–Here is an example of an “Obama compromise”

Mitchell’s laws: To survive, a monetarily non-sovereign government must have a positive balance of payments. Economic austerity causes civil disorder. Reduced money growth cannot increase economic growth. Those, who do not understand the differences between Monetary Sovereignty and monetary non-sovereignty, do not understand economics.

An “Obama compromise” is when you give the other person everything he demands, but pretend it either is meaningless or is something you always wanted. Here’s a classic example:

Washington Post:
News Alert: Obama to address joint session of Congress on Sept. 8
August 31, 2011 9:36:20 PM

President Obama will address a joint session of Congress on Sept. 8 to lay out his plan for jobs and the economy, the White House announced Wednesday night. The date is one day later than the president requested earlier Wednesday, but that date conflicted with a scheduled debate of Republican presidential candidates, drawing objections from GOP lawmakers. House Speaker John A. Boehner responded by suggesting that Obama come to Capitol Hill on Thursday night, a date that now puts the president up against the first game of the NFL season.

Good luck, Mr. President, getting a huge, national audience vs. the NFL opener. But at least the Tea/Republicans have what they demanded. So that’s nice.

Rodger Malcolm Mitchell

No nation can tax itself into prosperity, nor grow without money growth. Monetary Sovereignty: Cutting federal deficits to grow the economy is like applying leeches to cure anemia. The key equation in economics: Federal Deficits – Net Imports = Net Private Savings


8 thoughts on “–Here is an example of an “Obama compromise”

  1. If you’re like absolutely nobody, you’re really excited about Obama’s Annual Big-Time Jobs Speech next week. He’s been in office for over 31 months, and he just got done with yet another vacation, so of course the only date and time when he could possibly give his nation-saving speech before a joint session of Congress is… during the next GOP debate on Sept. 7. Wow, what an amazing coincidence! This amateurish attempt at gamesmanship went about as well as everything else has been going for Obama lately.


  2. So far, a failed presidency. The one big thing that was done during his presidency — the expanded medical insurance plan — was pushed through by the Democrats, essentially without his help. And because most of the benefits don’t begin until 2014, few people understand what it does.

    As a leader, he makes a great follower.

    Rodger Malcolm Mitchell


  3. I try to imagine what LBJ would have done to the likes of the current Tea/Republican leadership or someone like Boehner? Compromise is not a word that comes to mind.


  4. Okay, I’m as disappointed as anyone here. But, please get off the vacation bit. Other recent presidents have taken much more, and besides, they need it. I don’t want my president getting burned out, I want him in top form. (I know, the “top” so far has been pretty poor, that’s not the point.) There are only four other men alive who know exactly how hard that job is.


  5. John I would certainly agree with you if all I said was Obama takes too much vaca. But really the point was that he goes on vaca AND then pretends the only time he can give this allegedly important speech (not important enough to put in front of or cut short vaca I guess) on the same evening as the GOP debate. Juvenile and transparent. As a matter of political optics I also think it is poor form to spend a month crucifying jet owners and the wealthy and then go and jet off two Martha’s Vineyard. Perhaps something more low key like Camp David would have made more sense politically. That would have been my advice if I was advising him.


    1. Matt — And I agree that the timing of his speech was pure politics and that Camp David would probably have been a better choice this summer. Also, I’ve always thought his complaining about jet owners was really poor form. If I remember correctly what I read somewhere, it’s not the owners who get the tax benefit he’s referring to, it’s the manufacturers. A better target, imho, would be the bankers. Oh, right, that’s his buddies. 🙂


  6. Another Obama compromise:

    “President Obama abruptly pulled back proposed new national smog standards Friday morning, overruling the Environmental Protection Agency’s efforts to compel states and communities nationwide to reduce local air pollution in the coming years or face federal penalties.”

    The beat goes on.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s