HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » Forums & Groups » Main » General Discussion (Forum) » Obama, how DARE you cave ...

Wed Dec 19, 2012, 07:32 PM

Obama, how DARE you cave on tax cuts for the rich & then raid Social Security to pay for them

Last edited Thu Dec 20, 2012, 04:24 PM - Edit history (1)

That is NOT what Democrats, yourself first and foremost, were just elected to do. You won't be the one who feels the pain you now are willing to agree to, nor will Americans earning between $250,000 and $400,000 a year.

143 replies, 15540 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 143 replies Author Time Post
Reply Obama, how DARE you cave on tax cuts for the rich & then raid Social Security to pay for them (Original post)
Tom Rinaldo Dec 2012 OP
FirstLight Dec 2012 #1
Tom Rinaldo Dec 2012 #6
ProudProgressiveNow Dec 2012 #38
iemitsu Dec 2012 #59
marew Dec 2012 #67
iemitsu Dec 2012 #69
MsLeopard Dec 2012 #109
LiberalLovinLug Dec 2012 #120
GeorgeGist Dec 2012 #2
iemitsu Dec 2012 #60
CrispyQ Dec 2012 #91
Dustlawyer Dec 2012 #104
leftstreet Dec 2012 #3
Fumesucker Dec 2012 #4
doc03 Dec 2012 #5
Tom Rinaldo Dec 2012 #7
Auntie Bush Dec 2012 #8
sharp_stick Dec 2012 #9
Tom Rinaldo Dec 2012 #10
djean111 Dec 2012 #11
Wind Dancer Dec 2012 #15
AAO Dec 2012 #29
Plucketeer Dec 2012 #40
JDPriestly Dec 2012 #116
Plucketeer Dec 2012 #125
JDPriestly Dec 2012 #132
Plucketeer Dec 2012 #141
WHEN CRABS ROAR Dec 2012 #134
Dyedinthewoolliberal Dec 2012 #61
pandr32 Dec 2012 #99
xtraxritical Dec 2012 #105
marew Dec 2012 #117
plethoro Dec 2012 #21
AAO Dec 2012 #31
Doctor_J Dec 2012 #51
marew Dec 2012 #66
marew Dec 2012 #65
grahamhgreen Dec 2012 #68
harun Dec 2012 #87
Jakes Progress Dec 2012 #94
appacom Dec 2012 #107
Bake Dec 2012 #130
AverageJoe90 Dec 2012 #138
woo me with science Dec 2012 #140
lib2DaBone Dec 2012 #12
jerseyjack Dec 2012 #13
Tom Rinaldo Dec 2012 #16
AAO Dec 2012 #33
Plucketeer Dec 2012 #43
No Compromise Dec 2012 #46
dflprincess Dec 2012 #54
marew Dec 2012 #63
John2 Dec 2012 #47
Doctor_J Dec 2012 #53
marew Dec 2012 #64
gollygee Dec 2012 #75
shanti Dec 2012 #131
femrap Dec 2012 #44
AzDar Dec 2012 #14
jsr Dec 2012 #17
WeekendWarrior Dec 2012 #18
Tom Rinaldo Dec 2012 #19
Jakes Progress Dec 2012 #95
Poll_Blind Dec 2012 #20
tiredtoo Dec 2012 #22
AnnieK401 Dec 2012 #111
bluegopher Dec 2012 #23
RickFromMN Dec 2012 #24
bluemarkers Dec 2012 #25
NorthCarolina Dec 2012 #85
bluemarkers Dec 2012 #133
AAO Dec 2012 #26
Angry Dragon Dec 2012 #34
AAO Dec 2012 #37
Angry Dragon Dec 2012 #41
duffyduff Dec 2012 #71
Oilwellian Dec 2012 #93
AAO Dec 2012 #142
Divine Discontent Dec 2012 #27
NashvilleLefty Dec 2012 #28
Paulie Dec 2012 #35
Angry Dragon Dec 2012 #36
AldoLeopold Dec 2012 #55
AverageJoe90 Dec 2012 #143
In Truth We Trust Dec 2012 #30
840high Dec 2012 #42
kitt6 Dec 2012 #32
kitt6 Dec 2012 #39
blkmusclmachine Dec 2012 #45
Neon2012 Dec 2012 #48
iemitsu Dec 2012 #72
CakeGrrl Dec 2012 #49
Doctor_J Dec 2012 #50
dflprincess Dec 2012 #56
AldoLeopold Dec 2012 #52
brooklynite Dec 2012 #57
Tom Rinaldo Dec 2012 #83
nruthie Dec 2012 #58
marew Dec 2012 #62
grahamhgreen Dec 2012 #70
jsr Dec 2012 #73
harun Dec 2012 #88
heaven05 Dec 2012 #74
Tom Rinaldo Dec 2012 #78
heaven05 Dec 2012 #80
Jakes Progress Dec 2012 #96
heaven05 Dec 2012 #139
COLGATE4 Dec 2012 #98
ann--- Dec 2012 #76
underthematrix Dec 2012 #77
Tom Rinaldo Dec 2012 #84
Loge23 Dec 2012 #103
Turbineguy Dec 2012 #79
Champion Jack Dec 2012 #81
Tom Rinaldo Dec 2012 #86
Liberal_Stalwart71 Dec 2012 #82
TheKentuckian Dec 2012 #89
Liberal_Stalwart71 Dec 2012 #101
prius4me Dec 2012 #90
Beakybird Dec 2012 #92
treestar Dec 2012 #97
bhikkhu Dec 2012 #100
raindaddy Dec 2012 #102
kenny blankenship Dec 2012 #108
raindaddy Dec 2012 #110
grantcart Dec 2012 #106
Tom Rinaldo Dec 2012 #112
mostlyconfused Dec 2012 #113
Capt Lionel Mandrake Dec 2012 #114
indepat Dec 2012 #115
Fire Walk With Me Dec 2012 #118
alfredo Dec 2012 #119
Tom Rinaldo Dec 2012 #121
alfredo Dec 2012 #135
MotherPetrie Dec 2012 #122
alfredo Dec 2012 #136
ReRe Dec 2012 #123
Tom Rinaldo Dec 2012 #124
ReRe Dec 2012 #128
99th_Monkey Dec 2012 #126
railsback Dec 2012 #127
forestpath Dec 2012 #129
Liberal_Stalwart71 Dec 2012 #137

Response to Tom Rinaldo (Original post)

Wed Dec 19, 2012, 07:36 PM

1. I hope to god he isn;t gonna go there

what happened to mandate?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to FirstLight (Reply #1)

Wed Dec 19, 2012, 07:49 PM

6. I believe he already has gone there

Republicans could have bargained for letting more of the rich keep their temporary tax cuts after they won the 2010 mid term election, but they refused to. They wanted to keep every dime and slice up up the federal budget instead. Their "compromise" was to eztend the Bush tax cuts in full for two more years. Republicans were confident they would retake the Senate for sure and probably the Presidencyalso in 2012. They sadi let the people decide, and the people decided.

