Voters Think Obama Is Trying To Take Their Social Security, Medicare and Retirement.

[TheMastersNemesis]

While I was waiting to play golf the other day was listening to a couple of guys talking about how Obama is stealing their retirement. They also believe he is trying to get rid of their Social Security and Medicare. And in all honesty I cannot defend Obama to them because of his actions related to reforming those programs.

By putting Simpson and Bowles on that commission and proposing the "chained CPI" he is undercutting Democrats and giving the real culprits cover. And we know it is the GOP that has caused all these problems and they are the ones who have proposed initiatives that would wreck both programs.

Obama's silence or lack of aggressive defense of these programs by taking all cuts off the table and his willingness to propose a reform that is absurd on its face may have already wrecked Democratic chances in 2014. Obama's Clinton style triangulation and bipartisanship is destructive and counter productive. The fact that he has not aggressively spoken out against raising the retirement age and eligibility age for Medicare is a political blunder. His embrace of austerity has given the GOP the playing field and control of the conversation.

The real problem is that Obama is the villain in people's minds. And it is particularly entrenched in the minds of white males. What is happening is almost the same as "job losses" being blamed on Clinton who pushed to pass GOP initiatives like NAFTA, GATT, favored nation status, telecommunications legislation, and "welfare deform" during his administration.

Democratic presidents like Clinton and Obama who are willing to pass and support what really are GOP ideas are idiotic what they have done and are doing by being "reasonable" is no better than giving your enemy the weapons and ammunition to slay you.

I supported Obama in both elections but his centrism in not defendable. And the longer he shuns and attacks his own base the more difficult it is to move the country forward. Obama is too willing to allow so many GOP initiatives and policies to continue.

His biggest mistake has been to not abolish Bush's education policies and continue them under "race to the top". His education policies alone are a very good way to turn our children over to RW ideology.

If Obama is the best Democratic president that we can field, then the country is doomed to further economic erosion.

[Triana]

1. IMO, he is. n/t

[Myrina]

2. Exactly.

And then he and the GOP are going to sit back and point fingers at each other in public, while patting each other on the back with the other hand.

[duffyduff]

10. He is. There's no getting around it.

Social Security and the other programs are not the problem. The problem is with corrupt, ego-ridden politicians who want to get their hands on the money in order to further enrich the banksters.

[forestpath]

16. +1000

[leftstreet]

21. +1

[ctsnowman]

60. +1

[demokatgurrl]

82. yes - I can no longer convince myself

That he is being pushed by the repubs. This is what he wants.

[lumberjack_jeff]

120. If you believe what he says, and watch what he does, then he absolutely is.

The deniers all rely upon a belief that he's not telling us the truth.

[Populist_Prole]

3. Yeah...

Sure does make me squirm to see so much ammunition given to people just like describe in your OP. Granted they will always find a reason to be anti-Obama, but we sure as hell don't need to give them any real reasons.

[TheMastersNemesis]

6. The Most Aggravating Thing About Obama Is He Demands His Base STFU. The GOP On The Other Hand -

dances to its base no matter how extreme they are. As a progressive I am put in an position that is not defensible.

[Populist_Prole]

9. Can't agree more

Very well said in the most condensed logical way. I feel the same frustration.

[Pisces]

39. Maybe he knows his base has the brains to understand nuance and compromise where

As the repubs know they are dealing with the lowest common denominator. I have never felt that the Pres. Had told us to STFU. On the contrary he has asked us to make him change things with our words and actions. You must be listening to someone different.

[Oilwellian]

42. It's insidious Third Way propaganda

It's not just the Democratic base who are speaking out against the cuts. A majority of ALL Americans are against ANY cuts to SS & Medicare. It's been an insidious and quite successful plan to divide our party, and it has handed the Republicans who are hanging by a nail over a cliff, an incredible gift for the 2014 campaign.

[G_j]

115. /\ yep

so sad

[Recursion]

4. Any evidence other than a strong desire that this were so? (nt)

[woo me with science]

24. ...

Corporate and bank-cozy appointments, over and over again, including major appointments like:

A serial defender of corrupt bankers for the SEC; the architect of "Kill Lists" and supporter of torture, drone wars, and telecom immunity for the CIA; and a Monsanto VP who has lied and been involved in extremely disturbing claims regarding food safety for the FDA. An Attorney General who has not prosecuted a single large bank but wages war against medical marijuana users and *for* strip searches and warrantless surveillance of Americans. And let's not forget Tim Geithner.

