Something the "Obama-has-deserted us" whiners need to remember about listening to the media....

[Rosco T.]

[madfloridian]

1. I despise the word "whiners" used in that context. It shows contempt.

If you feel it is necessary then call me one.

I am quite disgusted right now.

I am tired of the party leaders and those who support all they do talking to the rest of us in a condescending manner.

[Rosco T.]

2. The same 'contempt' used toward the President???

and I didn't name a single person. You self-identified, not me.

[Bluenorthwest]

4. The President says my sort of person should not have equal

rights. I hold no one in as much contempt as he holds us. So you know, boo hoo for Mr President.

[Name removed]

6. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[CakeGrrl]

23. He said NOTHING of the kind. EVER. -nt

[Ignis]

34. "I believe that marriage is the union between a man and a woman."

- Candidate Obama to "Reverend" Rick Warren, noted bigot, in 2008.

[graywarrior]

5. Self-identified!

:applause:

[EFerrari]

7. Broadbrushing DUers is not an argument. n/t

[Rosco T.]

9. No broad brushing, just those that are beliving the media spin and not facts...

.. let me know when you can provide a direct link/quote to where Obama says he will cut SS/Medicare benefits.

thank you.

[EFerrari]

14. Yes, calling DUers "whiners" is exactly broadbrushing.

Same with all the other insults that made this place uninhabitable for so long.

Please consider making your argument in place of just name calling.

[Whisp]

10. self-identified.

*chortle chortle

[madfloridian]

15. It is childish to use the word whiners when they are attacking people's very livelihood.

It's defending the indefensible.

[MADem]

19. Who is "they" and do post a link showing these attacks to people's livlihoods....

Everyone is whining--and they ARE whining--based on rumor and innuendo, and nothing more.

[madfloridian]

26. I mean "they" as in those putting social safety nets on the table...

I have posted links to what they are doing, many of us have written about it. Click the red button in my post, and perhaps do a search here for social security.

If I am critical of Obama, you call it whining. I call it holding him responsible.

[MADem]

27. Don't "hold him responsible" until he signs a law you don't like.

In the meantime, I recommend that you expend your energy going after the people who are going to craft and vote on bills on this topic--not the guy who may, or may not, sign the thing into law.

By the time it gets to his desk, it's too late. It's written and voted on.

The ones who need to feel your ire, and the ire of your neighbors, are the people who represent you in Congress. They need to know what you don't want to see in a bill of this nature. If they think their seat is in danger, they'll be very careful not to piss their constituency off.

[RaleighNCDUer]

33. You do understand that once he signs it

IT'S TOO FUCKING LATE TO DO ANYTHING ABOUT IT.

Do you have ANY idea how many bills have been stopped cold, simply by the president saying "I don't like that proposed bill, and if it comes to my desk I will veto it."

OTOH, when the president says "anything is on the table" he is INVITING those bad bills.

BTW, in the day of Diebold, they don't really give a crap about their constituents' opinions.

[Palmer Eldritch]

32. Those who abandon the President at the slightest rumor are contemptible.

[Drale]

3. +1!!

[RaleighNCDUer]

8. No democrats claimed that Truman had abandoned them.

What's your point?

[fadedrose]

11. Also, it was the press that said he lost, not his WH spokesman . . . nt

[Hippo_Tron]

30. I think the Democrats who left the party and nominated Henry Wallace would beg to differ

[woo me with science]

12. And how many could we post where they got the winner right?

Hmm.

[bemildred]

13. Something the democratic political hacks need to remember:

http://growingbolder.com/articles/living/politics/dnc-chicago-1968-192208.html

[MADem]

18. Yeah--Humphrey wasn't "good enough" to suit, so we ended up with Tricky Dick instead.

That's what I take from those days, anyway.

I liked HHH--he had a good heart.

[bemildred]

24. Because of the war.

Humphrey refused to come out against the war, so we got Dick instead.

[MADem]

28. And he had a "secret plan" to end the war. And idiots believed him.

Or they believed the reporters who were carrying his water about that bullshit.

Who says the American voter is smart? Oftentimes, as a group, they're dumber than dirt.

Anyone with a head on their shoulders, even back then, before computers, knew that HHH wanted out of the war--he was prepared to extricate, but he did not want to be "disloyal" to LBJ because they had a lot of history and he was the sitting VP. It was bad form to break with your ticketmate back in those days, it made the candidate seem crass and ungrateful. Plenty of people were telegraphing that there would be a sea change in the course of the war should HHH get the nod, but too many morons liked the idea of a "secret plan." Some were hoping that it included tactical nuclear weapons.