The tax cuts by law are set to expire. Every dollar Obama lets the rich keeps from them needs to be offset some place else. The Republican House will never pass any bill with significant revenue increases in it. NEVER. Compromising on tax cuts for the wealthy means someone else will have to sacrifice as part of any deficit plan, and Obama has just offered up those on fixed Social Security incomes as the designated sacrificial lambs.

The only thing that can save Obama from following through is total Republican stonewalling and going over the cliff. By far that is now the better option.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Tom Rinaldo (Reply #6)

Wed Dec 19, 2012, 09:43 PM

38. Can't phrase it any better...+1..

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Tom Rinaldo (Reply #6)

Wed Dec 19, 2012, 11:46 PM

59. Huh, a conscience and some balls would keep him from following through on with such a bad plan.

This is a losing proposal. Half of America's elderly depend only on SS as a source of income. They will suffer. No Democrat should put them in that position.
Obama should insist that republicans take all the credit for their irresponsible actions and force them to concede. And if they don't they will be seen as the problem.
Obama's plan makes him the problem.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to iemitsu (Reply #59)

Thu Dec 20, 2012, 12:18 AM

67. Obviously Obama doesn't give a you-know-what!

Just like for other rethugs- they have theirs and we are not worthy of consideration because we are not in the 1%!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to marew (Reply #67)

Thu Dec 20, 2012, 12:20 AM

69. You said it, and I agree.

We're what are called "no-counts".

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to iemitsu (Reply #69)

Thu Dec 20, 2012, 12:50 PM

109. Or Muppets nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Tom Rinaldo (Reply #6)

Thu Dec 20, 2012, 04:49 PM

120. The Rethugs might just do that

After accepting Obama's groveling submission of cutting SS benefits, they may uncross their fingers from behind their backs and hold hands and jump over the cliff crying that its not enough. Now, they will say, we are getting somewhere...what else can we cut?

I have never seen such blind capitulation by a winning administration in ANY country and ANY time in history that I can recall. And this after falling for the Charlie Brown and Lucy football scene time and time before. Its really quite amazing. The majority of Americans DO NOT WANT SS cut. Just like the majority of Americans wanted the public option for medical insurance...you had them at "Hello...I'm your new President" Why does this administration feel that it is good political tactics, even disregarding the snubbing of traditional Democratic values, to slap the faces of the majority of people in the nation like that?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Tom Rinaldo (Original post)

Wed Dec 19, 2012, 07:40 PM

2. Not even Moderate Republican from the 80's ...

Welshed on SS.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to GeorgeGist (Reply #2)

Wed Dec 19, 2012, 11:46 PM

60. Nope, and Obama claims to be one of these.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to GeorgeGist (Reply #2)

Thu Dec 20, 2012, 10:17 AM

91. It really shows how far to the right the Democratic Party has shifted, doesn't it?

If the dems do this, 2014 will make 2010 pale in comparison.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to CrispyQ (Reply #91)

Thu Dec 20, 2012, 11:34 AM

104. Shifted my ass! They are bought and paid for, that is the only explanation!

Obama has a mandate to stand firm on this and would find great support for not giving up something that has nothing to do with the deficit..

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Tom Rinaldo (Original post)

Wed Dec 19, 2012, 07:43 PM

3. CHECKMATE !!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to leftstreet (Reply #3)

Wed Dec 19, 2012, 07:46 PM

4. ...

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Tom Rinaldo (Original post)

Wed Dec 19, 2012, 07:47 PM

5. Rush Limbaugh "WE don't compromise, we won." apparently that doesn't

work for Democrats.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to doc03 (Reply #5)

Wed Dec 19, 2012, 07:55 PM

7. It's frightening to think what "compromises" Obama might have agreed to...

...if Democrats hadn't picked up seats in the House and Senate. This is what it looks like when we win big.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Tom Rinaldo (Original post)

Wed Dec 19, 2012, 07:59 PM

8. I'm so disappointed in Obama for doing this. So now we're taking

from the poor, middle class and elderly so we can take less from the rich? I thought elections had consequences...apparently not as much as we hoped.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Tom Rinaldo (Original post)

Wed Dec 19, 2012, 08:07 PM

9. He hasn't fucking done anything yet

holy shit on a fucking cracker.

We went through this when he was caving on don't ask don't tell we went through this when he was caving on the original stimulus bill and we went through this when he was caving on extending unemployment benefits. If I'm not mistaken a lot of the "usual suspects" bitching about the previous caving are all over this white on rice.

The amount of pre-whining going on around here is pathetic beyond belief.

on edit: I guess I repressed all the pre-whining about how he was blowing his re-election chances from the arm-chair keyboard pundits around here. That was classic whining

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to sharp_stick (Reply #9)

Wed Dec 19, 2012, 08:12 PM

10. He hasn't fucking done anything yet because the Republicans haven't agreed to it yet

And it is true, it isn't a done deal until it is a done deal. We agree on that. I would much prefer trying to force Obama to retreat on this now than wait to complain about it after it's a done deal. It's not called "crying wolf" when you actually see the wolf, whether or not any lifestock have been attacked yet.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Tom Rinaldo (Reply #10)

Wed Dec 19, 2012, 08:18 PM

11. +1

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Tom Rinaldo (Reply #10)

Wed Dec 19, 2012, 08:38 PM

15. +2

I'm tired of the apologists for Obama re: Social Security.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Tom Rinaldo (Reply #10)

Wed Dec 19, 2012, 09:28 PM

29. FuckinARight!

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Tom Rinaldo (Reply #10)

Wed Dec 19, 2012, 09:45 PM

40. Pre-emptive bitching

all to hell beats the torturous writhing and apologetic reconciling AFTER the FACT! Think back to the pipeline give-in, drill baby drill give-in, and how's that single payer health care workin' for ya??? How about the continued expansion of drones in military and civilian realms? - habeus corpus? The furtherance of the STUPID and wasteful War on Drugs?
Yeah - we need to just SIT BACK and applaud as each facet of progressive hopes is explained away while trying to appease the Right! Right! Our Clintonesque Mr. Idigo Blue dog president - we're thankful for every CRUMB of Democratic ideals you pay homage to!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Plucketeer (Reply #40)

Thu Dec 20, 2012, 04:10 PM

116. The pipeline give-in is yet to come.

I wish we had single payer.

