As much as I like Obama, there's nothing I can say to defend him.

[pacalo]

As far-out nutty & obstructive as the Republicans are for Obama to deal with, I want to believe that Obama is having to use a poker-face strategy in using Social Security cuts as a bargaining chip to put public pressure on the Republicans to leave SS alone & agree to do the right thing in raising taxes for the rich & eliminating corporate loopholes. I can't forget his "not on my watch" campaign promise.

But having a feeling of trust doesn't amount to anything if there's nothing concrete to support it. Obama hasn't shown that he's been swayed by Robert Reich's petition that was signed by more than 2.3 million people & delivered to the White House yesterday. Neither has Obama addressed the country in explaining in detail what "chained CPI" would mean to us & why he is reneging on his "not on my watch" campaign promise.

In fact, after listening to David Axelrod on Rachel's show tonight, I'm now worried. So is my husband. According to Axelrod, "something has to be done about SS". From everything Axelrod said, it looks like Obama is serious about this offer.

My husband asked 'what the hell is chained CPI'? I remembered a DUer's simplified way of putting it: As the cost of living continues to rise, those on a fixed income would naturally be forced to cut their expenses, many buying much less & eating beans just to survive from one paycheck to the next. How much we spend for the year would be used by SSA to determine how much (or how little) our cost of living increase would be for the next year. I mentioned how well Robert Reich's video tutorial explained it & he was very much interested in seeing it.

Even if this chained CPI doesn't become the new policy, the way this has unfolded was a big misstep for Obama. After campaigning on the promise that he would not touch SS, I'm taken aback that Obama would come up with this offer & at how easy it seemed to be for him to reveal it to the public, as though going back on a promise to the little people is no big deal.

As good a speaker as Obama is, his not communicating with the people is another misstep. Leaving us in the dark as we become more & more anxious (& angrier) isn't respectful to us.

A cruel irony is that Obama is having a steak dinner this evening with a select group of Republican leaders who have shown nothing but contempt for him. I don't respect that. No Democrats were invited & chained CPI will no doubt be discussed. Many people will be eating meager meals if the SS cuts become law & that decision is in the hands of those enjoying those pricey steaks tonight. That feels like a slap to our faces.

Knowing that already-meager fixed incomes are being used as a carrot stick when SS has nothing to do with the budget is beyond my comprehension & it angers me that we have no say about it.

[CaliforniaPeggy]

1. You have stated this so very clearly...

I appreciate that.

And I agree with everything you've said here tonight.

I veer between sadness and anger at President Obama's actions on SS and the budget.

[pacalo]

2. I know you like him, too, CalPeg.

I just don't know what to say anymore.

[CaliforniaPeggy]

5. ...

[pacalo]

7. You're the absolute best, CP.

[shireen]

111. it's a betrayal

I'm not crazy about the guy, but always thought of him as decent and empathic, someone who would protect those who need the most protection. I'm deeply disappointed too.

[Raven]

121. Dear Peggy, I am sorry to say that I am

exactly where you are...sad and very, very angry. At my age, I should know better that to put my trust in a politician but there was a time when some of them meant what they said and stood for it. Very sad and no way to sugar coat it. Obama has put himself in a sink hole and he deserves to be there.

[LeftInTX]

3. I agree with Peggy

It's worded so clearly, that after being angry all day, and then reading this, it hit me

[pacalo]

4. I don't usually write OPs, but the discussion with my husband tonight

after listening to David Axelrod brought out my feelings about it.

[ashling]

8. I was left cold by Axelrod

I was watching one of those ads for financial advisers that say they'll guide your way through to a better retirement.

The guy they use in the ad was supposed to be an architect ...

nobody wants to be the guiding light for home healthcare worker, or retail clerk, or -hell an adjunct college instructor

not even the man we worked so hard for and gave our last penny to get elected.

[pacalo]

12. The reverse mortgage ads are annoying, too.

The idea is presented as another way to guide you through a better retirement -- like people would choose to exchange their kids' future inheritance for the sake of 'enjoying' their golden years. Those who are in the most dire straits with no other options are most likely to consider it, imo. I don't know anything about it, but I suspect there are big profits to be made by the banks (& cleverly lost in the pages of small print).

[Sheepshank]

54. however, that works very well for childess persons...or

persons where they have struggled all of their lives, the kids are well set and financially secure because of the parents lifetime of sacrifices....it is finally their turn.

I wonder if it's also a way to help with college expense now, so the kids don't graduate from med school with $150K in debt. Like the kids would get their inheritance early?

I'm not in either of those situations just yet (lets see how the kids fair after college).....but I work with some people that would benefit from the program.

[Demo_Chris]

63. Respectfully, that's incorrect. These companies know exactly who they are marketing to.

Boomers.

Quite a number of whom seemingly see it as their life's work to keep the party going until they drop, and to leave nothing but pocket change, Walmart jobs, and a mountain of debt as their grandchildren's inheritence. They are the first to leave the country in worse shape than when they inherited it.

We are all familiar with the graphs that divide wealth by percentage. If you took those same graphs and replaced wealth quintiles with age, the charts would look basically the same. The youngest 80% have essentially nothing. It's all at the top, the oldest 20%. They inherited a utopia and they are determined to spend it all before they die. These commercials are just offering them another way to extract just a little more from whatever they have left. The message is simple:

Don't pass down your property, don't pass along anything! Take another vacation, buy another luxury car, party!

[haikugal]

77. This is unfair at best

and untrue. Boomers started losing perks and income in the early 70's when all this started. You need to look elsewhere to lay your guilt. Boomers have paid for damn near everything including their parents retirement, their own retirement and their kids schooling. They've been hit over and over again financially. These are working people you're denigrating, or they used to be. If they don't have anything left to pass on it isn't due to spending unwisely...look to the Reagan culture.

There is so much that could be said about your post just from my family experience...I don't know, maybe you don't have family or someone did you out of your inheritance. Stop trying to lay everything at the feet of Boomers...it's a very large, diverse group.

[haikugal]

94. Thx for this detailed response..

I'll read and respond later as I have a difficult problem with my computer which makes it hard to type a response and it will take me time. I hope I can give your points the consideration they deserve.

[Demo_Chris]

95. Thanks. Don't bother I am going to delete it...

This is the wrong topic for this thread or this time. Whatever the "reality" is or where the blame lies, we need to stand together now.

