HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » Forums & Groups » Main » General Discussion (Forum) » So now that Obama has sai...
Introducing Discussionist: A new forum by the creators of DU

Sun Dec 30, 2012, 02:14 PM

So now that Obama has said, himself, on MTP that he proposed Chained CPI...

what's the new goal post location?

Personally, I'm going with "out of context and doctored video." After that I'll probably switch to, "Chained CPI is better." And after that, "Hope you enjoy President Palin."

(He cited his putting forward Chained CPI as something he, Barack Obama, personally did and was willing to pass and deserves centrist credit for, to show David Gregory that he is willing to get tough with seniors, etc., etc.)

115 replies, 7091 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 115 replies Author Time Post
Reply So now that Obama has said, himself, on MTP that he proposed Chained CPI... (Original post)
cthulu2016 Dec 2012 OP
99th_Monkey Dec 2012 #1
Shivering Jemmy Dec 2012 #2
grahamhgreen Dec 2012 #65
ProSense Dec 2012 #3
bama_blue_dot Dec 2012 #7
Arcanetrance Dec 2012 #26
bama_blue_dot Dec 2012 #33
Arcanetrance Dec 2012 #37
daa Dec 2012 #66
L0oniX Dec 2012 #43
Cosmocat Dec 2012 #82
shrdlu Dec 2012 #12
ProSense Dec 2012 #15
bama_blue_dot Dec 2012 #34
grantcart Dec 2012 #42
cthulu2016 Dec 2012 #48
grantcart Dec 2012 #53
PETRUS Dec 2012 #59
Fuddnik Dec 2012 #106
Curmudgeoness Dec 2012 #50
HiPointDem Dec 2012 #58
mathematic Dec 2012 #72
sabrina 1 Dec 2012 #60
leveymg Dec 2012 #84
arthritisR_US Dec 2012 #4
bama_blue_dot Dec 2012 #8
madfloridian Dec 2012 #11
sabrina 1 Dec 2012 #71
cthulu2016 Dec 2012 #9
bama_blue_dot Dec 2012 #16
djean111 Dec 2012 #31
leftstreet Dec 2012 #5
nashville_brook Dec 2012 #19
SammyWinstonJack Dec 2012 #73
Oilwellian Dec 2012 #94
still_one Dec 2012 #6
NorthCarolina Dec 2012 #45
still_one Dec 2012 #55
alcibiades_mystery Dec 2012 #10
dkf Dec 2012 #14
cthulu2016 Dec 2012 #18
nashville_brook Dec 2012 #20
dkf Dec 2012 #25
cthulu2016 Dec 2012 #30
Marr Dec 2012 #105
WorseBeforeBetter Dec 2012 #21
Matariki Dec 2012 #23
bama_blue_dot Dec 2012 #39
WorseBeforeBetter Dec 2012 #115
alcibiades_mystery Dec 2012 #22
Guy Whitey Corngood Dec 2012 #24
MannyGoldstein Dec 2012 #29
cthulu2016 Dec 2012 #32
MannyGoldstein Dec 2012 #35
TheKentuckian Dec 2012 #110
kenny blankenship Dec 2012 #27
alcibiades_mystery Dec 2012 #36
democrattotheend Dec 2012 #114
limpyhobbler Dec 2012 #13
bama_blue_dot Dec 2012 #17
limpyhobbler Dec 2012 #38
MotherPetrie Dec 2012 #28
limpyhobbler Dec 2012 #44
MotherPetrie Dec 2012 #46
Bluenorthwest Dec 2012 #68
MotherPetrie Dec 2012 #101
Jackpine Radical Dec 2012 #93
limpyhobbler Dec 2012 #100
JEB Dec 2012 #40
L0oniX Dec 2012 #41
DeSwiss Dec 2012 #88
UnrepentantLiberal Dec 2012 #47
Curmudgeoness Dec 2012 #52
UnrepentantLiberal Dec 2012 #64
JDPriestly Dec 2012 #49
underthematrix Dec 2012 #56
SammyWinstonJack Dec 2012 #85
JDPriestly Dec 2012 #97
truedelphi Dec 2012 #67
underthematrix Dec 2012 #75
ann--- Dec 2012 #80
Faygo Kid Dec 2012 #51
melody Dec 2012 #54
bvar22 Dec 2012 #57
djean111 Dec 2012 #61
LarryNM Dec 2012 #76
Catherina Dec 2012 #108
Marr Dec 2012 #111
Evergreen Emerald Dec 2012 #62
grahamhgreen Dec 2012 #63
SammyWinstonJack Dec 2012 #86
Swede Atlanta Dec 2012 #69
Oilwellian Dec 2012 #99
cese Dec 2012 #70
DeSwiss Dec 2012 #87
AnnieK401 Dec 2012 #74
DeSwiss Dec 2012 #77
ann--- Dec 2012 #78
JoePhilly Dec 2012 #79
MjolnirTime Dec 2012 #81
cthulu2016 Dec 2012 #90
MjolnirTime Dec 2012 #102
bvar22 Dec 2012 #112
No Compromise Dec 2012 #83
progressoid Dec 2012 #89
bowens43 Dec 2012 #91
Jack Sprat Dec 2012 #92
4 more years Dec 2012 #95
CheapShotArtist Dec 2012 #98
MotherPetrie Dec 2012 #103
CheapShotArtist Dec 2012 #107
JohnnyRingo Dec 2012 #96
kenny blankenship Dec 2012 #104
joshcryer Dec 2012 #109
bvar22 Dec 2012 #113