As for the rest, I agree with you. Let's run a Progressive in every congressional district in 2014.

Make the ConservaDems explain why what they are voting for is the best policy. I don't think they can do it.

I think they vote according to their campaign fund drives and not according to common sense or their consciences.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to JDPriestly (Reply #116)

Thu Dec 20, 2012, 05:35 PM

125. What do you do when...

the yokel you've got for a rep won't even MEET with the folks of his district? He's got solid support from the wealthy and a district full of Right-minded rubes who would vote Republican with their last, dying breath. He actually HAD a decent opponent this time around, but he wouldn't debate or even meet with locals. The guy's an a**-wipe.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Plucketeer (Reply #125)

Thu Dec 20, 2012, 06:34 PM

132. Sounds like John Boehner. Am I right?

I've heard this before about him.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to JDPriestly (Reply #132)

Fri Dec 21, 2012, 11:51 AM

141. While I'm sure Boehner's like that

the Rep I'm referring to is Devin Nunes (R) Dist. 22, California.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to JDPriestly (Reply #116)

Thu Dec 20, 2012, 07:46 PM

134. They vote for increasing their stock investments.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Tom Rinaldo (Reply #10)

Wed Dec 19, 2012, 11:58 PM

61. The Republicans aren't the ones accepting Obama's deal

it's the other way around. He has stated repeatedly what it will take to get an agreement. All this worrying that Obama has given away the store (my words) is premature. Besides, our course of action is to bombard our elected Congress people and tell them how to vote. If they bill doesn't make it to the Presidents desk before Jan 1, the cuts expire and nothing else is touched.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Dyedinthewoolliberal (Reply #61)

Thu Dec 20, 2012, 11:15 AM

99. "...our course of action is to bombard our elected Congress people"

Perfect--I am starting this morning.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to pandr32 (Reply #99)

Thu Dec 20, 2012, 11:37 AM

105. I wanted to "contact" Pelosi, who endorses this legislation, to let her know I emphatically disagree

 

but she won't take email from out of her district. Let's hope her constituents raise hell.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to xtraxritical (Reply #105)

Thu Dec 20, 2012, 04:46 PM

117. I tried also and got the same response!

She's a coward!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to sharp_stick (Reply #9)

Wed Dec 19, 2012, 09:06 PM

21. It is far far more than the usual subjects and of that I am completely delighted. After all the

 

hours my diabetic website and I put in, all the money I donated getting Obama re-elected and Obama puts a stealth cut to Social Security on the table, I will never trust him again.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to plethoro (Reply #21)

Wed Dec 19, 2012, 09:33 PM

31. Let's wait and see.

 

It's not looking good at the moment, and I'm preparing for the worst - nothing's happened yet.

Maybe the big "O" will prove a 5 dimensional chess player.

I know it's lame, but it's all I've got at the moment.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to sharp_stick (Reply #9)

Wed Dec 19, 2012, 11:20 PM

51. Yes, he has

Every newspaper, magazine, blog, and the White House Official Web Site is printing that he proposed/agreed to cuts. Why do you continue to maintain that he hasn't?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Doctor_J (Reply #51)

Thu Dec 20, 2012, 12:15 AM

66. Again you are absolutely correct!

I do not get that people cannot comprehend that Obama is just waiting for the right moment to throw seniors under the bus!!!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to sharp_stick (Reply #9)

Thu Dec 20, 2012, 12:13 AM

65. Duh! Reality check!

He is completely willing to screw seniors over or he would NEVER have offered this. Playing games with people's retirement incomes they've put together for 40 years is just a joke to you and Obama! You two are all heart-NOT!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to sharp_stick (Reply #9)

Thu Dec 20, 2012, 12:18 AM

68. All he has to do is nothing, and the tax cuts expire.... Which he failed at doing last time

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to sharp_stick (Reply #9)

Thu Dec 20, 2012, 09:34 AM

87. No he hasn't but anyone paying attention knows the script

Boner and Obama do their dance right up to the last minute. Then they "finally" have an agreement and they dump a huge pile of steaming shit on the Progressives in the House like they are some sort of an afterthought and tell them they need to vote for it or the fucking world ends.



Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to sharp_stick (Reply #9)

Thu Dec 20, 2012, 10:39 AM

94. Are you genuinely unaware of what is happening?

The president offered to cut SS and raise the income level. He wasn't responding to a republican demand. He was offering. He said he wouldn't negotiate with himself, and then he began negotiating with himself.

So you say he is going to withdraw what he offered? Really? I would love it, but there is nothing in his past capitu.... I mean negotiating that would offer any hope for this.

I call hero worship.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to sharp_stick (Reply #9)

Thu Dec 20, 2012, 12:12 PM

107. Thank you, all the pre-whining is making me mad as hell

We 'd all be in quite a pickle if Obama stopped being an adult. I trust him to make the best deal he possible can for pool ole ladies like me.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to appacom (Reply #107)

Thu Dec 20, 2012, 06:01 PM

130. Best deal possible??

Apparently your idea of negotiating is asking the car dealer how much they want ABOVE the sticker price.

Bake

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to sharp_stick (Reply #9)

Thu Dec 20, 2012, 09:28 PM

138. Yeah.

TBH, Prez O ain't Mr. Perfect, but he's the best we got right now.......