[haikugal]

96. OK...

I was just getting busy with it. I avoid that due to the difficulties I'm experiencing at the moment but you deserve to have the discussion, maybe we all do. If you ever decide to make a post about this topic in future please send me an pm so I can be sure not to miss it,

I agree we need to unite but we can still have discussion...

Later!

[sendero]

127. Gee..

.... you are SO full of shit. As for "passing down" anything at all what the fuck is wrong with you? Nothing was passed down to boomers, what do they owe you?

Your personal problems with your parents are not really interesting.

[awoke_in_2003]

78. Those reverse mortgages are insidious...

good OP by the way.

[hay rick]

6. K&R

[Triana]

9. I will NOT defend him and couldn't if I wanted to

Last edited Thu Apr 11, 2013, 03:16 AM - Edit history (1)

I voted for @BarackObama twice, however I can no longer defend him since he is advocating unfair and unnecessary cuts to Social Security.

President Obama OWES the American people a clear explanation as to:

WHY he is choosing to advocate for cutting SS after repeatedly promising not to

WHY he is buying into the debt/deficit propaganda and the austerity bullshit when it's clear that austerity has not worked anywhere else in the world and when virtually EVERY economist says it's JOBS that ought be priority #1 for fixing the economy, NOT cuts!

WHY he is insisting in coupling the need to "do something" about SS with talks about the deficit, when SS has not added ONE CENT to the deficit. Talks about any "fixes" to SS ought to be separated from debt talks and any fixes to SS can wait since the program is fully solvent for at least another 20 years. Why now?

WHY he insists on CUTTING SS when other options that most Americans support and which are MUCH less damaging are available - such as raising or removing the FICA cap, or raising FICA tax rates - yet these options are NEVER mentioned or discussed by his admin. Why is that?

Social Security IS OUR MONEY. It is not an "entitlement". It is an EARNED BENEFIT and we have every right to an explanation as to WHY this president is CHOOSING to "bargain" it away in some unnecessary, immoral, unfair, and ill-conceived plan which we know has its roots in a group of very wealthy men who have sought to destroy the program since it was created. (See Pete Peterson's "Fix the Debt&quot WHY is he HELPING them do it?!

This squirrelly man needs to be cornered with these questions. Preferably by some very angry voters who supported his (re)election - however I doubt he has the guts to face them after what he's done on this issue - which he surely knows is wrong, unfair, and grossly immoral.

It is unconscionable to force our nation's elderly, sick, disabled vets, and our poor to suffer even more to pay down a debt which THEY didn't create and which Social Security hasn't added one cent to.

I KNOW this president knows better than this. The American people certainly do. But he likely won't face them on this issue. I wonder how he can even face himself.

He's lost my support. If I wanted policies like this, I'd have voted Republican. I don't want them. I didn't vote for them. And I never will.

[sabrina 1]

10. He also owes the American people an explanation of why he is perpetuating the Republican lie

that SS in any way contributed to the deficit.

IT DID NOT. SS HAD NOTHING TO DO WITH THE DEFICIT. That is a Republican LIE.

Why is he doing this??

As of today we have TWO Republicans now positioning themselves as the protectors of SS!! He has handed them, like a GIFT, the way to defeat Democrats in 2014,

IF Democrats in Congress do not separate themselves from this betrayal, we can look forward to another 2010.

As for Axelrod, the man is a Third Way, iow a Republican pretending to be a Democrat, imposter, always was. I believe it was he who referred to the people who worked so hard to get Democrats elected as 'The Professional Left'. I totally despise that man and wondered what Obama was thinking when he chose him as part of his 'team'. More and more I don't wonder anymore.

Time to move on, we were duped and we have no more time to waste on these people. We have the elderly, the poor, dependent children, the disabled to protect and we better get organized and stop waiting and hoping for something that never was going to happen. Better to accept the fact that we were used, and start the process of trying to make up for lost time.

[Triana]

13. +1

Totally agreed. We were lied to. Time to move on and organize to elect REAL progressives next time.

[FiveGoodMen]

79. The real explanation is that he's really a republican.

He probably still can't say so out loud, though.

[Summer Hathaway]

11. It looks like Obama

" ... is serious about this offer."

So serious he included a poison pill as part of the package, i.e. the dismantling of 'tax incentives' to Big Oil, who have been enjoying tax breaks that actually put taxpayer money in their pockets, despite their record obscene profits.

Knowing that our friends on the other side of the aisle would NEVER take that bait, do you still think this was a "serious offer"?

Obama has turned "give them an offer they can't refuse" into "give them an offer they can never, ever, ever accept." And then sit back and watch them refuse it, yet again, while an entire country watches and takes note.

[pacalo]

16. Those are good points, Summer.

That's in line with how I had been looking at it & trying to think the best. After watching the Axelrod segment on Rachel's show, though, it occurred to me how badly this has been handled.

[Summer Hathaway]

18. There is a hand being played here

and David Axelrod is the last person on earth who is going to tip that hand.

[pacalo]

20. To be fair, that is actually very likely.

[Babel_17]

66. Once a popular Democrat includes SS as part of a budget negotiation

how do we, with a straight face, scream bloody murder when a Republican proposes to cut benefits?

Well, some of us on the sidelines will have credibility, but what about the people who's input gets counted? Some of them won't be able to face the cameras.

[sabrina 1]

22. SS had nothing to do with the deficit, why is he dragging it into these discussions? Why is he

perpetuating the Republican lie that SS had anything to do with the deficit? That is a lie.

No one is interested in whatever games he is supposedly playing, they are only interested in one thing, the SS belongs to the people, they own it, he has no right to use it as a bargaining chip for
ANY reason. I don't think those who are advising him, or he for that matter, understand this issue at all. If he thought he could drag SS into the problems of the Fed Govt, that he could use some deceptive terminology to try to deceive people into thinking that what he was appeasing Republicans with were not cuts, then all I can say is, none of them understand the disaster of any politician, for any reason, touching that fund. If there is one thing people across the board understand, it is SS.

I see that now we have a second Republican expressing 'shock' that this president would 'hurt seniors by proposing cuts to SS'. That makes two so far. What he has done is to give Republicans the opportunity to position themselves as the 'saviors of SS'. He just handed them a winning issue for 2014.

And yes, I know, we all know they are lying. And we all knew this is what they would do. Who is advising this president?? And why is he listening to them?