Bailouts and settlements for corrupt banks (with personal pressure from Obama to attorneys general to approve them),
Refusal by Obama's DOJ to prosecute even huge, egregious examples of bank fraud (i.e, HSBC)
signing NDAA to allow indefinite detention,
"Kill lists" and claiming of the right to assassinate even American citizens without trial
Expansion of wars into several new countries
A renewed public advocacy for the concept of preemptive war
Drone campaigns in multiple countries with whom we are not at war
Proliferation of military drones in our skies
Federal targeting of Occupy for surveillance and militarized response to peaceful protesters
Fighting all the way to the Supreme Court for warrantless surveillance
Fighting all the way to the Supreme Court for strip searches for any arrestee
Supporting and signing Internet-censoring and privacy-violating measures like ACTA
Support for corporate groping and naked scanning of Americans seeking to travel
A new, massive spy center for warrantless access to Americans' phone calls, emails, and internet use
Support of legislation to legalize massive surveillance of Americans
Militarized police departments, through federal grants
Marijuana users and medical marijuana clinics under assault,
Skyrocketing of the budget for prisons.
Failing to veto a bipartisan vote in Congress to gut more financial regulations.
Passionate speeches and press conferences promoting austerity for Americans
Bush tax cuts extended for billionaires, them much of it made permanent
Support for the payroll tax holiday, tying SS to the general fund
Support for the vicious chained CPI cut in Social Security and benefits for the disabled
Social security, Medicare, and Medicaid offered up as bargaining chips in budget negotiations, with No mention of cutting corporate welfare or the military budget
Advocacy of multiple new free trade agreements, including The Trans-Pacific, otherwise known as "NAFTA on steroids."
Support of drilling, pipelines, and selling off portions of the Gulf of Mexico
Corporate education policy including high stakes corporate testing and closures of public schools
Entrenchment of exorbitant for-profit health insurance companies into healthcare, through mandate
Legal assault on union rights of hundreds of thousands of federal workers
New policies of targeting children and first responders in drone campaigns,
New policies of awarding medals for remote drone attacks,
Appointment of private prison executives to head the US Marshal's office
Massive escalation of federal contracts for private prisons under US Marshall's office

[WhaTHellsgoingonhere]

38. nice

[Recursion]

40. So, no. Got it.

I was worried for a second this was more than a long whine. Carry on.

[bvar22]

86. Great rebuttal.

Only possible response is belligerent denial with the necessary covering of the ears.


Nice list off the top of your head.
Please allow me to copy your work,
add to it,
and repost it in the future.
I will probably add spacer lines and bullets.

Thanks!


You will know them by their WORKS,
not by their promises or excuses.
[font size=5 color=green]Solidarity99![/font][font size=2 color=green]
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------[/center]

[AnotherMcIntosh]

106. Good idea.

[woo me with science]

109. Please, please do.

I would be honored. There is much to be added, some just from within the past few weeks. Just off the top of my head, I was planning on adding (but needed to find links for):

billions for upgrading nuclear bombs in Europe,
lowering of EPA standards for radiation,
replacing poultry standards with industry self-regulation,
changing of the formula to calculate GDP,
plans to allow increased media consolidation,
granting robosigning immunity,
treatment of whistleblowers including indictment of John Kiriakou for exposing CIA torture of detainees, treatment of Bradley Manning
Pursuit of Julian Assange

And I would put in bold as opener or ending to this list that the vast majority of it had nothing whatsoever to do with Republican obstruction.

Thanks, bvar22.

[AnotherMcIntosh]

105. Thank you.

[NightWatcher]

5. "Voters think"? Good thing he isn't running again, huh?

He won twice yet people still worry about him being elected again. I know I know 2014 election, but come on.

[Fumesucker]

14. Good thing Obama's not a Democrat because voters might connect him with the party otherwise

[woo me with science]

53. +100000

Oh, my WORD.

[SammyWinstonJack]

124. heh

[betterdemsonly]

29. That is right being that he is a slightly less

evil, but still evil, he should be lameducked by progressives in Congress! At least he would be if they aren't corrupt too!

[Scuba]

7. Trying to defend the President has become an impossible task.

[bvar22]

8. Is it too much to expect our Democratic President do something like this?

[woo me with science]

83. That one hurts.

That one shows the depth of the problem we face.

[denem]

116. It hurts more than words can say.

nt.

[lumberjack_jeff]

121. Exactly right. n/t

[CTyankee]

11. I was afraid of this. I knew this whole chained cpi thing would blow up in our faces.

what I can't figure out is why Obama's people didn't realize it...

[zipplewrath]

12. Maybe you don't understand their goals

Just sayin', think of what the logical outcomes of their actions will be, then ask yourself if they see them as positive or negative?

[CTyankee]

19. his stand can be used against them in repub. propaganda for years to come. That to me is

the "logical" outcome here. Why aren't we being strong in defending SS? I don't get it...

