GRRRRRRR..."Millions protesting Social Security plan"...."The President wants to see more of that"

[Armstead]

Morning Joe -- the repository for Smug Beltway/NY Conventional Wisdom -- just had a brief discussion about the opposition to President Obama's Dog Food For Seniors Plan for Social Security.

David Gregory, who was probably driven there in his company limo -- said "That kind of opposition from The left is what the President wants to see more of to show republicans he is serious."

The well-heeled panel basically concurred.

I hope they are wrong in saying that the president WANTS to see the Awful Left protesting his proposal.

But either way, it is just the kind of compassion-free conventional wisdom from the media and politicians that makes one want to vomit.

[liberal N proud]

1. More right wing twisted logic

How would the Presidents own supporters protesting him show that he is serious? It makes no sense.

[BumRushDaShow]

2. "How would the Presidents own supporters protesting him show that he is serious?"

Because he has said time and time and time again - "YOU are the change".

If rethugs keep demanding over and over and over that "the people" want "entitlement reform", then the people have to get riled up enough to say "ABSOLUTELY NOT" so that ALL can hear it - through sheer volume. And THAT is what is happening. By proposing it, we are seeing the collective YELL to the Lyin' Ryans and Turtle McConnell's of the world that says "NO. THAT is NOT what the people want".

Yet sadly here on DU, alot of the hollering has been personal against the President rather than against the lunatics of the GOP which it should be directed to. I.e., the GOP who keeps insisting the most important things are the "deficit, debt, entitlement cuts, vouchers, privatization".

[Armstead]

11. Um, you don't gain support by deliberatly angering supporters.

[BumRushDaShow]

16. The end result of people demanding action for what they DO want worked, didn't it? n/t

[Armstead]

38. Strange way to go about it

And it will not have "worked" if Obama actually puts his name and support behind this chained-CPI plan.....Unless that's what he really wants.

[randome]

12. You said it!

[tularetom]

28. I'm not smart enough to understand 12 dimensional chess so I take these statements at face value

If the President makes an offer to cut SS benefits, I tend to believe that he has offered to cut SS benefits, not that he has pulled some slick maneuver to expose republicans for the shitheels they are. For somebody to actually believe he deliberately made this proposal to stir up a storm of outrage is ridiculous even for a moran like David Gregory.

Of course people on DU are pissed at the President. The reason I bitch when Obama does something like this is that I expect better from him. The republicans? Screw em that's what I expect from them.

[Armstead]

41. Slight clarification

Gregory was not saying Obama is trying to show up Republicans as shitheels.

He was saying that if "The Left" is complaining, then Obama can prove to the GOP that he is willing to stand up to his "base" and that his proposal is "serious" and they can come up with some kind of grand compromise.

Someone referred to it as a Sista Solja moment for Obama.

[tularetom]

53. Wow, if anything that's even worse

"Sister Soljah" was a cheap political stunt and the fact that it worked does not make it the right thing to do. And to imply that Obama has played the same kind of sleazy trick in order to prove to the republicans that he isn't some wild eyed socialist radical is beneath him. Social Security should not be a pawn in his attempt to prove to his opponents that he is a "moderate".

In fact he shouldn't have to prove it at all. He most definitely is a moderate. I'm having trouble understanding who he thinks of as his "base". It isn't real actual Democrats and it isn't the poor or elderly.

The only reason he is labeled a "socialist" is because of the obsession of the media to portray every issue as "left vs. right", or "red states vs. Blue states". He's black, he's from Chicago and he's a Democrat so he must be a "liberal".

[Eleanors38]

62. Good stuff. Behind the political gyrations & speculations is a fundamental truth...

The Democratic Party, President Obama, MSM want NOTHING to do with the "left," except as it serves as a gas giant for political special FX. I think these elites know that the scattered remnants of FDR/LBJ liberal activists have no where to go and no means to define themselves, and they use the "left" accordingly.

Otherwise, these elites don't want us.