It's too late for him to try to save face now. We can only hope that Congressional Democrats will do what Elizabeth Warren has wisely done already, distance themselves now from this president, otherwise we will have a repeat of 2010.

[Summer Hathaway]

27. I hope you sent Obama an email

and explained to him that SS has nothing to do with the deficit. I'm sure he DOESN'T know that - and I'm sure he'll appreciate your pointing it out to him.

When the 'bargaining chip' of SS is inextricably entwined with poison-pill revenue-raisers - like the dissolution of 'tax incentives' for Big Oil - the bargaining chip is as safe as a baby in its mother's arms.

Those who insist that "yeah, but WHAT IF the Republicans actually ACCEPT what's being offered" have not been paying attention to who the Republicans are, and what they will NEVER accept as a result of being who they are.

[Bluenorthwest]

46. You didn't answer the other poster's question. Now I have a couple for you to ignore and be seen

ignoring.
First, why is it you are certain the GOP will not make a counter offer, making the things they object to toothless while retaining the cuts to SS? If it is all about compromise, what you need to be talking about is what compromises to the current offer you'd be willing to accept. Because an offer has been made by the President, the GOP will tweak it in their favor and if the entire goal is to get any old deal no matter what deal, then Obama has to take it or seem unwilling to compromise, which is apparently the end of the world in DC, to stand by a principle while being a Democrat.
My second question is more general. You claim Obama is bluffing, and you know that. If your friend is bluffing in poker, and you know this, what is the best course of action? Your choice seems to be to run around shouting that it is all a bluff, trying to get others to see that bluff for what it is. How does that help our friend pull off the bluff? If it is a bluff, Axelrod seems wise not to tip the hand, and those here who say they think it is a bluff seem to lack a certain portion of bluffing theory, which is you never telegraph a bluff you wish to see fool the other side. It is hard for me to understand why those thinking this is a bluff would want to make that into a public position, much less advocate for others to join in with the thinking. For such a bluff to work, seems to me, those who oppose the proposed bluff need to say so loudly and with conviction in order to help sell the bluff. Those who run around tipping what they think of the hand seem to be making the bluff harder to accomplish, not easier....
If we are ever in a casino, and you know I am bluffing, please, for the love of Mike keep that to yourself.

[sabrina 1]

58. If you think that anyone here thought the Republicans would accept this then it is not they who are

not paying attention.

This is what the 'professional left' predicted. That they would not accept any offer, regardless. But they wait to see if the president would dare to include SS cuts in his proposal and then they would do what they always do, keeping the 2014 election in mind, use every tool they could, to put themselves in the majority in the Senate and increase their majority in Congress.

And over the last few days this is exactly what they have done. Two of them so far have claimed to be the protectors of SS. They are SHOCKED they say, that the President would 'harm the elderly' by cutting SS, something, they say they will not do.

So there is the result of the amazing chess game we've been hearing about. Republicans pounced on the Democrats positioning themselves as the enemies of SS now, and handing what was always their issue, to Republicans.

Yes, yes we know they are lying, but as the defenders of this horrible proposal have been telling us all along, the president 'isn't serious' either.

Meantime when while all those millionaires are busy lying and not being serious, millions of Americans, the most vulnerable, are now scared to death that they will lose once again no matter who is lying about what. Because they always do, lately.

[amborin]

65. "unacceptable to rethugs" defense cuts were the most recent poison pill.....

[AnotherMcIntosh]

102. I hope that you telephoned the WH at 202-456-1111.

It only takes a minute or so and you can be sure that someone is listening.

[Armstead]

57. I respectfully disagree.

If what you say is true, why the hell doesn't he give a really serious offer?

Show America where he really stands and what he really wants. That would be a pretty good starting point.

The GOP is not likely to go along with much of anything Obama proposes at this point -- even if he were to abolish the IRS and propose a flat tax for everyone.

So what is the point of angering his supporters, and confusing fence-sitters with a SS ;plan he doesn't really want? Is that going to somehow get the GOP to support things they hate?

I doubt. Rather it seemed to me to be an act of political self-destruction and destruction of the Democratic Party by throwing out a winning issue and position that is at the core of what the Democratic party is supposed to support.

[NoMoreWarNow]

68. exactly-- this offer to cut SS just seems to fuck over the Dems

more than hurting Repubs.

[NoMoreWarNow]

67. yes, but to what end?

I get it that this is not going to happen, so why not just hold firm to principles?

[lark]

76. Forget chess, he's taking a sledgehammer to the third rail.

He's also giving Repugs GREAT talking points about how Dems want to hurt granny and take the food out of their mouths. There's zero good that can come from this. Repugs won't give him the oil co. tax sanity, they won't give more revenue, they won't give shit. They just want to take more and more $ from workers and give to the owners. He obviously knows this, he's not stupid. So, the only possible angle is he wants to cut SSI and doesn't give a shit about granny. We've been lied to is the ugly truth, it's just a hard thing to accept. Our hope has been turned to dust. We've been had.

[babylonsister]

126. Thank you. I

think you're right. There's no way this President is doing anything maliciously, despite some of the posts on DU. There is a reason, if only to show the unreasonableness of the gop.

[Jamastiene]

135. I would really rather he didn't play 256 dimensional chess with Social Security that way.

And most people do not see it the way you are seeing it. You forget all the Darwin Awards waiting to happen to over half the people in America. The majority are not the sharpest tools in the shed.

[Summer Hathaway]

139. Well, it's funny you should mention that, Jamastiene

about how the majority of Americans are not the sharpest tools in the shed.

What's funny about it is that DUers always talk about how the average citizen doesn't really know what's going on, because they're too busy watching "American Idol" or "Dancing with the Stars". They're not interested in politics and, as a result, they really don't know anything.

But as soon as something like the "chained CPI" thing comes along, suddenly those same people who don't follow politics at all become aware of the sword of Damocles hanging over their heads and are living in total anguish. Suddenly every senior in the country has turned the TV off and is completely aware of the smallest detail of political wrangling, and are shaking with fear.

This pattern has played itself out here many, many times. The vast majority of Americans, according to some on DU, are woefully misinformed dolts who don't "get it" - until it becomes advantageous to insist that EVERYONE knows what Obama is 'up to', and they are outraged!!!

The chess game analogy is really old. Maybe those who can't wrap their head around the intricacies of checkers should try another tack.