Response to cthulu2016 (Original post)

Sun Dec 30, 2012, 02:16 PM

1. Puke

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to cthulu2016 (Original post)

Sun Dec 30, 2012, 02:17 PM

2. No new goal post for me

I'd take that deal

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Shivering Jemmy (Reply #2)

Sun Dec 30, 2012, 04:23 PM

65. SS DOES NOT ADD ONE NICKEL TO THE DEFICIT! It's not a deal.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to cthulu2016 (Original post)

Sun Dec 30, 2012, 02:18 PM

3. There is

"what's the new goal post location? "

...no "new goal post"

PRESIDENT OBAMA: ...but I already have, David, as you know, one of the proposals we made was something called Chain CPI, which sounds real technical but basically makes an adjustment in terms of how inflation is calculated on Social Security. Highly unpopular among Democrats. Not something supported by AARP. But in pursuit of strengthening Social Security for the long-term I'm willing to make those decisions. What I'm not willing to do is to have the entire burden of deficit reduction rest on the shoulders of seniors, making students pay higher student loan rates, ruining our capacity to invest in things like basic research that help our economy grow. Those are the things that I'm not willing to do. And so...

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/50314590

Boehner turned him down. The offer is no longer valid, and chained CPI will never pass in the Senate.

Here's an example of how dead chained CPI is, and why it should be.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10022048462

President Obama on what happens if Republicans block the middle-class tax cuts.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10022097008

I don't think we're going to see a repeat of the past.

The basic rule put in place was that up to 50% of Social Security benefits could be added to taxable income, if the taxpayer's total income exceeded certain thresholds.

<...>

In 1993, legislation was enacted which had the effect of increasing the tax put in place under the 1983 law. It raised from 50% to 85% the portion of Social Security benefits subject to taxation; but the increased percentage only applied to "higher income" beneficiaries. Beneficiaries of modest incomes might still be subject to the 50% rate, or to no taxation at all, depending on their overall taxable income.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/10022096027

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ProSense (Reply #3)

Sun Dec 30, 2012, 02:20 PM

7. Thank you!

I don't know why it matters what was talked about previously.. The Repubs lost their chance.. The President knew they wouldn't accept it in the first place.. Even Sam Stein was just tweeting that they lost their chance on that deal.. The "deal" was never real to begin with..

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to bama_blue_dot (Reply #7)

Sun Dec 30, 2012, 03:08 PM

26. So we should forgive Obama for even putting it on the table and regardless of what you and others

Would like the rest of us to think the deal isn't dead once something is proposed its there the Republicans aren't just gonna go oh okay. No they're gonna demand that just to start the negotiations. Furthermore the people saying it won't pass the Senate obviously haven't been paying attention there's enough conservadems to side with the other side and the rest even some of the "liberals" there will side with the president cause he proposed it

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Arcanetrance (Reply #26)

Sun Dec 30, 2012, 03:16 PM

33. Harry Reid was on the Senate floor about 20 minutes ago

saying there will be no cuts to SS in any deal.. He obviously felt the need to make that statement because the Repubs have been begging for it to be put back on the table again..

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to bama_blue_dot (Reply #33)

Sun Dec 30, 2012, 03:20 PM

37. Good for him making statements but the previous actions alot of times are the opposite

If Obama leads future negotiations and puts chained cpi back on the table which it will be Reid will let it pass

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to bama_blue_dot (Reply #33)

Sun Dec 30, 2012, 04:24 PM

66. He said at this time, not in no deal. Nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Arcanetrance (Reply #26)

Sun Dec 30, 2012, 03:29 PM

43. The left moves right and the right moves left. What could go wrong?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to bama_blue_dot (Reply #7)

Sun Dec 30, 2012, 05:06 PM

82. Oh, that is bullshit

nonsense.

I like this President a lot, and part of what I like about him is he isn't a bullshitter.

He says something, he means it.

He did not make this offer in some kind of Machiavellian mind trip knowing the Rs would not take it.

The man desperately WANTS to make a deal.

If people did not get that republicans were raging jackasses BEFORE now, this thing isn't going to be the magical straw that breaks their backs into figuring it out.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ProSense (Reply #3)

Sun Dec 30, 2012, 02:43 PM

12. CPI strengthening SS is BS and BO should be ashamed...

...as even a small "d" democrat for allowing the scheme in play.

This is from ProSense's second link above:

"This proposal should never again resurface in reasonable discussions about Social Security, and should never be described as "strengthening" the program."

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to shrdlu (Reply #12)

Sun Dec 30, 2012, 02:46 PM

15. True, and

as I point out, the math doesn't work. The fact is that if all the exemptions (low-income seniors, Veterans, SSI) are taken into consideration, it's a useless and silly proposal.

Even the CBPP admits as much.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ProSense (Reply #15)

Sun Dec 30, 2012, 03:17 PM

34. Do you have any idea as to why it was proposed in the first place then?

Was it just to give the Repubs a gift, so they would accept the tax increases?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to bama_blue_dot (Reply #34)

Sun Dec 30, 2012, 03:27 PM

42. From a technical/academic point of view the chained CPI is more accurate for a general population


The difference is that the it accounts for substitutions when key items go up.

For example if the price of gas goes up to $ 5 per gallon the amount of gas used changes as people car pool, make fewer trips with more stops or use mass transit.

The criticism is that for specialized populations, like the elderly, who are unable to substitute, because a higher percent of their income goes to health care for example, that it isn't more accurate.

