General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsObama's support for Social Security cuts allows GOP leaders to become defenders of safety nets.
Here is the Republican campaign chairman accusing the president of balancing the budget on the backs of seniors.
This really angers me more than I can say. Health care givers and facilities for seniors are overwhelmed as it is, and President Obama seems unaware.
The fact that the head of the NRCC is right makes it all the more infuriating.
GOP campaign chairman calls chained CPI trying to balance the budget on the backs of seniors
BLITZER: Well, let's talk about these proposed changes that the president is putting forward when it comes to Social Security and Medicare, the shocking proposals that you say the president's putting forward that could affect seniors. What's so shocking about changing that CPI, that consumer price index the way that you would determine how much inflation would go ahead with increases for Social Security recipients, for example?
WALDEN: Well, once again, you're trying to balance this budget on the backs of seniors and I just think it's not the right way to go.
And here he is on the Medicare cuts:
Well, I thought it very intriguing in that the budget really lays out kind of a shocking attack on seniors, if you will. And we haven't seen all the detail yet, and we'll look at it, but I'll tell you, when you're going after seniors the way he's already done on Obamacare, taking $700 billion out of Medicare to put into Obamacare, and now coming back at seniors again, I think you're crossing that line very quickly here in terms of denying access to seniors for health care in districts like mine, certainly, and around the country. I think he's going to have a lot of pushback from some of the major senior organizations on this and Republicans, as well.
I would like to know why in the world the Democrats think this is going to work? Last night David Axelrod was pathetic on Rachel's show. His talking points were against the progressives, and he almost showed contempt.
I wonder whose bright idea this was? Wait, I think I know.
Guess what. Chained CPI is the bright idea of Third Way, the Dem policy shop.
Yesterday, the organization Third Way released a plan outlining several Social Security reform proposals meant to ensure the program's solvency over the next 75 years. The plan, called Saving Social Security, makes several fundamental changes to the program and cuts $2 in benefits for every $1 it increases taxes. The authors of the plan describe it as "savings-led" and say that by approaching Social Security reform in a progressive way, it's possible to come up with "a solvency plan that would make Franklin Roosevelt proud".
Now the Republicans can pretend to become the defenders of the elderly when that is very far from what they really are. That's what happens when Democrats latch on to Republican policy and make it our own.
There is no one now really standing up for the left and the liberals. They are all too busy playing their political games.
alsame
(7,784 posts)cut the safety nets but no one wants to take responsibility.
vi5
(13,305 posts)alsame
(7,784 posts)Way wants it privatized eventually, just like the GOP. This is the first of the death by 1000 cuts.
Lifelong Protester
(8,421 posts)This:
Now the Republicans can pretend to become the defenders of the elderly when that is very far from what they really are. That's what happens when Democrats latch on to Republican policy and make it our own.
Autumn
(44,762 posts)rec
markpkessinger
(8,381 posts)whathehell
(28,969 posts)and I thought she handed his ass to him. I was especially happy
to hear her call him out, repeatedly, on "raising the cap", something
which he had NO good answer for.
I love that woman!
xtraxritical
(3,576 posts)another tax on business.
whathehell
(28,969 posts)You know -- The way 80 percent of Americans in both parties want it!
xtraxritical
(3,576 posts)whathehell
(28,969 posts)Glad you are:
madfloridian
(88,117 posts)He was clueless.
markpkessinger
(8,381 posts). . . because he is thinking about his "legacy." It occurred to me that the last time a Democratic President started worrying too much about his legacy, we wound up with NAFTA and the repeal of Glass-Steagall.
madfloridian
(88,117 posts)Two things that have devastated our nation, signed by a Democratic president.
Douglas Carpenter
(20,226 posts)woo me with science
(32,139 posts)Buy both parties, polarize the fan bases for them, and then let the divided lemmings take turns defending the unconscionable. It's deviously clever, as long as there are always enough useful idiots* to pull it off.
We will be urged to be all upset about it again when Republicans are in power, but then it will be THEIR turn to circle the wagons and ensure that the bipartisan corporate takeover is protected.
Ever feel like we have been mistaken for lemmings?
*"Useful idiot": http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Useful_idiot:
patrice
(47,992 posts)madfloridian
(88,117 posts)We have always done all of the above. Stop assuming, and stop being so critical when you assume too much.
ProSense
(116,464 posts)"Obama's support for Social Security cuts allows GOP leaders to become defenders of safety nets."