[stanchaz]

14. Throw Grandma from the train?

Mr. Obama: Do you REALLY want to throw Grandma off the train?
Sir, do you REALLY want to throw disabled vets under the bus?
Is THIS the Barack Obama that we voted for?
Is THIS the Barack Obama that we believed in?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?...

This is not a "Grand Bargain" Sir. Your “chained C.P.I.” proposal
(for Social Security /Disabled Veteran Cost of Living DECREASES)
is nothing but a GRAND BETRAYAL. It’s a betrayal of the ideals and the programs
that Democrats have fought for ....long and hard ....over the years.

Don't make me ASHAMED of being a lifelong Democrat,
and your supporter, Mr. President. 
YOU DONT COMPROMISE YOUR BASIC PRINCIPLES AND IDEALS, MR. OBAMA. 
And you SURELY don’t try to balance the budget on the
 backs of the most vulnerable! ...while the super-rich laugh all the way to the bank, and their off shore tax havens.
 That’s not compromise - it’s capitulation ...and shameful.
 Any person in Congress who votes for this proposal 
will live to regret it - because we will not forget: not at the polls, ....not at the primaries ....and not at the fund raisers.

Unfortunately, it looks like you’re not much of a fighter, Mr. President.

Well, you've got a HELL of a fight on your hands now,
-unless you come to your senses.

You keep on trying to “compromise” towards the so-called “middle”
-
while they laugh at you, and keep moving their goalposts to the right.

Again, ...and again, ...and again! 
 Stop --- and stand your ground, Sir!
Please, make us proud of you again.

[Summer Hathaway]

21. It's been rather curious

as to how many truly devoted, life-long Dems have started posting on DU of late - suddenly inspired to make their voices heard at a time when so many here are expressing their dissatisfaction with the party and the Prez.

I guess it's just one of those weird coincidences.

[carolinayellowdog]

32. the devoted lifelong Dems who have been protesting here

are very largely familiar names to me as a DUer since 2002, not newbies. That's a diversionary smear-- or an attempt at one, but given the magnitude of the crisis, games like that won't divert anyone's attention.

[Summer Hathaway]

34. There are 'long time Dems'

with recognizable names protesting here. Never said there weren't.

But it seems oddly curious that so many newbies, who never voiced their opinions on this site before, have suddenly been 'enlightened' and feel an overwhelming need to post their anti-Obama/anti-Dem feelings.

If you want to believe that's just an amazing coincidence, please feel free to do so.

[quakerboy]

39. What is truely amazing

is that any major elected Democrat, much less someone as savy as the President, has opened this door, given the republicans all the ammunition they could possibly dream of to demolish the Democratic party, stoking any fire of internal divide to a point surpassing even that of the Tea Party and their effect on the republicans. I think we are more likely to see a major party split than they are at this point, where even a week ago i would have sworn the opposite was true.

Ya know.. even if all these new posters are paid republican plants, it doesnt much matter. Obama offered to cut social security. Thats the heart of whats going on here. Unless the entire rest of the democratic party stands shoulder to shoulder in firm opposition to that, how do we get back from that precipice?

[Summer Hathaway]

40. You DO understand

that an 'offer' that includes a poison pill (like a dissolution of Big Oil 'tax incentives') amounts to NO serious offer at all?

I don't think these new posters are "paid republican plants". They are simply trolls who see any dissatisfaction with the president or his party being expressed on an (alleged) Democratic website as an opportunity to stir the shit.

If you think it's not common knowledge on RW sites that some DUers seem ripe for the pickin', you are incredibly naive.

[quakerboy]

43. You do understand that offering up social security cuts

is something that a great many people will never forget? No matter what the end result? No matter whether you condescendingly dismiss it as "no serious offer" or not.

There are things you just don't do. This is one of them. It will cost Democrats votes in the next election. Maybe a lot of votes. It may well split our party. It was a bad choice. There is no upside to the president in having done it. Not morally, not politically, not practically. It was a bad choice.

[Laurian]

44. My thoughts, exactly. This should never have been

proposed by a Democratic President for any reason. I'm not buying the "it's a tactic" excuse.

[Bluenorthwest]

47. Well said.

nt

[Summer Hathaway]

142. Yeah, there's been a lot of that

"it will cost Democratic votes in the next election - may well split the party" comments going around on DU of late.

You might want to take note of whose who are promoting that idea, inserting it in every thread (regardless of whether it's off-topic or not), and repeating it as often as they can.

Some of them have an agenda. You'd better believe it.

[quakerboy]

143. Do all the elders have an agenda?

Because those are the ones I'm talking about. The 100 post newbs who signed on just to complain are the least of anyones worries. There are many people who have been contributing here a long time who are sick to their stomachs over this. And from the other side of the conversation, all we can get is dismissal, often quite rudely.

When I say votes, I'm talking about the actual voters. The millions of them across this nation who dont participate in any political forums. The ones who heard Obama say "I wont cut SS, unlike my opponent". And who now are hearing "Obama's going to cut social security" from credible sources, namely his own budget proposal. And you better believe they will hear it again when the campaign ads come out, the next few cycles.

How does the next Democrat to run for congress in a blueish but conflicted state like Colorado convince the voters that Democrats won't to cut social security, when our own president puts it out there?

How does the next Democratic presidential candidate convince people that, unlike the last man in her/his position, he actually, really isnt willing to cut social security?

The next time a Democrat says "I will fight to protect your social security", How does he or she maintain any credibility when the Republican says "Neither will we, this is just a Democrat scare tactic, even the bluest president of them all is on our side of this"

This is a big f'ing deal. And trying to sweep it under the rug, or pretend that it doesn't matter, its just a few internet trolls.. Look around. There's a lot of not at all trollish people very upset. Why attempt to marginalize them(us)?

[Isoldeblue]

134. I doubt that's the case...

It appears like a typical ploy used by neocon-baggers, posing as disgruntled liberals. Right............. And I'm Greta Garbo....

[Summer Hathaway]

141. Welcome to DU, Greta n/t

[Summer Hathaway]

140. It should be obvious

that I am not referring to long-time DUers when I refer to newbies.

I think the Post count 13, joined yesterday info in someone's profile is a pretty clear indication that they are indeed new sign-ups.

