First off: Tuesday was a sad day; Elizabeth Edwards passed away after fighting breast cancer for six years. When her estranged husband got into the race for vice president in 2004, it quickly became apparent where the real brains in the family resided. John Edwards ain’t no dummy, but his wife Elizabeth, she showed herself to be the real wit and struggled at times not to overshadow her husband, the one who was supposed to be in the spotlight.
She didn’t go quietly into the night when it was revealed her husband had an affair with a campaign staffer, a videographer. And then when we learned a child was the result of that relationship, she handled that with such grace, even people on the other side of the political spectrum applauded her — and still do.
Like the wife of South Carolina governor Mark Sanford, Jenny. How they both handled their husbands’ infidelities are profiles in grace, courage and dignity.
We always wonder why the smartest of us, regardless of political affiliation, don’t run for public office, and Elizabeth Edwards was really the smart one on the campaign trails of 2004 and 2008. President Barack Obama is definitely a smart guy, but Elizabeth Edwards, her smile on the campaign trail during the 2008 Democratic primaries told the tale.
Elizabeth Edwards now rests with the angels, as the saying goes. If the past is precedent, Elizabeth Edwards will be forgotten by most people, myself included, as we busy ourselves with our lives and aspirations. Those closest to her though will always remember Elizabeth, as all of us remember our family and friends now deceased. But once in a while, when a topic like breast cancer makes it into the news again, or the wife of a political figure goes through the embarrassing moment of learning her husband had or is having an affair, the name of Elizabeth Edwards — and her example of how to deal with it — will resurface.
•••• •••• •••• •••• •••• •••• •••• •••• ••••
The other big news of Tuesday was the president’s press conference, in which he blasted the critics in his own party. Not so much the news that the president agreed to Republican demands over the tax cuts for the wealthiest Americans. Those have been extended another two years, which really means they will be with us forever, or until the Democrats get another solid majority in both Houses of Congress.
We, the president’s base, have been intolerant and expect too much; this was the health care debate all over again. Back when we were upset when proponents of single payer health care were not even allowed, let alone invited, into the room when negotiations began on the health care bill. Like when were up in arms when the public option was dropped from the bill.
The Republicans wanted the tax cuts for the wealthiest, unfunded. But, for extended unemployment benefits for those not working, those benefits had to be paid for, according to the same Republicans. Even though every economic study has shown that unemployment benefits stimulate the economy and tax cuts — especially for the wealthiest among us —
never stimulate the economy.
But benefits for the “99’s” have not been extended. The “99’s” are those people who have been collecting unemployment for 99 weeks and will lose their benefits once they run out. They will drop off the unemployment rolls and eventually will stop being counted in unemployment figures.

In fact, tax cuts have never paid for themselves with increased tax revenue from an increase in consumer consumption. When President Reagan first floated this fallacy nearly 30 years ago, most Americans rallied around the new president and his budget guru, David Stockman. And then the president had to take Stockman to the woodshed and give him a spanking for getting real about the president’s economic policy.
After resigning from his post as the Director of the Office of Management and Budget, Stockman wrote a book on why President Reagan’s economic policy — Stockman’s economic policy — was a failure:
The Triumph of Politics: Why the Reagan Revolution Failed.
So, this president has given in to Republicans over tax cuts for the wealthiest to save the Middle Class. And he chastised all the Democrats and progressives — I prefer the label “liberal” — that opposed this compromise.
But he also did something else during that press conference that made me smile and forgive his transgressions. He referred to those of us
not in the top two percent as hostages, held hostage by the Republicans. Yeah, as we jump up and down about the president giving in to the Republicans and then taking us to the woodshed (publicly) in his press conference, the president also sent his first shot across the bow of the 2012 elections. You gotta smile; the president now has not only a sound bite, but also a political slogan.

The Republicans are holding the Middle Class hostage. Remember that in the next two years as the president does battle over Don’t Ask Don’t Tell and further extensions of unemployment benefits, over the inevitable attacks on Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid. As the deficit continues to grow as a result of extending the Bush tax cuts, Republicans will gnash their teeth over what
they have wrought and their answer, as usual, will be to end Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid. And repeal the health care bill.
Okay, I’m ready to give President Obama the benefit of the doubt. He’s looking down the road and beginning to frame the debate for the next two years, not just to win another presidential election, but also to further his own social agenda and principles.
As for the “99ers,” that is up to Congressional Democrats to fix; right now they are reacting to the president’s compromise, but the practical thing to do: fix the president’s compromise, especially for unemployment benefits. And then follow the president’s lead: remind their constituents it was the Republicans who held we Americans hostage to increase the national debt with a tax cut for the richest two percent.
Remind Americans who the hostage takers are in this government and be sure to put two faces in particular on that issue: Mitch McConnell and John Boehner. And then for each individual race for Congress, be it the House of Representatives or the Senate, put the incumbent Republican’s face on that issue.