HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » Forums & Groups » Main » General Discussion (Forum) » Looks like Obama's on the...
Introducing Discussionist: A new forum by the creators of DU

Tue Dec 18, 2012, 07:17 PM

Looks like Obama's on the cusp of fulfilling his dream

of cutting Social Security benefits.

10% cuts for 85-year-olds: very impressive!

The wealthy can start sleeping better again, now that they know the Trust fund is starting to funnel into their coffers.

Don't think this is a good idea? Then sign the $&@#ing petition:

WE PETITION THE OBAMA ADMINISTRATION TO: not cut Social Security and/or Medicare to simply keep taxes low on the wealthiest Americans

Ask your friends and family to sign too. One day, if they're not eating cat food, they'll thank you.

232 replies, 35304 views

Reply to this thread

Back to top Alert abuse

Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum
Replies to this discussion thread
Arrow 232 replies Author Time Post
Reply Looks like Obama's on the cusp of fulfilling his dream (Original post)
MannyGoldstein Dec 2012 OP
msongs Dec 2012 #1
leftstreet Dec 2012 #2
OldDem2012 Dec 2012 #14
cui bono Dec 2012 #172
OldDem2012 Dec 2012 #212
cui bono Dec 2012 #221
OldDem2012 Dec 2012 #224
Terra Alta Dec 2012 #98
CheapShotArtist Dec 2012 #180
leveymg Dec 2012 #183
brush Dec 2012 #198
leveymg Dec 2012 #202
brush Dec 2012 #217
mucifer Dec 2012 #3
MotherPetrie Dec 2012 #12
OldDem2012 Dec 2012 #31
MotherPetrie Dec 2012 #68
OldDem2012 Dec 2012 #120
pscot Dec 2012 #154
OldDem2012 Dec 2012 #211
closeupready Dec 2012 #156
Scootaloo Dec 2012 #175
HiPointDem Dec 2012 #140
darkangel218 Dec 2012 #4
MannyGoldstein Dec 2012 #5
darkangel218 Dec 2012 #8
MannyGoldstein Dec 2012 #15
OldDem2012 Dec 2012 #23
cui bono Dec 2012 #166
Ineeda Dec 2012 #26
Marr Dec 2012 #37
truedelphi Dec 2012 #87
tridim Dec 2012 #179
truedelphi Dec 2012 #189
RKP5637 Dec 2012 #102
femrap Dec 2012 #163
RKP5637 Dec 2012 #174
Michigan Alum Dec 2012 #200
femrap Dec 2012 #203
RKP5637 Dec 2012 #206
femrap Dec 2012 #216
JackRiddler Dec 2012 #130
LanternWaste Dec 2012 #70
PETRUS Dec 2012 #96
MannyGoldstein Dec 2012 #105
Oilwellian Dec 2012 #219
woo me with science Dec 2012 #111
Oilwellian Dec 2012 #220
jsr Dec 2012 #6
MjolnirTime Dec 2012 #7
OldDem2012 Dec 2012 #9
Summer Hathaway Dec 2012 #20
uponit7771 Dec 2012 #24
leeroysphitz Dec 2012 #110
cui bono Dec 2012 #167
Michigan Alum Dec 2012 #199
MotherPetrie Dec 2012 #10
ReRe Dec 2012 #53
MotherPetrie Dec 2012 #84
ReRe Dec 2012 #124
Whisp Dec 2012 #11
MannyGoldstein Dec 2012 #13
Whisp Dec 2012 #17
MannyGoldstein Dec 2012 #22
OldDem2012 Dec 2012 #28
MannyGoldstein Dec 2012 #30
OldDem2012 Dec 2012 #34
MannyGoldstein Dec 2012 #38
OldDem2012 Dec 2012 #40
blackspade Dec 2012 #162
progressoid Dec 2012 #134
truedelphi Dec 2012 #91
democrattotheend Dec 2012 #55
cui bono Dec 2012 #168
Beacool Dec 2012 #118
Whisp Dec 2012 #119
Beacool Dec 2012 #121
Whisp Dec 2012 #123
Beacool Dec 2012 #127
CakeGrrl Dec 2012 #133
Beacool Dec 2012 #138
cliffordu Dec 2012 #16
fascisthunter Dec 2012 #39
OldDem2012 Dec 2012 #43
fascisthunter Dec 2012 #46
OldDem2012 Dec 2012 #48
fascisthunter Dec 2012 #49
OldDem2012 Dec 2012 #60
fascisthunter Dec 2012 #62
HiPointDem Dec 2012 #143
cliffordu Dec 2012 #47
fascisthunter Dec 2012 #50
MannyGoldstein Dec 2012 #56
fascisthunter Dec 2012 #58
leeroysphitz Dec 2012 #112
hughee99 Dec 2012 #227
democrattotheend Dec 2012 #57
fascisthunter Dec 2012 #63
truedelphi Dec 2012 #88
SidDithers Dec 2012 #18
MannyGoldstein Dec 2012 #19
OldDem2012 Dec 2012 #29
MannyGoldstein Dec 2012 #33
OldDem2012 Dec 2012 #36
MannyGoldstein Dec 2012 #41
OldDem2012 Dec 2012 #45
MannyGoldstein Dec 2012 #52
OldDem2012 Dec 2012 #59
Bobbie Jo Dec 2012 #54
cliffordu Dec 2012 #71
cliffordu Dec 2012 #61
dionysus Dec 2012 #65
mzmolly Dec 2012 #21
demwing Dec 2012 #25
lillypaddle Dec 2012 #27
wryter2000 Dec 2012 #32
fascisthunter Dec 2012 #35
valerief Dec 2012 #42
MannyGoldstein Dec 2012 #44
libdem4life Dec 2012 #51
dionysus Dec 2012 #64
MannyGoldstein Dec 2012 #80
dionysus Dec 2012 #82
MannyGoldstein Dec 2012 #86
dionysus Dec 2012 #94
NCTraveler Dec 2012 #66
neverforget Dec 2012 #67
jillan Dec 2012 #73
Matariki Dec 2012 #85
truedelphi Dec 2012 #92
HiPointDem Dec 2012 #141
truedelphi Dec 2012 #144
HiPointDem Dec 2012 #145
truedelphi Dec 2012 #146
HiPointDem Dec 2012 #147
truedelphi Dec 2012 #190
WorseBeforeBetter Dec 2012 #125
cui bono Dec 2012 #170
neverforget Dec 2012 #173
truedelphi Dec 2012 #209
Angry Dragon Dec 2012 #207
bvar22 Dec 2012 #69
sendero Dec 2012 #89
In Truth We Trust Dec 2012 #93
woo me with science Dec 2012 #165
cui bono Dec 2012 #171
Nay Dec 2012 #176
MannyGoldstein Dec 2012 #193
Hotler Dec 2012 #72
DFW Dec 2012 #74
MannyGoldstein Dec 2012 #75
Doctor_J Dec 2012 #101
DFW Dec 2012 #142
bvar22 Dec 2012 #155
DFW Dec 2012 #231
ELI BOY 1950 Dec 2012 #76
forestpath Dec 2012 #77
Chef Eric Dec 2012 #161
CindyinIndy Dec 2012 #78
banned from Kos Dec 2012 #95
JackRiddler Dec 2012 #129
bvar22 Dec 2012 #169
a2liberal Dec 2012 #79
Doctor_J Dec 2012 #103
bvar22 Dec 2012 #178
Liberalynn Dec 2012 #197
MrMickeysMom Dec 2012 #81
WillyT Dec 2012 #83
Neon2012 Dec 2012 #90
MannyGoldstein Dec 2012 #99
Neon2012 Dec 2012 #107
Agony Dec 2012 #108
MannyGoldstein Dec 2012 #109
durablend Dec 2012 #196
CakeGrrl Dec 2012 #97
democrattotheend Dec 2012 #115
CakeGrrl Dec 2012 #132
lib2DaBone Dec 2012 #100
democrattotheend Dec 2012 #114
HoosierRadical Dec 2012 #104
JackRiddler Dec 2012 #185
scheming daemons Dec 2012 #106
MannyGoldstein Dec 2012 #116
woo me with science Dec 2012 #117
Pisces Dec 2012 #122
woo me with science Dec 2012 #113
veganlush Dec 2012 #126
Coyotl Dec 2012 #128
MrSlayer Dec 2012 #131
kath Dec 2012 #135
99th_Monkey Dec 2012 #136
Doctor_J Dec 2012 #149
truedelphi Dec 2012 #208
amborin Dec 2012 #137
kenny blankenship Dec 2012 #184
amborin Dec 2012 #191
DakotaLady Dec 2012 #139
WorseBeforeBetter Dec 2012 #148
UnrepentantLiberal Dec 2012 #150
treestar Dec 2012 #151
MannyGoldstein Dec 2012 #152
treestar Dec 2012 #186
MannyGoldstein Dec 2012 #192
treestar Dec 2012 #223
MannyGoldstein Dec 2012 #225
bvar22 Dec 2012 #157
treestar Dec 2012 #187
Bluenorthwest Dec 2012 #158
treestar Dec 2012 #188
Doctor_J Dec 2012 #214
treestar Dec 2012 #222
MNBrewer Dec 2012 #228
treestar Dec 2012 #232
Gin Dec 2012 #153
AzDar Dec 2012 #159
Chef Eric Dec 2012 #160
MannyGoldstein Dec 2012 #164
CanonRay Dec 2012 #177
kenny blankenship Dec 2012 #181
hay rick Dec 2012 #182
blackspade Dec 2012 #194
WhoIsNumberNone Dec 2012 #195
ann--- Dec 2012 #201
Doctor_J Dec 2012 #213
MNBrewer Dec 2012 #229
blkmusclmachine Dec 2012 #204
MannyGoldstein Dec 2012 #205
great white snark Dec 2012 #210
Poll_Blind Dec 2012 #215
steve2470 Dec 2012 #218
catbyte Dec 2012 #226
Doctor_J Dec 2012 #230

Response to MannyGoldstein (Original post)

Tue Dec 18, 2012, 07:19 PM

1. ben dover and spread em is not a negotiating strategy for most people nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MannyGoldstein (Original post)

Tue Dec 18, 2012, 07:19 PM

2. Obama is a weakling

He had more political capital than any Prez in our lifetimes

Squandered it, blew it, pissed it away

The only campaign promises he's kept:

1) Take Michelle on a date
2) Get his kids a dog

Fail

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to leftstreet (Reply #2)

Tue Dec 18, 2012, 07:40 PM

14. No, you're the one who has managed to "fail". As much as we have all stated repeatedly that...

...the MSM is NOT our friend and will report anything as fact, you still continue to believe them.