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to sharp_stick (Reply #9)

Fri Dec 21, 2012, 10:56 AM

140. What utter delusion and spin. Of course he has.

We have ALREADY been sold out to austerity.

By validating, participating in, and agreeing to the Shock Doctrine SCAM of the debt ceiling negotiations last spring, the President already ensured that we will be subjected to sweeping, painful austerity cuts. We are merely waiting to see which version we get. He USED Medicare and Social Security as hostages to ENSURE an austerity deal.

The corporatists set this up so that even in the best case scenario, going over the cliff, we will suffer broad, vicious, triggered cuts across the board that will slow this economy even further and hit the poorest hardest. We know from hundreds of economists and from Europe that austerity is a corporate theft and SCAM by the one percent...harmful to economies and deadly to human beings. But we will get some version of it no matter what, by design.

We win NOTHING here, even if we go over the cliff. Consistent with the predictable Third Way game, we are being propagandized to be grateful if we end up with the lesser of the evils...the LESS painful and damaging of the horrible options that have been carefully set up.

Of course we have been harmed already. It is brazen spin to call this despicable corporatist manipulation a win in any way.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Tom Rinaldo (Original post)

Wed Dec 19, 2012, 08:22 PM

12. I filled out the on-line petitions and called my Senator today...

 

Seniors HAVE to get vocal and do it quick....

Allowing people who make half-a-million a year tax breaks while going after seniors making what, $12,000 a year?

Mr. Obama and the DEMS who sign this are DISGRACEFUL.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Tom Rinaldo (Original post)

Wed Dec 19, 2012, 08:31 PM

13. This is why I criticized Obama during the electio process.

 

He is basically useless.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to jerseyjack (Reply #13)

Wed Dec 19, 2012, 08:39 PM

16. I held my fire during the election and worked to get him elected

I knew Romney would be far worse. But the election is over and Obama works for us, not the other way around. He is safely in office, now there is no reason to be silent when our interests are in danger. When he earns an honest backlash against his embrace of the establishment center, far be it from me to deny him it.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Tom Rinaldo (Reply #16)

Wed Dec 19, 2012, 09:36 PM

33. He seems to be a 'no bones about it' corporatist.

 

I'm disappointed, but not shocked.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Tom Rinaldo (Reply #16)

Wed Dec 19, 2012, 09:50 PM

43. I'm with you, Tom!

I told anyone who cared to listen - that I would be voting for the LESSER of evils. Am I happy Obama won? NO - I'm happy Romney lost.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Tom Rinaldo (Reply #16)

Wed Dec 19, 2012, 09:59 PM

46. "the election is over and Obama works for us, not the other way around"

 

yes

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to No Compromise (Reply #46)

Wed Dec 19, 2012, 11:29 PM

54. The election is over and Obama doesn't need us anymore.

And, as he's run his last campaign, he will never need us again. We're screwed.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to dflprincess (Reply #54)

Thu Dec 20, 2012, 12:07 AM

63. Absolutely!!!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Tom Rinaldo (Reply #16)

Wed Dec 19, 2012, 09:59 PM

47. He is worried

 

about those Defense contractors that would lose their jobs. They will have to suffer or call the Republicans. I think it will be good to take the sequestrian cuts. The recession will not last all of 2013 and most of the jobs lost will be in defense. I'm not really worried about taxes going up. We can always lower them when the Repukes want a deal. If I was the President, I would just show them my pen for the next 2-4 years. I don't mind

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Tom Rinaldo (Reply #16)

Wed Dec 19, 2012, 11:21 PM

53. Same here

but this has now become a bad joke that we are the butts of. He has moved from pathetic dupe to total disaster.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Doctor_J (Reply #53)

Thu Dec 20, 2012, 12:09 AM

64. Amen!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Tom Rinaldo (Reply #16)

Thu Dec 20, 2012, 08:44 AM

75. Agreed. n/t

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Tom Rinaldo (Reply #16)

Thu Dec 20, 2012, 06:01 PM

131. absolutely!

we can't stop holding his feet to the fire now! i will not be quiet either!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to jerseyjack (Reply #13)

Wed Dec 19, 2012, 09:52 PM

44. Bouught and

 

paid for.

Deceptive little turd.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Tom Rinaldo (Original post)

Wed Dec 19, 2012, 08:35 PM

14. K & R

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Tom Rinaldo (Original post)

Wed Dec 19, 2012, 08:48 PM

17. Best title of the day.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Tom Rinaldo (Original post)

Wed Dec 19, 2012, 08:54 PM

18. What the fuck are you talking about?

I've come to the conclusion half of DU is tone deaf.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink



Response to Tom Rinaldo (Reply #19)

Thu Dec 20, 2012, 10:40 AM

95. Thank you for providing clues

to the clueless. I don't notice any response, of course.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Tom Rinaldo (Original post)

Wed Dec 19, 2012, 09:00 PM

20. DU REC +1 nt

PB

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Tom Rinaldo (Original post)

Wed Dec 19, 2012, 09:09 PM

22. This may be a lost cause already

But i just donated some money to moveon in an effort to fight this. I also spent most of the day trying to leave a message at white house. (202-456-1111) did not get through, busy all day. called again a few minutes ago and phone is turned off. tells us to call between 9 am and 5 pm. I did send an email and will try calling again tomorrow. Damn I hate it when this happens.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to tiredtoo (Reply #22)

Thu Dec 20, 2012, 01:45 PM

111. I went on the WH website and sent a message.

I had the same experience trying to call. They must be getting a lot of heat - good.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Tom Rinaldo (Original post)

Wed Dec 19, 2012, 09:11 PM

23. I'll only hold it against him if it happens...


but i don't think it will. It may end up making the repcons look even more stupid and unwilling to compromise.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Tom Rinaldo (Original post)

Wed Dec 19, 2012, 09:11 PM

24. Let the Bush Tax Cuts expire! Negotiate a tax cut for the middle class in the upcoming year.


What am I worried about?

The Republicans won't agree to anything unless they get everything they want.

Boehner won't be able to get anything through the House.
Even a bill Boehner proposes won't make it through the House.

