Obama's way.

"Also, this first step by Obama's team (and in other interviews) suggests that they are intent on letting the Senate have Obama's way."

Letting the Senate have Obama's way? Wat

There's an old saying by a negotiator:

"I'm always hell-bent on letting the other fellow have my way."

Always thought of it as a good one.

So you mean he will defeat their concerns and get the bill the way he wants it? Personally I had enough rubberstamping of George Bush to rubber stamp more bad ideas.

Jim Moran and Dennis Kucinich discuss this on hardball, keeping with the new rule of providing links to stuff

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/21134540/vp/28583526#28583526

Zaid,

No, the point of the quote is that you let the other guy think he came up with your ideas on his own, and then walk away happy for "beating" you when giving you exactly what you want.

His advisors have essentially leaked that they are low-balling the Congress knowing that they are going to what greatly to mark it all up.

I don't think it's the size of the package that's as much of a contention as much as it is the ineffective tax cuts all over it.

They say they're going for 80 senate votes. If what you say is true, they're not going to get that, they'll just look stupid publicly saying that.

"I don't think it's the size of the package that's as much of a contention as much as it is the ineffective tax cuts all over it."

That's what she said.

+1 to collapser.

Anyway, here's Paul Krugman's chiming in:

http://www.iht.com/articles/2009/01/12/opinion/edkrugman.php

Aaaand here comes in the right to praise Obama and lol @ those silly nobel laureates like Krugman who know he's wrong:

http://blogs.forbes.com/digitalrules/2009/01/did-obama-dis-p.html

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/01/12/olmert-bush-humiliated-ri_n_157201.html

did i read this right?

olmert calls bush to tell him to do something bush calls condi and tells her to do something then olmert brags about humiliating US policies?

Rep. DeFazio I think pretty much says it all on why we don't need a lot of absurd advice from Summers (he literally calls out Larry Summers), who has a history of screwing up on all this:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0JglPCv4yjk

Update: Obama threatens veto if Senate doesn't release second half of TARP.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/01/13/obama-issues-first-veto-t_n_157585.html

We should have an actual Zaid open thread rather than forcing him to hijack one.

I'm viewing it as an open economic thread and posting news updates. If your panties are in a wad over that, you don't have to read any of it, either. That's the great thing about an open and public internet.

In other words, cry moar?

far be it from me to speak to the intention of the original poster but, I think it clearly states "discuss on change.gov"

he changed.gov'ed the venue.

yes we can.

Zaid,

I thought you'd like your own thread, I was merely suggesting to the powers that be that they give it to you. Why would you assume I didn't want to read it or was being sarcastic?

I don't know, after you misused three facts a post in the I/P thread I thought you might give up trying to be taken seriously and had turned to court jester?

***sits down, opens a bag of popcorn, waits for fireworks***

So much for detente.