No, you're the one demonstrating weak tendencies. Grow a pair.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink



Response to cui bono (Reply #172)

Wed Dec 19, 2012, 08:12 PM

212. Newsflash: Jay Carney's not the President....

....hopefully, you actually knew that.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to OldDem2012 (Reply #212)

Thu Dec 20, 2012, 02:59 AM

221. That really doesn't warrant a response, but...

you do know who he is right?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to cui bono (Reply #221)

Thu Dec 20, 2012, 11:29 AM

224. That REALLY doesn't warrant a response. Try again. nt.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to leftstreet (Reply #2)

Tue Dec 18, 2012, 10:06 PM

98. what about promises like

ending the war in Iraq.. overturning DADT.. passing health care reform.. hunting down bin Laden.. to name a few.

Yes, there's a fail, alright, but it isn't Obama.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Terra Alta (Reply #98)

Wed Dec 19, 2012, 04:15 PM

180. +1

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Terra Alta (Reply #98)

Wed Dec 19, 2012, 04:23 PM

183. For almost all those promises kept, there's been another problem created.

Such as: getting the US into civil wars and bloody regime change operations in Libya and Syria, no public option or cost containment for most people in the HRC that was passed, an unprecedented campaign to silence national security whistleblowers.

Maybe not a fail, but he gets mixed reviews.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to leveymg (Reply #183)

Wed Dec 19, 2012, 05:37 PM

198. Don't get what you're saying about Syria and Libya

We all know very well that the President kept us from major, Bush/repug-style involvement in Syria and Libya. If you don't know that, you should. There have been no boots on the ground, no troops getting killed or maimed. That to me shows measured restraint and the wisdom to know that we can't continue to blow our billions by storming into all hot spots in the world with guns blazing and bombs falling. What support that has been offered to those fighting the oppressive regimes has been financial and most likely weapons funneled through a third party ally.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to brush (Reply #198)

Wed Dec 19, 2012, 06:05 PM

202. Tens of thousands of human lives have no importance to you, other than American boots?

"Measured restraint and wisdom" - how humanistic of you to say so.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to leveymg (Reply #202)

Wed Dec 19, 2012, 11:23 PM

217. Still don't get what you're saying

He kept US troops out, which didn't add more lives to the carnage. What exactly are you saying? There's nothing wrong with a little clarity.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MannyGoldstein (Original post)

Tue Dec 18, 2012, 07:21 PM

3. Here's the white house phone info if you want to call:

Write or Call the White House
President Obama is committed to creating the most open and accessible administration in American history. That begins with taking comments and questions from you, the public, through our website.

Call the President
PHONE NUMBERS
Comments: 202-456-1111
Switchboard: 202-456-1414
TTY/TTD
Comments: 202-456-6213
Visitor's Office: 202-456-2121


I really don't see The President backing down from this. But, it can't hurt to sign the petition and call!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to mucifer (Reply #3)

Tue Dec 18, 2012, 07:38 PM

12. I have tried to call all day. Got busy signal all day.

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MotherPetrie (Reply #12)

Tue Dec 18, 2012, 07:53 PM

31. That's because, once again, the MSM has managed to stir the pot and create stuff out of thin air. nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to OldDem2012 (Reply #31)

Tue Dec 18, 2012, 08:36 PM

68. Such as?

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MotherPetrie (Reply #68)

Wed Dec 19, 2012, 12:23 AM

120. If you have to ask then you'll just have to find out on your own. nt.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to OldDem2012 (Reply #120)

Wed Dec 19, 2012, 01:00 PM

154. I just did, watching the President on TV

It seems like cuts to SS will be his 1st post-election cave. God knows what we can expect, now that he doesn't need to get re-elected. His lips don't seem to be able to form the word NO.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to pscot (Reply #154)

Wed Dec 19, 2012, 08:10 PM

211. And the President said what, exactly? Do you have a direct quote....

...from the President himself?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to OldDem2012 (Reply #120)

Wed Dec 19, 2012, 01:39 PM

156. Because you know, but it's a secret?

?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to OldDem2012 (Reply #31)

Wed Dec 19, 2012, 04:07 PM

175. It never hurts to call / write though

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to mucifer (Reply #3)

Wed Dec 19, 2012, 04:28 AM

140. +100

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MannyGoldstein (Original post)

Tue Dec 18, 2012, 07:21 PM

4. "fulfilling his dream"?

When has POTUS ever wanted to cut SS?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to darkangel218 (Reply #4)

Tue Dec 18, 2012, 07:23 PM

5. Some folks believe that Obama began aggressively going after Social Security

Since before his inauguration. Think "appointing Simpson-Bowles", for example.

To be fair, others continue to think he's never wanted to cut SS and still does not.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MannyGoldstein (Reply #5)

Tue Dec 18, 2012, 07:32 PM

8. Thats crazy, Obama never once said he wants to cut down social security benefits.

Those are speculations. I belive in our President that he's going to do the best he can. Screw the haters.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to darkangel218 (Reply #8)

Tue Dec 18, 2012, 07:41 PM

15. For example, check out his Clintonian language on SS

In hist 2011 SOTU.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MannyGoldstein (Reply #15)

Tue Dec 18, 2012, 07:48 PM

23. Link it and quote the offending passage please. nt.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink



Response to darkangel218 (Reply #8)

Tue Dec 18, 2012, 07:50 PM

26. the person you're responding to

is one of the consistent ones, so you're wasting your breath. He always thinks/believes the worst of this president. BTW, I agree with you.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to darkangel218 (Reply #8)

Tue Dec 18, 2012, 07:56 PM

37. I watch what he *does*. I don't care what he *says*.

Obama is very much part of the business/political establishment class, and their priorities are all the same; take more from the 99% and give more to the 1%. If he didn't believe in that, he never would've been the DLC-approved presidential nominee in the first place.

Words from politicians don't mean jack shit. Only their maneuvering does. And Obama has been maneuvering toward this goal, in synch with the rest of the political class, since he was inaugurated.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Marr (Reply #37)

Tue Dec 18, 2012, 09:40 PM

87. Even those defending him slip up in the terms they use

Eleventy dimension chess playing, is how they describe him.

Well, chess is, at its most basic, a game in which the pawns are sacrificed for the sake of the nobility.

That's all there is to the game. You sacrifice your smaller pieces correctly, and you save your king and destroy the opponent's.

No need to find the analogy distasteful, as long as you are one of the nobility.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to truedelphi (Reply #87)

Wed Dec 19, 2012, 04:14 PM

179. Political chess is about thinking n-number of moves ahead, not sacrificing "pawns".

It's shocking that you don't even know what the phrase means.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to tridim (Reply #179)

Wed Dec 19, 2012, 05:01 PM

189. Really? Chess is chess, and most people I know

Who remember who this guy was back when he campaigned in Wisconsin in October of 2008, remember that he had respect for us pawns.

It's one thing to tell those of us who remember what this Party once stood for that we are pissed off because we don't have our ponies or unicorns yet. It's another to tell us that now there is an extra dimension to the definition of chess.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Marr (Reply #37)

Tue Dec 18, 2012, 10:19 PM

102. When $$$$$ is involved, A=B in USA, Incorporated! $$$$$ 1st, people last. n/t

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to RKP5637 (Reply #102)

Wed Dec 19, 2012, 03:08 PM

163. Those who are 85

 

like my mom are from the 'Quiet Generation.' So they seem like a good target. Gee, hope her electric bill doesn't go up or food prices, or her Medicare premiums, or the price of cat food and litter.

All those years she worked....at times, 3 jobs.

What a liar....and he does it with such ease. What a talent.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to femrap (Reply #163)

Wed Dec 19, 2012, 04:06 PM

174. Yeah, it torques me. We voted not to have this happen, but then what was the alternative. I do

often wonder if we wouldn't have been far better with Hilary.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to RKP5637 (Reply #174)

Wed Dec 19, 2012, 05:44 PM

200. Yes, I think about that.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to RKP5637 (Reply #174)

Wed Dec 19, 2012, 06:22 PM

203. Does this

 

mean I get to say "I told everyone so." Just kidding. I liked HRC. Obama was just too young and he knows NOTHING about how Wall Street works.

She would never do this to old women. And women will be the ones who will suffer the most.

I never trusted Obama....I voted for him in '08, but that was it...no phone banks, no knocking, no nothing. And he immediately pissed me off with his Cabinet selections.