Still, if anything ugly makes it out of the House, the Senate Democrats better be prepared to block it.
I get scared when I think of President Obama's instinct to compromise. I almost said capitulate.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Tom Rinaldo (Original post)

Wed Dec 19, 2012, 09:15 PM

25. got a survey from Debbie Wasserman today

I responded... I came across as an angry middle aged while woman... 'cause I am

Let them know

eta: just so you know I know this was nothing more than a fund raiser by the DNC. Hopefully every little bit helps. I've written the WH and my rep as well. I need to do one Senator, the other is useless.


Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to bluemarkers (Reply #25)

Thu Dec 20, 2012, 09:30 AM

85. I did the same thing.

I'm fairly sure it won't do any good though. Looking back at how things have transpired since the Simpson-Bowles plan, I believe this has been carefully crafted and scripted from the get go. We are seeing the play unfold now. Social Security and Medicare have always been the one true goal, and the rest, like the "fiscal cliff" and "raising taxes on the uber rich" are just a ploy. Even if taxes do go up (on paper), they can simply go back and reduce the taxes later on, even retro-actively if they so choose. However, any changes to Social Security and Medicare would be permanent. It's clear what the goal really is, and it's pretty evident that our congress members may be eligible for a Tony Award when this theatrical event is complete.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to NorthCarolina (Reply #85)

Thu Dec 20, 2012, 06:52 PM

133. I know you are right

I just don't want to believe it....

Erskine Bowles is a big ole poopy head. hehe

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Tom Rinaldo (Original post)

Wed Dec 19, 2012, 09:21 PM

26. Correct me if I'm wrong.

 

Cutting expenditures for Social Security does not affect the budget. All it does is hurt lots of grammas and grampas, disabled people, and people that will one day be eligible for those benefits.

Social Security and Medicare should be separate issues, not part of "fiscal FUCKING cliff" cave-ins.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to AAO (Reply #26)

Wed Dec 19, 2012, 09:38 PM

34. SS has no effect on the deficit by law

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Angry Dragon (Reply #34)

Wed Dec 19, 2012, 09:41 PM

37. Then that begs the question: Why is Obama doing this?

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to AAO (Reply #37)

Wed Dec 19, 2012, 09:46 PM

41. He is the worst negotiator I have ever seen

That is why the republicans want to negotiate with him instead of actually do it in congress where it belongs

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to AAO (Reply #37)

Thu Dec 20, 2012, 12:23 AM

71. He's more interested in impressing the historians

than he is in doing the people's business. He wants to be seen as a "post-partisan" president or some other stupid shit.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to duffyduff (Reply #71)

Thu Dec 20, 2012, 10:35 AM

93. He won't be impressing historians

They will write about the greatest post-election betrayal in American history.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Oilwellian (Reply #93)

Fri Dec 21, 2012, 06:51 PM

142. I hope you're wrong, but I fear you are right...

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Tom Rinaldo (Original post)

Wed Dec 19, 2012, 09:25 PM

27. if the GOP agrees to the cuts (but why would they, they believe he'll give them even more!) the DEM

party will be cut off at the knees in 2014. There will be no excitement to prevent the GOP from taking over the Senate.

The president needs to get on the right side of this, and that's not even having SS be a part of the debate.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Tom Rinaldo (Original post)

Wed Dec 19, 2012, 09:26 PM

28. Do you have a fucking clue how "negotiation" works?

Have you ever played Poker?

Obama is winning this. The deal is not just between him and Boehner, although they are the ones negotiating. Obama has to give something to allow the Repugs to "save face" and at least feel like they got something out of it. Remember, Obama's original goal was increasing taxes on people making $500k or over. His opening bid was $250k. Boehner eventually responded with $1mil and unspecified "entitlement" cuts, although they hinted at changing the chained CPI which is a HUGE concession considering that they wanted to privatize SS entirely.

Obama responded with tax increases for everyone with $400K and over - still $100k below his stated preference. I fault Obama because he already put a stake in the ground at $500, but at least we know what his line in the sand is. If he "gives" a little on the chained CPI, it's no big deal because that can be changed later.

All this extremist talk is just subjective.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to NashvilleLefty (Reply #28)

Wed Dec 19, 2012, 09:39 PM

35. In poker you don't throw back three aces

Because you can win the next hand. Especially when what you're throwing away is monetary support for the vulnerable populations in this country; elderly and disabled.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to NashvilleLefty (Reply #28)

Wed Dec 19, 2012, 09:41 PM

36. "save face" ........... not up to dems to make the repugs look good

your post is a bunch of crap and full of lies and lack of facts

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to NashvilleLefty (Reply #28)

Wed Dec 19, 2012, 11:31 PM

55. It is possible this is a grand raise

To see how far they'll go. It is possible. In my opinion, in pure braincells, this guy has got the top marks.

I look forward to the conclusion of the hand.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to NashvilleLefty (Reply #28)

Mon Dec 24, 2012, 02:11 AM

143. Yep, that definitely turned out to be the case. n/t =)

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Tom Rinaldo (Original post)

Wed Dec 19, 2012, 09:30 PM

30. REC REC and fuckety fuck fuck him!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to In Truth We Trust (Reply #30)

Wed Dec 19, 2012, 09:47 PM

42. You read my mind.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Tom Rinaldo (Original post)

Wed Dec 19, 2012, 09:35 PM

32. Anxiety Pills wouldn't hurt

 

THIS population in the least bit!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Tom Rinaldo (Original post)

Wed Dec 19, 2012, 09:43 PM

39. And even if they are going to cut

 

something? (I agree would be low Learn from it! (for a change.)

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Tom Rinaldo (Original post)

Wed Dec 19, 2012, 09:58 PM

45. A DEMOCRAT wouldn't. Obama, however, ...

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Tom Rinaldo (Original post)

Wed Dec 19, 2012, 10:25 PM

48. It's "earning" not "earing" and...

 

there has to be a reasonable agreement which will pass the House and Senate.

Whatever your idea is, if you have one, is probably not likely to pass.