[madrchsod]

137. i`ve been here since 2002 and i`m pissed off

just went through 6 days trying to stay alive then 3 more weeks of cardio rehab. thanks to medicare i received first class medical treatment that saved my life.

the thought that obama even hints at messing with medicare has both democrats and republican seniors pissed off. i have no idea why he thinks he`s right but he ain`t . i`m afraid the democrats are going to pay the price the next election.

we know what happens if we lose the house and senate.

[Summer Hathaway]

138. Yes, we know what happens

if we lose the house and senate. Which is why I have taken note of all of the 'new' posters who are busily stirring the "both parties are alike, they're all corporate water-carriers," etc., pot.

It is one thing to be pissed-off. It is quite another to be advocating sitting out the next election in order to "teach the Dems a lesson".


(All political disagreements aside ... I am glad you got the treatment you needed, and wish you a full and speedy recovery.)

[supercats]

15. Well Said...

I agree with you. This is absolutely unacceptable, cutting our social safety net and doing so in such a breezy manner just to get 'a grand bargain'. Every liberal should be outraged by this!!!

[Summer Hathaway]

30. When was the social safety net cut?

I must check LBN - I had NO idea anything had been cut at all, no less in a "breezy manner".

I guess it happened when I wasn't looking.

But, hey - where are my manners? Welcome to DU! Always nice to see a devoted Dem suddenly decide to voice their negative opinion of the Prez on a "Democratic" website after years of not feeling the need to.

I've no doubt your liberal Democratic heart is in the right place.

[Bluenorthwest]

48. Wow, now there's wisdom! It has been offered, but do not complain until it is done!!

The proposal itself was wrong in every way. Obama's proposal. Just wrong.
When you find yourself making ugly insinuations about others on a personal level because you don't have any actual points to make, it is time to calmly reconsider what you are doing and how you are doing it.

[gtar100]

17. He's acting like a person who has either been bought out or threatened.

Shear obstinance but what is the real reason. There is no good argument for cutting Social Security.

[pacalo]

19. I'd like to know, too. It doesn't make sense.

[SammyWinstonJack]

49. He must have been bought out shortly after taking office because that is when

first he started making noise about entitlement cuts to reduce the deficit.

[Warren DeMontague]

23. I've been assuming he knows they won't go along with it.

But I can see how it puts certain disturbing "truths" out into the aether.

I wish he'd listen to my budget ideas, but they're a little... radical.

[pacalo]

28. That's how I had been thinking, too.

I had a good conversation with my husband about it tonight & my suppressed feelings began flooding out.

Perhaps it angered me & I'll see that I was wrong after the decisions have been made; I'm going to try to keep an open mind. Just felt like venting after hearing "something has to be done with SS" -- it really rubbed me the wrong way.

Obama really blew it when he refused to take a look at your ideas.

[Warren DeMontague]

29. Thanks. Yeah, my reaction to that is; what??? I mean, doesn't something have to be done about

the fact that we spend more on "defense" than the rest of the planet combined? Or our expensive drug war/incarceration complex?

That line would have pissed me off, too.

Social Security works fine. What's happening now is an inevitable demographic blip based on the size of The Boomers vs. the size of Gen X, AFAIC. Fully manageable.

Medicare- and health costs in general- are something else, of course, and I would agree that that situation in particular does need "something done about it", but again my ideas are along the lines of a medicare for all, SPHC system.

And none of that has jack squat to do with SS.

I just think he's dangling a bone in front of the GOP to look 'reasonable' so when they come back with Paul Ryan Budget Mark III or whatever, he can say "I tried".

[pacalo]

33. I agree 100%...

but I'm now even more disappointed that Obama refuses to listen to you:

...my ideas are along the lines of a medicare for all, SPHC system.

[IDemo]

53. Unless he and Boner agreed to this puppet show out on the golf course

There's no way he could know absolutely that they would reject the proposal.

[Warren DeMontague]

82. If it contains anything remotely resembling a tax increase, he can be pretty sure.

[IDemo]

98. Pretty sure ≠ absolutely sure

It was at best a good gamble, but a gamble nonetheless.

[Warren DeMontague]

103. I'm in agreement. I'm not sold on the logic of it, at all.

And like I said, it puts some destructive and patently false memes out, like "we need to do something about SS". SS is the one part of the budget that is working.

[DeSwiss]

24. K&R

"All our beliefs are being challenged now, and rightfully so; they're stupid." ~Bill Hicks

[LittleBlue]

25. K&R!

Good read

[msongs]

26. obama and his republican best friends are celebrating together nt

[olddots]

31. It's very hard not being cynical about life on earth right now

he has not fallen far from grace for me . Clinton was charming and lucky to have been president during the computer boom years right now what ever hope I had for this country is dying .The bad guys won .

[pacalo]

37. Thanks, olddots.

he has not fallen far from grace for me .

I hope I'm pleasantly surprised when the final decisions have been made.

[jambo101]

35. On the other hand.we can look at the positives.

http://pleasecutthecrap.typepad.com/main/what-has-obama-done-since-january-20-2009.html

[Skittles]

42. please, not the fucking list

[quakerboy]

36. It just doesnt make sense.

Theres no big payoff for cutting social security. Hopefully it wont pass, but even if he knew for a fact it would fail to pass, all offering it up as a possibility does is piss off every senior, near senior, person related to a senior, and liberal in the country. Damaging his reputation, probably costing us dearly in the 2014 elections, and generally poisoning the well for every democrat that follows him in desiring to be elected. With no payoff. No upside.

What the hell happened to make things go so far off the rails on this one?

[pacalo]

38. I couldn't agree more. And I truly do not want Obama to fail.

[Nay]

45. Agree 100%, Quakerboy. There are NO UPSIDES to mention even mild cuts of any kind

to SS. It opens up a Pandora's box that should never have been opened, especially by a Democrat, for god's sake. And WHY WHY WHY does Obama ignore the fact that SS does not contribute to the budget problems at all? It just makes him look stupid and uninformed when he does not emphasize this. God knows the Pubs will be riling up their base in 2014 over it.

[MisterP]

88. dunno, if they lose '14 they can 1) do as little as they want and 2) blame the people pushing things

like they do for '10 (they used to blame gays for sitting out '10, but that didn't stick)

come to think of it, they'd blame the 80% minority of the country for losing '14 even if they won it

[quakerboy]

117. "they" would do that, win or lose

What has substantially changed from 2009 vs 2011 vs 2013, in terms of legislation that actually passes into law?

