In a townhall today:

“I can’t give tax cuts to the top 2 percent of Americans” and “lower the deficit at the same time,” the president said during an hour-long town-hall discussion on jobs and the economy on CNBC television from the Newseum in Washington. To give “tax relief primarily to millionaires and billionaires” would be “ an irresponsible thing for us to do,” Obama said. “Those folks are least likely to spend it.”

[. . .]Obama is challenging congressional Republicans to make only middle-class tax cuts permanent. He wants lawmakers to find agreement on initiatives to spur economic growth and hiring and on extension of Bush-era tax cuts for individuals who make less than $200,000 a year and couples earning less than $250,000.

On this issue, the President has been solid. Obviously, there is room for complaint though.

Speaking for me only

The White House has released the transcript of President Obama's remarks at a Greenwich, CT DNC fundraiser. Among his comments, this one is causing ire among progressives on Twitter today:

....Democrats, just congenitally, tend to get -- to see the glass as half empty. (Laughter.) If we get an historic health care bill passed -- oh, well, the public option wasn’t there. If you get the financial reform bill passed -- then, well, I don't know about this particularly derivatives rule, I'm not sure that I'm satisfied with that. And gosh, we haven’t yet brought about world peace and -- (laughter.) I thought that was going to happen quicker. (Laughter.) You know who you are.

Is the White House sending a message in releasing the transcript? What is it? Shouldn't Obama be encouraging progressives to feel included in the Democratic party and get out and vote, rather than belittling their concerns? Or, does he believe they'll come out to vote against Republicans no matter how they're treated by their own, so there's little downside?

Here's Glenn Greenwald and Jane Hamsher's take yesterday on the speech.

President Obama, hampered by political buffoons in the Democratic Congress, is sticking to his guns:

"I am urging the leaders of the other party to stop holding middle class tax cuts hostage and extend this relief to families immediately."

Obama can not say what we all know -- that a large part of his problem right now is found at Dem headquarters in the Congress. Josh Marshall explains:

Republicans “want to hold these middle-class tax cuts hostage until they get an additional tax cut for the wealthiest 2 percent of Americans.” - President Obama

President Obama has it exactly right on the tax cut debate. The question is who are you for?

“We simply can’t afford [the GOP tax cuts for the rich],” [President] Obama said. “It would mean borrowing $700 billion in order to fund these tax cuts for the very wealthiest Americans — $700 billion to give a tax cut worth an average of $100,000 to millionaires and billionaires. And it’s a tax cut economists say would do little to add momentum to our economy.”

He added: “Middle-class families need this relief. These are the Americans who saw their wages and incomes flat-line over the last decade, who’ve seen the costs of everything from health care to college tuition skyrocket and who have been hardest hit by this recession.”

(Emphasis supplied.) The question is, as the President states, who are you for?

Speaking for me only

The President has to stay on the issue of his middle class tax cuts and the GOP attempt to hold them hostage in favor of tax cuts for the rich. And it looks like he will:

The White House has added an event to today's schedule for President Obama. An administration source tells TPM that Obama should be expected to mention the tax cuts debate raging on Capitol Hill.

Stick to your guns Mr. President. He did, hammered the Republicans. Now what to do about the Blue Dogs?

Speaking for me only

CBS News interviews Eric Holder about criticism during his tenure as Attorney General and his decision to try the 9/11 Defendants in federal court.

"No, I'm not tone-deaf. But I understand what the nature of being Attorney General is. I don't have the same latitude that other politicians might have, to put my finger up to the wind and figure out what's going to be popular. So it's not tone deafness. It's a commitment to justice and a commitment to the law. It is not tone deafness," Holder said. "I think that is a criticism that is fundamentally unfair and political in nature," he added.

President Obama's today:

"I’m prepared to work on a bill and sign a bill this month to ensure that middle class families get tax relief.” But he says Republicans are “holding middle-class tax relief hostage” in order to “give tax relief to millionaires and billionaires.”

This is the message. It resonates with me.

Speaking for me only

Here's President Obama on ABC this morning (commercial free), saying Terry Jones should "listen to those better angels" and skip the Quran burning. Obama says it will endanger the troops and serve as a recruiting tool for al Qaida, including suicide bombers in American cities.

He also says "his understanding" is there's no crime if Jones proceeds, other than a citation for public burning. If Obama believes Jones' acts will serve as a recruiting tool for al Qaida, why doesn't he have him charged with conspiring or attempting to to provide material support to terrorists? Or attempt or conspiracy to violate 18 USC Section 2383, Rebellion and Insurrection?

Whoever incites, sets on foot, assists, or engages in any rebellion or insurrection against the authority of the United States or the laws thereof, or gives aid or comfort thereto, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than ten years, or both; and shall be incapable of holding any office under the United States.

Maybe Obama should have Jones arrested on one of these charges and ask for detention, and then dismiss the case and release him on 9/12? [More...]

The President will be speaking momentarily regarding his proposal to provide tax relief to 98% of Americans. The Republicans are opposed to the Obama Tax Cuts, insisting that they must include tax cuts for the wealthy that will cost $700 billion.

I hope to provide a link for viewing as soon as one becomes available.

"Same old Republican ideas, cut taxes for millionaires and corporations." Not enough mention of Bush though for my taste. It's a good speech. Nice Lincoln quote on how the government should do what individuals can't do for themselves.

Really good speech. Where's this guy been? (Though I was told he showed up in Wisconsin last week.)

"I believe we should make tax cuts for the middle class permanent."

"We should not hold tax cuts for the middle class hostage to tax cuts for the wealthy." Ding!

President Obama is killing it. Great speech. This, my friends, is the bully pulpit. Makes me want to post a photo diary . . . text of the best parts of the speech on the flip

NYTimes:

President Obama on Wednesday will make clear that he opposes any compromise that would extend the Bush-era tax cuts for the wealthy beyond this year, officials said, adding a populist twist to an election-season economic package that is otherwise designed to entice support from big businesses and their Republican allies.

If the President sticks to his guns, it will be the crowning progressive achievement of his tenure to date.

Speaking for me only

Earlier today, I wrote about Matt Yglesias' critique of a book he has not read. Yglesias urged that the truth matters. Earlier, Yglesias wrote "the truth is that whatever the failings of the White House’s approach to fiscal policy, they have been out there consistently pushing for somewhat more to be done." Well, it turns out that's not true - from The Hill:

"Some big, new stimulus plan is not in the offing," White House press secretary Robert Gibbs said.


How about a little truth telling about that?

Speaking for me only

Time magazine's false report that Congressional liberal lions called the shots on the stimulus is belied by this January 7, 2009 CNBC interview with then President-elect Obama:

[JOHN] HARWOOD: Tomorrow you're going to give a speech and talk about your economic stimulus package. [. . .] It looks like it's going to be at the high end of your range, around $775 billion.

Pres.-elect OBAMA: That's correct.

HARWOOD: If it's correct that, as your aides have said, the danger is doing too little rather than doing too much [. . .] why stop at $775 billion? Why not go to the $1.2 trillion that some economists have recommended? Is that because you think that the political figure of a trillion dollars is too politically charged to get over? Is it because you think more spending would be pork rather than stimulus? Or do you think you've figured out exactly the right amount of stimulus that's needed?

Pres.-elect OBAMA: [. . .] We've seen ranges from 800 to 1.3 trillion and our attitude was that given the legislative process, if we start towards the low end of that, we'll see how it develops. [. . . MORE . . .]