[zipplewrath]

22. Against them?

Or does it move them further right, to clear room for him to fill in and accomplish what he is after?

[CTyankee]

26. but what good is it when the repubs can use it against us?

Why do we hand them another stick to beat Dems with?

[zipplewrath]

34. "We"?

Why does the White House? The answer to that can be a bit disturbing.

[CTyankee]

41. Look, can you tell me what you are thinking here? I'm truly wondering.

Help me out, since I don't really know what you are driving at...

[zipplewrath]

50. Your goals aren't the White House goals

It might be time to consider that your goals and the White House goals aren't the same thing. They are executing their strategy because it serves their goals even if it doesn't serve yours.

[CTyankee]

61. Oh, I get you now. I guess we wait and see...

[woo me with science]

65. The patient push to awakening.

Well done.

[CTyankee]

85. not sure that is the correct answer, but it is one explanation. As I said, we shall see...

[bvar22]

88. You won't have to wait long to see THIS:

[center][font size=6]Obama tried to CUT
YOUR Social Security!

We STOPPED him!
Vote Republican 2014!

[/center][/font]

You won't have to wait long at all.
You can TRY long winded explainations about how Obama wasn't serious,
and he was only bluffing,
and it is really the Republicans who want to do that,
but I don't think that will get any traction,
and certainly won't fit in a 10 second Sound Byte.

ALL the Republicans have to do is play the video of Obama pushing SS into the pot.


You also won't have to wait long before Social Security is Back-On-the-Table in the very next budget "negotiation" now that the TABOO against touching it has been broken By a Democratic President.

[CTyankee]

89. I don't buy that he wasn't serious or bluffing. And you are right about breaking the taboo.

And I don't believe the chess game stuff. This is why I don't understand why he did it. I do trust Paul Krugman who reasons that Obama wants to be taken seriously by the Very Serious People and offering chained cpi is a way of proving his bona fides. I am totally on "Team Krugman" because he has been right on everything.

[bvar22]

93. Krugman hasn't been always right.

He was very wrong about NAFTA, Free Trade, and Free Markets.
He has since modified his position somewhat,
but he is still wrong.

I agree with you that President Obama is deadly serious about dismantling the few remaining legacies of the New Deal and the Great Society,
and Privatizing everything,
AND, that WILL earn him "bona fides" from the "Very Serious People",
if by [i\]Very Serious People you mean those who already OWN the Global Corporations.
You know, the 1%.

He and his friends among the Very Serious People will continue to throw just enough beans and rhetoric to all the rest of us to keep the easily confused disoriented.

[CTyankee]

95. I see it as him throwing to the VSP chained cpi as a kind of delaying tactic. I don't think it

will work, as you think, so don't get on my case about that. My sense of what I think is that he wants the public to see what this policy will do and then make a reasoned judgement which (I am guessing) he thinks they will reject.

I think his problem is that he is seeing this in highly antiseptic terms and it is really a raging infection. He thinks this little bit of anti-sepsis will help cure it. Not sure it will. I think lots MORE must be done. And he isn't doing it.

So, before you start getting on my case, let me just say I think he is very wrong and he needs to get this thing right and SOON. We NEED more stimulus so that jobs can be created and he can do this. GET IT DONE, Mr.President!

[CTyankee]

100. I haven't read what krugman said about NAFTA, Free Trade and Free Markets...

but I know I sure was. I've been reading PK since 2001...

[woo me with science]

94. Here is my view, CTYankee,

Last edited Tue Apr 23, 2013, 06:53 PM - Edit history (1)

and I offer it with great respect and an embarrassed apology. You are among my favorite DUers, not the least because I have always wished that I'd studied more art in school, and your wonderful teaching interactions with everyone who responds to your art quizzes constantly inform and delight me. I look forward to them, a lot, even though I never have the answers. I apologize to you for my post about gradual awakenings. It was rude, particularly directed to another DUer, and I am grateful you responded directly to me the way you did. I really am sorry. I hope you can forgive me and try to hear my response to the post you just made.

To start: Corporate money and influence flood our entire political system now, from elections, where it takes billions in contributions and advertising to begin to complete at the national level, to the lobbying and deal-making that pervade Congress and the White House, to the restructuring in recent decades of countless aspects of our system to favor corporate interests (e.g., debate structure and exclusions, changes in funding laws...).

Given all of this, it deeply frustrates me that people keep trying to locate the problem in psychological explanations (i.e., in individual politicians who are mysteriously timid or have some idiosyncratic need to "impress" someone), when the systemic, pervasive corporate-financial web of pressure and influence is so clear and documented and in our faces.