Then along comes '12....and I just despise RobMe. To me '12 was an Election of Hate...on both sides. I hated RobMe more than I liked Obama...again, I just do not trust him. He's bought and paid for....as they all are.

Now it appears that my only hope is Mother Nature and she will decide to her shoulders and end globalization in its tracks. Pretty damn sad that I'm hoping Mother Nature will hit The Reset Button.

The only light I see at the end of the tunnel is a train headed toward me. Aren't I just a bundle of Holiday festivity tonight? Maybe I need some nog!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to femrap (Reply #203)

Wed Dec 19, 2012, 07:07 PM

206. Some days I think that's a good solution, "Maybe I need some nog!" I was just

telling someone earlier tonight almost the same, don't expect this to all hang together long term. One of my older friends kept telling me many times she was voting for Obama, but there was something about his sincerity in all he was saying that bothered her. She's passed on now, and I think she was onto something many did not get.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to RKP5637 (Reply #206)

Wed Dec 19, 2012, 10:08 PM

216. Sometimes I get these

 

weird 'words from the unknown' stated into/from my brain.

And I remember the first time I saw Obama on TV after he had declared he was going to run for President....the words were: "He is not what he appears."





Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to darkangel218 (Reply #8)

Wed Dec 19, 2012, 01:04 AM

130. Appointing Bowles and Simpson to lead the most important...

policy commission of his first term, with a focus on "deficit" rather than "Wall Street," is pretty close to a definitive statement. Their conclusion was predetermined, and he made a big show of saying he'd go with their proposals. That is a statement.

If Bowles replaces Geithner, that will be a hell of a statement.

But it's looking like by then it will just be an exclamation point. I certainly hope your incredibly sanguine view of what's being cooked into this fiscal bump deal turns out to be true.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MannyGoldstein (Reply #5)

Tue Dec 18, 2012, 08:41 PM

70. It does beg the question then

It does beg the question then: What was the precise and relevant reason for use of the word dream.

I can perceive it only melodramatic posturing, but I am fairly certain you can dissuade me of this with a valid and objective context of use, or simply by avoiding answering the question also can be convenient...

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink



Response to PETRUS (Reply #96)

Tue Dec 18, 2012, 10:38 PM

105. THAT was the interview that made my head explode

He sounded like Pete Peterson's ventriloquist dummy. Once he appointed Simpson and Bowles, it was clear that this was a catastrophe.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to PETRUS (Reply #96)

Thu Dec 20, 2012, 02:14 AM

219. 2009 seems to be the year

It gets interesting starting at 1:19.

"As we've all known for some time, the rules of globalization have changed the game. How we work, how we prosper, how we compete with the rest of the world. And we all know how the coming baby boom retirement will add to the new challenges we face in this new era. Unfortunately, as the world has changed around us, Washington has been remarkably slow to adopt 21st century solutions in a 21st century economy. As so many of us have seen, both sides of the political spectrum have tended to cling to outdated policies, and tired ideologies, instead of coalescing around what actually works. For those on the left, and I include myself in that category, too many of us have been interested in defending programs that were written in 1938, admitting that we need to modernize these programs to fit changing times."


Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to darkangel218 (Reply #4)

Tue Dec 18, 2012, 11:04 PM

111. Obama and the Hamiltonian Democrats: "This is not a bloodless process."


Obama and the Hamiltonian Democrats: "This is not a bloodless process."
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=439x1540315

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to woo me with science (Reply #111)

Thu Dec 20, 2012, 02:16 AM

220. That quote is in the video I just posted above your post n/t

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MannyGoldstein (Original post)

Tue Dec 18, 2012, 07:25 PM

6. Only Nixon could go to China. Only Obama can "reform" the New Deal.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MannyGoldstein (Original post)

Tue Dec 18, 2012, 07:31 PM

7. You're full of shit, Manny. And that's the truth.

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MjolnirTime (Reply #7)

Tue Dec 18, 2012, 07:35 PM

9. +10,000!! I personally think he took a left turn when he meant to take a right turn. nt.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MjolnirTime (Reply #7)

Tue Dec 18, 2012, 07:44 PM

20. Concise and to the point.

And he is.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MjolnirTime (Reply #7)

Tue Dec 18, 2012, 07:48 PM

24. If Manny was agreeing with what was happenin and praising Obama I'd be surprised otherwise BAU

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MjolnirTime (Reply #7)

Tue Dec 18, 2012, 11:00 PM

110. Time will tell. It does seem odd that S.S. keeps coming up.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MjolnirTime (Reply #7)

Wed Dec 19, 2012, 03:47 PM

167. Then why is this the first presidency where SS is on the table?

Even GWB got shot down for trying to touch SS. But let a Dem do it and the "loyal" Dems all applaud and just can't believe it's happening even while it actually is happening.

Obama is doing a lot of other stuff that DUers would have been OUTRAGED about but now that Obama is doing it it's just dandy.

Wake up and be consistent in your ideals, don't just blindly follow a Dem because they're on your "team". You may end up finding out you're not playing for the team you thought you were.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to cui bono (Reply #167)

Wed Dec 19, 2012, 05:39 PM

199. Yep! To hell with 'sacred cows'

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MannyGoldstein (Original post)

Tue Dec 18, 2012, 07:37 PM

10. Snatching defeat from the jaws of victory! Par-TAY!!!! Cat food's on me!

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MotherPetrie (Reply #10)

Tue Dec 18, 2012, 08:10 PM

53. I know this is a serious subject, but........

..........can I laugh just once? ...that was just too funny Mother Petrie.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ReRe (Reply #53)

Tue Dec 18, 2012, 09:37 PM

84. Thanks... sometimes you gotta laugh because you can't cry all the time.

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MotherPetrie (Reply #84)

Wed Dec 19, 2012, 12:48 AM

124. Exactly

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MannyGoldstein (Original post)

Tue Dec 18, 2012, 07:38 PM

11. what a repulsive post.

 

I am sickened.

but you obviously like to sicken people.

what's wrong with you?

Yes, Obama's Dream all along has been to cut SS. It took him years to build a resume to be able to contest A Clinton for the Presdency. He worked real hard because it was very important for him to cut SS - that was his goal, his one and only true goal and all the other things he has accomplished are only smokescreens he needed to fool the world.

jeeesuz fucking cripes.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Whisp (Reply #11)

Tue Dec 18, 2012, 07:40 PM

13. It's not his only dream

Last edited Wed Dec 19, 2012, 12:20 AM - Edit history (1)

And, I have no evidence that he wanted to do this before January 2009.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MannyGoldstein (Reply #13)

Tue Dec 18, 2012, 07:41 PM

17. you have no evidence of jack squat shit of anything

 

except you-know-what.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Whisp (Reply #17)

Tue Dec 18, 2012, 07:46 PM

22. Does this count?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MannyGoldstein (Reply #22)

Tue Dec 18, 2012, 07:50 PM

28. "Terrifically funny", because that's Jay Carney speaking more than a year ago....

....not the President.

Bzzzzztttt!! Try again.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to OldDem2012 (Reply #28)

Tue Dec 18, 2012, 07:52 PM

30. Can you remind me of Carney's title again?

I seem to have forgotten it.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MannyGoldstein (Reply #30)

Tue Dec 18, 2012, 07:55 PM

34. You seem to have forgotten a lot of things....

...are you sure you're on the correct board?

Or should I say the "right" board?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to OldDem2012 (Reply #34)

Tue Dec 18, 2012, 07:56 PM

38. Oh, now I remember: Presidential Spokesperson

Yet unaffiliated with the President, yes?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MannyGoldstein (Reply #38)

Tue Dec 18, 2012, 07:57 PM

40. Link it and quote it. nt.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to OldDem2012 (Reply #40)

Wed Dec 19, 2012, 03:08 PM

162. This seems to be an issue with you.

You demand quotes and links but refuse to provide them.
Why is that?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MannyGoldstein (Reply #22)

Wed Dec 19, 2012, 01:30 AM

134. Itís slash. (Laughter.) And I donít mean the guitarist. (Laughter.)

That's fuckin hilarious. I'm sure my parents will think so too when their benefits will only be cut and not slashed. Ha ha ha.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MannyGoldstein (Reply #13)

Tue Dec 18, 2012, 09:51 PM

91. But it is not the type of thing he campaigned on.

the YouTubes of Obama adopting a lot of Dennis Kucinich talking points are still up and running. October 2008, various towns and cities in Wisconsin, and he still was able to talk about watching the banking crowd, and insisting on regulations for them, if needed.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Whisp (Reply #11)

Tue Dec 18, 2012, 08:12 PM

55. Haven't you heard? He's a stealth Republican who ran as a Democrat

and tricked us all into supporting him so he could fulfill their dreams of dismantling the social safety net!

It's his greatest dream to screw over poor seniors and give their money to gazillionaires...that's what gets him up in the morning.

:snark:

Except if that were really true, you wonder why these tycoons like the Koch brothers spent millions trying to defeat him.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to democrattotheend (Reply #55)

Wed Dec 19, 2012, 03:50 PM

168. Because they're impatient.

It all would have happened so much faster and without pretense if they had a Republican president. Republicans don't have to pretend they're on our side, we know they're not and their base is completely fooled. Our base is only partially fooled, then the ones who aren't fooled get ridiculed by those who are.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Whisp (Reply #11)

Tue Dec 18, 2012, 11:51 PM

118. What resume?

Oh yeah, his two years in the US Senate..........