Sorry we live in a democratic society.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Neon2012 (Reply #48)

Thu Dec 20, 2012, 12:38 AM

72. Passing nothing is better than giving away earned benefits

that millions depend on to survive.
He does not have any business playing with people's lives this way.
If Obama takes from the elderly to subsidize the rich he is a lousy excuse for a human and a terrible leader.
He will not be remembered well for this.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Tom Rinaldo (Original post)

Wed Dec 19, 2012, 10:36 PM

49. Let me know when he's actually DONE that.

In the meantime, maybe people should do what they can to make sure a Dem President doesn't have to try to deal with a Teabag-infested House of Representatives and a filibuster-happy Senate. Threatening to sit out 2014, which raises its ugly head as it did in 2010, is not a step in the right direction if people want to see Progressive legislation get ALL the way through Congress.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to CakeGrrl (Reply #49)

Wed Dec 19, 2012, 11:17 PM

50. Everyone, including the WH, has admitted that he agreed to the cuts

Why can you not accept that?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to CakeGrrl (Reply #49)

Wed Dec 19, 2012, 11:35 PM

56. What we should be doing is making it clear to the Democrats in Congress is that,

if they go along with this theft, they will be looking for other jobs after 2014. If they're willing to sell us out on Social Security, there is just no trusting them on anything.

This is not a deal Obama got cornered into doing - especially after he said Social Security would not be cut. Right now we'd be better off going "off the cliff" - at least that will leave SS and Medicare alone and actually cut some money from the Defense Department.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Tom Rinaldo (Original post)

Wed Dec 19, 2012, 11:21 PM

52. Its very simple

Its not hard.

If this goes through, then we'll know both parties fuck us. So who's left then? The people.

Then shit gets real.

Here's to shit getting real.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Tom Rinaldo (Original post)

Wed Dec 19, 2012, 11:38 PM

57. Unrec

However you feel about the way Obama wants to deal with SS benefits, he NOT "raiding it to pay for tax cuts" and you know it.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to brooklynite (Reply #57)

Thu Dec 20, 2012, 09:08 AM

83. Just connect the simple dots

No doubt Obama wouldn't frame it this way, but that is the end result. This entire battle, the fiscal cliff and all of that, is all about reducing the red ink in our budget. There are only two ways to do so, bring in more revenue or slash expenditures. Obama campaigned on a proposal to allow the Bush tax cuts to expire on income over $250,000 a year becasue that would bring in almost a Trillion dollars in revenue over a ten year period AND THAT REVENUE STREAM WOULD BE PERMANENT. Now Obama is offering to accept less revenues by allowing the rich to keep their tax cuts on income below $400,000 a year. He opened the tax cut window by an additional $150,000. The entire income of the average American family is well below $150,000 a year.

Obama just offered to accept less revenue from the richest 2% of Americans even though the budget NEEDS that revenue. Without it even deeper cuts must be made to reduce the deficit, and Obama just propsed that we achieve more savings through a budgetary gimmic that reduces the size of future Socoal Security checks. Republicans wouldn't hesitate to call that a "new tax" if the income of the wealthy were being reduced through that type of gimmic.

Obama's latest proposal, compared to the position he campaigned on and won, transfers costs from some of the richest people in America to some of the poorest. The Bush tax cuts are set to legally expire. Obama is proposing NEW tax cuts for the rich while proposing smaller Social Security payments to the elderly and disabled. That is a fact.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Tom Rinaldo (Original post)

Wed Dec 19, 2012, 11:46 PM

58. What's the matter with you people???

On the news (pst) tonight they reported that Boehner had said no to Obama's latest alleged proposal. Have you all heard something to the contrary? I'm still hoping time will expire and we'll not have a deal at all...but I'm not quite ready to start damning Obama until all the facts are in.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to nruthie (Reply #58)

Thu Dec 20, 2012, 12:05 AM

62. Big deal!

He put the seniors out there! You really do not see that as a problem?!? Amazing! We may not know for sure just yet but it is obvious he was MORE than willing to throw seniors under the bus to feed his own ego!
I regret every cent I gave to his campaigns, every minute I worked on the campaign, and I take back every good thing I EVER said about that man!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to nruthie (Reply #58)

Thu Dec 20, 2012, 12:20 AM

70. So, we were saved from Obamas attack on SS by Boner????

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to grahamhgreen (Reply #70)

Thu Dec 20, 2012, 01:30 AM

73. Perfect summary of our wholly unnecessary predicament.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to nruthie (Reply #58)

Thu Dec 20, 2012, 09:39 AM

88. Point is, if Obama isn't going to threaten the GOP with going over the cliff or else

the GOP is going to get their concessions.

Just bad weak negotiations.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Tom Rinaldo (Original post)

Thu Dec 20, 2012, 08:43 AM

74. you

all have your knives out to do our President in, there has been nothing put on paper to sign or veto by him. All of you, your loyalty STINKS! I am getting weary of watching all these fires and woe is me memes. God, all of you are so pitiful asking for betrayal so you can say "I told you so"! Grow up! All of your disloyalty is disheartening and it almost make me wish 12/21/12 prognostications are true. I am REALLY sick of all of you.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to heaven05 (Reply #74)

Thu Dec 20, 2012, 08:49 AM

78. Your idea of loyalty reminds me of Blind Patriotism

I gave Obama my loyalty during the Presidential Election campaign. Even though I was worried about the deals he might be willing to cut during this lame duck session of Congress, I kept my mouth shut and worked for the team. The election is over. Now our elected leaders work for us. I am perfectly capable of blasting Obama's stance on one issue while praising his stance on another, if that is how the chips are falling. Democracy is not about "following the leader".

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Tom Rinaldo (Reply #78)

Thu Dec 20, 2012, 08:55 AM

80. what ever!

I stand by my statement Quisling.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Tom Rinaldo (Reply #78)

Thu Dec 20, 2012, 10:42 AM

96. Reminds me of my Southern Baptist cousin.

He declared that he loved his church because it relieved him of having to think about stuff. The church just told him what was good and bad and he didn't have to think anymore. It was a great relief to him.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Tom Rinaldo (Reply #78)

Fri Dec 21, 2012, 10:40 AM

139. and

my loyalty has not been betrayed. My! The naysayers and Quislings are quiet this morning. There has been a pole shift!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to heaven05 (Reply #74)

Thu Dec 20, 2012, 10:58 AM

98. My President, right or wrong. (Sounds better

in the original German)

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Tom Rinaldo (Original post)


Response to Tom Rinaldo (Original post)

Thu Dec 20, 2012, 08:47 AM

77. The story in this post is false.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to underthematrix (Reply #77)

Thu Dec 20, 2012, 09:12 AM

84. I'll repeat something I just posted as a reply in the center of this thread

Just connect the simple dots.

