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

MisterP

(23,730 posts)
111. well, Gore did win--and they've formally admitted that since *2001*
Tue Apr 9, 2013, 02:44 PM
Apr 2013

it's not a matter of "myths are enduring" it's more a matter of "myths are profitable to the media and so they paper over the truth once they've admitted it" ...

Why indeed. woo me with science Dec 2012 #1
Thanks for that video. Obama thinks liberalism is a tired, old ideology that needs to be replaced?? factsarenotfair Dec 2012 #42
Obama: "Too many of us have been interested in defending programs as written in 1938." woo me with science Dec 2012 #69
How can intelligent people fail to heed Obama's words and deeds: He is not a friend of Social byeya Dec 2012 #73
The words "not a bloodless process" are indeed chilling. factsarenotfair Dec 2012 #102
This message was self-deleted by its author woo me with science Dec 2012 #104
Because the Third Way believes that SS needs to be privatized and that the sabrina 1 Dec 2012 #2
I think the opposite argument could be made too democrattotheend Dec 2012 #5
so to "reduce the cost of the program" by cutting future benefits is ok with you? DrDan Dec 2012 #8
I never said it's ok democrattotheend Dec 2012 #9
I have to agree with your reasoning Freddie Dec 2012 #18
+1 SunSeeker Dec 2012 #23
We democrats did NOT stay home in 2010. Independents stayed home. sabrina 1 Dec 2012 #82
there are other options that do not seem to be pursued - for example raising the cap DrDan Dec 2012 #35
Wait. Why is Social Security in the mix - WHEN IT DOES NOT ADD TO THE DEFICIT? grahamhgreen Dec 2012 #37
!!!! bvar22 Dec 2012 #68
Great photo! grahamhgreen Dec 2012 #70
I was lucky enough to have lived in St Paul, Minnesota... bvar22 Dec 2012 #79
Amen. woo me with science Dec 2012 #76
That's absurd. Simply having those who earn over $110,000/yr pay ito it will keep grahamhgreen Dec 2012 #10
and/or include capital gains and "carried interest" reteachinwi Dec 2012 #27
That is a solution I could definitely get behind democrattotheend Dec 2012 #108
There is no reason to even mention SS in these negotiations and the Progressive Caucus xtraxritical Dec 2012 #31
I've never seen any figures on how raising the cap will raise sufficient sums of money customerserviceguy Dec 2012 #80
There's a bill introduced by Bernie Sanders that details all of it: grahamhgreen Dec 2012 #84
I see some pretty charts customerserviceguy Dec 2012 #92
Here are the core numbers in the PDF from the Social Security Chief Actuary: grahamhgreen Dec 2012 #98
But the whole reason this "cut" is being proposed is truedelphi Dec 2012 #53
"have the President sign and Executive Order recapturing that money" - grahamhgreen Dec 2012 #86
If only that were true. But the opposite is true. First of all SS is not in trouble sabrina 1 Dec 2012 #63
Hear Hear! Well said! grahamhgreen Dec 2012 #87
I think YOU MIS READ WHAT I POSTED. truedelphi Dec 2012 #100
I'm sorry, I was trying to agree with you but didn't do it very well. sabrina 1 Dec 2012 #105
all I know is that I am headachy and grouchy now that not a truedelphi Dec 2012 #106
Lol, I haven't had any egg nog either, so I wish I could join you also. sabrina 1 Dec 2012 #107
Do you even know what a chained CPI is? daa Dec 2012 #66
Sorry, but that makes no sense... grahamhgreen Dec 2012 #110
Yep they first have to degrade and denature it kenny blankenship Dec 2012 #12
Neo-liberalism is a failure as policy duffyduff Dec 2012 #28
Yes, Neo-liberaliam has been tried in several places throughout the world and has been proved to byeya Dec 2012 #74
Certainly Social Security is Self-Funded, On the Road Dec 2012 #3
That's absurd. No one has to negotiate that which is simply not in play. Bluenorthwest Dec 2012 #4
No excuse for adopting what they bring to our proposals. TheKentuckian Dec 2012 #6
If you are in control of negotiations, if your party wins an election, you get to sabrina 1 Dec 2012 #7
Look at OBAMA'S offers, not BOHNERS. Why did OBAMA put it on the table? grahamhgreen Dec 2012 #11
Mr. Obama is a long way from Wellstone ruled Dec 2012 #13
He's "more like Harry Truman"? You must have a sense of humor. He's the exact opposite of Truman. AnotherMcIntosh Dec 2012 #17
Right now, SS is self-funding. However, this will not be the case starting in 2033. Nye Bevan Dec 2012 #14
Projections can change, it still has nothing to do with the current deficit Dragonfli Dec 2012 #20
Exactly right reteachinwi Dec 2012 #30
Bingo, spot-on, you've nailed it. hypergrove Dec 2012 #45
Rationalization fail. Logic fail. High probability of administration deception detected. grahamhgreen Dec 2012 #38
All we need do is have those who make over $110,000/yr pay into SS! grahamhgreen Dec 2012 #32