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Beacool (Reply #118)

Wed Dec 19, 2012, 12:13 AM

119. now why did I know you'd be salivating at an OP like this.

 

how is Massive Headwound Hillary doing?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Whisp (Reply #119)

Wed Dec 19, 2012, 12:29 AM

121. Recuperating.

How's our negotiating president? Caving in?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Beacool (Reply #121)

Wed Dec 19, 2012, 12:32 AM

123. He out spelunks even the master spelunkers.

 

that man excels at everything, doesn't he.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Whisp (Reply #123)

Wed Dec 19, 2012, 12:57 AM

127. No, he doesn't.

But keep believing it.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Beacool (Reply #118)

Wed Dec 19, 2012, 01:26 AM

133. And two terms in the WH.

Cheers!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to CakeGrrl (Reply #133)

Wed Dec 19, 2012, 01:52 AM

138. Now, not back then.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MannyGoldstein (Original post)

Tue Dec 18, 2012, 07:41 PM

16. Poor Manny.

Chumped by rumor and innuendo again.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to cliffordu (Reply #16)

Tue Dec 18, 2012, 07:57 PM

39. is it though?

or is it alarming folks that they better stay on top of their politicians because this so-called trail balloon is being floated out there. What if nobody responds to that trial balloon? Will the White House see that as the public acquiescing to such a proposal?

To me, this is productive.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to fascisthunter (Reply #39)

Tue Dec 18, 2012, 07:59 PM

43. What if the trial balloon originated on the right and the MSM reported it as coming from the left?..

...nah, that's not possible is it?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to OldDem2012 (Reply #43)

Tue Dec 18, 2012, 08:02 PM

46. so what... what bad will come of this?

Are you saying motivation to apply pressure on a politician to get what you want is bad....? Sorry, that makes no sense at all.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to fascisthunter (Reply #46)

Tue Dec 18, 2012, 08:04 PM

48. Whoooooshhh! That's the sound of my post going over your head at 50,000 feet. nt.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to OldDem2012 (Reply #48)

Tue Dec 18, 2012, 08:07 PM

49. that's you avoiding my question

nice try though. Have a nice night playing games online.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to fascisthunter (Reply #49)

Tue Dec 18, 2012, 08:17 PM

60. Couldn't answer your question, such that it was, because it completely missed the point of my post..

...go back and read it s...l...o...w...l...y. It might make more sense to you.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to OldDem2012 (Reply #60)

Tue Dec 18, 2012, 08:20 PM

62. why are you avoiding my question?

WHAT harm is there????????? I tell the White House not to cave.... what harm is there?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to OldDem2012 (Reply #60)

Wed Dec 19, 2012, 04:44 AM

143. guess what, it was the white house that leaked the details. what do you say now?

 

And by leaking details of its plan last night, the White House hoped to upstage Boehnerís Plan B announcement, said a Democratic Senate leadership aide.

ďThe details of the presidentís plan basically one upped Boehner by showing an even bigger move to the middle on entitlements than Boehner has showed on taxes,Ē the aide said.

http://www.nationaljournal.com/dems-dodge-questions-on-spending-cuts-20121218

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to OldDem2012 (Reply #43)

Tue Dec 18, 2012, 08:03 PM

47. As the Joker says:

"NOW WE'RE TALKIN'..."

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to cliffordu (Reply #47)

Tue Dec 18, 2012, 08:08 PM

50. yeah, but the Joker is fictional... my SS isn't

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to fascisthunter (Reply #50)

Tue Dec 18, 2012, 08:12 PM

56. I disagree.

Your SS may soon be fictional as well.

This will be a long, tough war.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MannyGoldstein (Reply #56)

Tue Dec 18, 2012, 08:14 PM

58. Funny how we REAL folks grovel for the least

and those who live comfy lives, tell us to shut up because "it looks and sounds bad". See we should care about the comfies feelings over our own well being.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to fascisthunter (Reply #58)

Tue Dec 18, 2012, 11:09 PM

112. +1

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to OldDem2012 (Reply #43)

Thu Dec 20, 2012, 02:18 PM

227. How do you suppose the RW got Jay Carney to float this balloon for them? n/t

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to cliffordu (Reply #16)

Tue Dec 18, 2012, 08:14 PM

57. This isn't rumor. The White House leaked this

http://www.nationaljournal.com/dems-dodge-questions-on-spending-cuts-20121218

I still find it curious that the WH would leak it unless they are either really really close to a deal or don't expect Republicans to vote for it.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to democrattotheend (Reply #57)

Tue Dec 18, 2012, 08:21 PM

63. interesting, thank you for that

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to democrattotheend (Reply #57)

Tue Dec 18, 2012, 09:48 PM

88. My take in reading the article that you are quoting is

That the cuts (CPI adjustments, swiping some 36 cents out of every four dollars of Social Security) are coming about because "there is a need to bring about revenue that just won't happen." Boehner won't budge on the tax increase to those making above 400K a year -so the Admin is willing to take some more flesh out of the hide of the people who are struggling.

Obama's ACA already swiped some 500 millions of dollars out of the MediCare budget. People here cheered that, as the statement released by the WH emphasized that it would mean "Cuts to the providers" not to the recipients.

But mark my words, when doctors can't afford to take on new MediCare patients, then what? How good is a government program without any damn providers? (Way back in the 1990's, I had a hard time finding doctors taking on new MediCarepatients. And that was almost two decades back.)

I find myself able to relax about life by envisioning an alternate world, one in which someone like Bill Moyers could be President. And he could have Bartlet and Yves Smith help him with the economy, while Giethner would be in jail waiting his court date. .

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MannyGoldstein (Original post)

Tue Dec 18, 2012, 07:42 PM

18. For two years you've been telling us 22%, Manny...

Why should we believe this prediction is any more accurate than that one?

Sid

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to SidDithers (Reply #18)

Tue Dec 18, 2012, 07:44 PM

19. I've been saying that Obama's committee recommended a 22% cut

to the average recipients benefits.

Is that not true?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MannyGoldstein (Reply #19)

Tue Dec 18, 2012, 07:52 PM

29. "Obama's committee"?? Hmmm. Got a link? Got a direct quote from the President? nt.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to OldDem2012 (Reply #29)

Tue Dec 18, 2012, 07:54 PM

33. It's public record

Google the letter from the chief actuary of SS's analysis of Simpson-Bowles' recommendations.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MannyGoldstein (Reply #33)

Tue Dec 18, 2012, 07:56 PM

36. Link it and quote it. nt.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to OldDem2012 (Reply #36)

Tue Dec 18, 2012, 07:58 PM

41. I'm not your servant.

I've linked and quoted numerous times on DU - do a search.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MannyGoldstein (Reply #41)

Tue Dec 18, 2012, 08:02 PM

45. You made the accusation, so you post the link and the exact quote...

...to back up your assertion. That's the way it works on DU and any other board. Otherwise, you lose credibility....oh, wait....

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to OldDem2012 (Reply #45)

Tue Dec 18, 2012, 08:10 PM

52. Do you know about a site called "Google"?

You should check into it. Google is one of a number of "search sites".

They can be helpful!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MannyGoldstein (Reply #52)

Tue Dec 18, 2012, 08:14 PM

59. Do you know the definition of the word "credibility"? Use Google and look it up. nt.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to OldDem2012 (Reply #45)

Tue Dec 18, 2012, 08:10 PM

54. That ship has sailed. nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Bobbie Jo (Reply #54)

Tue Dec 18, 2012, 08:43 PM

71. No shit.

I'm glad they are all outing themselves.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to SidDithers (Reply #18)

Tue Dec 18, 2012, 08:20 PM

61. Boom goes the dynamite

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to SidDithers (Reply #18)

Tue Dec 18, 2012, 08:23 PM

65. manny trollstein is on a roll..

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MannyGoldstein (Original post)

Tue Dec 18, 2012, 07:46 PM

21. I guess that's what secret muslim terrorists do.

Kill old people and stuff.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MannyGoldstein (Original post)

Tue Dec 18, 2012, 07:50 PM

25. thats enough of Manny

can't take no more....

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MannyGoldstein (Original post)

Tue Dec 18, 2012, 07:50 PM

27. wow

"fulfilling his dream"

You are over the fucking top.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MannyGoldstein (Original post)

Tue Dec 18, 2012, 07:53 PM

32. He asked Santa for that every year when he was a kid

Santa, may I please kill the New Deal?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MannyGoldstein (Original post)

Tue Dec 18, 2012, 07:55 PM

35. hahaha...lol

I see what you did!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MannyGoldstein (Original post)

Tue Dec 18, 2012, 07:59 PM

42. I hope universal care for EVERYONE comes with this price tag. nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to valerief (Reply #42)

Tue Dec 18, 2012, 08:00 PM

44. Nah... Medicare's probably getting cut too

No specifics yet.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MannyGoldstein (Original post)

Tue Dec 18, 2012, 08:09 PM

51. I have gotten regular AARP updates, information, pre-written email to "click here", text messages

with Go To. I always shied away from them politically, but joined anyway and I'm glad I did. It's given me really concrete information and access to friends and family. Just "call your Congressman" or "get out the vote" while important is not that easy for millions and the lines are usually busy anyway...probably just On Hold...and these days, without a PAC and with Diebold, I have to question the actual impact of a vote.

