Boehner: "The Pres. is adamant that we cannot make fundamental changes to our entitlement programs."

[ClarkUSA]

In a letter sent to Republican lawmakers, Boehner said Obama's position on revenues kept a deal from being done.

"In the end, we couldn't connect," Boehner wrote. "Not because of different personalities, but because of different visions for our country. The president is emphatic that taxes have to be raised. The president is adamant that we cannot make fundamental changes to our entitlement programs."

http://tpmdc.talkingpointsmemo.com/2011/07/obama-we-have-now-run-out-of-time.php?ref=fpa

[originalpckelly]

1. Oh so that's why the President himself said he was for these changes?

[ClarkUSA]

7. It's called bluffing... and Boehner folded.

[originalpckelly]

13. Grade A, 100% Premium BULLSHIT.

Playing games with the most vulnerable in America. That's what it is.

[ClarkUSA]

17. That's what you're shovelling, not me. Would "rope-a-dope" make you happier?

:sarcasm:

[ohheckyeah]

16. And if Boehner hadn't folded?

Obama was willing to give up cuts to SS and Medicare.

[ClarkUSA]

18. Teabagger House Republicans have been saying they'll never ever raise taxes.

President Obama knows this.

[gateley]

12. You almost make it sound as though he WANTED changes.

He said he was willing to take the hit in order to achieve raising the debt ceiling. He must feel that allowing the default would harm more people than whatever he had on the table?

Wonder if we'll ever know just exactly was being offered. :shrug:

We've seen over and over again on this issue, we don't really know what's going on.

[Lifelong Protester]

21. I know, and I am the first to admit that the NOT KNOWING thing

was worse than what we 'thought' we knew.

I am not good at the 'wait and see' game, I'm no poker player. I'd never make it in politics.

Please, President Obama, make good on your words to keep the debt reduction plans OFF the backs of the vulnerable people in this country. Thank you!

[gateley]

26. I know - it's extra stressful this time for some reason. We're all

SO affected by this that we can't help but jump on every bandwagon that comes along!

[Lifelong Protester]

36. Yes, especially after what we went through and are going through

in Wisconsin. We (especially me, I guess) are a bit edgy.

[tallahasseedem]

2. Well, well, well...

How about that? Where are the President "he's going to slash entitlements" Obama critics now?

[liberalmuse]

3. And...Obama's liberal approval rating just went up a titch.

I think most Americans are okay with this. Boehner is not very saavy.

[gateley]

4. K&R -- that's a relief after all the speculation. Although, I'm guessing

Boehner's idea of "fundamental" and ours differ greatly.

[Rex]

5. His entitlement programs?

Does he collect SSI?

[Ruby the Liberal]

6. He gave them $650 BILLION from SS/Med.

I am as pissed about that as I am about the Rs lying about it.

[ClarkUSA]

11. Why are you "pissed" over a good bluff? Pres. Obama knew the Teabagger House will never raise taxes.

[quaker bill]

20. The Rs aren't lying about it

the "trim" was not what they wanted, they prefer disembowelment.

[Ruby the Liberal]

24. Boehner said the WH "never brought a plan" to the table

That is lying. Never brought a plan we could agree on? Truth. Never brought a plan. (end of statement) Lie.

[ThoughtCriminal]

8. "fundamental changes" = privatize

and cut.

[quaker bill]

22. Not just cut

end all government responsibility for benefits, like they are doing with gov't pensions. They want us all on "investment plans". In short, they want to take 6 percent of your paycheck by force of law and give it to their friends on Wall Street. Get it?

[Lifelong Protester]

9. I have been waiting for these types of words to come from the

President. Yep, I have stated I have been disappointed over the whole 'take care of the debt on the backs of seniors, kids, the disabled, etc.' and I have not been happy with the lack of info from the WH.
I will state here and now, I am no longer disappointed, if the President can turn this into action.

[ClarkUSA]

19. He has and he will. He's said a default may happen and he's consulting Treasury.

[Poll_Blind]

10. Let me get this right: You're trusting something Boehner said to make the President look like...

...he's really protecting Social Security?

Jesus Christ. President himself on national TV said $600+ Bln cuts to Social Security was part of the deal.

Spin that.

PB

[slipslidingaway]

14. +1 n/t

[ClarkUSA]

15. Pres. Obama bluffed, knowing the Teabagger House will not raise taxes. Boehner predictably folded.

[Safetykitten]

23. The key word here is "fundamental".

[TomCADem]

25. Exactly, President Obama Was Offering Cuts, But Republicans Wanted...

...privitization or outright dissolution of Medicare and Social Security. Lets put everyone on a 401(k)! That is the only solution!

[Major Hogwash]

28. That was Bush's plan back in 2005 -- and it cost him the House in the mid-terms in 2006.

People like Social Security.
They like Medicare.
They like Medicaid.

Half of the poor people that live in this country live in states with Republican representatives!
Those people aren't going to re-elect Boehner or any of the other boneheads for taking money away from them!!
They're poor, but they're not that stupid!!

[readmoreoften]

27. Not any changes. FUNDAMENTAL changes. He himself admitted to offering 650 Mil in cuts.

Hope you're getting paid for all this spin.

[ClarkUSA]

29. Contrary to what so many thought, he didn't cave, did he? And those numbers mean nothing.

They were a part of Pres. Obama's bluff, which worked.

[TomCADem]

34. Don't Call My Bluff - President Obama Dared The Republicans To Validate Social Security/Medicare...

...with simple tweaks: raise the retirement age and means test Medicare premiums. Yes, this upset liberals, but it did not fundamentally change the programs.

But Republicans, who are not serious about deficit reduction, do not want any part of that. They want fundamental change, which means to get rid of these programs and replace them with 401(k)'s and voucher programs.

[Edweird]

30. I see. Taking Boehner's word over Obama's when it suits you. How odd.

[ecstatic]

31. Technically, Obama can't end the charade until the debt limit is raised

At the end, it will be Obama & Democrats 1, Repugs 0. Sorry if your feelings got hurt in the process.

[ClarkUSA]

32. Obama's statements were entirely consistent with Boehner's.

I am unlike some people, who'd rather take anybody's word over Pres. Obama's.

[in_cog_ni_to]

33. $650 BILLION is fundamental changes PLUS he lowered THEIR tax cuts.

He offered lower tax cuts than what was offered in the gang of 6 proposal.


<snip>Essentially what we had offered Speaker Boehner was over a trillion dollars in cuts to discretionary spending, both domestic and defense. We then offered an additional $650 billion in cuts to entitlement programs — Medicare, Medicaid, Social Security. We believed that it was possible to shape those in a way that preserved the integrity of the system, made them available for the next generation, and did not affect current beneficiaries in an adverse way.<snip>

<snip>
So let me reiterate what we were offering. We were offering a deal that called for as much discretionary savings as the Gang of Six. We were calling for taxes that were less than what the Gang of Six had proposed. And we were calling for modifications to entitlement programs, would have saved just as much over the 10-year window. In other words, this was an extraordinarily fair deal. If it was unbalanced, it was unbalanced in the direction of not enough revenue.<snip>

http://blogs.wsj.com/washwire/2011/07/22/transcript-of-obamas-news-conference-on-the-debt-ceiling/


Affects programs for future generations. BAD, bad, bad. HANDS OFF the big 3. SS has nothing to do with the debt. PERIOD.

[mmonk]

35. Define fundamental.