freeman2 wrote:How is reducing loopholes in exchange for lowering rates a net increase in taxes?

Because that would lead to more revenues to the government.

And, note well: this is exactly what the president's own bipartisan debt commission proposed. The President, showing he was willing to lead on the issue, ignored it.

rickyp wrote:"As a result of our discussions and other interactions with gay and lesbian voters across the state, I am more convinced than ever before that as we seek to establish full equality for America's gay and lesbian citizens, I will provide more effective leadership than my opponent."
Mitt Romney 1994

Hey, start a Romney flip-flops forum! I can keep Obama's name out of it. Why can't you do the same?

Btw, isn't it a flip-flop for Obama too? He once opposed gay marriage and now supports it.

Hey, start a Romney flip-flops forum!

Actually Romney didn't flip flop . He just claimed to offer leadership. After this statement he preceeded to work against gay marriage.
Unfortunately for Mitt, the people of his state did not follow him. And the gays are still getting hitched in Boston.

Leadership in a democracy is a funny thing. The people who often begin a change in direction, offer true leadership, aren't always in positions of power. They are however, opinion leaders. They can be from many walks of life and offer leadership all kinds of different ways...
But its the rare politican who tackles a contentious issue, and steps out ahead of the curve, and attempts to change enough opinions that a direction is changed.
Usually a politician only recognizes that conditions have changed and that he better get out ahead of the general public opinion. "There they go. I must catch up, for I am their leader".
You have an old fashioned idea of leadership in a complex world Steve. You somehow expect sme guy up front making all the rules, making all the statements, personnally writing the laws and making the important pronouncements... The world is too complicated , especially in modern democracies with complicated media .. for that concept of the autocratic big man. You must like Putin. Big issues can have a lot of people in leadership postions contributing to moving the issue, idea or law forward.... Not just one guy. Even simply by default of his elected role, Obama gets to claim participation in the issues that were listed, In the same way, he gets blamed for shit he has the same kind of relationship towards...

Today, with the gay marriage statement, Obama took a bit of a risk that even for you has to demonstrate leadership. he stuck his neck out.... a little.

By the way, Romney taking credit for the Auto Bailout working out is the height of hypocricy. What he "recommended" wasn't possible. There was no money around for a managed bankruptcy involving private companies. Even Bain Capital passed. The reason the bailout happened is that a private bailout had been explored and everyone passed. Then Mitt published his editorial. A little after the fact...
The thing about Mitt is that he's made so many fatuous claims, like offering leadership to Mass. gays, that he's always going to end up debating with himself in the attack ads the Dems are creating...
Obama has at least recognized that he "evolved" on the issue of gay marriage. (I wonder where Mitt stands on evolution?)

Where Mitt stands on evolution.

I believe that God designed the universe and created the universe,” Mr. Romney said in an interview this week. “And I believe evolution is most likely the process he used to create the human body.”
He was asked: Is that intelligent design?
“I’m not exactly sure what is meant by intelligent design,” he said. “But I believe God is intelligent and I believe he designed the creation. And I believe he used the process of evolution to create the human body.”
While governor of Massachusetts, Mr. Romney opposed the teaching of intelligent design in science classes.
“In my opinion, the science class is where to teach evolution, or if there are other scientific thoughts that need to be discussed,” he said. “If we’re going to talk about more philosophical matters, like why it was created, and was there an intelligent designer behind it, that’s for the religion class or philosophy class or social studies
class.”

So let me see---Republicans want steep cuts and they want lower tax cut rates.So Obama says ok I'll agree to a certain amount of cuts if you agree to a certain amount of tax increases. And the Republican response is that we want cuts and we want lower tax rates but we will agree to cut certain loopholes that no one would get exercised about. That's called having your cake and eat it too compromise. (and the loopholes would have amounted to a small fraction of the cuts).

Sorry, that is not compromise no matter how you try to spin it, Steve.

I think the burden is on you Steve to show that Obama is not responsible for policies he championed. And of course you can't do so you attempt to shift the burden of proof. Nice try.

Aww, did Steve's latest Obama-bash thread not end up as an echo-chamber for the right?

Waaah!

freeman2 wrote:So let me see---Republicans want steep cuts and they want lower tax cut rates.So Obama says ok I'll agree to a certain amount of cuts if you agree to a certain amount of tax increases. And the Republican response is that we want cuts and we want lower tax rates but we will agree to cut certain loopholes that no one would get exercised about. That's called having your cake and eat it too compromise. (and the loopholes would have amounted to a small fraction of the cuts).

Sorry, that is not compromise no matter how you try to spin it, Steve.

Proof of his offer is where?

freeman2 wrote:I think the burden is on you Steve to show that Obama is not responsible for policies he championed. And of course you can't do so you attempt to shift the burden of proof. Nice try.

Prove he championed removing Qaddafi. He was dragged.

Show his leadership. What brave stands has he made?

danivon wrote:Aww, did Steve's latest Obama-bash thread not end up as an echo-chamber for the right?

Waaah!

It's actually amusing that you liberals can't make a positive case for your fellow socialist.

Dogging Romney tells me nothing about the Man you worship.

Btw, talk about cowardice: he flips on gay marriage AFTER Biden forced it, but says it's his personal opinion. He's not actually planning to do anything about it. Why should he?

After all, he's only the President.

Bottom line Steve: Obama made the call to get involved in Libya and he made the call to send in the Navy Seals to get Bin Laden. He also had made finding Bin Laden a priority, whereas the Bush Administration did not. He was responsible for making those decisions--no one else did it for him. And regardless of what Republicans say we do not know that Romney would have made that call. He gets credit in two ways: (1) making the decision to make finding Bin Laden a priority, and (2) making the difficult and risky decision to order the military to violate the sovereignty of our ally, Pakistan. Sounds like leadership to me.

My recollection was that Obama was willing to make cuts (was even willing to talk about entitlements) but Republicans in the House refused to consider tax increases. This happened during the debt ceiling crisis. Prove me wrong.

Doctor Fate wrote:It's actually amusing that you liberals can't make a positive case for your fellow socialist.

hmmm. So four or five people provide examples of ways they think Obama has provided leadership, and all you can do is pick nits?

Dogging Romney tells me nothing about the Man you worship.

if anyone on here is obsessed with Obama, I'm going to venture it's the guy who keeps starting threads about him.

Additional

I just did a quick survey. Of the 220 threads in this forum, DF started 50. Of those, 15 mention Obama by name or are clearly about the current President simply on the thread title. A further 15 mention Obama by name or by title in the first post.

60% of DF's threads, and more than 1 in 8 of all threads since the relaunch were started by him to have a go at Obama in some way.

None other than Rush Limbaugh says the President is a leader:

"The POTUS is going to lead a war on traditional marriage."

I was going to say that I agreed with Steve on the whole leadership thing, but Rush convinced me otherwise. Thank goodness he's finally showing leadership on something that's important! (I know, Biden made him do it.)

steve

He's not actually planning to do anything about it. Why should he?

After all, he's only the President.

He's already taken action to NOT defend the DOMA in the courts.
What else could he do as President ? Other than using his office as a bully pulpit.... he's limited isn't he? (He did end Don't Ask Don't tell with executive order....)

Just wondering Steve... since you are a huge defender of states rights under the Constitution... What to you hasn't he done that he could on this issue?