...it's still possible to callout Republicans for their bullshit, that is unless the plan is to help them with their talking points.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/plum-line/wp/2013/04/10/fiscal-frauds/
sabrina 1
(62,325 posts)telling us that their party is protecting SS and as one of them said, they are 'shocked that the President would harm seniors this way'??? So what do we say to that? Do we lie and say he IS protecting Seniors by cutting their benefits?
Sorry, but I won't lie to defend anyone who proposes cuts to SS and who falsely ties SS to the Deficit.
I used to be able to defeat right wingers on the issues with no problem because we ARE the party of the people, the party that implemented those great programs, SS, Medicare and Medicaid. Now, I will simply not bother engaging them. Let those who think this is some great strategy to show how awful Republicans do so.
This is the third Republican to now claim they will protect SS from Democrats. There will be more, what a great campaign issue for them.
This is what the Third Way has done to the Democratic Party. This has to be what we focus on from now on, ridding the party of these faux democrats.
progressoid
(49,827 posts)ProSense
(116,464 posts)"Calling out Repubs for their bullshit doesn't invalidate Democratic bullshit."
...it doesn't, but helping them push their talking points isn't exactly calling them out, is it?
House GOP campaign chief doubles down on attack against Obama budget's Social Security cut
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10022653873
progressoid
(49,827 posts)I'm not pushing any RW talking points. Unless, FDR was a right winger.
Republicans are attacking this because it is politically expedient. Liberals are attacking it because of the harm it will do to Americans.
madfloridian
(88,117 posts)You posted Jed's diary, I posted Joan's.
Two good articles in support of Soc. Sec.
sabrina 1
(62,325 posts)What would any politician do when handed such a magnificent opportunity they could have only dreamed of up to now???
He and Bachmann now claiming the Republicans will NOT harm seniors.
He is SHOCKED, he said, that the President would 'harm Seniors' and that they will NEVER do such a thing!!
Did we not predict this, it was so obvious a result of this insane proposal.
I agree with you Madfloridian, it is totally infuriating that Democrats have worked so hard for this party only to be placed now in this position of being accused of wanting to harm seniors. Unbelievable.
madfloridian
(88,117 posts)It allows the Republicans to sound so righteous.
xtraxritical
(3,576 posts)Jakes Progress
(11,121 posts)As always, insightful and germane.
The only question is whether the president and his advisors are too dumb and too inexperienced to have seen this or whether they are part of the right wing program. Stupid or evil? Don't you just hate when that happens?
(Of course their is the very possible alternative that they are both.)
Katashi_itto
(10,175 posts)Jakes Progress
(11,121 posts)how many cheerleaders get on the panel.
Katashi_itto
(10,175 posts)xtraxritical
(3,576 posts)if Republicons reject this budget (which includes 98% of what they asked for) the President and Democrats can squarely lay the pain of sequester at their feet. If they further refuse to raise the debt ceiling this summer, after rejecting this offer, the Democrats can hammer home the theme of RepubliCON obstructionism. I hope this will be the denouement.
Jakes Progress
(11,121 posts)will be biggest campaign issue for republicans in the midterms. They have already begun. Their strategy is to tell seniors to vote in more republicans to keep Obama from cutting SS. It was a stupid move on the part of the administration.
1-Old-Man
(2,667 posts)patrice
(47,992 posts)trying to destroy everything and EVERYONE else in order to build their own base for an agenda THAT THEY CAN'T DELIVER FOR AT LEAST A COUPLE OF DECADES, ****IF**** THEN.
madfloridian
(88,117 posts)I am so tired of hearing about the "liberals" and their outrageous expectations. That is just right wing talk which has crept into the Democratic party speak via DLC and Third Way false centrism.
This stuff happens every time we the people of the Democratic party expect common sense things to happen.
You are using talking points that are geared to keep the left in its place.
patrice
(47,992 posts)Last edited Thu Apr 11, 2013, 02:16 PM - Edit history (1)
that reward people for staying home in 2014, IOW, "My way or the highway" and the highway IS what you and everything that you want (which, BTW, is pretty much exactly what I want too) are going to get.
The ends DO NOT justify the means and when YOUR means hurt people who did not get a chance to make their own free choices about the pain that YOU are delivering, that makes you no better than the oppressor you claim to be struggling against.
....................
Read up on alternative energy news, madfloridian, NOTHING is going to work except: 1. GET RID OF A BUNCH OF PEOPLE (& I'll give you just one guess who THAT'S going to be); and/or 2. As many people as possible need to move in together to reduce and share energy resources.
WHICH of those two solutions is quicker and more feasible politically and economically?