Those numbers are based on the worst economy and the high enemployment sabrina 1 Dec 2012 #64
If by self-funding customerserviceguy Dec 2012 #81
The media has spun the demographics to make it appear half the population is not working, thus they freshwest Dec 2012 #15
Obama is not doing this alone. AnotherMcIntosh Dec 2012 #16
The appointer of Simpson & Bowles knew exactly where these two right-wingers stood. Their answer indepat Dec 2012 #19
Take the cap off of wage limits on SSI. Not fair that poor and middle class only pay this in. earcandle Dec 2012 #21
or maybe it was used to bribe senators and house? Put it back and audit SSI NOW earcandle Dec 2012 #22
The ruling class sulphurdunn Dec 2012 #24
Same reason he is lowering corporate taxes, and... soryang Dec 2012 #25
President Obama has already taken Social Security off the table UCmeNdc Dec 2012 #26
If you have any proof of that, I would love to see it, unfortunately his latest statement, grahamhgreen Dec 2012 #89
because he knew the radical right would never go for a tax increase. He looks like a goddamn hero pasto76 Dec 2012 #29
How does offering up our SS fund to vultures make him look like a "goddamn hero"? Dragonfli Dec 2012 #33
Wait. You have a link for that? I would love it if he said he took SS off grahamhgreen Dec 2012 #39
It is simple....... rustydad Dec 2012 #34
....and that is why Al Gore wanted a "lock box". NCarolinawoman Dec 2012 #43
well, Gore did win--and they've formally admitted that since *2001* MisterP Apr 2013 #111
Because "deficit" isn't the only thing that matters. Igel Dec 2012 #36
So, you don't want to pay back the money you borrowed from the elderly... grahamhgreen Dec 2012 #41
SS is not under attack and the deficit has nothing to so with SS... TreasonousBastard Dec 2012 #40
"Odd" That Obama "Throws Out Suggestions" Regarding SS Iggy Dec 2012 #44
That's not how it works... TreasonousBastard Dec 2012 #54
No, that's wrong. Both sides throw out an entire offer, woo me with science Dec 2012 #90
You state, "SS is not under attack", yet you admit that grahamhgreen Dec 2012 #46
he hasn't stolen fom anyone yet, and... TreasonousBastard Dec 2012 #52
Of course, but historically Obama has had to be pushed hard to do the right thing. grahamhgreen Dec 2012 #61
Look back at his first two years and say that. TreasonousBastard Dec 2012 #65
"can be changed in the future"? NCarolinawoman Dec 2012 #47
We are finished with shadow governments and guns and fake facts. earcandle Dec 2012 #48
Every body knows. earcandle Dec 2012 #49
Quite possibly, when there is a less toxic House... TreasonousBastard Dec 2012 #51
Because Obama is a Republican. UnrepentantLiberal Dec 2012 #50
Oh bullshit. I know the reason: ProSense Dec 2012 #55
. UnrepentantLiberal Dec 2012 #56
Ah, ProSense Dec 2012 #57
Advantage: Prosense Number23 Dec 2012 #59
Thank you.... Bobbie Jo Dec 2012 #94
Don't you wish that just once he would pander to the left Doctor_J Dec 2012 #60
Because the banksters who own the government WANT IT Doctor_J Dec 2012 #58
When negotiating, you must offer the other side something they want. Agnosticsherbet Dec 2012 #62
Just say someone wants to buy your car, but, heck, they'd like your house too; grahamhgreen Dec 2012 #67
I don't think it should have ever been offered...but I still understand why he went there. Agnosticsherbet Dec 2012 #72
I read nothing in that article about Obama attacking or cutting Social Security. And he hasn't. Honeycombe8 Dec 2012 #71
All the red areas comprise cuts to Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid, grahamhgreen Dec 2012 #75
The CPI is only in Obama's last proposal, which he has withdrawn. Honeycombe8 Dec 2012 #95
I would very much appreciate a link to the administration stating that chained cpi and grahamhgreen Dec 2012 #96
Bullshit. You declare defeat before anything even happens. MjolnirTime Dec 2012 #77
I had to laugh out loud at your response Oilwellian Dec 2012 #83
What are you talkin about? This is a call to action, asking that we all call grahamhgreen Dec 2012 #85
Don't cut SS, cut corporate welfare! commenter8 Dec 2012 #78
Because this is what the professors are telling him to do Yo_Mama Dec 2012 #88
Bernake is only interested in stuffing our hard earned money into his obesely rich grahamhgreen Dec 2012 #91
Corzine was never prosecuted Yo_Mama Dec 2012 #93
Because SS is unsustainable in its current form- it's going to need some tweaking if people my age cecilfirefox Dec 2012 #97
Then it should be adressed seperately from the the deficit reduction talks. Especially grahamhgreen Dec 2012 #99
Last year Sekhmets Daughter Dec 2012 #101
Wall St. JReed Dec 2012 #103
But Obama magically *knew* his offer(s) wouldn't be accepted! DirkGently Dec 2012 #109
Latest Discussions»General Discussion»Why is Social Security Un...»Reply #111