It was developed as a purely academic improvement on a 50 year old CPI formula.

Lawrence ODonnell talked about it being part of a package that had a 5% offset for seniors and low income SS recepients so that the net change would appear to be negligible but I never saw the details of the offset.

So the history of the chained CPI is based on objective economic analysis and didn't have a partisan origin.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to grantcart (Reply #42)

Sun Dec 30, 2012, 03:46 PM

48. This is true, and a CCPI with offsetting benefit increase would be fine

But it is being proposed for the purpose of reducing benefits, not for the purpose of cleaner accounting.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to cthulu2016 (Reply #48)

Sun Dec 30, 2012, 03:56 PM

53. What is really odd to me is that with such a sizeable population on social security that


no one has thought to create a more accurate CPI especially for that age group.

Seems like a worthwhile and pretty straightforward effort, wonder why no one has advanced it?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to grantcart (Reply #53)

Sun Dec 30, 2012, 04:11 PM

59. The BLS has been calculating an elderly index for twenty or thirty years, but it's not used.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to PETRUS (Reply #59)

Sun Dec 30, 2012, 05:56 PM

106. I just got a call yesterday.

My homeowners insurance has increased 17% upon renewal in February. Not to mention Electric (double digits).

Food and gas increases are puny by comparison.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to grantcart (Reply #42)

Sun Dec 30, 2012, 03:50 PM

50. And when the price of meat goes up, they will eat cat food.

I am shocked that this was even considered, when you look at how much of the income of seniors is spent on health care and medicines, which are not able to be substituted.....unless we get an underground market for dishonorable doctors and pharmacies.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to grantcart (Reply #42)

Sun Dec 30, 2012, 04:10 PM

58. Chained CPI is not 'more accurate' as a measure of consumer prices at all. I don't know why

 

anyone would say so.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to HiPointDem (Reply #58)

Sun Dec 30, 2012, 04:52 PM

72. It's more accurate as a cost of living index

I'm pleasantly surprised to see somebody on DU write it out.

People say so quite simply because the substitution effect is real and it's not about buying 3lbs of hamburger instead of buying 3lbs of steak (a common misconception). It's about spending more of your money on goods that have become relatively cheaper. This means that if the price of hamburger rises more than the price of steak then you buy MORE steak relative to hamburger, not less.

Regular CPI is always greater than a true cost of living index.

The policy discussion should not be about chained cpi vs regular cpi. It should be about cpi-u vs cpi-e and if a cost of living adjustment, as measured by the cpi, is even a suitable way to adjust SS payments.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ProSense (Reply #3)

Sun Dec 30, 2012, 04:16 PM

60. So we have to be thankful to Republicans for turning it down now?

Looks like the goal posts have been moved way out into left field.

So, this is where we are: A Dem President has the gall to make that false claim, that the Chained CPI will 'strengthen SS (has he ever explained this btw?) and boasts about how he is willing to go against the will of those who elected him, (that's something to be proud of now?). He states that the Chained CPI 'sounds technical'?? No, it sounds exactly like what it is, it is a cut to the benefits of the people who own that fund and which neither he nor any other elected official has any right to 'offer' to anyone.

Why does he think we the people are too stupid to know what a Chained CPI is? Does he really believe this?

I don't think your comment is helping. I am more furious after reading it than I was before, and knowing so many people who will be affected by this, Veterans, disabled people, dependent children, elderly people who are absolutely terrified right now as they are very up on what is going on, I cannot believe this was said by a Dem president when he had the opportunity to set the record straight to Republicans in public.

Thank god Republicans turned this down, although I am reading from conservative authors that they 'made a huge mistake and should reconsider this offer which is so rare coming from a Dem, meaning they won't have to take the blame for it'.

So, is it still 'on the table, this betrayal of those who worked so hard to get Dems elected?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ProSense (Reply #3)

Sun Dec 30, 2012, 05:07 PM

84. So, you're claiming, Obama offered something on SS that's not relevant to the Cliff talks?

Why did he even bring it up in this context with Boehner and then make reference to it Gregory? Seems it's either a red-herring argument or he's signalling his willingness to make that sort of cut to SS COLAs in the near future. Either way, not a really good statement for him to make. Do you agree?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to cthulu2016 (Original post)

Sun Dec 30, 2012, 02:19 PM

4. He was showing that he was the only one

truly willing to negotiate in good faith. After that the gloves come off.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to arthritisR_US (Reply #4)

Sun Dec 30, 2012, 02:22 PM

8. Exactly..

Some people just can't comprehend this..

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to bama_blue_dot (Reply #8)

Sun Dec 30, 2012, 02:28 PM

11. "Some people" like me do comprehend, and it is repulsive to me.

There is no reason to do this, except to look tough. If it does remain on the table, I think some up for re-election will be nervous. They know how the people feel, how the polls are going. I don't think the president hears the people, only the WH bubble advisors.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to bama_blue_dot (Reply #8)

Sun Dec 30, 2012, 04:44 PM

71. We comprehend perfectly. The president we elected, offered cuts to SS

and went further, he made a false claim that the Chained CPI will 'strengthen SS'. That is false. He also introduced SS into Deficit reduction talks, where it absolutely does not belong and which Republicans have been trying to do forever. SS had ZERO to do with the deficit, so why is he giving credibility to that Republican lie?

