Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

muriel_volestrangler

(101,154 posts)
Wed Apr 10, 2013, 07:49 PM Apr 2013

WH rationale for chained CPI: if we don't do it, Paul Ryan will

You think I'm joking?

To Obama, curbing entitlement growth has never been a core priority — it’s more a means to an end — and the liberal rage against the CPI plan is useful only up to a point:

It makes his CPI plan seem like a major concession instead of the minor baby step Republicans claim it is.

“We’re not going to have the White House forever, folks. If he doesn’t do this, Paul Ryan is going to do it for us in a few years,” said a longtime Obama aide, referring to the 2012 Republican vice presidential candidate who proposed a sweeping overhaul of Medicare that would replace some benefits with vouchers.

Anxiety, not ideology prodded Obama to push for entitlement savings, people close to the president say. Obama has told people in his orbit that he feels “squeezed” by the rise of entitlement spending and sees it as a threat to getting anything else done, especially his plans for increased education and infrastructure spending.

http://www.politico.com/story/2013/04/medicare-entitlements-obama-budget-muddle-chained-cpi-89844_Page2.html
16 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
WH rationale for chained CPI: if we don't do it, Paul Ryan will (Original Post) muriel_volestrangler Apr 2013 OP
Well, somebody has to "save the village." AnotherMcIntosh Apr 2013 #1
Where have we heard that before? AnotherMcIntosh Apr 2013 #3
"We had to destroy Social Security in order to save it" tularetom Apr 2013 #11
I actually looked to see if it was The Onion Autumn Apr 2013 #2
Very defensive BeyondGeography Apr 2013 #4
*facepalm* Cali_Democrat Apr 2013 #5
All hands off social security - period Rosa Luxemburg Apr 2013 #6
I think Obama has lost his mind. I'm disgusted..n/t monmouth3 Apr 2013 #7
How about doing what 90% of Amercians want and not messing with it at all? tularetom Apr 2013 #8
It doesn't get much lower than preempting the likes of Paul fuckng Ryan! MotherPetrie Apr 2013 #9
beware when anyone calls you "folks" bbgrunt Apr 2013 #10
One of my pet peeves. Or uses the words "notion" or "common sense." forestpath Apr 2013 #13
Nonsense! Vinnie From Indy Apr 2013 #12
WTF is he babbling about - Obama's doing nothing but HELPING Rand Paul. forestpath Apr 2013 #14
Absolutely ridiculous... ljm2002 Apr 2013 #15
May I offer an alternate scenario? ... 1StrongBlackMan Apr 2013 #16

tularetom

(23,664 posts)
11. "We had to destroy Social Security in order to save it"
Wed Apr 10, 2013, 08:40 PM
Apr 2013

The Democratic campaign slogan for the 2014 congressional midterms. Has a nice ring to it don't ya think?

Autumn

(44,762 posts)
2. I actually looked to see if it was The Onion
Wed Apr 10, 2013, 07:59 PM
Apr 2013

It's not. Do they really think we are that fucking stupid as to accept that rational? More likely it's we had to cut SS now, because if a republican tries to do it in a few years Democrats will stop it. Fuck their noise.

BeyondGeography

(39,284 posts)
4. Very defensive
Wed Apr 10, 2013, 08:02 PM
Apr 2013

Psst, Mr. President: You just beat Paul Ryan like a drum in a national election.

This is what happens when he has conversations with himself. We have seen this before. Nobody will play ball with him.

tularetom

(23,664 posts)
8. How about doing what 90% of Amercians want and not messing with it at all?
Wed Apr 10, 2013, 08:23 PM
Apr 2013

Oh well, I'm sure it's all part of clever plan to paint republicans as the party that wants to destroy social security by...oh, wait, he can't say that anymore can he?

Never mind.

Vinnie From Indy

(10,820 posts)
12. Nonsense!
Wed Apr 10, 2013, 09:06 PM
Apr 2013

It is makes no sense. This idea is akin to FDR bombing Pearl Harbor because the Japanese were gonna do it eventually.

No, I think there is a larger gane afoot!

Cheers!

ljm2002

(10,751 posts)
15. Absolutely ridiculous...
Wed Apr 10, 2013, 10:13 PM
Apr 2013

...bad policy, bad morality, and bad politics.

If you don't want the chained CPI then don't offer it in your proposed budget! It's really that simple. Instead they tell us they have to offer it because the guys who LOST THE LAST ELECTION might do it some time in the future when they win.

Oddly, those guys don't offer the same kind of concessions to our side when they win and we lose.

So what is the point of winning an election, again?

Geez Louise this stuff gets old. You would think the bright boys and girls who run the White House could figure this stuff out.

Well of course I understand, they actually are bright and they actually have figured it out. The thing is, they WANT the chained CPI. They're just hand-waving so we won't notice. Only this time it's not working.

Assholes.

 

1StrongBlackMan

(31,849 posts)
16. May I offer an alternate scenario? ...
Wed Apr 10, 2013, 11:42 PM
Apr 2013

please allow me to provide my prediction, as a seasoned negotiator, of President Obama (and his more seasoned team's) next move in these "negotiations":

President Obama (or maybe a Democratic legislator):


Okay, Mr./Ms. gop Legislator ... Here's what we can do ... I'll drop the Chained CPI, no one seems to like that approach, even apparently the gop that is demanding cuts to "entitlements" (a win for the American people) and I will reduce my revenue ask by half what the CCPI would have realized (a win for the you, the gop).


Now ... where does the gop go ... and not cement their "unwillingness to compromise" monicker with the solid plurarity of gop and independent voters (a solid majority when taken as a whole) that poll as having the gop being unwilling to compromise and President Obama (and Democrats being willing to compromise).

In order to flip the House (because of gerrymandering as a result of 2010), we need those groups to either stay home, vote 3rd-Party, or vote Democratic. In my estimation ... It 's all about 2014.
Latest Discussions»Retired Forums»2016 Postmortem»WH rationale for chained ...