Back away from the ledge and read

[oviedodem]

http://www.theleftcoaster.com/">leftcoaser

It is at the top,

The president's proposal hits the UPPER INCOME folks, drug companies, and providers.

I don't think the man is that dumb.

[Drale]

1. O thank God there is at least one sane person left on DU, I was beginning to worry. /nt

[graywarrior]

3. There are a few of us

[vaberella]

4. We're around. It's just currently overrun by lemmings. n/t

[mzteris]

7. +10000.

Me, too.

WTF is WRONG with these people? Makes you wonder, doesn't it?

[Drale]

8. All the Mercury in the water must finally be catching up with us. /nt

[Tx4obama]

12. I am here too :) n/t

[bemildred]

2. That's all spin, there are no facts yet, Obama has said nothing yet. nt

[oviedodem]

5. He probably has not said anything for a reason. I refuse to believe that he

would sell out the staple of left so easily.

[Drale]

6. Like some other people have said this might be a purpose leak

to not only gage public reaction but to spread false info and to make the public aware of the coming crisis.

[bemildred]

16. No doubt it's political drama, the question is what's really up? nt

[RaleighNCDUer]

21. That's what I once said - before he abandond the public option

in favor of the insurance companies.

I guess we all have our own 'last straw'.

Yours is coming.

[Bluerthanblue]

9. what 's the "he's gonna gut it" meme if not spin?

where are any facts to back that up?

You are correct, Pres. Obama hasn't said anything specific yet, but you wouldn't know that by reading DU today.


:shrug:

[bemildred]

20. So you think we all should just shut up, or what?

We should just ignore it until they change the law? When did free expression of ones political views become reprehensible? If politicians don't like the heat, there is an obvious solution, nobody makes them run.

[Bluerthanblue]

23. please show me a post where ANYONE advocates that others should

"shut up"?

It's troubling that people make some pretty broad assumptions based on very little factual evidence.

Outrage over things that haven't happened yet- statements that claim to be fact based, but contain no credible facts only divides us against each other.

Is that "free expressions of ones political views"?

I'm interested in hearing other peoples perspectives of what is happening in our society, but I'm not interested in gossip.

Or being part of spreading rumor and mis-information.

[bemildred]

25. So you think Pelosi is just freaking out?

Outrage over things that have not happened yet is an EXCELLENT way to make sure they don't happen, eh?

[Bluerthanblue]

26. no, I don't think she's "freaking out"- What gives you the idea that

she is?

this isn't "freaking out" imo-

http://www.nasdaq.com/aspx/stock-market-news-story.aspx?storyid=201107071707dowjonesdjonline000586&title=correctpelosidemocrats-wont-support-us-debt-deal-with-benefit-cuts

She's not jumping to conclusions.

:shrug:

[bemildred]

27. So then it's OK to speculate about what might be done and to have opinions about it?

Based on what crops up in the news media? Even if we disagree? And if Ms Pelosi speak publicly about SSI, then we can too?

[Bluerthanblue]

28. hell yes-

as long as it's clearly expressed as speculation, and not as a fact based, done deal.

There has been an awful lot of 'speculation' being passed off as reality today, which is counter-productive and destructive.

:hi:

[Bluerthanblue]

10. K&R

:hi:

[bigwillq]

11. K and R for the thread title

LOL :rofl:

[Jakes Progress]

13. Yeah. And take a sip of this kool-aid.

[PoliticAverse]

14. "Changing the Social Security benefit index would reduce benefits over time."

The "UPPER INCOME folks, drug companies, and providers" line is about Medicare, not social security.

I will leave to others the discussion on whether cutting payments to medicare providers decreases
people's access to health care.

[oviedodem]

19. If the la times article in the post is right, then there is talk of fixing

the way COLA is calculated. My parents have not gotten a COLA in 2 years due to inflationary reasons. If a fix helps that great, If the benefits are reduced for UPPER INCOME earners then that may not be a bad thing either since these folks are more than likely living fat of off captial gains and interest over the years.

[bluestateguy]

15. That may be a little too wonky and intellectual for some people

I mean, that's like a really detailed look under the hood of public policy and the legislative process.

Grown up stuff there, which is not for everybody.

[housewolf]

17. Some of us watch, listen, read, think about things

and wait to post until we've thought things through rather than reacting in a knee-jerk fashion

[RaleighNCDUer]

18. This is good?

What Obama said today is that he is willing, as part of a larger $4 trillion debt reduction package to change the Social Security benefit indexing method and adopt changes that force higher income Medicare recipients to pay more for their care. Changing the Social Security benefit index would reduce benefits over time.

[oviedodem]

22. It may reduce benefits but possibly for those that have had higher incomes also

the higher income earners might be paying MORE into SS than they are currently paying which actually may increase it's longevity. In actuality, the republicans don't care where the cuts come from. So if Warren Buffet pays more in and gets less back to make SS more solvent then do it. It would be more troublesome if benefits were cut to middle class and the poor; I have not seen anything to this effect.

[CakeGrrl]

24. You're correct.

But there's no arguing that point with people who are beyond rational discussion.

When the dust settles, they (and the MSM) will once again look like...they didn't know what they were talking about.

When the MSM finds a shiny new toy, it's best not to pick it up.

[Palmer Eldritch]

29. Obama's alot smarter than those who sell him short.