We get it, that is the problem. People are now far more aware of what is going on than ever before. These little tricks politicians play, Obama's hope eg, that 'the Chained CPI sounds technical' you know too technical of us plebs to understand, shows that they assume we are all stupid out here. They could not be more wrong and as the huge Coalition now formed to protect SS by millions of Americans has said, 'if they do this, there will be hell to pay'.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to arthritisR_US (Reply #4)

Sun Dec 30, 2012, 02:22 PM

9. negotiating in good faith does not require

changing social security, which has nothing at all to do with the budget deficit.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to cthulu2016 (Reply #9)

Sun Dec 30, 2012, 02:47 PM

16. I understand that point..

If anything Medicare would make more sense in that respect.. It doesn't matter right now though.. Harry Reid was just on the Senate floor saying there will be no cuts to SS in any deal made..

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to bama_blue_dot (Reply #16)

Sun Dec 30, 2012, 03:14 PM

31. Oh, but Pelosi says Chained CPI is not a cut. It strengthens, remember?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to cthulu2016 (Original post)

Sun Dec 30, 2012, 02:20 PM

5. He's bluffing! CHESS!! Obama *hearts* seniors!

You're making baby Jesus cry

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to leftstreet (Reply #5)

Sun Dec 30, 2012, 02:51 PM

19. [spits coffee on keyboard.]



Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to leftstreet (Reply #5)

Sun Dec 30, 2012, 04:54 PM

73. heh.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to leftstreet (Reply #5)

Sun Dec 30, 2012, 05:26 PM

94. LOL

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to cthulu2016 (Original post)

Sun Dec 30, 2012, 02:20 PM

6. Of course he did. He also put Social Security and Medicare on the table in the first round also.

The repukes rejected it then, as they are now

The only thing worse than Democrats are republicans

The Democrats created Social Security and Medicare, and it will be a disgrace if they are the ones who start to destroy it

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to still_one (Reply #6)

Sun Dec 30, 2012, 03:30 PM

45. Well, "todays" Democrats would never have created such programs.

Those Democrats are long gone for the most part. The only thing left is a vestigial feeling that Democrats are generally for the people. We all know who they really serve though.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to NorthCarolina (Reply #45)

Sun Dec 30, 2012, 04:07 PM

55. Good point.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to cthulu2016 (Original post)

Sun Dec 30, 2012, 02:24 PM

10. It's becoming clear that Obama thinks the long-term viability of Social Security

depends on a different way of determining COLA. I disagree strongly with the President on chained CPI. It is, indeed, a benefits cut. Moreover, it is not a good way to determine cost of living for senior populations.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to alcibiades_mystery (Reply #10)

Sun Dec 30, 2012, 02:44 PM

14. I dare say he has examined the numbers more thoroughly than you have.

 

Why do you think you are more informed than he is?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to dkf (Reply #14)

Sun Dec 30, 2012, 02:49 PM

18. The desperate last gasp... "He knows more than you do"

A naked appeal to authority.

Do you make this argument consistently? It seems that it should apply to any disagreement with any policy.

Do you recognize that there are some Republicans who have examined the numbers more thoroughly than you have?

Do you defer to them on that basis?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to cthulu2016 (Reply #18)

Sun Dec 30, 2012, 02:54 PM

20. +10000000000 - the lame is strong on this one.

almost expected the poster to end with "nanny nanny boo boo."

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to cthulu2016 (Reply #18)

Sun Dec 30, 2012, 03:01 PM

25. When a person goes contrary to their natural constituency, there must be a good reason.

 

I don't think he is proposing this for kicks and giggles.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to dkf (Reply #25)

Sun Dec 30, 2012, 03:13 PM

30. I hope our other "natural constituencies" actually vote Democratic because we lost seniors big

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to dkf (Reply #25)

Sun Dec 30, 2012, 05:56 PM

105. My, how the arguments evolve.

"He'd never do that" becomes "I'm sure he has a good reason" and eventually, I expect, "thank god he did it/it was the adult thing to do".

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to dkf (Reply #14)

Sun Dec 30, 2012, 02:56 PM

21. Our "informed" President and Congress gave us Iraq...

when we "uninformed" knew it was one huge fucking lie. This attack on Social Security is no different.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to WorseBeforeBetter (Reply #21)

Sun Dec 30, 2012, 03:00 PM

23. +1

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to WorseBeforeBetter (Reply #21)

Sun Dec 30, 2012, 03:23 PM

39. Please don't tell me you are equating the knowledge of Bush with

President Obama?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to bama_blue_dot (Reply #39)

Mon Dec 31, 2012, 10:28 AM

115. If Obama believes we need to cut/slash Social Security in order to "save" it...

then yes, I'd say the two are on par. Sorta like Condi Rice telling us a mushroom cloud could hit us in 45 minutes, and the gullible lapping it up. More Americans need to call "bullshit" on their elected officials/public servants (of which Obama is one). Forget Chained CPI, I want to hear offers of raising the cap, and for Congress and the Prez to stop fucking with the payroll tax.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to dkf (Reply #14)

Sun Dec 30, 2012, 02:59 PM

22. There is certainly a policy debate to be had regarding the future of Social Security

I think neither the "Just as it is NOW!" crowd, nor your "It is Doomed without Market Logics" crowd (i.e., your conservative position) will have the final say on the matter.