No doubt Obama wouldn't frame it this way, but that is the end result. This entire battle, the fiscal cliff and all of that, is all about reducing the red ink in our budget. There are only two ways to do so, bring in more revenue or slash expenditures. Obama campaigned on a proposal to allow the Bush tax cuts to expire on income over $250,000 a year becasue that would bring in almost a Trillion dollars in revenue over a ten year period AND THAT REVENUE STREAM WOULD BE PERMANENT. Now Obama is offering to accept less revenues by allowing the rich to keep their tax cuts on income below $400,000 a year. He opened the tax cut window by an additional $150,000. The entire income of the average American family is well below $150,000 a year.

Obama just offered to accept less revenue from the richest 2% of Americans even though the budget NEEDS that revenue. Without it even deeper cuts must be made to reduce the deficit, and Obama just propsed that we achieve more savings through a budgetary gimmic that reduces the size of future Socoal Security checks. Republicans wouldn't hesitate to call that a "new tax" if the income of the wealthy were being reduced through that type of gimmic.

Obama's latest proposal, compared to the position he campaigned on and won, transfers costs from some of the richest people in America to some of the poorest. The Bush tax cuts are set to legally expire. Obama is proposing NEW tax cuts for the rich while proposing smaller Social Security payments to the elderly and disabled. That is a fact.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Tom Rinaldo (Reply #84)

Thu Dec 20, 2012, 11:24 AM

103. A-freakin men! (eom)

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Tom Rinaldo (Original post)

Thu Dec 20, 2012, 08:51 AM

79. It's the smart play

A lot of SS recipients vote for republicans. There is no way to convince them except make them pay.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink



Response to Champion Jack (Reply #81)

Thu Dec 20, 2012, 09:31 AM

86. I'm sorry. Passivity now is not our friend.

Even from yo0ur perspective, the very least we can accomplish by "over reacting" now is to strengthen the Democrats ultimate bargaining position. That's the least.

Sooner or later there will be a deal struck. There are too many things each side refuses to live with if we go over the fiscal cliff and don't retroactively alter those terms. Any offer that the President makes in public now will form the basis of the new Republican floor in future negotiations which seemingly will begin in ernest now in January.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Tom Rinaldo (Original post)

Thu Dec 20, 2012, 09:00 AM

82. GOBAMA!!! The president is winning! Trashing thread!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Liberal_Stalwart71 (Reply #82)

Thu Dec 20, 2012, 10:04 AM

89. Winning what? There is no winning. He put us in check by simply accepting the framing.

Every deal since just created more hostages in harm's way.

Now we have our option of flavor of trainwreck but he has wrecked us good either way. People are going to be hurt and demand will be pulled from an economy starving for it.
You realize a delusional and dangerous environment has been willfully crafted here, we can no longer advance the ball economically or make more sturdy the safety net.

Our party may already be dead, he has accepted the fundamental opposition worldview and destroyed our capability to do more than soften the crash.
Essentially, the party has little reason to exist other than to be the avenue to more compassionate conservatism than the opposition offers.

Obama may be "winning" aka getting his way because he is a global corporatist and a neoliberal but the people lose, the flavor of our defeat is the option.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to TheKentuckian (Reply #89)

Thu Dec 20, 2012, 11:20 AM

101. He's done no such thing. Until I see a plan, all this whining is senseless. GOBAMA!!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Tom Rinaldo (Original post)

Thu Dec 20, 2012, 10:06 AM

90. Stupid rich people

 

Stupid richies having all the monney but not giving it to Obamma. Take it all and give me some.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Tom Rinaldo (Original post)

Thu Dec 20, 2012, 10:17 AM

92. Amen +1

The middle class and poor have been hurt by the Bush tax structure. After years of living fat off the cow of these low tax rates, Obama wants to let those making 250,000 to 400,000 - who can make a little bit of a sacrifice - go Scott free.

Now because the Bush tax cuts and deregulation that favored the rich and powerful added to the deficit, Obama's solution to the deficit is to protect the rich and punish the middle class and poor. Oy ve!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Tom Rinaldo (Original post)

Thu Dec 20, 2012, 10:45 AM

97. Because the Republicans hold the House?

And if there is no compromise, then there will be bigger cuts.

Face it, getting that Republican Congress in 2010 had consequences.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Tom Rinaldo (Original post)

Thu Dec 20, 2012, 11:19 AM

100. He hasn't done either, and one thing has nothing to do with the other

If you look at the actual changes proposed to Social Security benefits, implementing chained cpi (as proposed by the president) would preserve all the benefits of those below a certain income level.

Essentially it would be a way of means-testing benefits, which has been argued for here far a long time!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Tom Rinaldo (Original post)

Thu Dec 20, 2012, 11:23 AM

102. Face the facts. Obama's really a moderate Republican.

The Republicans kicked the moderates out of their party and a number of opportunistic Democrats seized the moment. Obama just won an election with a significant majority of mostly middle-class and poor voters. He's smart enough to know that Social Security isn't part of the budget and not even a major problem. Yet he's using the so called "fiscal cliff" as a means to cut into a program protected by two generations of Democratic Party leaders while protecting the interests of the wealthy. Obama's negotiating against the very people who "voted" him in the White House to pay back the people who fund elections in this country and those people win no matter who's in office.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to raindaddy (Reply #102)

Thu Dec 20, 2012, 12:35 PM

108. I remember moderate Republicans. They weren't hostile to Social Security.

"Should any political party attempt to abolish social security, unemployment insurance, and eliminate labor laws and farm programs, you would not hear of that party again in our political history. There is a tiny splinter group, of course, that believes that you can do these things. Among them are a few Texas oil millionaires, and an occasional politician or businessman from other areas. Their number is negligible and they are stupid."

President Dwight D. Eisenhower, l952


Bircher Republicans, sure. Goldwater Republicans. Those folk hated Social Security.
Hostility to Social Security is further to the right than Nixon, or even Reagan.