In my strongly held view, the reason the betrayals keep happening is not a mystery. It is not a mystery at all. It is not a matter of personality quirks or psychological peccadillos or evil intentions or personal weaknesses of individual candidates. It happens over and over and over again, because the system creates it and demands it. It is virtually impossible anymore for a politician to make it to the level of Presidential election unless they are massively beholden to major corporate donors, and the same is true to a large extent for Congressional races. And the corporate-financial pressures and incentives once in office are just as great. And even those few who might have a fleeting chance to buck the financial pressures, say, as a result of being independently wealthy to begin with, will be targeted mercilessly with the deep pockets of the gargantuan corporate media to remove them from the races even before they begin.

I just feel like we need to cry this from the rafters. If you look at how the whole system is structured, it's not a mystery at all. It's really, really, really not.

The media doesn't talk about financial corruption of the system, which is why so many people remain mystified. But IMO we need to look squarely at this elephant in the room, and realize that it's really *good* news that it's not such a mystery, because structural problems, once identified and confronted with unified public outrage, can be fixed.

[CTyankee]

96. Oh, thank you for your kind words! I am so honored that you feel this way. I did not

think you were being disrespectful, I just disagreed. And thank you for your thoughtful explanation of your analysis of this situation. I can see where you are coming from. Yes, we do need to "cry from the rafters." But we don't. I wish we did and I wish we talked about the financial corruption of the system (which is nothing new in America). That we don't has been a constant cry from me since my anti-Vietnam War days as a mother of a young son. And these many years later, there is nothing more discouraging than hearing your analysis, which I have heard and heard.

At long last we may be at a point where we ask where is revolution. This may just be ahead of us. Where Obama figures, I don't know. It's an interesting question. At some point the people have had enough. I never thought I would see it, but now I am not so sure. This is why I seek refuge in art. It gives me a quiet place where I can ask questions and hope to get answers that I can use to sleep at night.

None of this answers your questions, I know. Barack Obama has a beating heart. I just have to wonder but to hope that he understands, in the bleak of night, what it is he is doing...

As a peace offering, here is Brahms:

[woo me with science]

99. Thank you. That was really beautiful,

and much needed right now. And right after I listened to it, I noticed that someone else mentioned this very piece in KoKo's thread about coping these days. it was lovely to have just heard it and to be able to hear the music in my head...

I hear you about the long-range view. I am not sure exactly where we're headed or how soon, but I think I'm drawn to your art lessons for exactly the reasons you talk about here.

Peace to you, too.

[Oilwellian]

43. What makes you think they didn't? n/t

[pampango]

44. You were afraid that a couple of guys on a golf course would complain that Obama is stealing their

Social Security? The OP is not about some national poll that shows that Americans now trust republicans more than Democrats on Social Security. It is about 2 guys on a golf course who then - conveniently perhaps - come to represent the entire American public.

[CTyankee]

90. I see. an evil plot hatched on a golf course to hand over the USA to the republican party.

OK, I checked off that box...

[CountAllVotes]

58. Why?

Nancy Pelosi supports it as do others. Senators and representatives like her that support this on both sides of the table have one thing in common: They have NEVER HAD TO DO WITHOUT in their entire lives.

Does Nancy Pelosi collect social security? I rather doubt it.

Who needs such a pittance to live and and be forced into Medicare because of it when you live in a million dollar mansion? Certainly not Nancy Pelosi nor Pres. Obama or any of the rest of these Washington pigs with all of their $$$!! They are after all the 1%! We must protect them at ALL COSTS!

[closeupready]

64. This. Pelosi and the rest are all very, VERY WEALTHY.

Pelosi is worth, what, $80 million if not more. Why should she really care about social security?

Don't get me wrong, that doesn't necessarily mean I dislike them; in fact, on most issues, I think they are correct.

But on this specific issue, your personal wealth is going to insure that no matter what happens to social security, you will be okay.

No, nobody who wants a health social security program can rely upon ANY of these DC insiders to protect it. We need to protect it for ourselves.

[CountAllVotes]

71. Feinstein is another one

Rich as all hell owns a few mansions here and there and I really never much cared for her and no, I never vote for her. I leave the box for Senator blank when I vote. I can't take her, never could and never will. Any good San Franciscan that has been around awhile and remembers her as Mayor of this great City has known this for decades!

The rich have not a clue, not a clue.

[closeupready]

72. Yep. Feinstein is just awful, and a hypocrite.

For those whose Senator she is, constant vigilance is essential, IMO.

[CountAllVotes]

75. She is one of my senators

and as I stated, I do not vote for her. She's rotten to the core!

I'll never forget her ugly history in SF. While I was living there, the Moscone/Milk murders occurred. Moscone had just won the election as the new mayor of SF and he ran against "Dear Dianne" as she was called in SF at that time or "Dianne Frankenstein".