Of course, the other posters are correct to point out your feeble attempt at a trump.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to dkf (Reply #14)

Sun Dec 30, 2012, 03:00 PM

24. I'm pretty sure he examined the situation in Benghazi more thoroughly than you did.

Yet you pretended to be more informed than he was. Go figure when it comes to fucking over seniors and the poor you're all gung ho about it.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to dkf (Reply #14)

Sun Dec 30, 2012, 03:13 PM

29. Since Obama's repeatedly claimed that SS wasn't started for retirees,

It's not clear he's studied very much.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MannyGoldstein (Reply #29)

Sun Dec 30, 2012, 03:14 PM

32. He only said that because he knew you would reject it

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to cthulu2016 (Reply #32)

Sun Dec 30, 2012, 03:20 PM

35. Good point. Sometimes I forget about

the power that I have over things.

With malice towards none,

Manny

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to dkf (Reply #14)

Sun Dec 30, 2012, 08:08 PM

110. Then he should be able to make a convincing argument and has the pulpit to make it.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to alcibiades_mystery (Reply #10)

Sun Dec 30, 2012, 03:08 PM

27. I'd say it's WAY more clear that he doesn't give a shit about Social Security

It's never added to the deficit (before he got his hands on it anyway), and any fix it might need in the future is easily accomplished by raising the cap on free-loading rich people.)

As someone who will never need to depend on it, his serene indifference is not very hard to understand.

Moreover I think his, ahem , strengthening proposal looks a lot like what someone who planned to hollow out, degrade, discredit, and eventually PRIVATIZE Social Security would do. A lot like what they would do.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to kenny blankenship (Reply #27)

Sun Dec 30, 2012, 03:20 PM

36. Your position is also quite clear

Thanks.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to alcibiades_mystery (Reply #10)

Sun Dec 30, 2012, 08:47 PM

114. I am glad he is doing something about the long term viability of Social Security

As a young person whose parents will be 75 and 81 when SS will no longer be able to pay out full benefits, I am concerned about the long-term solvency of the program and want to make sure my parents don't face cuts that would be far more drastic than chained CPI if they do nothing until 2032.

At the same time, I think there are better ways to shore up SS than chained CPI. In addition to raising the cap, I think another way that the system could save money is to limit it to those who actually retire, so that seniors who keep working and earning over a certain amount (somewhere between $50,000-$75,000) cannot collect SS until they retire or their income falls below that threshold. I don't believe anyone should be forced to keep working after 65, but those who choose to do so (and earn a decent amount) arguably do not need social security, which was designed to be retirement replacement income.

There is no reason that a CEO or even a doctor who chooses to work until age 75 needs Social Security before retiring, and giving middle and upper income earners the choice between working or collecting SS would incentivize people to retire and free up some spots in the workforce for younger workers. Having fewer workers available on the market and freeing employers from the cost of providing health insurance for workers over 65 (which employers w/more than 20 employees are required to do at the same level as younger workers even if they are eligible for Medicare) might also drive up wages and thus bring more money into the system.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to cthulu2016 (Original post)

Sun Dec 30, 2012, 02:43 PM

13. As far as I know, President Obama has always supported Chained CPI. Not sure why this is news.

I've never once heard him say he didn't support cutting Social Security.

There was one time Biden "flat out guaranteed" there would be no changes. But I had just assumed that was a standard campaign season lie.

I don't know maybe I'm wrong about it

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to limpyhobbler (Reply #13)

Sun Dec 30, 2012, 02:48 PM

17. Do you have any links to show that he has always supported

Chained CPI? I wasn't aware he had ever spoken about it..

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to bama_blue_dot (Reply #17)

Sun Dec 30, 2012, 03:22 PM

38. I could just tell by his beady eyes.

Just kidding. Honestly no. But I was able to deduce it based on the aspects of the issue presented in these various sources. Also I could just tell by the way certain posters on DU were acting. Before the election some people were saying we should stop asking about about Social Security cuts, because it might pin the President down as far as his ability to negotiate after the election. It seemed like they were repeating some campaign talking points. So I took it to mean that yes he was prepared to cut but he just didn't want to say it out loud. Also for me if somebody doesn't promise not to cut social security, that means they are ok with cutting it.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/daniel-marans/in-social-security-cuts-l_b_892208.html

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2011/08/18/1008266/-Obama-pushes-chained-CPI-in-town-hall-meeting#

http://news.firedoglake.com/2011/08/19/obama-lets-slip-plans-for-chained-cpi/

http://americablog.com/2012/11/leaked-deal-memo-for-last-years-grand-bargain-obama-willing-to-go-quite-far.html

http://news.firedoglake.com/2012/11/12/leaked-woodward-memo-offers-road-map-on-grand-bargain/

http://presspass.nbcnews.com/_news/2012/11/11/15089281-white-house-grand-bargain-offer-to-speaker-boehner-obtained-by-bob-woodward

http://www.npr.org/2012/10/03/162258551/transcript-first-obama-romney-presidential-debate

http://www.youtube.com/watch?&v=T1HJAyFHU4o

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to limpyhobbler (Reply #13)

Sun Dec 30, 2012, 03:09 PM

28. I heard OurPOTUS say he was against cuts to SS when I attended one of his rallies in September

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MotherPetrie (Reply #28)

Sun Dec 30, 2012, 03:29 PM

44. Should have video taped it LOL.

I've heard him say he was against slashing Social Security. Slashing is kind of subjective though.

He usually would say some weasel words like: I won't slash Social Security just so millionaires can get a tax break.
Translation: I will cut Social Security as part of a grand bargain that includes a tax increase for millionaires.

maybe? Just one way of looking at it. I'm not sure.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to limpyhobbler (Reply #44)

Sun Dec 30, 2012, 03:38 PM

46. I just checked the transcript. Yeah, OurPOTUS said "slashing" - most definitely a weasel word.

 

This was the whole statement: "Just like we’ll keep the promise of Social Security, but we will not be slashing benefits or turning it over to Wall Street, like some have proposed. That’s the wrong way to go. (Applause.)"