[upaloopa]

30. You are wrong. Repubs by blocking the rasing

of taxes are the ones preventing the S S reform and sadly you blame DUers for standing up for what is right.

[djean111]

3. It shows them that Obama doesn't give a shit about the left, and is willing to cut "entitlements".

Since Obama has so kindly STARTED negotiations with chained CPI, imagine the depths the GOP can push him to, willingly, in closed door negotiations.
All the convoluted logic in the world, on both sides, can't change the fact that voters will see and hear that the Democrats want to cut Social Security. They don't care about history, they won't care what any other president did. This is perfect fodder for sound bites and banners and t shirts. All the twisting and turning on an internet board won't change the impact of Obama offering chained CPI.
Right wing twisted logic works on an awful lot of voters; right wing twisted logic doesn't care if you call it names.
And after all, lying is part of campaigning, right? Else we wouldn't have so many examples of Obama saying he wouldn't cut entitlements.
I guess the next act in this sad little drama is to be condescendingly told how cutting social security is necessary to save it, since raising the cap evidently is Obama's third rail, seasoned with a dash of "well, it will be all good if you live to be 85".

[Armstead]

10. Because his supporters are leftist jerks, I guess.

[Myrina]

39. It shows that he is serious about 'the Grand Bargain' and working with the GOP ...

... not that he's serious about keeping his campaign promises or protecting the working class.

[sabrina 1]

44. Because, as the OP says, he wants to show the bullies on the Right that he doesn't care about his

own base, he wants to show them he is willing to completely ignore them, he wants them to know how 'serious' he is about cutting SS benefits so they will see him as an ally, willing to compromise, not like some lefty lunatic who won't take the political risk of angering Democrats.

I believe he has commented on this before, how willing he is to go against the 'Professional Left'. Iow, he believes that when the Left is angry with him, it is proof of how much he wants to give them something they really, really want.

[BeyondGeography]

4. And you play right along with your Dog Food for Seniors nonsense

The "Awful Left" is only a prop for the President when it goes overboard. Until we know more about the protections for the most vulnerable and the oldest that have been promised as part of CCPI, a policy step that will only be taken if the Republicans agree to a balanced approach on deficit reduction and should take Medicare and Medicaid cuts off the table btw, people who are screaming about pet food and starvation are making themselves into useful fodder for the same Beltway Bozos they despise.

[MannyGoldstein]

6. We know what the "protections" are.

Google 'em. They suck, they're basically a Styrofoam cup thrown to a drowning victim instead of a life preserver, and then only the victim has been swallowing water and is near death.

But it doesn't matter anyway - not a penny of earned benefits should be touched.

[BeyondGeography]

7. I missed that article

"Obama to Throw Styrofoam Cup to Drowning Elders." Do you have a link?

[caseymoz]

55. Here:

http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/political-animal-a/2013_04/mitigating_the_damage_on_chain044072.php

For more, put "chained CPI, protections" into Google.

BTW, if protections are aimed at the neediest, what's protecting the rest depending on SS funds from being pushed down into the "neediest" category? If it "protects" the neediest, I'm not interested if its also going to swell their ranks.

I gave to Obama twice out of my disability funds. That was money I couldn't afford to give. I feel like I was taken by a grifter.

[frylock]

65. here's the link..

http://www.thefreedictionary.com/rhetorical+device

[Armstead]

14. The "awful left" incljudes a lot of reasonable people who only go overboard when pushed too far

The President floated a plan, as politicians do, to test the waters.

If enough people don't believe that the door should be opened to cutting SS benefits and then complain about it, that is NOT going overboard.

I sorta thought petitions, rallies, phone calls, etc. is the way representative government is supposed to work. Maybe I'm mistaken.

And if you think this is going to take further Medicaid and Medicare cuts off the table I've got a bridge to sell you.

[deutsey]

17. You mean, we're not just supposed to just cast a ballot

every so often before returning to our regularly programmed lives?