After Mayor Moscone was shot and killed, she became the new unelected mayor being she was the President of the Board of Supervisors in SF and next in line for the mayor's job given her position much to the dismay of the general populace of the City at that time.

She announced that the Mayor and Supervisor Milk had been shot and killed. I remember picking up almost a sense of glee when she made that announcement for now it was she who was now the Mayor that no one wanted. again.

And from there emerged her "political career" and we see what it has become. Is she really a Democrat? I really do not think so and that is why I never will vote for her!

SOME OF US NEVER FORGET!

On edit: It was also Dear Dianne that banned the Grateful Dead from playing in SF after their New Year's Eve concert at SF Civic in 1984. That really pissed me off and shame on her for doing this. All of the members of this great band were natives of the bay area, Garcia himself a native San Franciscan!

[closeupready]

80. Oh, yeah - I remember a lot of that.

I could get started on Iraq, too, and her votes in the Senate, but I'll just leave it for now. Cheers.

[BlueCaliDem]

101. Did you vote for Mike Strimling in the primaries last year? I did.

I tried very hard to get the word out to support and vote for Mike Strimling so he'd at least have a chance to go up against Feinstein in the general. But he ultimately got LESS votes than Orly Taitz.

Where are all the Progressives in California?

[CountAllVotes]

110. No

As I stated, I voted for no one for Senator v. Feinstein.

I am after all a registered Democrat and I vote the ticket. However, if it is someone that I simply do like like, I do not vote at all.

I learned by lesson the hard way about voting for persons outside of the Democratic party years ago. What a fool I was indeed. Name: Quakenbush ... UGH.

[BlueCaliDem]

114. He's a Democrat. And a true Progressive.

Here is his very admirable bio: http://www.smartvoter.org/2012/06/05/ca/state/vote/strimling_m/

I would never vote outside of the Democratic Party, either. I didn't back in 2000 and I won't ever. I know it's a choice of the lesser of two {corporate} evils, but the Democratic Party is all we have now to counter the Republicans.

[CTyankee]

91. well, all right, then...

but my instinct is not as overwrought as yours in this case.

[AnotherMcIntosh]

112. IMO, no matter how much we want it, his goal is not to preserve the traditional Democratic Party

and what's left of the American middle-class but to preserve the "two party" system at all costs.

I'm not sure that he miscalculated the damage that this will do to the Democratic Party in the next election. How could he not know that Social Security is important to the country as a whole and an important plank of the Democratic platform? He even specifically campaigned on a principle of maintaining Social Security. He knows that the issue is important. But, IMO, maintaining the "two-party" system (and preventing the Republican Party from collapsing under its own weight) is even more important.

There is no way that this is going to help Democratic candidates in the next election.

[lumberjack_jeff]

122. Your premise depends upon accurately understanding their goals.

I don't think you do.

Obama wants to look like a very serious person who is willing to make the hard choices by doing what his University of Chicago business school advisers and friends agree is what very serious people do.

He appointed the simpson bowles commission because he wants to cut social security and wanted very serious people to give him political cover.

[Faryn Balyncd]

13. The solution is for the President to admit he has been werong on this issue, and to back up these...

...words with actions: withdraw his proposal to further rig the already rigged CPI, and pledge to veto any bill that includes it.

[Cal33]

23. Fat chance of this ever happening. I voted both times for Obama, but

I don't regret it. Just look at the alternative. It's even worse.
A complete Fascist takeover has been prevented until 2016, at
which time, we'll see how the elections will go.

It seems to me that Hillary Clinton will not be too much unlike
Obama. I'd rather take my chances and vote for Sen. Sanders,
Elizabeth Warren, or Alan Grayson. It's high time that we get a
real Democrat -- for a change. I've had it up to here with
Centrists. No more Centrists for me!!

[ctsnowman]

62. X2

[Cal33]

73. Welcome to DU, and may your future posts be longer than this one. :)

[BlueCaliDem]

103. This is very reminiscent of "Vote Nader" from 2000.

"No more centrists for me!" "Gore and Bush are no different!" and "Let's elect a REAL Liberal!"

Enough Liberals voted for Nader {and refused to listen to the warning by Progressives that the GOP were funding his campaign to siphon votes away from Gore} and then we got Bush.

You seriously want a repeat in 2016? Because you can bet your social safety net benefits on the fact that John Ellis Bush is going to be running in 2016.

"Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it" ~ George Santayana

As a person who wants to see this country progress, I will cast my vote for Hillary Clinton IF she's the nominee. I won't bother with fringe candidates who have zero, let me repeat that, ZERO chance of winning, because then I'll be - and here again it must be repeated since too many have forgotten - "casting my vote for a Republican".