In retrospect, I really don't think his statement could have been any more weasely or calculated to deceive.

But -- at least I can comfort myself with the knowledge that OurPOTUS is a Democrat.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MotherPetrie (Reply #46)

Sun Dec 30, 2012, 04:35 PM

68. Weasle word is a nice way of saying 'a lie'.

I'd just say lie. He lied using specific tactics of dishonesty learned in politics, a business so corrupt they have as many words for 'lie' as the Inuit have for snow.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Bluenorthwest (Reply #68)

Sun Dec 30, 2012, 05:49 PM

101. Definitely a lie - a cowardly, weasely, two-faced lie.

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to limpyhobbler (Reply #44)

Sun Dec 30, 2012, 05:24 PM

93. From Daily Kos, Aug 18, 2011

Obama pushes chained CPI in town hall meeting
byJoan McCarter
When folks tell you that we've got a choice between jobs now or dealing with our debt crisis, they're wrong. They're wrong. We can't afford to just do one or the other. We've got to do both. And the way to do it is to make some—reform the tax code, close loopholes, make some modest modifications in programs like Medicare and Social Security so they're there for the next generation, stabilize those systems. And you could actually save so much money that you could actually pay for some of the things like additional infrastructure right now.


Now, we know that President Obama knows that Social Security doesn't have one damned thing to do with the debt. He has said so repeatedly. And yet, Social Security continues to pop up all of the time when he's talking about the debt and deficit, and has been dragged onto the table in the debt ceiling negotiations. It came up again in yesterday's town meeting when this question was asked:

Q My question is about Social Security. I know that one of your ideas to fix the solvency of it is to reevaluate the equation that determines the COLA, the cost-of-living adjustment. But as the law stands right now, we are only taxed on the first $107,000 that we make.
THE PRESIDENT: Right.

Q That means every dime that I make is taxed for Social Security.

THE PRESIDENT: Right.

Q I don't make $107,000. (Laughter.) But that means that—

THE PRESIDENT: Somebody said you will—

Q Someday, I hope.

THE PRESIDENT: Yes, you sound pretty smart. It sounds like you're going to do just great.

Q Thanks. But that means that people like Mitt Romney only pay into Social Security on the first one-tenth of 1 percent of what they make.

THE PRESIDENT: Right.

Q Can we look forward to you telling the Republicans that it's time that the wealthy pay their fair share? (Applause.)

THE PRESIDENT: Well, first—this is a very well-informed young man here. (Laughter.) You're exactly right that the way the Social Security system works, there's what's called—there's basically a cap on your Social Security, which there isn't, by the way, on Medicare. But Social Security, it only goes up to the first $107,000; and you're right, somebody who makes—who has net assets of $250 million and are making maybe $5 million a year just on interest or capital gains or something, just a fraction of it's going to Social Security. I think there's a way for us to make adjustments on the Social Security tax that would be fairer than the system that we use right now.

I do think, in terms of how we calculate inflation, that's important as well.


That means that the White House will continue to push for the chained CPI, the new inflation formula that will mean a very real benefits cut for seniors as they age. A lifting of the payroll tax cap is a no-brainer for the program, and makes absolute sense, but the chained CPI will do real harm, and mean a real cut in benefits.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Jackpine Radical (Reply #93)

Sun Dec 30, 2012, 05:45 PM

100. yeah that pretty much shows he was for it.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to cthulu2016 (Original post)

Sun Dec 30, 2012, 03:24 PM

40. Just what

is so great about Chained CPI? Everything I hear says it just means less needed money for Grandma and disabled Vets.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to cthulu2016 (Original post)

Sun Dec 30, 2012, 03:25 PM

41. This is nothing but good cop bad cop sociopathic politics.

Let this be a lesson to those who think they are working to contribute to society ...you are going to be fucked ...hard! ...as soon as you are no longer able to contribute ...then DIE QUICKLY! Honor is for suckers. Voting is for suckers. The game is rigged against you but you are welcome to convince yourself otherwise. The goal post has be outfitted with monster truck tires and a 500 hp 454 with a roller cam and NOS kit.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to L0oniX (Reply #41)

Sun Dec 30, 2012, 05:17 PM

88. +1000

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to cthulu2016 (Original post)

Sun Dec 30, 2012, 03:43 PM

47. Looks like I'm not going to be eating crow after all.

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to UnrepentantLiberal (Reply #47)

Sun Dec 30, 2012, 03:53 PM

52. Wait until you retire

and chicken is too expensive. You will be looking longingly at that crow.

Too bad that it is not a reason to celebrate that you were right, huh?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Curmudgeoness (Reply #52)

Sun Dec 30, 2012, 04:22 PM

64. I'll probably go with pigeon.

 

They'll be easier to shoot with a pellet gun. A little egg and flower and I'll have myself a feast.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to cthulu2016 (Original post)

Sun Dec 30, 2012, 03:47 PM

49. I feel like a fool for having worked for him.

I bet a lot of older people feel that way.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to JDPriestly (Reply #49)

Sun Dec 30, 2012, 04:08 PM

56. I'm a senior and just

started receiving SS. I love the President. I think he is doing a fabulous job with the shitstorm he has been dealt on so many levels.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to underthematrix (Reply #56)

Sun Dec 30, 2012, 05:07 PM

85. ...