Anyone 50 or older can join and it's a powerful PAC.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MannyGoldstein (Original post)

Tue Dec 18, 2012, 08:22 PM

64. manny, you have an unheathy obsession.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to dionysus (Reply #64)

Tue Dec 18, 2012, 09:23 PM

80. I think Social Security is pretty important

Unhealthy? Don't think so.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MannyGoldstein (Reply #80)

Tue Dec 18, 2012, 09:31 PM

82. you've made bullshit ploclamations for years

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to dionysus (Reply #82)

Tue Dec 18, 2012, 09:39 PM

86. Please point to one. Let's have a look.

Thanks

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MannyGoldstein (Reply #86)

Tue Dec 18, 2012, 10:01 PM

94. go on and show them. you're full of shit. nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MannyGoldstein (Original post)

Tue Dec 18, 2012, 08:26 PM

66. While I don't think it is going to happen...

I have no problem signing the petition or you voicing your concern here. It is how bs is stopped.

Although we both know it isn't Obamas dream. That is also bs.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MannyGoldstein (Original post)

Tue Dec 18, 2012, 08:31 PM

67. Don't worry Manny, it's only a "technical change".

I'll give them my "technical change": remove the ceiling on SSI taxes.

http://www.enewspf.com/latest-news/latest-national/39244-white-house-press-briefing-by-jay-carney-december-18-2012.html

Q Yes, Jay, a lot of top Democrats on the Hill, and I think President Obama, spent the campaign season saying, letís not touch Social Security -- it doesnít add to the deficit; we can resolve this issue without going to that entitlement program. What is the Presidentís message to those lawmakers who promised constituents that Social Security would not be touched after the President now has put chain CPI on the table for Republicans?

MR. CARNEY: Well, letís be clear about one thing: The President didnít put it on the table. This is something that Republicans want. And it is --

Q But the Republicans --

MR. CARNEY: -- part of his -- if I could please answer Samís question, Iíd appreciate it. And the President did include it in his counterproposal, his counteroffer, as part of this process, as part of the negotiation process. I would note that this is a technical change -- would be if instated -- to the way that economists calculate inflation, and it would affect every program that has -- that uses the CPI in its calculations. And so itís not directed at one particular program; it would affect every program that uses CPI. There are also -- as part of the Presidentís proposals, he would make sure that the most vulnerable were exempted out from this change.

But letís be clear, this is something that the Republicans have asked for, and as part of an effort to find common ground with the Republicans, the President has agreed to put this in his proposal -- agreed to have this as part of a broad deficit reduction package that includes asking the wealthiest to pay more so that we can achieve the kind of revenue targets that are necessary for a balanced approach to deficit reduction.

Q Right, but thereís a lot -- again, my question was thereís a lot of people who voted for these lawmakers on a promise that --

MR. CARNEY: You heard the President say every time he talked about this --

Q Can I finish my question?

MR. CARNEY: Sure, yes.

Q A lot of people -- Iíll let you answer -- a lot of people voted for these lawmakers for reelection not too long ago on a promise that Social Security wouldnít be touched, and if it was touched, it would be done separately from these fiscal cliff negotiations. What do those people -- what are these people now supposed to believe about the promises that their lawmakers made, including the President?

MR. CARNEY: Let me again make clear two things. One, the President has always said as part of this process when weíre talking about the spending cuts side of this that it would require tough choices by both sides. And that is certainly the case if you want to reach an agreement.

Secondly, this is a technical adjustment that supporters of it and economists -- outside economists say is meant to make the governmentís estimates of inflation more accurate. Thirdly, as part of the Presidentís proposal, there is a clause that would protect vulnerable communities including the very elderly when it comes to Social Security recipients.

So thereís no question that it represents an effort to compromise, but it is also not -- this is a technical adjustment that economists believe is about getting the proper measure of inflation, and it is one sought by Republicans.


So, again, weíre not going to get everything we want. We knew that the Presidentís proposal that he put forward to the super committee that we put forward in the beginning of these negotiations would not pass unchanged. But I think your question demonstrates the absolute fact that the President has shown enormous good faith in trying to reach a compromise here. And it would be shocking if Republicans passed up this opportunity for what they say they seek, which is significant deficit reduction, significant spending cuts, simply to protect those just shy of being millionaires from having to pay a dime extra in income taxes.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to neverforget (Reply #67)

Tue Dec 18, 2012, 08:49 PM

73. Thank you for posting that. I was just going to google it to post it.



Ready to scream!!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to neverforget (Reply #67)

Tue Dec 18, 2012, 09:37 PM

85. "tough choices" that conveniently never touch the people making them.

arrrrgh.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Matariki (Reply #85)

Tue Dec 18, 2012, 09:56 PM

92. I think those "tough choices" do impact the lives of those who

Make them.

Look at Bill Clinton. He had to decide if he would sign off on the two banking "reform" measures that came to him late in his Presidency. And through signing those measures, the Glass Steagall protections that shielded the middle class from having to worry that our financial institutions would go and create derivatives and CDO's and other exotic instruments that would spell the demise of our society in a mere nine years from the day of his signing. Yet, with one swipe of his pen, Bill Clinton allowed for those "reforms."

And by the time he left office, he was bankrupt. But then, within six months of leaving office, he is making speeches for
$ 150K a pop. In very short time, he and Hillary are worth some 100 million bucks. All for two small signatures, that probably were only discussed on page 34 of the New York Times.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to truedelphi (Reply #92)

Wed Dec 19, 2012, 04:40 AM

141. bankrupt when he left office? cite?

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to HiPointDem (Reply #141)

Wed Dec 19, 2012, 05:53 AM

144. Common knowledge, discussed quite a bit in the press back in the day.

Lawsuits defending himself cost the couple a lot. (Whitewater, and of course, the Monica scandal that ended up being considered an impeachable offense.)

He himself has commented that he didn't have money till after he left the WH.

One citation out there is here:
http://voices.yahoo.com/bill-hillary-clinton-out-debt-worth-400447.html
Bill and Hillary Clinton Are Out of Debt and Worth Millions
Earnings Derived Mostly from Speeches, Bill and Hillary Clinton Now Own Millions
Kareyth Patrick
Kareyth Patrick, Yahoo! Contributor Network
Jun 16, 2007 "Share your voice on Yahoo! websites. Start Here."


When Bill Clinton left office with Hillary Clinton, together they owed millions of dollars in legal costs accrued fighting scandals that dotted the landscape of their White House years, as the Telegraph reports. With earnings based mostly on speaking engagements for which Bill is abundantly popular, Bill and Hillary Clinton now have a healthy fortune of many millions of dollars.

The Washington Post reports that when Clinton left office, he and Hillary were in debt more than $10 million dollars, though Reuters specifies $5.5 million with $1.5 million in assets. Both Bill and Hillary wrote best selling books to begin to reduce their debt.

####

Article goes on to state that in one year, Bill Clinton made some 10 million from speeches.

At the time the Yahoo article (above) was written there were many other similar citations.








Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to truedelphi (Reply #144)

Wed Dec 19, 2012, 06:03 AM

145. that doesn't say he was bankrupt. and 'didn't have any money' to clinton could actually mean

 

he had what most of us would consider a nice upper-middle-class income, benefits, and some moderate invested capital.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to HiPointDem (Reply #145)

Wed Dec 19, 2012, 06:13 AM

146. It was discussed in the press. Including the Telegraph, the Washinton Post and other places. The

Couple owed money for lawsuits, including the lawyers that were paid to assist them in various lawsuits, at the time that they left the WH.

But like so many other government officials, Clinton knew that once he was out of office, the "good deeds" he had done would finally pay off. For instance, back when the bank reform measure was stumbling around in Congress:

- NYTimes.com

Oct.-Nov. 1999 Congress passes Financial Services Modernization Act after 12 attempts in 25 years, Congress finally repeals Glass-Steagall, rewarding financial companies for more than 20 years and $300 million worth of lobbying efforts. As pretty sycophantic article in NYT stated (Citiís Creator, Sandy Weill, Alone With His Regrets ):

To create Citi, Weill fought to change laws that had prevented banks, insurers and brokerage firms from merging. But in the wake of the economic crisis last year, Congress has introduced laws to reinstate parts of the legislation. In November, Mr. Weillís former co-C.E.O. at Citi, John Reed, told Bloomberg News that he was sorry for his role in helping to end Glass-Steagall.

When asked about Mr. Reedís apology, Mr. Weill says: ďI donít agree at all.Ē Such differences, he says, were ďpart of our problem.Ē

Mr. Reed, who lost a battle with Mr. Weill for control of Citi, declined to comment for this article.

<snip>

Mr. Weill personally recruited Robert Rubin to Citi after Mr. Rubin stepped down as Treasury secretary. Mr. Rubin, who has since left Citi and declined to comment about his tenure there, has been criticized as failing to help rein in the bankís excesses.
<snip>
Analysts say that managerial problems plagued the Citi empire and that its board, which might have imposed some order, became little more than a rubber stamp during the Weill era. ďSandy surrounded himself with yes men,Ē says Mr. Whalen. ďHe never wanted anyone second-guessing him.Ē At the time supporters hailed the change as the long-overdue demise of a Depression-era relic. So on Oct. 21, with the House-Senate conference committee deadlocked after marathon negotiations, the main sticking point is partisan bickering over the bill's effect on the Community Reinvestment Act, which sets rules for lending to poor communities.

Sandy Weill calls President Clinton in the evening to try to break the deadlock after Senator Phil Gramm, chairman of the Banking Committee, warned Citigroup lobbyist Roger Levy that Weill has to get White House moving on the bill or he would shut down the House-Senate conference. Serious negotiations resume, and a deal is announced at 2:45 a.m. on Oct. 22.