[Armstead]

21. What really gets annoying is when it seems they look at protesting is part of the program

It's like they've become so manipulative that they want us to complain as part of shoving through the crap people don't want.

I hate thinking like that, but the machinations of the bastids, especially the ones who claim to represent us, makes one very cynical at times.

[deutsey]

22. I can definitely dig it.

[Nay]

35. Exactly -- especially when our protests are used to show Pubs that "lefties" don't like the

CPI, so Obama is on the Pubs' side in making hard choices. It sorta destroys that whole Obama supporter's phrase of "make him do it!", doesn't it? If he's just using our protests to prove a point to Pubs and not to actually find out what we, his constituents want, and then craft legislation to represent our desires, then what the fuck is the point of any of this shit? No wonder half the population doesn't vote. I'm nearly there myself.

[Myrina]

40. ^^ Nay, for the win ^^

[Armstead]

43. Yep the one who claims to be trying to reduce cynicism is actively promoting it

[Liberalynn]

63. Not only are they betraying us, they are mocking us as they do it.

[bread_and_roses]

19. Putting SS "on the table" at ALL is a betrayal, no matter how it's spun.

There should not have to be "protections" for the vulnerable! And there are enormous pitfalls to turning SS into any sort of "means-tested" program. Look at what our good Dem President did to "welfare" for an example. And what is this "balanced approach to deficit reduction" craziness that you are dutifully repeating? Our "deficit" is NOT the problem: jobs, inequality, poverty - those are problems - which is what the POTUS should be saying. Instead he mouths the Right-wing mantra that is nothing but a smoke-screen for handing more power and wealth to the Banksters and other assorted Oligarchs.

[Armstead]

23. Bingo

[BeyondGeography]

33. It's already means tested

30% pay a tax on their benefits and the ratio of benefits to earnings decreases as income rises. The fact that it is means tested should open the door to raising the cap, btw, which would help us avoid CCPI. If you read my post, my main point is cries about cat food/pet food/starvation are unwarranted and counterproductive.

As for me being a mouthpiece for oligarchs, if you're for cutting defense and raising taxes on the wealthy, you're for a balanced approach to deficit reduction, too.

[Armstead]

47. If a republican wewre proposing this, I think a lot of people would.....

be talking about cat food and worse, with no fear of contradiction from other DUers.

yes its hyperbole, but not too far from reality if people who are skimping by have to skimp harder because of this.

[upaloopa]

31. We don't need protections because there is no need for

SS reform. You are a fool for saying lets take the hit because maybe it won't hurt too bad.

[sabrina 1]

50. Everyone dependent on SS is vulnerable. But that isn't the only problem with a Democratic president

using the SS as a bargaining chip with Republicans. He has no right to touch that fund, to play games with it, chess, checkers or any other kind of game. THAT is the PEOPLE'S Fund. It is not part of the Federal Government's Fund. Do you understand this at all? Republicans have always wanted to rob that fund to pay for their wars and Wall St. gambling. He has no right to hand any part of it, no matter how tiny a part. We don't need him to 'protect the most vulnerable since the Program itself does that and has done very nicely for decades.

The only reason he needs to say that is because he has now made the most vulnerable even more vulnerable. Like someone handing the neighborhood bullies their children's lunch money so they will be nice to them.

This is outrageous, the door opened by a Democrat to the SS fund. And worse, the Republican lie that SS had anything to do with the deficit confirmed by a Democrat.

Please stop trying to make excuses for this, there are none, not a single excuse. Democrats protect SS from the thieves on the Right. That is one of the main reasons who people are Democrats.

This isn't chess, it isn't 'politics', is a betrayal of all those who helped him get elected.

[tularetom]

67. I've shut up for 4+ years when I was told Obama knows what he's doing

And I finally agree - he knows exactly what he's doing. He believes the deficit is more important than jobs. He believes that there is a free market solution to any economic problem and he believes that the some creditors (China) are more important than others (the SS trust fund).