[dflprincess]

123. I imagine there's a big payoff for him

he's playing to his Wall Street pals now and looking to make sure his own retirement is secure (think of how well Clinton has done). He only needed us until he was reelected.

[quakerboy]

124. I dont believe thats all there is too this

I really don't. He is a US president. His retirement is secure, and it would be fairly hard for him not to be padding his nest without even trying at this point. But I don't think he is the kind of person who would have done this for just that reason, nor do I believe that this would be his best course toward reaching that goal even if it were foremost in his mind.

This is a name destroyer, not a reputation maker. The is the opposite of what people mean when they talk about "building a legacy".

[IdaBriggs]

41. "SS has nothing to do with the budget" says it all.

[WillyT]

50. K & R !!!

[forestpath]

51. I don't like people who want to hurt the weak and vulnerable. So I don't like Obama.

[Lifelong Protester]

52. Sing it, sister! So much of what you state is how I feel

and I, too, picked up on this irony yesterday:

A cruel irony is that Obama is having a steak dinner this evening with a select group of Republican leaders who have shown nothing but contempt for him. I don't respect that. No Democrats were invited & chained CPI will no doubt be discussed. Many people will be eating meager meals if the SS cuts become law & that decision is in the hands of those enjoying those pricey steaks tonight. That feels like a slap to our faces.

Knowing that already-meager fixed incomes are being used as a carrot stick when SS has nothing to do with the budget is beyond my comprehension & it angers me that we have no say about it.

[Dpm12]

55. I don't get why everyone on here's pissed

he's just trying to bargain with Republicans

[OldDem2012]

60. Enjoy your stay. nt.

[FiveGoodMen]

80. We're not as stupid as you'd like us to be.

Take that message back to those who are paying you.

[yellowcanine]

56. Cheap shots about steak dinners with Republicans don't advance your argument.

Arguments against chained CPI are reasonable but sniping about what is served for dinner and the fact that no Democrats were invited is crap. The point is that Obama is meeting with Republican leaders. He also meets with Democratic leaders. He does not have to do it at the same time or the same way for it to be legitimate. Snarky sniping undermines your sincerity.

[OldDem2012]

61. The Obama-Hate is strong in this and other threads ranting about a budget PROPOSAL....

....that will never see the President's desk in the current form.

Senate Dems will never allow cuts to earned benefit programs, and the House GOP Tea-Nazis will never allow an increase in taxes on the wealthy. Those two facets of the budget PROPOSAL are chained together in a way that will not allow either to be passed by itself.

[NoMoreWarNow]

69. so what was the point of this then?

And what will happen?

[randome]

71. No one knows what's going to happen.

That's why all this hand-wringing seems pretty pointless to me. We should all make our opinions known to our reps.

[NoMoreWarNow]

73. I agree the handwringing is kind of pointless and we should obviously contact our reps

but it's worth speculating on possible budget outcomes... and I really haven't seen anything on this.

[OldDem2012]

83. It's called a wedge issue. The GOP Tea-Nazis will be forced to either defend their stance....

....on destroying SS and other earned benefits to their election detriment in 2014, or they will be forced to to try to attack the President in an attempt to show support for their senior constituents (that's already happening on TV). The strategy by the President is to pull GOP poor and middle-class GOP retires and soon-to-be retirees away from GOP Tea-Nazi candidates.

If they pick option one, they're toast in the 2014 elections. Their senior constituents will back away from GOP Tea-Nazi candidates by voting for other candidates who support not cutting earned benefit programs, or they will just stay home.

If they pick the second option, they're toast anyway because their attempts to cut and/or destroy earned benefits has been going on since FDR signed those programs into law. It is, and will be clearly seen as political posturing by the right.

Just my opinion, but all of this discussion about forming some kind of third party is total nonsense. The vast majority of Democrats need to understand that voting for third-party candidates will lead to splitting the Democratic Party vote and handing victory to the GOP Tea-Nazis.

[Isoldeblue]

132. +1 n/m

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

59. The bosses get together and make decisions about people's lives without consulting the people.

If, as both sides proclaim, that the budget negotiations are so important, why not hold them in public instead of over steak dinners in private.

In a democracy, the people are responsible for holding their representatives (not "leaders" or "bosses&quot to account. They can't do so based only on posturing at photo ops.

But, "Transparency in Government" was a swell campaign slogan.

[Mnemosyne]

87. Hear, hear, Tierra_Y_Libertad! The wealthy decide, in secret, what the poorer citizens 'need' and we

have basically no say about it anymore, none at all.

I agree that they should have to have public negotiations. What are they hiding? Sunshine is healthy, wondering if we'll ever see it again.

[Babel_17]

62. "a big misstep": Agreed, the proposal looks bad and goes back on promises

Even when given ample opportunity to explain its rationale, the explanations for its inclusion fall flat.

Independents over 50, who vote, are overwhelmingly against it. Republican voters are strongly against it.

To the best of their abilities, all Democrats need to distance themselves from it.

Our side's initial budget offering should say what we think. Force the Republicans to do likewise. Imo that's the fastest way to get the best possible budget.

We've lost time offering something nobody will accept. It didn't make us look reasonable. It makes us look inconsistent and hard to understand.

[we can do it]

64. I can't defend him, he's not defending you or I, or those in need.

Its absolutely disheartening.

[randome]

70. Really? A blanket 'he doesn't care' statement?

Obamacare? Gay rights? Gun control? More equitable taxation?

Sure, he doesn't care.

Hell, Norquist is calling CCPI a tax increase.

[malthaussen]

72. The "defense of Obama" reduces to this:

The President is making a lying proposal to the GOP-controlled House that he "knows" will not stand a holy chance in hell of being accepted in order to point out to us dumbasses who do not understand "negotiation" that the GOP is intransigent and will not accept any proposal, however much it contains their desires.

There are a couple of problems with this defense, which has been trotted out every single time Mr Obama has proposed anything to Congress that the liberal branch of the Democratic party doesn't like.

For one thing, show of hands: who here has not by now gotten the message that the GOP are intransigent and won't move on any issue? So the President is beating a dead horse? And this is a good idea?

For another thing, are we to believe that the President lying about his intentions to score political points is a good idea? Makes one wonder, it does, how we're supposed to know when he is speaking the truth.