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to underthematrix (Reply #56)

Sun Dec 30, 2012, 05:39 PM

97. If you just started receiving SS, you paid the higher tax rates that Obama is so

reluctant to ask those now working to pay.

Why should your Social Security be cut to prevent the now working middle class from having to pay the TAX RATES YOU PAID.

That is absurd. Makes no sense at all.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to JDPriestly (Reply #49)

Sun Dec 30, 2012, 04:27 PM

67. And that is the same situation here in my household.

Plus a Happy New Year to you, my friend.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to truedelphi (Reply #67)

Sun Dec 30, 2012, 04:56 PM

75. Back at you

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to JDPriestly (Reply #49)


Response to cthulu2016 (Original post)

Sun Dec 30, 2012, 03:51 PM

51. Election? What election?

So he won't stand up for us. Beyond disappointing.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to cthulu2016 (Original post)

Sun Dec 30, 2012, 04:06 PM

54. It's the same one it has always been -- Obama is doing what he can

He's not omnipotent. He'd have to be a friend of Dick Cheney's to be omnipotent. He's doing what he can. I think we need to be adults and realize we won't get everything we want. The rich people own our country. We're stuck with the crumbs they throw us. All we can do is understand Obama's situation, fight with the Democrats (the only sane powerful party) and work toward electing progressives to the House.

And I think seriously looking toward distancing the sane states from the wacko ones might be helpful.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to cthulu2016 (Original post)

Sun Dec 30, 2012, 04:09 PM

57. I'm going with:

"We HAD to do SOMETHING."

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

"You don't understand how government works."

"He has to be President of ALL the People,"

"We don't want another Bush, do we?"

"We might not have had 60 votes, so why try?"

"This is a Center Right Country."

*11th dimensional Chess."

"A brilliant political strategy to adopt the Republican's positions.
It gives them no place to go, and Obama can count it as a WIN."

(Lawrence O'Donnell actually hyped THAT one, calling it the "Rope-a-Dope",
to the acclaim of all DU's Centrist Reagan Democrats.

"Its a step in the right direction."
(doesn't have to make sense)

"We can fix it later.
We need a WIN now."

"Its ALL Joe Lieberman's fault.
Lieberman is a Superman.
There was NOTHING the President could doooooo.
It was horrible."

"Its the sensible, pragmatic thing to do.
Everyone in the Reality Based Community supports this."

"Its a Political WIN.
Add it to The List!"

"You can't turn a big ship at sea."

"So, you want to help The Republicans"?

"Thank Gawd it passed!"

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



Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to bvar22 (Reply #57)

Sun Dec 30, 2012, 04:18 PM

61. +1 - no, wait - +1000 (to allow for chained CPI)

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to bvar22 (Reply #57)

Sun Dec 30, 2012, 04:57 PM

76. + 1,000 too n/t

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to bvar22 (Reply #57)

Sun Dec 30, 2012, 06:38 PM

108. +1000. And every single one of those seen here at DU. n/t

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to bvar22 (Reply #57)

Sun Dec 30, 2012, 08:14 PM

111. +1, That's about it.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to cthulu2016 (Original post)

Sun Dec 30, 2012, 04:21 PM

62. He got what he needed from us.

Why should he abide by his promise and his voter's desires? He is assisting the repugs in their goals of destroying the social safety net. He has nothing to lose he said so himself.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to cthulu2016 (Original post)

Sun Dec 30, 2012, 04:21 PM

63. SS DOES NOT ADD ONE NICKEL TO THE DEFICIT.

Starve seniors to prop up Big War? Despicable, nay, Evil.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to grahamhgreen (Reply #63)

Sun Dec 30, 2012, 05:12 PM

86. Someone should tell Obama because he is apparently NOT getting that!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to cthulu2016 (Original post)

Sun Dec 30, 2012, 04:38 PM

69. I thought he ran on a platform of no cuts to Medicare or Social Security.....

 

We were duped. I wouldn't have voted for the other guy anyway but Obama needs to pay a price for his lying.

Because raising the Medicare eligibility age to 67 or implementing the chained CPI method for Social Security do absolutely NOTHING to reduce the deficit, these actions are just cruel.

Compared to other western democracies our social safety net for our seniors is laughable in terms of its generosity. We should be beefing up these programs and not cutting them. There is plenty of fat to cut from Congressional, Judicial and Administration salaries and benefits (especially "retirement" benefits) to cutting the military by 25% and not missing anything to eliminating corporate welfare.

But BO needs to understand that raising the Medicare eligibility age and reducing future inflation adjustments to Social Security are non-starters for the people that re-elected him. I realize he doesn't have to run again but this action could well negatively affect voter turnout and support for Democratic candidates in the mid-term.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Swede Atlanta (Reply #69)

Sun Dec 30, 2012, 05:41 PM

99. Perhaps that's his intent?

I realize he doesn't have to run again but this action could well negatively affect voter turnout and support for Democratic candidates in the mid-term.


Since President Obama, just two weeks ago, referred to himself as a moderate Republican, perhaps it's to his ideological advantage to see the Democratic party taken down a few notches?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to cthulu2016 (Original post)

Sun Dec 30, 2012, 04:43 PM

70. cese

THE ONLY THING (HELP) THAT SOCIAL SECURITY NEEDS IS FOR THE US GOVERNMENT TO PAY BACK THOSE I.O.U.'S THEY ARE HOLDING........