He inherited an awful situation. It called for drastic solutions but what we've gotten is a mishmash of partial band aid type fixes. The people who caused this mess no longer bitch about Obama so I have to believe that Wall Street is happy with him. That in itself should alarm the rest of us.

[MannyGoldstein]

5. I'm a PROUD member of the Fucking Retarded wing of our party

And I don't care who blathers about my being a useful idiot. I'm just trying to do the right thing.

[djean111]

8. + .92 (let's get used to chained cpi)

[Glitterati]

9. +1000

Fucking Retard chiming in!

[kurtzapril4]

49. +1001

Another fucking retard on board!

[Downwinder]

13. What is it going to take to bury the SS issue?

Are we like Tunisia and will have to have a video taped self immolation?

[Glitterati]

15. Oh, that's easy

It's going to take electing representatives that aren't Blue Dogs.

It's going to take us "fucking retards" getting out there and replacing every Blue Dog with a progressive candidate.

It's going to take US mounting a primary against any Democrat who DARES to vote for this shit.

[LWolf]

20. +1000 nt

[Janecita]

25. Please

Americans have the attention span of a gnat! This is all going to be forgotten in a week. We don't go on the streets to protest because when we do it, the corp owned media calls us criminals. Our country is getting worst, but we are either too lazy or too tired to get off our asses and do anything about it!

[ProfessionalLeftist]

18. 2.4 million people is not "the left"

It's a big damn chunk of America and that's ONLY the people who signed petitions. MOST AMERICANS - Repuke and Dem - don't want SS cuts. It's not a "lefty" thing.

[Tom Rinaldo]

26. Wothy of emphasis: 2.4 million signatures in a few days represent way more than 2.4 million people

I know that you made that point, but i wanted to put it in the subject line (and kick your thread). Polling has long shown that large majorities of Americans OPPOSE cutting Social Security and Medicare benefits and would even rather see taxes raised if need be to maintain them.

[ProfessionalLeftist]

29. +1 - Perfectly elaborated on the point. Thank you!

[on point]

24. Usually the PTB find out too late that the PEOPLE are serious only when the guillotines arrive

Just saying that history shows when the elite are this out of touch, this exploitive and dismissive, they realize the population is serious only when it is too late for that governing structure to survive and everyone ends up much worse off, but the elite especially.

Only then do they say 'what happened, how could this have been prevented???"

[libdude]

27. From a Leftist

If David Gregory is correct that President Obama is using his advocacy for entitle-
ment i. e. chain CPI, to show he is serious about the budget reform, then I think that Obama either isn't as intelligent as belived, is fearful of failure, or is actually a moderate Republican who is using the Democratic base for his personal advancement.
I think Gregory is a self-promoting want to be pundit, who thinks his opinion matters to the American people.
The problem I have with the President is that a Federal budget he is submitting is actually a listing of values that he holds. Cutting the earned benefits of the most financially vulnerable is not a value I share with him no matter what his basis for doing so. Come on Democratic party, what do you have to say about this, can you take a stand for the people?

[Armstead]

34. Gregory is not alone -- Just typical of the thinking in the DC/NY Axis of Complacency

[Myrina]

42. POTUS said himself that he'd be considerd a 'moderate Republican'

.... by 1980's standards. What more does anyone on this side of the aisle need to hear?

[spanone]

32. republican circle jerk....nothing more

[forestpath]

36. It also means PBO wants a 2010 repeat. Funny how they don't mention THAT.

[graham4anything]

37. It takes a village to make the point President Obama made come true.

If you build it, they will come.

President Obama is not looking for credit, just keeping eye on the prize way down the road.

Only the instant gratificaiton cru don't see it.

[bobduca]

45. Word, Homey

That 'Instant Gratification Cru' is whickety whickety Wack!

[graham4anything]

48. It's going to take 30-40 years, perhaps 80. Only straight democratic rule will get one there quicker

Not one protest except and after the civil Rights protests helped while a democratic president was in office.

And the Civil rights protest of course had the Wallace DixieCrat DemocratRacists dividing the democratic party

Any other protest caused the defeat of the Democratic president.