Even granted that the defense is correct, the President's choice of offers is intriguing, and I've really seen no competent defense of his opening up the SS issue at all. He might as well propose to repeal the 14th amendment, or to apply to the Queen of Great Britain and Northern Ireland to accept us colonists back into the fold, since he "knows" these proposals will never pass, and isn't "serious" about them at all.

Or, in simpler language: stipulate that the President is lying. His choice of lies is still revealing, doncha think?

-- Mal

[Liberalynn]

86. +1

[Blaukraut]

74. Obama should listen to the Bush Admin: Deficits don't matter

I give him credit for all the good things he has accomplished and is still fighting for, but on the budget, and the so-called entitlement reforms, he is utterly tone deaf. I'd like to know who is advising him?

[Myrina]

75. Add this to the mix:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/1014451117

And there is absolutely, simply no way for him to justify touching SS or Medicare/Medicaid in any way, except that HE WANTS TO.

[mother earth]

81. We were sold of bill of goods that was not delivered. Romney meant certain & swift disaster, Obama

is slower but steady with a few crumbs along the way...all roads lead to the oligarchy, just as they were meant to. Now that we understand that...what's next?

[KoKo]

84. He met with 15 Top Bankers for Breakfast this Morning.....

I don't know if any of them are Demorats, but a Bloomberg news reporter said this morning that it wasn't on the White House schedule until yesterday. She thought that was odd.

I agree with your post. The anxiety he's putting so many through is not good. And breaking his campaign promise is not a good sign going forward. But, then it's not the first time. Gitmo is still open and being renovated...and there are someother things...but this broken promise is really so "in your face" that it's surprising because it was HIS choice to put it in there ....and that can't be blamed on Republican obstruction.

[LiberalLovinLug]

85. I'll say it, I was wrong

I supported Barack Obama above Hillary Clinton.

I did this because I believed Obama was the more progressive choice. He seemed to not only embrace a more liberal view on many issues (not all), but had the passion to deliver. Clinton was part of the "third way" DLC and seemed just a little too chummy with the Wall Street cronies.

But she would have been the better choice. At least she was a "known known". With the Clintons there was at least an attempt at communication with their base. There was to put it in nutshell, at least some substance behind their style.

I now see what Barack meant way back in that 2004 convention about their being no red America and no blue America. Its because that's the way he sees it. There is no difference to him which side gets more, he is an all-American politician first and he will tilt whatever way he thinks will have him rise up between both sides to the top of the mountain. I think he went too far this time though, asking for chained CPI, and he's going to be played for a fool by the right, and will look like one on the left.

[snort]

89. Gads.

Is it possible that most or at least many seniors are going to find increased benefits via medicare or the AHCA enough to offset the hit they'll be taking from a CPI?

[emsimon33]

90. The Democratic Party will live to regret this

If they want to do something with Social Security, then end the cap on salary--make everyone pay into Social Security. They treat it as a tax anyway, so have the millionaires and billionaires all contribute, too.

[cvoogt]

91. not sure how much I like

anyone who cuts SS, regardless of their other myriad qualities.

[Beacool]

92. I always thought Obama was overrated.

Last edited Thu Apr 11, 2013, 04:20 PM - Edit history (1)

Although he's great at marketing himself. In that he reminds me of Madonna, not a great singer but great at selling herself to the public. Obama is not nearly the politician that Clinton is. During the health care fight, he never voiced his case in a clear and understandable manner that would appeal across party lines. I heard Bill give one of the best explanations of the health care bill while standing under a tree in Africa. He was giving Nightline an interview. Bill had no notes, it was very hot and the sun was pounding; but he was clear and concise. Remember the 2012 Convention? Bill sold Obama better than Obama sold himself.

Yes, Obama is "likable enough", but so are other politicians. I still don't understand why so many on the Left thought that this centrist candidate would be as liberal as they are. Guantanamo is not only still open, but about to get a face-lift. The use of drones has grown exponentially since Bush was in office, the list goes on.

The WH tried the same 3D chess game in 2011 with Sequestration. Well, how's that working out.

[marmar]

122. So Bill's a better bullshitter. Point made.

So we had a Corporate centrist with good PR skills, and a Corporate centrist who's likable. In the end, we had Corporate centrists all too willing to sellout traditional Democratic values. It's like comparing a Dodge Stratus to a Chrysler Cirrus.

[BeyondGeography]

130. Still grinding that old axe

Some people never move on.

[mountain grammy]

97. I'm struggling too, but I always knew Obama wasn't as liberal as me..

in a lot of ways, he's quite Republican, the more moderate types like John Lindsay, Nelson Rockefeller, Gerald Ford, etc., to be sure, but I didn't think Obama would touch the COLA, so I'm kind of at a loss here too.
This would be the moderate Republican take: The debt is unsustainable. New taxes are absolutely necessary. Closing loopholes is absolutely necessary, and reigning in "entitlements" is also absolutely necessary. We don't actually cut benefits, but we can cut the growth of benefits. Is this the same thing? With the economy so crappy, no way. But the theory is, cut the debt, the economy grows and grows. A rising tide raises all boats, so theoretically, people won't be so dependent on social security because they will be doing so much better during their working lives.
Who knows if it works? The greed, religion, and outright stupidity of conservatives always gets in the way.

[madrchsod]

136. yup...he`s a moderate republican.

but those moderate republicans we remember did`t touch social security.

[mountain grammy]

145. Agree, but these are dangerous times we live in! That said...

I still think going after the COLA is as big a mistake as not offering a "medicare option" in the ACA. But this time, liberals, please don't sit out the 2014 election!

[Progressive dog]

99. You are right, I like him but this is indefensible nt

[Carolina]

100. I stopped liking him and defending him

early in the first term when he showed his true colors by his selection of Geithner, Summers, Rahm, Duncan... when he back pedaled on the public option (for profit insurance is not health care), when he continually cowed to the repukes who expressed nothing but loathing for him...

Sure I voted for him, but only because Mittens was so much worse. Now I can't stand his vapid speeches or the sight of him on TV. An empty suit with no substance or real character

[FiveGoodMen]

109. "An empty suit with no substance or real character"

I think you've nailed it.

A front man for the PTB.

Just like Bush, but with a new improved look and feel.

[randome]

112. God, how simplistic can you be?

The man who has advocated for greater health care coverage, gay rights, gun control and fair taxation. This guy is working for the Powers-That-Be?