OBVIOUSLY 1. is, so that's what destruction of the basically socialistically* inclined "democracy" that we have going on right now will produce and destruction of the socialistically inclined "democracy" (that IS being fucked over by corporate personhood) is what will be delivered by what calls itself "the Left", under the AUTHORITARIAN influence of Libertarians and Anarchists, WILL DELIVER.
Mark my words, there ARE those amongst what calls itself "the Left" who see 1. as a perfectly justifiable means to the end of "saving Earth" and oh so coincidentally, themselves, which they'll actually fail at because they and their very own citizens of the archipelagos will throw away so much value that it is possible that what comes next also will not be viable, or it will be viable for less and less and less and richer and richer and richer people, eating up yet another whole class of SERFS, until Earth's climate stabilizes.
In short, what calls itself "the Left" is selling BULLSHIT under popular marketing labels directed at younger generations' responses to FADS. It's another "man behind the curtain" with its own objectives that you and a bunch of other people are ASSUMING are the same as yours and, whereas some short term stuff may look satisfactory to you, the END GAME is the same as the 1%'s. They're just buying a different set of serfs.
...............................
What we need is TIME! Time to make 2. happen and people who pedal propaganda from what calls itself "the Left" and actively promote staying home in 2014, or working AGAINST Democrats, ARE THROWING AT LEAST A COUPLE OF DECADES AWAY. They are not admitting that. You're supposed to believe "Presto Chango = Egalitarian Paradise with exactly whatever your dreams are about all of that in full effect." Don't believe me? Press them on these issues and see how much you're included with the in-kids "Leftie" hipsters after you ask the wrong QUESTIONS.
Just like the oppressor, what calls itself "the Left" will tell you whatever you want to hear AND very likely WILL fail at what they say they are up to anyway, because whatever they create will STILL run on nothing but MONEY and OIL.
.................
* And if you doubt that we are a socialistically inclined "democracy", look up figures on how many people in the entire population receive some form of GOVERNMENT/TAX money of somekind (haven't seen this stuff for a while, but I recall it being something close to a quarter of all individuals, throw in the way that we subsidize Wall Street and we have nearly full on socialism going on, socialism that's schizoid because of capitalist leeches who are LYING about how things work). I'm NOT against individuals receiving government support, but ours is a WARPED kind of socialism, with the WRONG kind of power structures because of FLAWS IN OUR CONSTITUTION that allow things like government subsidized Corporate Personhood LIARS, so the socialism is tilted toward corporations, and gets called capitalism, a lie (hence the Libertarian angst).
Do you think we should throw away ALL of the ground we have gained and start over with nothing? That's what calls itself "the Left" wants and it has it's own corporate persons to make that happen.
madfloridian
(88,117 posts)Those are two vital issues for me. We are going backwards in those two areas.
You put a lot of stuff on me that I have not said. Things I have not advocated at all.
My big gripe here is setting the stage for Republicans to pretend to stand up for things Democrats have stood for traditionally.
patrice
(47,992 posts)madfloridian
(88,117 posts)I think it's a mistake giving the GOP this opening.
I am seeing the public education of America being quickly taken over by corporations. I am seeing my party advocate cuts for seniors when none are necessary.
Rex
(65,616 posts)when we laugh at their 'big tent' garbage and bullwhip. Many don't want the Left at all involved. Fine. Be losers, I think I am about done caring for Centrist-Righters on this site or the RAH RAH crowd. They seem to have nothing to add to the conversation.
Rex
(65,616 posts)sounds like they hate the Left? The main problem is we won't shut up about reality and you cannot handle it at all.
Sorry if these notions are beyond your understanding.
Douglas Carpenter
(20,226 posts)hockeynut57
(230 posts)matt819
(10,749 posts)And you can just picture the GOP campaigns in 2014: Obama doesn't care about you, my constituents; he wanted to cut SS.
Are we ever in Bizarro world??!
Babel_17
(5,400 posts)is the respect the media shows to Republicans advancing the argument that they are the protectors of SS.
That's how our MSM has been operating for a long time, Republicans don't get called out on living in their own reality, and it's gotten worse since Bush II.
KISS (Keep IT Simple, Stupid): We, the defenders of our safety net. Them, ruthless slashers of the safety net.
Was it worth it to see that damaged?
madfloridian
(88,117 posts)Democrats ARE the defenders of the safety nets....and yes that image is now damaged.
Dyedinthewoolliberal
(15,485 posts)that now the Republicans, trying to prive they are not heartless bastards, have started to publicly defend SSI and Medicare, how can they deny keeping those programs healthy now? ALl along they have hated those programs, now they are defending them.
