David Axelrod Tells Tim Pawlenty What He Can Google 9JUN11

BRAVO David Axelrod for throwing it right back in pawlenty's face...the people have the right to know, and tim pawlenty shouldn't be throwing stones from inside his glass house....from HuffPost....
WASHINGTON -- The assumption that President Barack Obama's reelection campaign will be felled by poor economic news is partially premised on the idea that the Republican alternative can offer something both fundamentally different and alluring. And so, while the president's reelection team is a bit away from running on all cylinders, top officials have been scheming to frame the top-tier Republican candidates as compromised on matters like jobs and recovery.
In an interview with The Huffington Post on Wednesday, Obama's adviser David Axelrod offered a fairly sharp criticism of Tim Pawlenty (for this early stage, at least). Axelrod was decidedly un-persuaded by the former Minnesota governor's idea that, if you could find a private company to handle a function via Google, the government shouldn't be involved.
"What he should Google is 'job growth for the last decade,'" said Axelrod, who, despite not officially being involved in the reelection at this point was huddling with top Obama advisers in D.C. on Wednesday. "What he should Google is 'what happened to income for the last decade,' when in many ways the policies that he prescribed were the governing theory. And then he should also Google 'budget deficits in the state of Minnesota.' And what he'll find is, when he left, he left a projected deficit of $6.2 billion, which doesn’t exactly qualify him as an expert on fiscal responsibility."
Pawlenty, whose campaign did not immediately respond to a request for comment, has taken some jabbing for the "Google test." One could, after all, find private militias via Google. Does that mean he doesn't think the government shouldn't fund an army? And what of public universities, from which Pawlenty earned two degrees?
But Axelrod's comments are, perhaps, more significant for what they say about the reelection campaign than what they say about Pawlenty's gimmicky suggestion. Top aides to the president are fond of arguing that elections represent a choice, not a referendum. Certainly, with unemployment expected to remain above 8 percent by November 2012 -- the first time it's been that high during an incumbent's run for a second term -- the idea is to turn the spotlight on to the opposition.
Former Gov. Mitt Romney has already undergone this treatment. He has been criticized for both his tenure in Massachusetts, in which the state ranked 47th out of 50 in job creation, and his time at Bain Capital, whose history of shipping jobs overseas served as a sticking point in his 1994 Senate loss against Ted Kennedy.
Pawlenty registers lower in the national polls than Romney. But his candidacy is growing serious enough that Obama's aides are starting to apply the same standards of scrutiny and push back.

WHITE HOUSE CONSIDERS COMPROMISE ON TAX CUTS FOR THE WEALTHY 11NOV10

THE OBAMA ADMINISTRATION is considering compromising with the gop and their tea-bagger allies on extending the bush era tax cuts for the wealthy for one or two years. BUT they are also feeling the heat from Progressives and working class, middle class and the working poor opposing this extension. There is no good reason for this compromise, the argument for it is based solely on the greed of the wealthy. The rich have received this tax break all through this recession but the gop and tea-baggers can't offer any proof, any numbers showing the number of jobs created by this tax break because it just isn't there....the rich have used this tax break to become richer, NOT to stimulate the economy. The Obama administration and the Democrats in Congress need to stand strong and united in opposing any extension of the bush era tax breaks for the wealthy. E mail President Obama with your opposition to any compromise on this at
http://www.whitehouse.gov/contact
UPDATE: White House denies giving in on Bush tax cuts: The White House is sharply denying the Huffington Post story I noted below claiming that David Axelrod signaled a willingness to accept a temporary extension of all the Bush tax cuts, claiming that their position remains unchanged.
Axelrod emails:

There is not one bit of news here. I simply re-stated what POTUS and Robert have been saying. Our two strong principles are that we need to extend the tax cuts for the middle class, but we can't afford a permanent extension of the tax cuts for the wealthy.

And White House comm director Dan Pfeiffer adds:

The story is overwritten. Nothing has changed from what the President said last week. We believe we need to extend the middle class tax cuts, we cannot afford to borrow 700 billion to pay for extending the tax cuts for the wealthiest Americans, and we are open to compromise and are looking forward to talking to the Congressional leadership next week to discuss how to move forward. Full Stop, period, end of sentence.

The question remains, though, whether the White House will hold fast to Obama's demand last week that the extension of the tax cuts for the middle class remain permanent while extending the high end ones temporarily. The main sticking point is that Republicans won't allow the two categories to be extended for different durations, because that would force them to push for just an extension of the cuts for the rich later.

ORIGINAL POST:
* White House giving in on the Bush tax cuts? The Huffington Post is reporting that David Axelrod signaled in an interview that a temporary extension of all the cuts, including those for the rich, is the only way to prevent taxes from going up on the middle class:

"We have to deal with the world as we find it," Axelrod said during an unusually candid and reflective 90-minute interview in his office, steps away from the Oval Office. "The world of what it takes to get this done."
"There are concerns," he added, that Congress will continue to kick the can down the road in the future by passing temporary extensions for the wealthy time and time again. "But I don't want to trade away security for the middle class in order to make that point."

I'm not sure this amounts to the White House giving in quite yet, but it seems to suggest that's where things are headed. The White House wanted a permanent extension for the middle class cuts and a temporary extension of the high end ones. But Republicans have refused any effort to "decouple" the two categories, insisting on extending both for the same duration, in order to avoid having to push for extending just the tax cuts for the rich later.
Also: Axelrod's acknowledgment that this solution amounts to merely kicking the can down the road is another indication that this would not represent a compromise in any meaningful sense. It would mean doing it the GOP's way for now, on the understanding that we'll have the exact same conversation again in a few years. It would mean temporary capitulation, pure and simple.
Stay tuned for more on this.