Get real. The Chained CPI proposal is a mistake but that's all it is.

It also has no chance of surviving he budget process.

[Number23]

113. I appreciate your efforts but why bother?

The nasty mindless hate and comments are at this point just feeding off of each other. This site has been ridiculous for several days now, any attempts to post an opposing point of view, a difference of opinion and perspective, even from well-regarded liberals, is besieged.

Hell, even attempts to talk about anything else that is going on in the country that millions of Americans may be concerned about are shouted down by simpletons saying that people are just "trying to change the subject." From you know, the one single issue that matters in America right now -- which are proposed cuts to SS which have about as much chance of passing as a pig flying out of Clarence Thomas' ass.

I actually understand the concern over this but the AMOUNT of it combined with the nasty, absurdly stupid attacks are just ridiculous. SS cuts have been on the table before and never made it any further than that, but we all know that won't stop the hysteria.

[randome]

129. I know. I think the chained CPI proposal was a mistake. We should hold his feet to the fire.

But to say there is no difference between the parties? There is a thread with the title 'I give up'. GIVE UP? What the hell?

[Isoldeblue]

146. +1 n/m

[FiveGoodMen]

114. The guy who took single-payer off the table and caved on public option?

Who half-heartedly went along with gay rights after his justice department defended DOMA?

How transparent can you be?

[randome]

128. Progress has been made. Not nearly enough, of course.

But we have made progress. An obstructionist Republican majority in the House means ANY progress is tantamount to a miracle.

Even if you want to see Obama as simply 'the lesser of two evils', that's still way ahead of where we would be if Romney was President.

So tell the WH and your Reps what you think. Don't give up.

[just1voice]

101. Leaving torture camps open might have been a clue

Not to mention single payer health care being "off the table" along with prosecuting war criminals and WMD conspiracy traitors.

Trying to steal Soc. Sec. doesn't surprise me at all, it's what people do when they don't have the moral compass to even hold torturers accountable.

[CrispyQ]

104. He's a tool for the 1%.

If the repubs hadn't talked such shit like 'legitimate rape' last summer & if Colorado hadn't been a swing state in November, I would have voted green. I'm disgusted with this prez. Not sure what I'll do in 2014, since this lesser of two evils is working so well for me - not.

[stevenleser]

105. You and I are on the same page.

This is a bridge too far.

[Fearless]

106. Nothing left to like about this president.

It's W Part II as far as I'm concerned. Oh but with a few token social issues to distract the media.

[glinda]

107. You are the company you keep and there we have it.

[MichiganVote]

108. There's nothing I WILL say to defend Obama.

My State Governor lied about Right to Work (for nuttin') and so has Obama. Both liars.

[Jackpine Radical]

110. The problem with playing Chicken with SS

is that you've proved you're willing to play Chicken with SS.

Period. Punkt. Full stop.

[Rex]

115. What happens if the GOP says 'yes'!

And then they get to BLAME Obama for the cuts AND get their pony!?! I don't know how stupid they are, but rope a dope works both ways.

[gateley]

116. Well stated, pacalo. I think you speak for many of us.

The steak/chicken/beans example is always given, but a LARGE chunk of seniors' income goes to health care. As someone posted, many senior are already taking their mediations every other day because they can't afford the prescriptions. What happens when the cost of medicine goes up?

And what really gets me , is that I don't think that the GOP ASKED for this! Ryan didn't have chained CPI in his evil budget even!

[sarge43]

118. I'm sorry to say; I agree

I feel stabbed in the back.

[jsr]

119. He clearly doesn't give a shit

about anyone but himself and his wealthy backers.

[Samantha]

120. Hi pacalo -- it is great to "see" you again

I understand and agree with your thread. I have much of the same feelings. I too wrote a thread about the harm that has been done with regard to how the base sees President Obama now. Many of us feel simply betrayed.

I guess it will take some time for us all to sort out our feelings; I personally am hoping the Republicans do not agree to any more revenue, which would negate President Obama's offer of the chained CPI.

Regards,

Sam

[Jamastiene]

125. K&R

Going after Social Security is unforgivable.

[BeyondGeography]

131. The lame, backroom-dealing is the saddest aspect of his presidency

He's a great campaigner, but when it comes to selling policies as a President, he has been largely MIA. He has the skills to go over the head of the Beltway (and applies them when it comes to winning elections), but he has governed as an eager-to-please insider.

[Isoldeblue]

133. It ain't over til

the fat lady sings.....
I don't know what will happen and til all this is passed and there is no going back, I can't make a judgement about Obama.

I'm a bit shook and have questions over this issue and his drone policy and the continuation of Bush's/Chaney's Homeland Security policies, to be sure.

But I still have some faith left in Obama. If I'm wrong, pity the fool for fooling me. The letter and calls he'll get from me will not be pretty or ladylike..... I'm basically a cynic, so this will hit hard, if he turns out to different than what I had believed. I have not trusted a politician for a verrrrry long time, till Obama.

I hear lots of doubt and complaints and many have turned on him. The thing is, what alternatives does he have as president of a house with intractable rethugs?

I don't hear solutions on how he should govern in the situation he's in. What steps should have he taken before or in the future? Just what exactly, people?? It certainly wasn't something he expected and neither did any of us. This congress is historically the worst and most unpatriotic, self-serving m'f'er's I've ever witnessed in over 66 years of my lifetime. There is no precedence set for how things are today.

The bottom line is that the POTUS only has so much power, while the house and states have the power to do the opposite of what Obama or we the people want.

But I am anxious to hear him explain enough for us to get why he's doing this or what his game plan is. In time, we'll know. But until then, we are all shooting in the dark about him.

No one knows anything for absolutely sure. It's time to get over the "instant gratification" and be patient. But still letting him know, what we want and what we don't. Which is no, to cutting SS and Medicare/Medicaid.

[ucrdem]

144. Axelrod no longer works for Obama. He works for MSNBC:

per wikipedia:

"It was announced on February 19, 2013, Axelrod joined NBC News and MSNBC as a senior political analyst."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/David_Axelrod

Interesting isn't it? I didn't see the show pacalo, and I think you expressed yourself well and honestly, but you have to consider that two employees of MSNBC do not represent the Obama administration. They basically represent MSNBC. And if they got you upset enough to pitch their show here on DU they're probably earning their pay. So the long and short of it is, this too shall pass.