Obama: It’ll be “messy,” but “I am absolutely confident” we can reach a grand deficit deal
posted at 4:01 pm on October 24, 2012 by Erika Johnsen
Ed already recapped the dustup between Team/President Obama and the editors of the Des Moines Register, among the more influential publications in the battleground state of Iowa (which the president also happens to be barnstorming during his campaign travels today), that finally resulted in campaign officials releasing a transcript of the phone interview to the publication. Why an interview meant to potentially bolster an endorsement from the DMR needed to be secretive in the first place remains a mystery, and I’m not sure what the big deal was since — according to the transcript — the chat seemed like just more of the usual bunk and a jumping-off platform for Obama’s lame-by-consensus last-moment second-term agenda.
Q: Great. Mr. President, we know that John Boehner and the House Republicans have not been easy to work with, and certainly you’ve had some obstacles in the Senate, even though it’s been controlled by the Democrats. At the time, whenever — we talked a lot about, in 2008, hope and change. I’m curious about what you see your role is in terms of changing the tone and the perception that Washington is broken. But particularly, sir, if you were granted a second term, how do you implode this partisan gridlock that has gripped Washington and Congress and basically our entire political structure right now?
THE PRESIDENT: Well, Rick, let me answer you short term and long term. In the short term, the good news is that there’s going to be a forcing mechanism to deal with what is the central ideological argument in Washington right now, and that is: How much government do we have and how do we pay for it?
So when you combine the Bush tax cuts expiring, the sequester in place, the commitment of both myself and my opponent — at least Governor Romney claims that he wants to reduce the deficit — but we’re going to be in a position where I believe in the first six months we are going to solve that big piece of business.
It will probably be messy. It won’t be pleasant. But I am absolutely confident that we can get what is the equivalent of the grand bargain that essentially I’ve been offering to the Republicans for a very long time, which is $2.50 worth of cuts for every dollar in spending, and work to reduce the costs of our health care programs.
If President Obama is reelected and the status of our executive and legislative branches stays unchanged, I’m not sure how or why O’s hitherto unbeknownst leadership skills will magically mean that everything’s okay, but yes, let’s please do talk about how we’re going to pay for all of this. Because, if hiking taxes on the upper echelons of earners is what’s supposed to make this all possible, er… via the WSJ:
Perhaps you’ve heard that the President wants to raise taxes on the top 2% of U.S. taxpayers. If you haven’t, well, the pamphlet mentions that once or twice. Left unsaid is that this plan increases revenue only between $50 billion and $80 billion a year, a rounding error in the $1 trillion-plus deficit era. Mr. Obama does claim to have a plan to reduce the gap by $4 trillion over the next decade. Mostly this comes from unwinding the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan that are already being unwound and assorted budget gimmicks.
But what about a grand budget bargain? Won’t that be Mr. Obama’s crowning second-term achievement? The pamphlet’s sections on health care and entitlements show that his real budget priority is to preserve all of the government he expanded in the first term.
Also of note in the DMR interview, from the president:
The second thing I’m confident we’ll get done next year is immigration reform. And since this is off the record, I will just be very blunt. Should I win a second term, a big reason I will win a second term is because the Republican nominee and the Republican Party have so alienated the fastest-growing demographic group in the country, the Latino community. And this is a relatively new phenomenon. George Bush and Karl Rove were smart enough to understand the changing nature of America. And so I am fairly confident that they’re going to have a deep interest in getting that done. And I want to get it done because it’s the right thing to do and I’ve cared about this ever since I ran back in 2008.
Well, that’s not much of a secret, either — John McCain did do better with Latinos generally, New Mexico, etcetera in 2008, but I think Obama is winning by default on this one rather than being a grand champion. He somehow never managed to make an issue out of immigration reform during the foreign policy debate, and in an interview with Univision earlier this fall, he told the audience that his “biggest failure” was not passing immigration reform earlier in his presidency… when he was unimpeded by a split Congress.
Related Posts:
Breaking on Hot Air


Menendez – Looks like we don’t have the votes for that immigration bill after all

America in decline – Bars selling rubbing alcohol as “scotch”






Blowback
Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.