Even the TeaBaggers know only to vote their choices in the primaries, but to get behind any Republican who wins it. It's a lesson Liberals on the ultra-left still need to learn.

[Cal33]

123. You are right. When push comes to shove, I'll vote for any Democrat rather

than for a Republican. What I'm trying to say is this: It's about time
that Democrats begin to understand that a Centrist Dem. can only
temporarily postpone the time before the Fascist Right-Wingers
take over our country and transform it into a dictatorship. It's
only a question of time.

A Centrist Democratic president has yet to show that s/he is
capable of changing the direction in which our nation is going --
towards self-destruction. We need a new FDR. Obama sounded
like a new FDR when he was campaigning, but he turned out to
be different when he was/is in office.

People like Sanders, Warren and Grayson seem to be capable of filling
that role. But we don't yet really know. From what we have seen
of these three so far, they look quite promising. We've got to let them
have a chance to try for REAL change.

I think too many Democrats are still in dreamland. I don't believe we
have much time left before we self-destruct.

[BlueCaliDem]

125. I understand your frustration, but realistically speaking,

how Liberal do you think Sanders or Warren or Grayson will remain to be with this Congress? We need to change Congress if we wan't a more progressive president, but for some strange reason, that appears easier said than done.

One of the first things President Obama did when he was arrived in the WH was sign an E.O. to shut down Gitmo within a year, believing that his fellow Democrats in the Senate would back him up since they'd been complaining about it all throughout their campaigns. Well, when push came to shove, they didn't support him. In fact, they dealt him an embarrassing slap in the face. They not only stopped him from closing Gitmo, but they put strict rules on how he was allowed to remove detainees. It hasn't stopped him from removing them, but it's been a slog.

FDR had a more supportive Congress compared to President Obama, so I understand why progress is so slow with this one. If we're frustrated with the slow progress, can you imagine how he feels?

But let's not forget what he's gotten through so far. The list is long. He's had to be clever in order to get *anything* through, though, like burying the public option in the PPACA, knowing there'd be challenges that would take it to the SCOTUS. But we got it and it will open this October.

You and I will have to come to terms with the fact that this nation is slow when it comes to progress because the majority (unfortunately) fear change. I've always contended, Americans will always do the right thing . . . after every alternative is exhausted.

[forestpath]

15. I guess they just don't understand eleventy dimension chess.

[treestar]

17. Well you should defend him, because he has not proposed eliminating the programs

And ask those people if they voted for candidates who would "take it away."

[woo me with science]

27. Good god.

Last edited Tue Apr 23, 2013, 02:36 PM - Edit history (2)

"He has not proposed ELIMINATING the programs.

How the bar has been lowered...

[treestar]

33. That's what the people in the OP's story were saying

How it was going to be "taken away" from them.

[closeupready]

18. That's not a controversial belief, is it?

I mean, other than among hardcore cultists?

[yellowcanine]

20. "A couple of guys" = "voters." Wow. You need to get out more.

Seriously.

[Demo_Chris]

25. When Obama (or Clinton) PROPOSES something it is no longer a "GOP initiative"

Obama is proposing chained CPI, he has proposed it over and over and over again. He has fought harder to promote this SS destroying proposal than ANY measure intended to help the poor or promote employment. It's not a GOP proposal, it's his proposal.

The same applied to Clinton and free trade. Clinton wanted it, he got it, and he deserves the blame. No President in modern history has done more to destroy working class American families and ensure the massive transfer of wealth to the elite. Obama apparently wants to finish the job.

[woo me with science]

47. +1000 Reality is, apparently, unpleasant.

The brazen denial in this thread is just breathtaking.

[woo me with science]

28. Voters are not blind.

The difference between fiction and reality is that, in "1984," Newspeak can convince the proles that the chocolate ration has, in fact, been increased.

In real life, it is much more difficult to use propaganda to get people to disbelieve what they experience in their own lives every single day.

[MichiganVote]

30. If it looks like a duck......

And just to be clear, Obama really has no education policy. Exactly as intended.

[duffyduff]

46. This is actually his education policy

http://www.broadeducation.org/asset/429-arrasmartoptions.pdf


This is word-for-word Obama's education policy, including his teacher-hating remarks at the very end of the document.


This reminds me of PNAC and Bush's foreign policy.

[woo me with science]

84. Thank you for posting this.

It never ends, does it.

[Pisces]

31. HA, what a joke.

[AnnieBW]

32. Oh, they're Federal Employees?

But that would be Congress, not Obama.

[Jamaal510]

35. ...And yet,

the Big 3 still have yet to be cut with Obama in office for over 4 years, even though he is supposedly so eager to gut those programs. Let us not forget--while he is just proposing minor changes to them, the GOP want to get rid of them ENTIRELY.
People always neglect the rest of this proposed deal. CPI cuts are not the only part of it. From what I've heard, there are also top tax hikes, tobacco tax hikes for universal pre-schooling, and clean energy initiatives along with other policies.