####

Remember, If Bill had wanted to - he could have vetoed the banking "reform" bill. But he didn't want to do that. Possible renumeration, such as the offered speeches with the huge fees, and also his wife's need to be able to raise monies from Wall Street to support her bids for office, were most probably part of his considerations.

And again, Bill himself has stated that the couple had no serious money at their disposable when they left the WH. That quote has been spotted more than a dozen times on various financial blogs.

Also, here is a synopsis of their holdings from CNN:
http://money.cnn.com/galleries/2007/moneymag/0712/gallery.candidates.moneymag/index.html

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to truedelphi (Reply #146)

Wed Dec 19, 2012, 06:18 AM

147. i don't see anything that says he was bankrupt. i'm not debating that he signed those bills, i just

 

want to see something that says he was bankrupt. or uses the word 'bankrupt'.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to HiPointDem (Reply #147)

Wed Dec 19, 2012, 05:15 PM

190. Like Clinton himelf would say - it depends on what your definition of "bankrupt" is.

Did the couple actually file for bankruptcy. No. But like a Yahoo news citation mentions, "The Washington Post reports that when Clinton left office, he and Hillary were in debt more than $10 million dollars, though Reuters specifies $5.5 million with $1.5 million in assets. Both Bill and Hillary wrote best selling books to begin to reduce their debt."


Colloquially, the term bankrupt can refer to being without the means to pay bills that are outstanding and are larger than the assets you have on hand. Legally, it means you have entered into a court agreement and a bankruptcy has been filed, with conditions that must be reached, with certain personal assets protected, but other things, like sometimes retirement monies, are dispensed to those to whom the party owes the debt.

The fact is that around the time they left the WH, they had massive amounts of legal debt. Ten million is what Yahoo News citation relates the WaPo piece had stated. The WaPO piece is not found on the internet - often the URL a newspaper holds expires after a certain time.

Perhaps insolvency would be the better word.

Had those law firms or attorneys to whom they owed the monies set up a court date and sued the couple, they would have probably filed for bankruptcy. And of course, even then, the Clintons would not be living in a van down by the river. Most states allow people to keep their residence, their vehicles and personal effects.

If I remember correctly, their friends helped them pay their bills. And/or maybe some of the attorneys involved put the payments on "hold."

In talking about this aspect of their lives, I hold no grudge against them. It was a tremendously disgusting spectacle to watch the Republicans sink so much money into the Whitewater investigation, and then to have the Monica Lewinsky scandal become "impeachable."

One thing I'd like to add - Clinton was approached by the Powers that Be to go and have a nasty and brutal all out war against the people of Iraq. Clinton refused them the war, and six weeks later, the Monica scandal hit the newspapers and TV news outlets.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to neverforget (Reply #67)

Wed Dec 19, 2012, 12:52 AM

125. "technical adjustment ... and it is one sought by Republicans."

Fucking disgusting.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to neverforget (Reply #67)

Wed Dec 19, 2012, 03:56 PM

170. Wow. So first Carney says the President didn't propose it, that it was a Republican

request, then later he says Obama included it in his proposal.

SO HE DID, IN FACT, INCLUDE IT, AND IT WAS BECAUSE THE PUGS REQUESTED IT.

Fucker.

They're really using the child's retort "he started it!" as their way of not taking responsibility for this??? That's low. And pathetic.

=======================================================================

MR. CARNEY: Well, letís be clear about one thing: The President didnít put it on the table. This is something that Republicans want. And it is --

Q But the Republicans --

MR. CARNEY: -- part of his -- if I could please answer Samís question, Iíd appreciate it. And the President did include it in his counterproposal, his counteroffer, as part of this process, as part of the negotiation process. I would note that this is a technical change -- would be if instated -- to the way that economists calculate inflation, and it would affect every program that has -- that uses the CPI in its calculations. And so itís not directed at one particular program; it would affect every program that uses CPI. There are also -- as part of the Presidentís proposals, he would make sure that the most vulnerable were exempted out from this change.

But letís be clear, this is something that the Republicans have asked for, and as part of an effort to find common ground with the Republicans, the President has agreed to put this in his proposal -- agreed to have this as part of a broad deficit reduction package that includes asking the wealthiest to pay more so that we can achieve the kind of revenue targets that are necessary for a balanced approach to deficit reduction.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to cui bono (Reply #170)

Wed Dec 19, 2012, 04:05 PM

173. Pretty sweet deal huh? These "technical adjustments" affect people's lives

but those in Washington are so far removed from everyday people that they don't get it anymore. Their salary, pensions and benefits should be cut too and painfully so. Make them live like the rest of us. This shit makes me so fucking angry!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to cui bono (Reply #170)

Wed Dec 19, 2012, 07:58 PM

209. Well, at least the president did approve of letting stem cell research go

Last edited Wed Dec 19, 2012, 08:54 PM - Edit history (1)

Through. A person can hope that somewhere someone is putting together FDR's clone, and hopefully that clone will be active soon enough to kick some Republican and New Age style Democratic Butt -- the sooner the better.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to neverforget (Reply #67)

Wed Dec 19, 2012, 07:12 PM

207. I am getting real tired of this tough choices for everyone shit

then let's see 70% for the top rate
that would be tough for me to live with but I am willing to do it for the benefit of this country
also I would be willing to give up my Congressional pension
also I would be willing to give up my Cadillac Congressional health care

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MannyGoldstein (Original post)

Tue Dec 18, 2012, 08:37 PM

69. Yeah, Manny.

Didn't you get all upset when a rumor was leaked that President Obama had trashcanned the Public Option?

And what about that time that a Washington Insider leaked that President Obama was going to extent the Bush Tax Cuts,
and you went all Outer Space on everybody?

Haven't you learned that you must bite your tongue until this is all a done deal,
and THEN hold your tongue because
you didn't get a pony,
or it was all Joe Lieberman's fault?

Boy, some people NEVER learn, do they?

Manny, you just got to learn the art of Blind Trust,
and never ask questions.
Things are Soooo much easier for a True Believer.
Go ahead, Manny.
TAKE the Blue Pill,
let go,
and slip into The Bliss!



"Morpheus:
That you are a slave, Neo. Like everyone else, you were born into bondage, born inside a prison that you cannot smell, taste, or touch. A prison for your mind. (long pause, sighs) Unfortunately, no one can be told what the Matrix is. You have to see it for yourself. This is your last chance. After this, there is no turning back.
(In his left hand, Morpheus shows a blue pill.)

Morpheus: You take the blue pill and the story ends. You wake in your bed and believe whatever you want to believe.
(a red pill is shown in his other hand)
You take the red pill and you stay in Wonderland and I show you how deep the rabbit-hole goes.

(Long pause; Neo begins to reach for the red pill)
Remember -- all I am offering is the truth, nothing more.

(Neo takes the red pill and swallows it with a glass of water)




Where never is heard
a discouraging word,
and the skies are not cloudy all daaaaaayyyyy!




"There are forces within the Democratic Party who want us to sound like kinder, gentler Republicans.
I want a party that will STAND UP for Working Americans."
---Paul Wellstone


photo by bvar22
Shortly before Sen Wellstone was killed



You will know them by their WORKS,
not by their rhetoric, promises, or excuses.
Solidarity99!
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to bvar22 (Reply #69)

Tue Dec 18, 2012, 09:48 PM

89. plus 1000

some people simply never learn. to even be TALKING about SS, which is funded for decades out, is ridiculous. medicare, well that is another story.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to bvar22 (Reply #69)

Tue Dec 18, 2012, 10:01 PM

93. Thanks for that. You will know them by their WORKS, not by their rhetoric, promises, or excuses.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to bvar22 (Reply #69)

Wed Dec 19, 2012, 03:20 PM

165. ...

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to bvar22 (Reply #69)

Wed Dec 19, 2012, 04:00 PM

171. +1,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to bvar22 (Reply #69)

Wed Dec 19, 2012, 04:10 PM

176. Indeed. Words mean nothing; actions mean everything. This is where Mr Obama sends

mixed messages -- he talks a great talk, but as you say, the actions belie the words. And Manny is entirely correct to be deeply suspicious and outraged at what's going on. A lot of us out here are right with you both.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to bvar22 (Reply #69)

Wed Dec 19, 2012, 05:22 PM

193. Good points.

I suck.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MannyGoldstein (Original post)

Tue Dec 18, 2012, 08:43 PM

72. Now is not the time to point fingers.....

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MannyGoldstein (Original post)

Tue Dec 18, 2012, 08:49 PM

74. If it makes any difference

I got to spend an hour with Obama in July. We talked, among other things, about deficit reduction. Cutting Social Security wasn't even mentioned as a possibility. On Fox, maybe. But the man himself stated nothing of the sort.

By the way, he IS interested in cutting the COST of health care to Americans, but not the amount of it any citizen gets. There may be some statistic that forces him to reconsider this, but Bonehead isn't it.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DFW (Reply #74)

Tue Dec 18, 2012, 08:56 PM

75. Then why appoint Simpson and Bowles to lead a commission

charged with determining how to cut deficits? The only certain answer from those two was to cut Social Security.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DFW (Reply #74)

Tue Dec 18, 2012, 10:18 PM

101. Did he say that he WOULDN'T cut SS?

That would be far more interesting than his avoidance of the subject altogether

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Doctor_J (Reply #101)

Wed Dec 19, 2012, 04:41 AM

142. He said he had no intention of cutting it

I can't know if any kind of brutal reality might have made him change his mind in the meantime, but it was certainly not what he planned and he definitely didn't avoid the subject. I doubt that he had anything else in mind in July, but then I doubt FDR had planned to fight a four year two front war in July, 1941, either. He also said he has no problem with the so-called "cliff" if Bonehead and his party won't come off their position.