Don't call him a moderate Republican. The only way he qualifies for that leniency is on social issues - sometimes.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to kenny blankenship (Reply #108)

Thu Dec 20, 2012, 01:27 PM

110. I remember moderate Republicans. They weren't hostile to Social Security.

When I said moderate Republican I was talking about today's Republicans, but I know what you mean. I do think Nixon and Reagan were pragmatists, they knew they would pay the price if they tried to touch Social Security because it was so unpopular with Americans. Today's politicians no longer give a sh*t what people want.
Talking about Ike, he also warned us about the war profiteers. I know this'll piss a few people off but I'd rather have Republican like Eisenhower in the WH than a Democrat like Obama.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Tom Rinaldo (Original post)

Thu Dec 20, 2012, 12:05 PM

106. lol

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to grantcart (Reply #106)

Thu Dec 20, 2012, 02:59 PM

112. That packed a lot into an OP Title, didn't it?

It was a challange but I was pissed so I decided to max it out.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Tom Rinaldo (Original post)

Thu Dec 20, 2012, 03:05 PM

113. The most frustrating thing about it is

they are negotiating over things that won't fix the problem. There is no amount of taxes you can raise from the rich that will address the deficit problem without significant spending cuts as well. If you raise the top marginal rate to 100% on both wages and capital gains, you cannot raise enough tax revenue to cover one year's worth of budget deficits. And these fools are debating about what percentage of the population should get a 4% increase. This is not a serious discussion at all.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Tom Rinaldo (Original post)

Thu Dec 20, 2012, 03:27 PM

114. Old News

I voted for Obama, yes, because I can never vote for the Repukes and because Obama's new Supreme Court appointee(s) (after one, two, or three current "justices" die or quit) will be better than Repuke appointees and because the injuries done to SS and Medicare/Medicaid stuff would be less serious under Obama than a Rawmoney. However, I also knew Obama would throw SS and Medicaid under his Wall Street bus, simply because his "economic team" included such Progressive-Socialist stalwarts as Geithner, Rubin, Summers, etc. and he himself assigned Simpson to the "deficit and cut committee." Obama has made more concessions than the Repukes ever asked for. I can't stand Obama--I couldn't, after he threw away the Single-Payer Option. He's a trainwreck. But there is no one else. Could we just throw away votes to stand on ceremonial principle?

We desperately need to take control of local politics, hound with letters phone calls and attendance at our "representatives'" public appearances, and try hard to influence the national democratic party. We need better men than Obama, far better. We need to organize, continue organizing, and plan on taking back, someday, the future.

Iceland put its bankers in jail. That is something of a model for the future. We should also make financial crimes of such magnitudes earn very serious incarceration time...

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Tom Rinaldo (Original post)

Thu Dec 20, 2012, 03:50 PM

115. That is exactly what it is: an extreme RW ploy in which social security benefits are reduced

to fund the continuance of a grossly inequitable and unfair tax cut for a portion of the top 2%. Stomps the shit out of the promote the general welfare doctrine. Unfuckin' unbelievable, diabolically perverse, lethal in its application.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Tom Rinaldo (Original post)

Thu Dec 20, 2012, 04:48 PM

118. Stealing from the poor to pay the rich is "austerity". Socialized theft. Disaster capitalism.

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Tom Rinaldo (Original post)

Thu Dec 20, 2012, 04:49 PM

119. He knew that if he proposed it, the GOP would reject it.

He was right.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to alfredo (Reply #119)

Thu Dec 20, 2012, 04:56 PM

121. Correct. Ever hear of "Give an inch and they'll take a mile"?

Whatever concession Obama coughs up becomes "an inch" allowing the Republoicans to get on with fighting fighting for "a mile". Of cpurse they won't settle for what they now see as as Obama's inch. They will use ti to move the bargaining table to the right and Obama just dragged all of us there with him.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Tom Rinaldo (Reply #121)

Thu Dec 20, 2012, 09:07 PM

135. They rejected it. The chained CPI was a poison pill.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to alfredo (Reply #119)

Thu Dec 20, 2012, 05:20 PM

122. Then why was he negotiating with them at all?

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MotherPetrie (Reply #122)

Thu Dec 20, 2012, 09:10 PM

136. I had confidence nothing would happen.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Tom Rinaldo (Original post)

Thu Dec 20, 2012, 05:23 PM

123. I respectfully disagree

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ReRe (Reply #123)

Thu Dec 20, 2012, 05:31 PM

124. And I respectfully acknowledge your disagreement

The world after all may end in a few hours. So little time left to waste on being disagreeable!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Tom Rinaldo (Reply #124)

Thu Dec 20, 2012, 05:57 PM

128. See, disagreeing isn't all that bad if you do it...

... respectfully.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Tom Rinaldo (Original post)

Thu Dec 20, 2012, 05:46 PM

126. As we are seeing here, having a 2nd Term POTUS has it's DOWNSIDES as well.

Obama can piss off whoever he wants to now, be it Wall St. or
Seniors, along with his entire Progressive base of REAL DEMOCRATS
who would NEVER stoop to the level of fucking with SS or Medicare.

Clearly Obama is just saying FU to millions of people who put their
trust and hope in him to use his 2nd term in an honorable and
constructive manner, to make the "tough decisions" in a way that is
NOT ON THE BACKS OF THE POOREST AND MOST VULNERABLE.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Tom Rinaldo (Original post)

Thu Dec 20, 2012, 05:56 PM

127. People need to to chill the fuck out

 

There's NO deal done. Boehner OBVIOUSLY is going to reject EVERYTHING, so the POTUS can say whatever he wants to show his willingness to work with the other side. Then we go off the curb and FINALLY get rid of that horrid monicker, 'The Bush Tax Cuts' and redo a whole new package called 'The Obama Tax Cuts'. Dan Burton knows this and is pretty vocal about it. Meanwhile, Boehner is wasting his time on Plan B, which is really stupid, further solidifying the theory that he's not going to do anything until after he's re-elected leader.

So everyone smoke some dope, chill out, and have a nice holiday.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Tom Rinaldo (Original post)

Thu Dec 20, 2012, 05:58 PM

129. His campaign was a total sham. He is now embracing Romneyhood.

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Tom Rinaldo (Original post)

Thu Dec 20, 2012, 09:27 PM

137. As I stated before and emphatically: OBAMA IS WINNING!!!!!!!!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Reply to this thread