President Obama again is rope-a-doping the enemies.
(even the supposed ones that call themselves democratic voters).

[bobduca]

51. Is there NOTHING this AMAZING GOD-LIKE figure CAN'T DO?

80 more years! 80 more years!

[Armstead]

52. I am absolutely amazed

This magical answer that will occur somewhere so far down the road that no one will realize that President Obama had anything to do with it?

This mystical alignment of forces that defy all comprehension of us mere mortals?

Instant gratification? Budster, I'm 62 years old and I've seen the end result of a lot of this same kind of weaselly crap. Democrats too often engage in this junk to avoid actually proposing straightforward answers to the problems we face -- or because they get so assimilated into the Elite that they lose sight of who brought them to the dance in the first place.

Despite the good things he accomplished, for example, some of Bill Clinton's triangulating 20-dimensional chess moves (orchestrated by that great liberal sage Dick Morris) have put us deeper in the toilet.

[NorthCarolina]

46. So, they are admitting that a majority of Americans are "from the Left". Good,

but many of us have known that simple truth for a long, long time.

[Nite Owl]

54. Opposition ia not

from the left it's a whole segment of society. The 2.3million is only 3 days worth too.
What kind of person is he to think this way, to get satisfaction from harming a whole group of people who are disabled, served our country in war, contributed to the SS fund from every paycheck?

[FreeBC]

56. Obama just can't get this kind of publicity without suggesting he may make concessions

"Republicans demand chained CPI" barely registers, both with the media and with democrats. It's just not news.

"Obama offers chained CPI" gets the whole nation demanding hands off social security. It's a major news story and it gets his people making noise, calling congressmen, and signing petitions.

[mcgarry50]

57. the new stupid party

i called my washington state congress persons murray, cantwell, and larson and told them by obama putting SS on the table as a democrat he just made this party the stupid party. they just put their chances of winning the 1014 election in jeopardy. cantwell has at least signed the pledge with bernie sanders and will not cut SS. dems murray and larson are clueless. i know i won't vote for them and i will register as an independent so i won't be embarrassed to belong to the stupid party.

[Armstead]

58. Not the "new" stupid party. The only difference now is that Democrats are being stupid in victory

This is the kind of moronic sell-out and timidity that has plagued the "centrist" Democratic poo-bahs for years.

The difference is that the Democrats basically won power and a mandate for progressive reform, but they insist on playing the same hapless games they did when the GOP held the reins.

[fredamae]

61. Or are murray and larson just "corp"

shills following their leaders?
It's getting more and more obvious to me--Who the "who's who" are in the Corp Wing of the Dem party....

[Fuddnik]

59. The last time we had a massive protest, they sent the Gestapo in to break it up. Nationwide.

But, some would believe that Obama or Homeland Security had nothing to do with a well orchestrated nationwide crackdown.

[fredamae]

60. I heard Palin's own Steve Schmidt

say that last night. Yes, I agree that this is Right Wing Nuttery...perhaps they simply want us to shut up (in a reverse psychology kinda way) so PBO can go forward with the plan they Really want but reject publicly just to go against PBO?

[Larkspur]

64. Obama's problem with chained CPI is not just the Left

The Right's base also doesn't support it and the Rethugs know it. That's why they don't want to vote for it. They want the Dems to fall on their Soc. Sec. sword so that they can campaign against Dems about it and drive down the Dems base in the next election.

Congressional Dems know this too and they would be crazy to vote for it.

[WinkyDink]

66. "the Awful Left "???

[HiPointDem]

68. what if we burned down the tv studio, what would that signify, david?

[Rex]

69. Yes when these idiots fail they love to blame the Left

or use the Left as a tool to deflect the truth of the matter. Obama doesn't need any of this, it is more like Third Way and Free Market types that want to avoid blame, so they do the time honored tradition of Left bashing.

Yawn...sad little freaks.

[kentuck]

70. I heard that!

Unbelievable!