He was pretty sure a majority of the voters would have his back, and the polls seem to back him up. After all, it's a no-brainer to have some House Democrat re-introduce a bill to re-instate the lower tax levels for people earning under $250K. What Republican is gonna vote against that, and still dare to show his face in his district again?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DFW (Reply #142)

Wed Dec 19, 2012, 01:36 PM

155. Did he say ANYTHING about "Raising-the-Cap"?

He used to "talk" about that all the time....back when he was "Candidate" Obama.

Promises on Social Security


....but then Candidate Obama "talked" about a lot of stuff back then,
like renegotiating NAFTA,
making EFCA "The Law of the Land",
requiring GMOs to be labeled....
etc.
etc.
etc.



You will know them by their WORKS,
not by their rhetoric, promises, or excuses.
Solidarity99!
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to bvar22 (Reply #155)

Thu Dec 20, 2012, 06:32 PM

231. I didn't ask about that

I am stationed overseas, and the meeting was arranged for Democrats Abroad. Most of the time not spent on election strategy was spent on foreign policy and health care, with some environmental issues thrown in. An hour goes by VERY quickly with him..

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MannyGoldstein (Original post)

Tue Dec 18, 2012, 08:58 PM

76. YOU are a fool to believe this...a fool

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MannyGoldstein (Original post)

Tue Dec 18, 2012, 09:07 PM

77. I signed the petition. Funny how so many posters who claim President Obama won't

 

cut SS/Medicare are so threatened by a petition asking him not to.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to forestpath (Reply #77)

Wed Dec 19, 2012, 03:06 PM

161. Well said! nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MannyGoldstein (Original post)


Response to CindyinIndy (Reply #78)


Response to banned from Kos (Reply #95)

Wed Dec 19, 2012, 01:00 AM

129. Whereas you are DU's version of Jim Cramer pitching Bear Stearns?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to JackRiddler (Reply #129)

Wed Dec 19, 2012, 03:52 PM

169. Touche'

...but sir,
you were so much kinder than I would have been.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MannyGoldstein (Original post)

Tue Dec 18, 2012, 09:08 PM

79. I don't think the cheerleaders here are going to believe it

until it actually happens. Maybe not even then. And when they do finally acknowledge it, it will be "well, nobody spoke up". (same thing happened with the insurance law)

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to a2liberal (Reply #79)

Tue Dec 18, 2012, 10:19 PM

103. Not even then

they are as deluded as Fox Nation

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to a2liberal (Reply #79)

Wed Dec 19, 2012, 04:14 PM

178. They will pull out the same old litany of excuses:

"We can't let the Perfect be the enemy of the Good."

"We HAD to do SOMETHING!"

"We can Fix it Later".

"We might not have had 60 votes."

"He has to be President of ALL the people."

"What??!@! You want him to be like Bush?"

"It takes a long time to turn a ship at sea."

(Whatever the fuck THAT was supposed to mean.
It only took 2 hours to sink the Titanic.)

"This was an incremental step in the right direction."

"He SAVED the Children."

"Thank GAWD it passed."

"What? You didn't get your pony?"

"Have you seen The LIST!"

"America is a Center-Right nation!"

"You don't understand how government works!"

"All the sensible, Reality Based Democrats support this."

"Just more noise from the Fringe Left Wing."

"Obama IS the Most Liberal President EVER."

"I have a picture of the President with a light around his head."

"A BRILLIANT Chess move.
NOW the Republicans can't complain!"

"We'll Fix-It-Later!"

"This is a step in the Right Direction."

It was ALL Joe Lieberman's fault!!!
He is a Big Bully SUPERMAN
who ruined it for everybody.
There was NOTHING we could Doooooo.
It was HORRIBLE!"



Did I miss any?



"If we don't fight hard enough for the things we stand for,
at some point we have to recognize that we don't really stand for them."

--- Paul Wellstone


photo by bvar22
Shortly before Sen Wellstone was killed


Solidarity!








Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to bvar22 (Reply #178)

Wed Dec 19, 2012, 05:36 PM

197. +1

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MannyGoldstein (Original post)

Tue Dec 18, 2012, 09:26 PM

81. And I have every right to call him "Spelunker In Chief" until he realizes....

He won the fucking election, so this is his god-damned mandate!

SIGN THE PETITION!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MannyGoldstein (Original post)

Tue Dec 18, 2012, 09:33 PM

83. K & R !!!




Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MannyGoldstein (Original post)

Tue Dec 18, 2012, 09:49 PM

90. Total bullshit!

 

The 10% is cuts to inefficiencies, not benefits.

Shut the fuck up with this bullshit!

(Ryan/Romney blamed Obama for 76B in Medicare cuts)

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Neon2012 (Reply #90)

Tue Dec 18, 2012, 10:13 PM

99. Actually, no. Google "chained CPI" nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MannyGoldstein (Reply #99)

Tue Dec 18, 2012, 10:45 PM

107. Nothing wrong with more contemporary standards.

 

Let's try to be reasonable.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Neon2012 (Reply #107)

Tue Dec 18, 2012, 10:50 PM

108. That is what you said about the Commodity Futures Modernization Act signed by Pres Clinton

look where that got us...

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Neon2012 (Reply #107)

Tue Dec 18, 2012, 10:56 PM

109. Is that what the kids are calling it these days?

Now google "CPI-E". Check out the difference in size between the CPI-E, which actually measures inflation experienced by the elderly, and the chained CPI.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Neon2012 (Reply #90)

Wed Dec 19, 2012, 05:32 PM

196. Ah so Granny is an "inefficiency"

Well at least you people are finally admitting you want her in the ground.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MannyGoldstein (Original post)

Tue Dec 18, 2012, 10:05 PM

97. Yay, Obummer is finally letting his long-stifled cat food-feeding flag fly!

He's always wanted to destroy America. The political poles are oddly in agreement about this.



Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to CakeGrrl (Reply #97)

Tue Dec 18, 2012, 11:13 PM

115. Obummer?

Am I on FreeRepublic?

Or am I failing to detect snark?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to democrattotheend (Reply #115)

Wed Dec 19, 2012, 01:25 AM

132. The answer is "B"

I can't take this doomsday "let's swallow anything the media throws out there yet AGAIN" OP seriously.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MannyGoldstein (Original post)

Tue Dec 18, 2012, 10:15 PM

100. Obama just sent 30,000 troops back into Iraq.. we are NEVER leaving..

 

Obama is a creature of Wall Street and the Big Banks. He could care less about America..

Our only hope is to become vocal. E-mail, Text, Call and complain.. with the hope that it might make a difference?

The only other option is to remain silent... under which case.... we get NOTHING.....

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to lib2DaBone (Reply #100)

Tue Dec 18, 2012, 11:13 PM

114. 30,000 back to Iraq? Do you have a source for that?

I am pretty sure we would have heard about it if that were true.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MannyGoldstein (Original post)

Tue Dec 18, 2012, 10:24 PM

104. Who in the hell folds on a winning hand?!

Does President Obama even like his supporters? Are we suppose to accept this BS deal, because it would have been worse with a President Romney? It is shit like this that makes me so angry and disappointed in President Obama, haven't the middle class and poor lost enough?! Hell with the Bush tax cuts, let's repeal the Reagan tax cuts!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to HoosierRadical (Reply #104)

Wed Dec 19, 2012, 04:30 PM

185. That depends on what game he's playing, and against whom.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MannyGoldstein (Original post)


Response to scheming daemons (Reply #106)

Tue Dec 18, 2012, 11:19 PM

116. Can you be specific as to my lie?

Or will you simply sit there and look silly?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to scheming daemons (Reply #106)

Tue Dec 18, 2012, 11:25 PM

117. Do you have any comprehension of the reference you make

when you accuse Manny of being "Goldstein"?

Is that truly the association you want to make about yourself?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to scheming daemons (Reply #106)

Wed Dec 19, 2012, 12:31 AM

122. +1 million!!!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MannyGoldstein (Original post)

Tue Dec 18, 2012, 11:12 PM

113. Obama and the Hamiltonian Democrats: "This is not a bloodless process."


(thanks to madfloridian)

Obama and the Hamiltonian Democrats: "This is not a bloodless process."
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=439x1540315

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MannyGoldstein (Original post)

Wed Dec 19, 2012, 12:56 AM

126. i yhink you dont understand negociating.

For one thing, he likely knows that the boner wont be able to perform. The teabags are no saner than before. The public will see that obama was negociating in good faith. We will come out good in the end

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MannyGoldstein (Original post)

Wed Dec 19, 2012, 12:58 AM

128. What a crock!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MannyGoldstein (Original post)

Wed Dec 19, 2012, 01:20 AM

131. Signed.

 

Hoping for the best, expecting the worst.

We really need a worker's party in this country.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MrSlayer (Reply #131)

Wed Dec 19, 2012, 01:37 AM

135. We absolutely need a workers' party.

The infiltration of the former Democratic party by DINOs, DLCers, Third Way types, and various Trojan Horses and other assholes is very nearly complete at this point.
The Party is dead.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MannyGoldstein (Original post)

Wed Dec 19, 2012, 01:45 AM

136. Has Axlerod told Obama he WON THE ELECTION?

Because our President is acting like a loser, like a turncoat, a traitor to everything
the Democratic Party is supposed to stand for, and he did so based on a LIE: the
big lie that Social Security has ANY THING to do with the fucking deficit.

