The Sad And The Beautiful

by digby

This is embarrassing. He didn't die. He just had to withdraw from a cabinet appointment. Geez:

In a stunning turn of events, former Senate Majority Leader Tom Daschle (D-S.D.) on Tuesday withdrew his nomination to be President Obama’s secretary of Health and Human Services.

The news shocked Democratic senators, who had publicly expressed confidence on Monday that Daschle’s nomination would not be significantly impeded by his failure to pay about $140,000 in back taxes.

Sen. Tom Harkin (D-Iowa) had tears in his eyes as he tried to speak to reporters on Tuesday afternoon. He said the former majority leader called him to give him a heads-up about the withdrawal, which Harkin did not believe was necessary.

“I’m emotionally distraught,” Harkin said. “I’m just too emotionally upset right now to talk about it.”


At least they didn't blame liberal bloggers. This time it was the New York Times' fault.

But this is good stuff from the Prez. More like it, please:

PRESIDENT OBAMA: Well, Charlie, if you take a look at the bill, the fact is, there are no earmarks in this bill, which, by the way, some of the critics can't claim for legislation they've voted for over the last eight years. There's no earmarks in it. We've made sure that there aren't individual pork projects in there.

The criticisms have generally been around some policy initiatives that were placed in the bill that I think are actually good policy, but some people may say is not going to actually stimulate jobs quickly enough. I think that there's legitimate room for working through those issues over the next several weeks to make sure that we get the best possible bill. But here's the thing that I think we have to understand. The economy is in desperate straits. What I won't do is adopt the same economic theories that helped land us in the worst economy since the Great Depression. What I will do is work with anybody of good faith to make sure that we can come up with the best possible package to not only create jobs and provide support to families, but also to lay the groundwork for long-term economic growth.

CHARLES GIBSON: CBO says only 25 percent of this bill would get to people within a year. Republicans now say it needs to be more stimulative, there needs to be more money on infrastructure, there needs to be more tax cuts, there needs to be more help for homeowners, maybe even guaranteeing 4, 4.5 percent mortgages.

Would you accept those things?

PRESIDENT OBAMA: Well, keep in mind, for example, some want to put more infrastructure in the bill, and they're also complaining that it doesn't spin out fast enough. In some cases, there are contradictions there. I mean, we may want to spend on a whole bunch of great infrastructure, but it may take seven or eight years to do it, in which case we're vulnerable for the criticism that it's not spinning out fast enough. I think that in a package of this sort, that has to go to Congress with 535 opinions, at least, then there's going to be some give and take.

What I've said is that any good idea thrown out there to improve this legislation I'm for. But I want to be absolutely clear here that the overwhelming bulk of the package is sound, is designed to put people back to work, help states that are in desperate straits, help families who are losing jobs and health care, and it's designed to make sure that we've got green energy jobs for the future. In fact, most of the programs that have been criticized as part of this package amount to less than one percent of the overall package. And it makes for good copy, but here's the thing -- we can't afford to play the usual politics at a time when the economy continues to worsen.

CHARLES GIBSON: And talking of politics, you have said you want bipartisanship in this bill, you want Republican support. You didn't get any in the House, and the leader of the House, the speaker of the House, said, well, yes, we wrote the bill and, yes, we won the election.

Is that kind of an in-your-face trash-talking to the Republicans?

PRESIDENT OBAMA: Well, I think what Speaker Pelosi also said was that she wanted to sit down with them and talk to them and, in fact, included some of their ideas in the package. I mean, keep in mind, when I first released the framework for our plan, we were complimented by the Republicans for the fact that about $300 billion of the package was in the form of tax cuts. I was criticized by members of my own party.

Now, that hasn't changed much. The only thing that's changed is the politics of it. And I'm less concerned about bipartisanship for bipartisanship's sake. I'm interested in solving the problem for the American people as quickly as possible. And I think that we have an obligation to make sure this money is spent wisely. I want this thing to move through the Senate. I want the House and the Senate bills to be reconciled.

We can scrub it of any problems that are in there. But what I don't want to do is to delay creating jobs for people who are losing work, providing families some direct relief in the form of middle class tax cuts, in the form of tax breaks for small businesses, and I want to make sure that we are investing this money in a way that's going to not just put people back to work right now, but will continue to pay high dividends in the future.


He needs to keep making that case or else the screeching cacophony of lies the Republicans are spewing into the ether will continue to be the only thing the people hear.

(It's also sadly important that he exert his authority. The GOP is busily turning him into a "very nice young man with good intentions" which is another way of saying he's a wimp. What else is new?)


.