Trackbacks/Pings
Trackback URL
Comments
Preach it brother. The Founders were no dummies. They understand that leaving things up to man would ultimately lead to disaster. But we have moved so far from the original meaning of the Constitution that we have allowed man to rule over us with the predictable results.
NotCoach on May 24, 2013 at 6:45 PM
Better watch who you call or text or email now, Erika. And, stay off those adult websites, by all means. Big Brother’s awatchin’. ;-)
TXUS on May 24, 2013 at 6:52 PM
Whether he was involved in these scandals from the beginning or not, one thing that is certain: his subsequent behavior in protecting, lying, stalling, etc makes Barack Obama the direct owner of them.
Rich H on May 24, 2013 at 6:54 PM
Your problem, Erika, is that you are a reasonable person looking at the issue in a reasonable way. Unfortunately, there is a critical mass of people who are not reasonable and believe that the problem is that the government is not big enough and is not spending enough money.
catsandbooks on May 24, 2013 at 6:55 PM
I always wondered how Germany fell for Nazism in the 30s. How could they be so stupid?
Ouch.
faraway on May 24, 2013 at 6:55 PM
Bobby, I love ya man! I voted for you when you first ran for Congress. But you’re wrong here. It isn’t a lack of trust in the American people it is contempt for the American people. An attitude that the American public isn’t intelligent enough to know what is good for them.
Happy Nomad on May 24, 2013 at 7:01 PM
The Big Crime Syndicate of Obama should be the biggest loser.
VorDaj on May 24, 2013 at 7:11 PM
Good stuff Bobby. Keep honing that message. Hoping for big things from him in 2016.
can_con on May 24, 2013 at 7:11 PM
Bobby must have been listening to Rush this week, because he said much the same thing: trying to pin it on Obama is not working; instead, it all shows the failure of liberalism and big government writ large.
This is it exactly. Contempt. These government types are those who wouldn’t bat an eye to hustle us all off to “reeducation camps.”
PatriotGal2257 on May 24, 2013 at 7:13 PM
Even small government would be bad if run by criminals. Jindal seems to have tunnel vision.
VorDaj on May 24, 2013 at 7:13 PM
Jindal seems to be implicitly saying that government is so big it got out of Obama’s control. Bull.
VorDaj on May 24, 2013 at 7:17 PM
I’ll take a small government run by criminals any day over the bloated and corrupt mess we have now.
NotCoach on May 24, 2013 at 7:18 PM
Then they are both simply Obama apologists.
VorDaj on May 24, 2013 at 7:20 PM
And take being shot with a .22 over being shot with a 30.06. I prefer neither.
VorDaj on May 24, 2013 at 7:22 PM
Obama is a much bigger target than big government. Only fools can not see this.
VorDaj on May 24, 2013 at 7:24 PM
I thought Jindal was just saying we needed to stop arguing about big government because it was a loser? Pfft.
echosyst on May 24, 2013 at 7:27 PM
We will always have big government. Even under Reagan we had big government. He didn’t/couldn’t even get rid of the Dept of “Education”. Now is not the time to turn all batteries at big government. At least 5 of 6 guns should be aimed and firing at Obama. If Limbaugh and Jindal are not up to the task, they should get the hell out of the way.
VorDaj on May 24, 2013 at 7:29 PM
…you’re not faraway at all!…you’re right on!
KOOLAID2 on May 24, 2013 at 7:30 PM
VorDaj, saying that Rush n Jindal should “step aside” simply becuase they dont go far enough, INHO, isn’t reason enough. Besides who else out there do you think has the platform or the common sense governance to at least get ‘our’ side of the conversation out there, esepcially to those that we’d like to convince? If you got a candidate in mind, im sure we could find a few holes in *thier* Geopolitical theory also.
BlaxPac on May 24, 2013 at 7:46 PM
I won’t go into details about my 44 years Military and Civilian experience with Viet Nam and Vietnamese and Vietnamese-American Society. I do agree that the Democrats, who were responsible for getting into that war and after killing a few million S E Asians and including non combat deaths over 100,000 Americans, betrayed our Vietnamese and Cambodian allies and sabotaged the South Vietnamese War effort insuring the defeat of South Viet Nam in 1974 and 1975. Yes, I was there at that time.
