President Obama: "This country was founded on compromise."

Q    Where is your line in the sand?

     THE PRESIDENT:  Well, look, I’ve got a whole bunch of lines in the sand.  Not making the tax cuts for the wealthy permanent -- that was a line in the sand.  Making sure that the things that most impact middle-class families and low-income families, that those were preserved -- that was a line in the sand.  I would not have agreed to a deal, which, by the way, some in Congress were talking about, of just a two-year extension on the Bush tax cuts and one year of unemployment insurance, but meanwhile all the other provisions, the Earned Income Tax Credit or other important breaks for middle-class families like the college tax credit, that those had gone away just because they had Obama’s name attached to them instead of Bush’s name attached to them.

     So this notion that somehow we are willing to compromise too much reminds me of the debate that we had during health care.  This is the public option debate all over again.  So I pass a signature piece of legislation where we finally get health care for all Americans, something that Democrats had been fighting for for a hundred years, but because there was a provision in there that they didn’t get that would have affected maybe a couple of million people, even though we got health insurance for 30 million people and the potential for lower     premiums for 100 million people, that somehow that was a sign of weakness and compromise. 

Now, if that’s the standard by which we are measuring success or core principles, then let’s face it, we will never get anything done.  People will have the satisfaction of having a purist position and no victories for the American people.  And we will be able to feel good about ourselves and sanctimonious about how pure our intentions are and how tough we are, and in the meantime, the American people are still seeing themselves not able to get health insurance because of preexisting conditions or not being able to pay their bills because their unemployment insurance ran out.

     That can’t be the measure of how we think about our public service.  That can’t be the measure of what it means to be a Democrat.  This is a big, diverse country.  Not everybody agrees with us.  I know that shocks people.  The New York Times editorial page does not permeate across all of America.  Neither does The Wall Street Journal editorial page.  Most Americans, they’re just trying to figure out how to go about their lives and how can we make sure that our elected officials are looking out for us.  And that means because it’s a big, diverse country and people have a lot of complicated positions, it means that in order to get stuff done, we’re going to compromise.  This is why FDR, when he started Social Security, it only affected widows and orphans.  You did not qualify.  And yet now it is something that really helps a lot of people.  When Medicare was started, it was a small program.  It grew. 

     Under the criteria that you just set out, each of those were betrayals of some abstract ideal.  This country was founded on compromise.  I couldn’t go through the front door at this country’s founding.  And if we were really thinking about ideal positions, we wouldn’t have a union.

     So my job is to make sure that we have a North Star out there.  What is helping the American people live out their lives?  What is giving them more opportunity?  What is growing the economy?  What is making us more competitive?  And at any given juncture, there are going to be times where my preferred option, what I am absolutely positive is right, I can’t get done.

     And so then my question is, does it make sense for me to tack a little bit this way or tack a little bit that way, because I’m keeping my eye on the long term and the long fight -- not my day-to-day news cycle, but where am I going over the long term?

     And I don’t think there’s a single Democrat out there, who if they looked at where we started when I came into office and look at where we are now, would say that somehow we have not moved in the direction that I promised.

     Take a tally.  Look at what I promised during the campaign.  There’s not a single thing that I’ve said that I would do that I have not either done or tried to do.  And if I haven’t gotten it done yet, I’m still trying to do it.

     And so the -- to my Democratic friends, what I’d suggest is, let’s make sure that we understand this is a long game.  This is not a short game.  And to my Republican friends, I would suggest -- I think this is a good agreement, because I know that they’re swallowing some things that they don’t like as well, and I’m looking forward to seeing them on the field of competition over the next two years.

Post your comment

Comments are moderated. See guidelines here.

Comments

  • In addition to my previous post, I would like to add:
    It is certainly the Republicans who must bear the brunt of blame and criticism here. The President's reference to them as "hostage-takers" was entirely appropriate.
    But the President is getting an earful from his base on this capitulation, and I think it's healthy that he does.
    While not discounting the gains working people will make in the short term, (in the form of extension of unemployment benefits and reduction in payroll taxes), these gains will be taken back and then some...when it comes time to cut social spending in order to make up for the $700,000,000,000 in tax cuts for the superrich.

    Posted by Brad, 12/08/2010 1:13pm (14 years ago)

  • If there was ever an opportunity that President Obama missed to make a principled stand, a line in the sand, a real fight...THIS WAS IT. I just don't buy his argument. If he won't stand with his base when the VAST MAJORITY of the country AGREES with us, then when will he?
    I am fully aware that President Obama has accomplished a lot over the past 2 years. I've found myself on many occassions defending him against disgruntled leftists. I can't defend his performance over the last couple weeks...a freeze on federal employee salaries, and now capitulation on tax cuts for billionaires. It's bad policy, AND it's bad politics.

    Posted by Brad, 12/08/2010 1:06pm (14 years ago)

  • " I couldn’t go through the front door at this country’s founding."

    He's actually going to grab THAT as cover for this piece of blatant con artistry? Wrong on so many levels.

    From now on, this will stay in my mind as an example of the shamelessness of elites.

    Posted by Trailer Trash, 12/08/2010 7:56am (14 years ago)

RSS feed for comments on this page | RSS feed for all comments