Shame on BHO. That is all I can think of to say. I'm ashamed to be associated
with this unnecessary act of cruelty against our elders.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to 99th_Monkey (Reply #136)

Wed Dec 19, 2012, 11:44 AM

149. Yes, and now he's enacting his Republican agenda

his goal all along, as Manny states.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Doctor_J (Reply #149)

Wed Dec 19, 2012, 07:56 PM

208. BIngo! n/t

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MannyGoldstein (Original post)

Wed Dec 19, 2012, 01:51 AM

137. the FICA tax cut was a step toward dismantling Social Security....it's being dismantled bit by bit;

and cutting FICA also meant that, for the first time in history, it was true that Soc Sec added to the deficit/debt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to amborin (Reply #137)

Wed Dec 19, 2012, 04:23 PM

184. Eventually you will come to see Individual Cat Food Savings Accounts as Salvation

This is how "incrementalism" works: degrading what you had achieved before bit by bit until you don't care anymore or can't fight it. Forced purchase of a private sector POS products are the future, and RobamneyCare will be the model.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to kenny blankenship (Reply #184)

Wed Dec 19, 2012, 05:15 PM

191. yes, the incrementalism is everywhere and very dangerous and insidious

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MannyGoldstein (Original post)


Response to MannyGoldstein (Original post)

Wed Dec 19, 2012, 11:21 AM

148. Kicking for those who missed the Carney/White House statement. (n/t)

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MannyGoldstein (Original post)

Wed Dec 19, 2012, 12:28 PM

150. Signed and shared on Facebook.

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MannyGoldstein (Original post)

Wed Dec 19, 2012, 12:29 PM

151. When are you going to blame Republicans?

And the voters who put them in charge of the House?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to treestar (Reply #151)

Wed Dec 19, 2012, 12:33 PM

152. Should Lincoln have fired his losing generals?

After all, it was the Confederacy that was in rebellion.

(We expect the enemy to be the enemy, and we can't control that. But we can control our leaders - and we expect them to win, or at least fight hard.)

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MannyGoldstein (Reply #152)

Wed Dec 19, 2012, 04:43 PM

186. Our leaders include the Republican house

There is no way for a President to fire house members.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to treestar (Reply #186)

Wed Dec 19, 2012, 05:20 PM

192. Obama needs to fight. And win.

Against the Republicans, that is.

That's why we hired him.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MannyGoldstein (Reply #192)

Thu Dec 20, 2012, 10:41 AM

223. It does not work that way

There is no fight between branches of the government - they are co-equal. The only place to win a direct battle is the elections.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to treestar (Reply #223)

Thu Dec 20, 2012, 11:40 AM

225. You are smoking something.

Obama is the leader of the Democratic Party. The Democratic Part *should* be at war with the crazies - instead, they are capitulating and triangulating at every turn.

Are you seriously claiming, for example, that LBJ's civil rights legislation was not a victory over the southern racists?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to treestar (Reply #151)

Wed Dec 19, 2012, 01:46 PM

157. I can't blame a DOG for being a DOG.

I don't vote for Republicans.
I don't send them any money.
I don't support Republicans (even those with a D after their name) in any way.
They have absolutely no reason to listen to me.

I EXPECT Republicans to behave like Republicans.
I am never disappointed.

I DO send Democrats my money.
I DO vote and campaign FOR Democrats.
I EXPECT Democrats to act like Democrats.

When Democrats act like Republicans,
I see that as a betrayal.
I am furious,
and the Democrats who ARE acting like Republicans
should expect to HEAR from me.

Those who claim to be Democrats,
but support these betrayals of traditional Democratic Party Values will also hear from me,
because THEY are a BIG part of the problem.


"There are forces within the Democratic Party who want us to sound like kinder, gentler Republicans.
I want a party that will STAND UP for Working Americans."
---Paul Wellstone


photo by bvar22
Shortly before Sen Wellstone was killed



You will know them by their WORKS,
not by their rhetoric, promises, or excuses.
Solidarity99!
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to bvar22 (Reply #157)

Wed Dec 19, 2012, 04:43 PM

187. Well then why don't you blame Republicans

in the House for holding out on the tax cuts? That's what Republicans do. If the House were in the hands of Democrats - no problem would exist.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to treestar (Reply #151)

Wed Dec 19, 2012, 02:36 PM

158. This morning you were ranting that this was not true, calling DU liars...

Now you skipped the apology, moved on to 'they are not blaming the right people'.
Good lord.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Bluenorthwest (Reply #158)

Wed Dec 19, 2012, 04:44 PM

188. The people to blame are Republicans

Boehner and the House. Without their power, this discussion would not even be necessary.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to treestar (Reply #188)

Wed Dec 19, 2012, 08:47 PM

214. The president proposed cuts. I will blame both

thank you very much. Cuts will not pass unless the Repukes AND THE PRESIDENT want them. So if there are cuts, both are to blame. OTOH the Repukes campaigned on cuts, while the president campaigned on NOT cutting.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Doctor_J (Reply #214)

Thu Dec 20, 2012, 10:40 AM

222. Not that simple

The President would not have to even think about these cuts if it were not for the Republicans. The choice is the fiscal cliff, which could hurt people on food stamps and unemployment. That's because of the Republicans. Republican House mean Republicans with power, and it's what they want that drives these proposals. They can complain the same way because they are not getting the tax cuts they would want.

So make sure there is a Democratic Congress (at least, let alone Blue Dogs) in 2014 or these compromises end up being required.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to treestar (Reply #222)

Thu Dec 20, 2012, 02:30 PM

228. you're funny

If the Republicans weren't in charge of the House of Representatives, President Obama wouldn't be FORCED to propose cuts to Social Security. OK. But how about some reality?

But they ARE in charge of the House of Representatives and he STILL didn't have to propose cuts to Social Security.

He did it voluntarily, despite the fact that it is completely unrelated to the issue of the "cliff". Whether this is n-dimensional chess, or a stunt to make it look like he's trying oh-so-hard to compromise with the Republicans in order to avoid the so-called "cliff", it certainly ISN'T living up to the promise to preserve Social Security.

Even if these cuts don't get enacted, he's flip-flopped on that, regardless of whether it is cynical political ploy or his sincere willingness to cut future benefits.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MNBrewer (Reply #228)

Fri Dec 21, 2012, 10:18 AM

232. Of course he is doing it to avoid the cliff

At any rate, the entire scenario takes place only due to a Republican House. If the House were Democratic, this would not be happening. The Republicans are at fault. And some of them don't want to sign anything that raises taxes on the rich - Boehner himself is having problems with his own side. So they see it the same way. But they are just as unreasonable - they don't have the Senate and the Presidency, and can't just lay the fact they have to give up their tax cuts to Boehner's "weakness."

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MannyGoldstein (Original post)

Wed Dec 19, 2012, 12:38 PM

153. Signed and shared

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MannyGoldstein (Original post)

Wed Dec 19, 2012, 02:41 PM

159. K & R

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MannyGoldstein (Original post)

Wed Dec 19, 2012, 03:05 PM

160. Thanks Manny. I'm signer #2,399. nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Chef Eric (Reply #160)

Wed Dec 19, 2012, 03:16 PM

164. Thanks! nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MannyGoldstein (Original post)

Wed Dec 19, 2012, 04:12 PM

177. Signed it!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MannyGoldstein (Original post)

Wed Dec 19, 2012, 04:16 PM

181. He's been to the mountaintop.

(Or maybe it was just the top of Trump Tower?) Anyhow...
Can't we all just get along...and cut Social Security?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MannyGoldstein (Original post)

Wed Dec 19, 2012, 04:18 PM

182. Signer 2471.

Plan B is acquiring a taste for cat food. I used to sneak dog biscuits as a kid, so I may be ok.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MannyGoldstein (Original post)

Wed Dec 19, 2012, 05:23 PM

194. K&R!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MannyGoldstein (Original post)

Wed Dec 19, 2012, 05:24 PM

195. I've tried to sign several petitions on this issue

This is the first one where the site hasn't been crashed.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MannyGoldstein (Original post)


Response to ann--- (Reply #201)

Wed Dec 19, 2012, 08:43 PM

213. Actually he recently said he's a Republican

a rare case in which he's told the truth over the last few weeks

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Doctor_J (Reply #213)

Thu Dec 20, 2012, 02:31 PM

229. and he's certainly NOT a Socialist.

sadly.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MannyGoldstein (Original post)

Wed Dec 19, 2012, 07:01 PM

204. Austerity Now! Austerity Forever!

It's good to see the paid posters shilling for the WH in 1 place. Makes it so easier to put them on Ignore.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to blkmusclmachine (Reply #204)

Wed Dec 19, 2012, 07:04 PM

205. LOL

I think I've seen that phrase before...

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MannyGoldstein (Original post)

Wed Dec 19, 2012, 08:01 PM

210. Any other non-vindictive person would have stopped at false prediction number 10.

Gotta give ya credit for that.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MannyGoldstein (Original post)

Wed Dec 19, 2012, 09:00 PM

215. Yup! nt

PB

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MannyGoldstein (Original post)

Wed Dec 19, 2012, 11:40 PM

218. k&r to sign petition nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MannyGoldstein (Original post)

Thu Dec 20, 2012, 01:17 PM

226. What makes you think that "Obama's Dream" is to cut SS?

What a ludicrous statement.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to catbyte (Reply #226)

Thu Dec 20, 2012, 03:02 PM

230. Because there are no cuts needed, and yet he has offered to make them

what should we think?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Reply to this thread