That said, over the last 30 years the current Vietnamese has been struggling to dismantle what was a very authoritarian Communist Government. From my first post War visit in 1995 till now(I’ve retired here), Viet Nam has made astonishing progress in dismantling the old regime. Except for Reagan, we Americans have mostly gone the other way.
Think about it.
Linh_My on May 24, 2013 at 7:53 PM
False equivalency. A better one is a million .22s vs. 1 30.06. I’ll take my chances with the single 30.06. Not only that we can better respond to and destroy the single 30.06.
NotCoach on May 24, 2013 at 7:54 PM
and that was before it really got entrenched—5-6 years into it.
arnold ziffel on May 24, 2013 at 7:55 PM
test
RickB on May 24, 2013 at 8:43 PM
F. Hayak wrote in his book “The Road To Serfdom” that Hitler was voted into power by large numbers of “docile and gullible” people who believed the lies (propaganda)told by Hitler and his elites.
Sound familiar? History repeats.
nofreelunch on May 24, 2013 at 11:02 PM
Lord have mercy, here I am defending or explaining Germans.
Adolph Hitler never got a clear majority in an election. He sorta grabbed power by exploiting deals, tricks, vacuums and technicalities. That aspect may now in replay before us.
Howover, I never heard of any elite behind him.
He was a thug, soldier and street fighter.
Unless OFA takes to the streets and Obama starts looking to build a vengeful, word dominating America, the two have little in common except a love of government power.
IlikedAUH2O on May 25, 2013 at 12:03 AM
Well that in itself, and there are other things, is an awful lot.
VorDaj on May 25, 2013 at 1:33 AM
You know. My maid understands this may be one of the most dangerous, egregious, undermining of The Constitution since the Japanese internment. But neither Congress, The Senate, nor Obama seem to get it. This can destroy the nation.
pat on May 25, 2013 at 2:16 AM
Well, they did vote for Øbama – twice. Maybe there’s something to that. :)
The last I checked, Øbama is not up for reelection. We certainly need to pound him but also those who think like him (you know, big govt types).
Odysseus on May 25, 2013 at 7:46 AM
Lots of blah, blah, blah…because in the back of the Republican’s mind is that some day they will be back in the White House and they will do everything Obama is doing. Any criticism will be met with “Obama did the same thing and no one cared, so we can do it, too.”
albill on May 25, 2013 at 8:58 AM
Beyond that, Obama has benefited from a lot of unethical behavior by liberals in general (and in government specifically). He is more post turtle than mastermind. His culpability is probably mostly in implicitly endorsing this kind of behavior in his speeches. He has a history of turning a blind eye to what others do to win his elections for him.
Count to 10 on May 25, 2013 at 9:07 AM
Bobby “BJ” Jindal: blah, blah, blah, big government is bad, blah, blah, blah, American flag, blah, blah, blah, Obama sucks, blah, blah, blah, the people, blah, blah, blah. This guy NEVER says anything new. Suck it, BJ.
HiJack on May 25, 2013 at 9:43 AM
Absolutely, positively. We can bank on it.
HiJack on May 25, 2013 at 9:45 AM
You’re missing the point Erika Johnsen: Takers gotta take. They don’t need no ‘compelling reason’ – as long as they’re on the receiving end. It’s why they vote democrat.
locomotivebreath1901 on May 25, 2013 at 9:51 AM
People are so afraid of calling Obama Cheat, liar, crook or whatever name that’s appropriate. If people had been this kind to Richard Nixon his face would be on Mt. Rushmore by now.
Herb on May 25, 2013 at 9:53 AM
Calling this government paternalistic is cowardly. This government is authoritarian and moving toward tyrannical.
The media are not in bed with the left; they are the left. They are the same people.
InterestedObserver on May 25, 2013 at 10:15 AM
We’ve killed 55,000,000 of our children.
We’re not much better than the Nazis.
itsnotaboutme on May 25, 2013 at 3:59 PM