When you glance at this deal from a Republican perspective, it doesn't really look all that delicious. We all know they'll never accept any of this stuff, anyway, especially the top tax hikes. And by refusing the deal, they will show an increasing number of voters that their party is immature and extreme.

[PennsylvaniaMatt]

36. If those voters were over the age of, about, 60...

They would think that regardless of anything Obama has proposed this year. Older people who vote Republican are so brain-washed by the right it is insane.

[bemildred]

37. Congress makes the law, not the President. nt

[woo me with science]

45. What an utterly ridiculous response.

Of course Congress makes the laws. But what an absurd, disingenuous comment this is, when the President has been, and continues to be, intimately involved in this process to the point of being involved in weeks of closed-door negotiations, making multiple public addresses about the topic, and submitting formal proposals for managing the budget and Social Security/Medicare.

We have all been here the whole time, remember?

Don't degrade the conversation with nonsense like this. These absurd, knee-jerk attempts to protect the President by suggesting that he has no significant role in this process defy reality to the point of being, frankly, insulting.

[bemildred]

48. The "reality" is that Congress makes the laws, not the President.

So whining about the President not making laws a certain way is empty babble. At best he is trying to trick them into doing something, anything.

[woo me with science]

54. "Anything," indeed. You know, these responses are

as breathtaking as the attempted defenses upthread, where we are admonished that we should defend Obama, because he hasn't recommended *eliminating* the programs....or that because he's not running again, Democrats don't need to worry about enraging voters.

What a sad, bizarre compilation of Third Way excuses, in this thread.

[bemildred]

55. Name calling is not much of an argument. nt

[woo me with science]

57. I have not "name-called." You, on the other hand,

resort to empty, smearing characterizations of my comments as "whining" and "babbling" when you cannot refute my point, which is that your attempt to insinuate that Obama has no influence in this process is frankly absurd and at odds with the reality we have all witnessed first-hand for over a year now.

The "Third Way" is an actual political entity, with political influence and massive financial backing from Wall Street. The predatory corporate agenda they push is visible clearly on their website. The moniker is also shorthand for the set of right-wing, corporatist policies and political views espoused and aggressively pursued by corporate Democrats including the President. Assaults on Social Security, like those repeatedly offered by our President, are perhaps the quintessential example of the Third Way agenda in action.

The Third Way messaging problem remains as difficult as ever. It is impossible for very long to *claim* to represent the same values and goals as traditional Democrats, while aggressively pursuing policies in direct opposition to them, before people begin to call out the disconnect.

[bemildred]

59. That's it, double down. nt

[emulatorloo]

68. It is what he does. Puts words in people's mouth, too.

[woo me with science]

70. And again, no substantive response. Just a personal swipe.

Res ipsa loquitur: "The thing speaks for itself."

[emulatorloo]

74. I engaged with you early on in discussion. But you always move the goal posts.

It is pointless to discuss things with you, as you are rhetorically dishonest.

[woo me with science]

77. Please post your many links.

I am quite confident that the exchanges I have had with you will speak clearly on my behalf, particularly since the vast majority of them take the form of the one we just had: my making a point, and your responding with a vapid, drive-by swipe at me personally.

[emulatorloo]

81. Yes, because you excel at putting words in other people's mouths.

[usGovOwesUs3Trillion]

98. pass the buck

:shakes-head:

[bemildred]

119. Pass the buck to where the buck properly belongs.

There is no point in beating the President up if he has not the power to solve the problem.

[Orsino]

49. That's the danger of becoming the face of government.

The buck rally does stop there.

[woo me with science]

56. Harry S. Truman: "The buck stops here."

Last edited Tue Apr 23, 2013, 11:56 AM - Edit history (1)

Harry S. Truman: "The buck stops here."

FDR: "A New Deal for the American People"

JFK: "Prosperity for All" and "We can do better."

According to responses in this thread so far, Barack Obama's version should be:

"Well, at least I haven't proposed completely *eliminating* the safety nets!"
or
"I'm not running again, so why worry about what voters think!"
or
"Hey, don't blame me or pay attention to my FORMAL PROPOSALS. After all, CONGRESS makes the laws!"

All fitting additions to:

"Make me do it."

[liberal N proud]

51. He hasn't taken any actions to protect it, then his budget looks like it will.

Not what I though I was campaigning for in 2008 or 2012.

[Avalux]

52. Some people may not know or may have forgotten what Rove perfected.

It didn't start with him, but the tactic has become the cornerstone of the psychological workings of the GOP. Rove used it with Bush and it worked like a charm. They turned a man who fought and suffered through Vietnam into coward.