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to cese (Reply #70)

Sun Dec 30, 2012, 05:14 PM

87. +1000

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to cthulu2016 (Original post)

Sun Dec 30, 2012, 04:55 PM

74. I had been boycotting MTP, but made an exception this AM

I have been very concerned about chained CPI because I am on a disability income. I would also like to say that the comments Tom B. made during the discussion made me change my opinion of him. I respected him up until this AM. He seemed to think people living on less than 20K should understand the angst of people trying to scrape by on 250K because they might have children in very expensive schools. Oh the humanity.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to cthulu2016 (Original post)

Sun Dec 30, 2012, 04:58 PM

77. K&R

- They can't help themselves, it's the spores.....

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to cthulu2016 (Original post)


Response to cthulu2016 (Original post)

Sun Dec 30, 2012, 05:00 PM

79. And another episode of HairOnFireUnderground begins.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to cthulu2016 (Original post)

Sun Dec 30, 2012, 05:01 PM

81. Cry me a river. Now that you can't crow about a deal that didn't happen, you do this.

 

You'll never be satisfied with Obama.
Why pretend that you're allegiance is even in play??

You want to gloat and piss and moan so damned much that you do it when nothing has even happened yet.

Get over yourself.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MjolnirTime (Reply #81)

Sun Dec 30, 2012, 05:20 PM

90. This isn't about Obama

The OP is mocking the incredibly dishonest positions taken by some disruptive Obama delusionists and loyalty cops.

I actually rather like President Obama.

I wish someone would save him from his most irrationally ardent sycophants.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to cthulu2016 (Reply #90)

Sun Dec 30, 2012, 05:49 PM

102. You're right. Obama's not the problem. It's your attitude.

 

You think you are a political expert.
You're not.

But the President is. That's why he's where he is and you're nowhere.
And I'm thankful for that.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MjolnirTime (Reply #102)

Sun Dec 30, 2012, 08:19 PM

112. Nixon, Gingrich, and Karl Rove qualify as political experts.

Should I follow their parades too?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to cthulu2016 (Original post)

Sun Dec 30, 2012, 05:07 PM

83. Nixon would never do that

 


Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to cthulu2016 (Original post)

Sun Dec 30, 2012, 05:19 PM

89. Global thermonuclear chess

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to cthulu2016 (Original post)

Sun Dec 30, 2012, 05:21 PM

91. the true believers will never admit

that Obama is perfectly willing to trade away social security....

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to cthulu2016 (Original post)

Sun Dec 30, 2012, 05:22 PM

92. Obama is misjudging the people on this.

 

As I watch the comments come across Yahoo articles featuring the fiscal cliff negotiations, it looks overwhelmingly like scarcely anybody sides with McConnell and the repubs.

The vast majority want taxes raised for the wealthier Americans, and they oppose any cuts to SS via the chained CPI or anything else.

The vast majority are willing to go over the cliff if that's what it takes to win this argument. They don't want cuts to SS thru a chained CPI. They do want taxes raised on the 250K plus incomes instead of that.

I can't believe the President's team is willing to get this wrong. If he concedes to the repubs, there will be a backlash against him. Everyone but the rethug congress and the conservative media will blame him for caving this time.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to cthulu2016 (Original post)

Sun Dec 30, 2012, 05:30 PM

95. SS cuts is what BO wants.

So us seniors will end up with a shit sandwich . Not happy the President's remarks, who the hell made him king ?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to 4 more years (Reply #95)

Sun Dec 30, 2012, 05:40 PM

98. For a president that supposedly "wants to cut SS",

Obama sure is horrible at it. He has had about 4 years to do it, AND a GOP congress to assist him. What gives?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to CheapShotArtist (Reply #98)

Sun Dec 30, 2012, 05:50 PM

103. What do you think? He was waiting for reelection.

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MotherPetrie (Reply #103)

Sun Dec 30, 2012, 06:08 PM

107. Social Security is not going to be cut.

He's as likely to cut that as he is to ban all guns.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to cthulu2016 (Original post)

Sun Dec 30, 2012, 05:33 PM

96. Is it too late for an election do-over?

Of course it is, but maybe if Romney had won the election people would have less to complain about, or at least they'd have a major consensus for their discontent, so what's your point? Are you just making a post-election case for a President Clinton, Kucinich, or Ron Paul? If so, your point is moot because that didn't happen.

Overwrought hand wringing has become a favorite pastime here. Wouldn't it be nice to live in a society where everybody gets exactly what they want all the time? We wouldn't even have to change our national documents, we'd just call it The Utopian States of America.

Wake me up, I must have been dreaming there.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to cthulu2016 (Original post)

Sun Dec 30, 2012, 05:55 PM

104. The new goal post is to interpret Republican refusals of SS cuts, from late 2008

to the present round of talks, to mean that the President NEVER OFFERED THEM. Even though he says did and even though he says he remains willing to do so. What he really meant by that, so we're told, is Never!, No way!, Absolutely not!

This has been your hourly goalpost update.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to cthulu2016 (Original post)

Sun Dec 30, 2012, 06:42 PM

109. The poverty exception assured it wouldn't be adopted.

So Obama can claim he acted in good faith but he knew the odds were slim that the Republicans would agree to a deal that brought nearly 4 million seniors out of poverty.

Note: I do think he would've accepted it.

But I don't think that the current Republican controlled House would have.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to cthulu2016 (Original post)

Sun Dec 30, 2012, 08:34 PM

113. Instead of Obama, we should have elected THIS guy!




or maybe even THIS guy:

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Reply to this thread