It could be more veiled strategy on the part of the White House. It IS possible is what I'm saying.
asjr
(10,479 posts)I feel this is his strategy. I do not think for a minute he is going to mess with SS. And those Republicans who jumped on it prematurely are being laughed at.
Sheepshank
(12,504 posts)they will be relying on the fact that Ryan NEVER said he would try and privitize it (watch that talking point be re-visited).
In a addition, as the new found saviours of the program, how can they possible vote to do anything but protect it?
jwirr
(39,215 posts)and we have now lost the high ground even if he is playing chess with it and has no intention of cutting them.
madfloridian
(88,117 posts)Surely is putting us in a bind trying to support his position.
jwirr
(39,215 posts)austerity president who i cannot trust.
sabrina 1
(62,325 posts)cut the deficit by 2 trillion. What part of his budget will do that? Cutting SS will do nothing to cut the deficit because it had nothing to do with the deficit. Is it possible he doesn't know this? And if he does, then why did he include SS in any budget with the goal of reducing the deficit??
Either he has extremely bad economic advisers or putting SS into the budget had nothing to do with the deficit. He's a smart man so the latter has to be true. And then the question is, what is trying to do here?
madfloridian
(88,117 posts)Methinks he is listening to the think tank policy shops too much.
Spitfire of ATJ
(32,723 posts)Third Doctor
(1,574 posts)by his rightfully pissed off base and now by his enemies. Whatever capital he had has slipped away. The GOP has actually for once done the smart strategic thing. A lot of idiots in this country don't remember that they have GOP people like Paul Ryan who wants destroy the safety net all together and will side the Repubs now. Even if Obama backs off the damage has been done.
If Obama had ran on this in 2012 he would have had a harder time being reelected. I can't defend him this time. Not this time...
HiPointDem
(20,729 posts)the parties trade the presidency back & forth between them?
madfloridian
(88,117 posts)they are pushing Jeb's education policies. Not a good idea.
madfloridian
(88,117 posts)The White House is in damage control mode after President Obama's budget with its Social Security cuts has been greeted with near-universal scorn. (Joe Scarborough's on their side, so they've got that going for them.)
While they're regrouping at the moment, they'll soon be beyond the "Republicans made us do it" narrative and move on to why these benefit cuts aren't so bad and how they will protect the most vulnerable with a "bump" in benefits. How this works is that after so many years of retirement or disability payments (in the Simpson-Bowles proposal this was cribbed from, it's 20 years) along with years of compounded chained CPI cuts, the oldest and the poorest will get a "bump" in benefits. That's how they'll mitigate for the cuts that they say aren't really cuts. (Update: The WH fact sheet outlines that the bump will occur after 10 years for retirees, 15 for disabled.)
madfloridian
(88,117 posts)President Obama has riled loyal Democrats by tossing Social Security onto the table in his poker game with Republicans. Not to worry. I think I know how this story ends. A year from now, when the 2014 congressional campaigns are hot underway, Republicans will be running against Obama-the-slasher and promising to protect Social Security from the bloodthirsty Democrats.
By then, having lost on his too-cute strategy, the president will be reduced to lamely reassuring old folks. Really, he didnt actually intend to cut their benefits, really he didnt. It was just a ploy to get tightwad conservatives to give in a little on tax increases. Republicans can pull out the videotapes in which Obama and team explain their high-minded purposesacrificing the Democratic partys sacred honor in order to get Republicans to play nice.
Forget about that. House Speaker John Boehner promptly brushed off Obamas gambit. If the president wants to whack Social Security, Boehner suggested he can do it, but dont expect the GOP to collaborate in such a plot. If the president believes these modest entitlement savings are needed to shore up these programs, there is no reason they should be held hostage for more tax hikes, Boehner said.
The president set this trap himself; now Boehner will spring it on him. Does Obama not remember how Democrats lost control of the House back in 2010? The party got very little credit for enacting health care reform because the Republicans had already demonized the accomplishment as a threat to the much-beloved program of Medicare. The rightwingers promised to save Medicare from bloodthirsty Democrats by repealing Obamas new reform program. This was all a ridiculous lie, of course, but the White House declined to call out the liars. Instead, Obama responded with flowers. This time, he is taking Republicans out to dinner.
HiPointDem
(20,729 posts)is, how Obama is going to turn this into a victory for the democratic party and the people if we just wait long enough.
SOMEONE JUST TOLD ME SO IN ALL CAPS.
usGovOwesUs3Trillion
(2,022 posts)Or, conversely, how much he will stick to his "guns"?