The GOP accuses and blame their opponents (loudly and dramatically) for doing what they are doing; they project their weaknesses, true nature and agenda onto the opponent.

Countering this tactic is very difficult; once the message/lie is spread and the media takes it up, it's nearly impossible to stop, with time wasted defending a baseless accusation. The perception is that there may be truth to the message and damage is done either way.

The GOP is doing a great job in portraying Obama as the Medicare/SS stealer, when it's their goal. We all need to understand this and not get caught up in it.

[woo me with science]

63. Obama put the cuts on the table,

repeatedly.

[TheMastersNemesis]

66. You Have A Point. Obama's Policies Become His Policies.

The problem for me is if that is the best Democrat we can get elected who is not really a Democrat in some important ways, then I do not know where we go. We need progressive policies now more than ever, yet we are still moving right in too many ways.

[emulatorloo]

67. Two guys on a golf course?

OK

[TheMastersNemesis]

69. The Public Golf Course I Play Almost Like A Country Club Politically.

Where I play golf is very conservative. Most of the guys I am around hate Obama and think he is taking their Social Security and retirement. I have played golf a lot with one of the fellows I mentioned. The other is a 40 something who works at the course is is very Republican.

I hear a lot of political chatter that is so off base. The fact that Obama embraces anything regarding reform of the big three just adds to the bias. If he truly believes in chained CPI and other right leaning ideas, he is not really a Democrat.

If he is playing chess, then he is pretty bad at it.

[emulatorloo]

76. We'll see how it plays out. In the meantime worth calling our Sens and Reps.

Personally i doubt this "deal" is going to happen. In two months your Republican friends will be onto something else.

As to who is most interested in the destruction of medicare and SS, might be worth having your Repubican friends study the details of the Ryan plan.

[Liberal_Stalwart71]

108. Exactly!! The OP lost me at "two guys on a golf course"!! Yeah, like they're really Obama supporters

in the first place. Let me get out my violin.

[RedstDem]

78. if it were shrubby proposing these cuts

He would be blamed, which is how I look at things. I don't pay attention to the R or D behind their name, since its meaningless these days.

[ecstatic]

79. "cool story bro"

[Initech]

87. No Wall St. is taking our Social Security, Medicare, and Retirement.

And then they pass the blame to whoever's in charge and rob us stupid while the government looks the other way.

[Rex]

92. That is it in a nutshell.

Kinda like the, 'look forward, not back' thingy on past crimes committed by the prior administration. Also, figuring out how to save everybody's ass with bailouts/too big to fail/TARP (thanks to 8 years of destruction) AND find a way to let CEOs off the hook so they can get back to work and invent new ways to make money.

[usGovOwesUs3Trillion]

97. we the people, are not as stupid as our owners think we are

we have been in big trouble since JFK was murdered.

[on point]

102. And they are right! Marketing spin cannot not hide the DLC right wing agenda BS

[BlueCaliDem]

104. I wonder how long it would take before another anti-Obama thread on Democratic Underground

would surface. And here it is!

[Liberal_Stalwart71]

107. Obama *IS* the *BEST* Democratic president! The best!!!!

[1-Old-Man]

113. ????

Ever hear of Franklin Delano Roosevelt?

[Liberal_Stalwart71]

117. Apart from the Japanese Internment camps, yes, he was the best.

But I believe that when it's all said and done, President Obama will be the best MODERN DAY president this country has ever had.

[Generic Other]

111. The game he is playing is called "dollar bill on a string"

The question is who is the mark? Sadly, I think it was me for believing my vote would matter.

[Newest Reality]

118. We are not even

due our beer money and traveling expenses and ... many experiences.

(classic, retro DU)

If we had a meter about how much we put in and contribute and the payoff, well ... we can see clearly where our payoff, payback or the returns on our "investment" in this mega-tribe goes.

[emsimon33]

126. "If Obama is the best Democratic president that we can field, then the country is doomed..."

Agreed. Both Clinton and Obama have been great disappointments in getting passed legislation, that if proposed by Republicans, would fail.

[Dawson Leery]

127. Old, white, conservative men who play Golf were never

Obama supporters. Rmoneyboy and Lyin' were going to privatize the "big three" and these golf jackals had no problem with that.

[tularetom]

128. Thanks for posting this

Boston kind of pushed the chained CPI clusterfuck off the front page but it won't go away. I've experienced the same response you did from at least a half a dozen people since the whole thing went down.

Normally I love to say I told you so. When I heard he was proposing to fuck with SS I knew it would come back to bite him in the ass and I said so. Now it looks like it is and I wish it wasn't.