God help us all....we haven't gotten any more sophisticated, even with more ready access to information.

[MADem]

16. I don't get it. Some of the people who were screaming OBAMA OBAMA OBAMA

during the last election, and telling me that Hillary was the Devil Herself, are now calling their
erstwhile hero everything from Dick Cheney to the Devil HIMself!

I ask myself, can these people be that fickle...or that stupid? Why do so few understand that politics is the art of compromise, and nothing happens overnight? Or are some of them gleeful Republicans, rabble-rousing shitheads trying to foment discontent?

On days like this, I have odd fantasies where I start to think they should up the voting (and enlistment) age to 21, or maybe 25 ... and require people to take a test of basic political knowledge in order earn the right to vote.

[ClarkUSA]

17. It's amazing how Fred Hyatt's right-wing WaPo Business Section shit-stirring spin was thought true.

Fred must be so proud. Those guys who thought up the copy must have been given a raise today.

Really, it's like shooting ducks in a barrel.

[high density]

20. Here's the right-wing Associated Press quoting right-wing White House officials

Once considered untouchable, Social Security is now in play in the debt-ceiling negotiations. And that could mean higher income taxes for many U.S. families in addition to shaved benefits for tens of millions of retirees as they age.

Social Security became part of the private discussions between President Barack Obama and Republican House Speaker John Boehner on coming up with "something big" to reduce deficits by $2 trillion to $4 trillion over the next decade. One option includes a new inflation measure for Social Security that could produce savings close to $200 billion through a combination of reduced benefits and higher taxes, White House officials said Thursday.
...
The proposal would represent a reversal for Obama. In contrast to his pledge to target tax increases at the wealthy, high-income families would largely be spared from tax increases that would result from changing the way inflation is measured. And until now, the administration has been adamant that Social Security does not add to the deficit and should not be a part of deficit reduction talks.

Adopting a new inflation measure would allow policymakers to gradually cut benefits and increase taxes in a way that might not be readily apparent to most Americans. The inflation measure under consideration is called the Chained Consumer Price Index. On average, the measure shows a lower level of inflation than the more widely used CPI.

http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5j7oZuOr-LwC83YRBMUzm_6vgYXYw?docId=fd1817c3ab1348c69cdc928d8e98f805

[ClarkUSA]

21. "The Progressive Caucus DEFENDS President Obama on his Social Security Stance"

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=433&topic_id=702936&mesg_id=702936

[high density]

22. "...so long as doing so did not impact beneficiaries."

I don't think they're defending the proposed idea to cut benefits by modifying the inflation calculations.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=433&topic_id=702936&mesg_id=702976

(Edited to add: Whatever the progressive caucus says does not invalidate the reporting I linked to.)

[MADem]

29. UH OH.....

I really wanted to read that, but unfortunately, all I got was this:


The moderators on duty have determined by consensus that this message does not meet Democratic Underground's community standards. This message will remain hidden from public view until it is edited by the member who posted it. The member may also choose to self-delete the message.


Too many paragraphs? Impure thoughts? What in hell are "Community standards?" Too many swears? Porn? Huh????

OK, I googled the subject line and it brought me to that smug Kos place--is that a "forbidden zone" or something? I then tracked the cite to it's original source, the Huffington Post, and I found an interesting article that included this: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/07/07/progressive-dems-social-security-cuts_n_892210.html

Politico had reported that the progressive members of Congress were "furious" at President Obama, but none of that fury was evident either in their press conference or their letter to the White House.

Jackson Lee said the heat should remain on Republicans who want to take down Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid -- not on the president, because they are still unsure of what changes he will propose.

"We should not let them define the agenda," she told HuffPost. "The president has done something heroic to convene everybody. ... We don't want to get into a mish-mash with the president of the United States when he is clearly on the side of the most vulnerable."

Lee said the president's heart is with the poor, basing that judgment on Obama's background as a community organizer in Chicago..."I think the fight must be with the hobgoblin, the ghost, the fear that has been set up by the Republicans to make people think that what is most valuable to the poor can be on the table," she said.


Gee, according to this article and SJL, the GOP is shit-stirring, and alarmists at DU have taken the bait.

Nothing changes, I suppose.

[Name removed]

25. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[CakeGrrl]

31. Bwah! More irony in this post than you can shake a stick at.

So amusing I'm not even gonna alert on it.