Skip to main content

View Diary: What I hate about so called progressives, democrats, liberals and whatever you call yourself...... (188 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  "The President didn’t put it on the table." (2+ / 0-)
    "The President didn’t put it on the table. This is something that Republicans want."
    Press Briefing by Press Secretary Jay Carney, 12/18/2012

    Brand new favorite RSS feed of Daily Kos Radio Podcasts
    Jobs, Jobs, Jobs

    by We Won on Wed Dec 19, 2012 at 01:38:30 PM PST

    [ Parent ]

    •  great (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      liberaldemdave, tardis10

      they put it on the table and he said yes. so much for the paradigm of democrats protecting social security.

      The cold passion for truth hunts in no pack. -Robinson Jeffers

      by Laurence Lewis on Wed Dec 19, 2012 at 01:41:08 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

    •  To be honest, Carney was talking out of (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:

      both sides of his mouth:

      Q    Yes, Jay, a lot of top Democrats on the Hill, and I think President Obama, spent the campaign season saying, let’s not touch Social Security -- it doesn’t add to the deficit; we can resolve this issue without going to that entitlement program. What is the President’s message to those lawmakers who promised constituents that Social Security would not be touched after the President now has put chain CPI on the table for Republicans?

      MR. CARNEY:  Well, let’s be clear about one thing:  The President didn’t put it on the table.  This is something that Republicans want.  And it is --

      Q    But the Republicans --

      MR. CARNEY:  -- part of his -- if I could please answer Sam’s question, I’d appreciate it.  And the President did include it in his counterproposal, his counteroffer, as part of this process, as part of the negotiation process.  I would note that this is a technical change -- would be if instated -- to the way that economists calculate inflation, and it would affect every program that has -- that uses the CPI in its calculations.  And so it’s not directed at one particular program; it would affect every program that uses CPI.  There are also -- as part of the President’s proposals, he would make sure that the most vulnerable were exempted out from this change.

      But let’s be clear, this is something that the Republicans have asked for, and as part of an effort to find common ground with the Republicans, the President has agreed to put this in his proposal -- agreed to have this as part of a broad deficit reduction package that includes asking the wealthiest to pay more so that we can achieve the kind of revenue targets that are necessary for a balanced approach to deficit reduction.

      Q    Right, but there’s a lot -- again, my question was there’s a lot of people who voted for these lawmakers on a promise that --

      MR. CARNEY:  You heard the President say every time he talked about this --

      Q    Can I finish my question?

      MR. CARNEY:  Sure, yes.

      Q    A lot of people -- I’ll let you answer -- a lot of people voted for these lawmakers for reelection not too long ago on a promise that Social Security wouldn’t be touched, and if it was touched, it would be done separately from these fiscal cliff negotiations.  What do those people -- what are these people now supposed to believe about the promises that their lawmakers made, including the President?

      MR. CARNEY:  Let me again make clear two things.  One, the President has always said as part of this process when we’re talking about the spending cuts side of this that it would require tough choices by both sides.  And that is certainly the case if you want to reach an agreement.

      Secondly, this is a technical adjustment that supporters of it and economists -- outside economists say is meant to make the government’s estimates of inflation more accurate.  Thirdly, as part of the President’s proposal, there is a clause that would protect vulnerable communities including the very elderly when it comes to Social Security recipients.

      So there’s no question that it represents an effort to compromise, but it is also not -- this is a technical adjustment that economists believe is about getting the proper measure of inflation, and it is one sought by Republicans.

      So, again, we’re not going to get everything we want.  We knew that the President’s proposal that he put forward to the super committee that we put forward in the beginning of these negotiations would not pass unchanged.  But I think your question demonstrates the absolute fact that the President has shown enormous good faith in trying to reach a compromise here.  And it would be shocking if Republicans passed up this opportunity for what they say they seek, which is significant deficit reduction, significant spending cuts, simply to protect those just shy of being millionaires from having to pay a dime extra in income taxes.

      I think honestly the WH should explain what they mean by 'technical adjustment'.  

      Also, and maybe I'm reading this wrong, but that last statement from Carney seems to suggest that the GOP will not go for the deal.  I will say that I've seen a number of teaparty-backed TV ads with Senator Marco Rubio that implore the GOP to hold the line on no increase in taxes.

      We shall see.

    •  If the Republicans put it on the table (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      jabney, hazzcon

      why didn't Obama say "Take that smelly piece of shit off the table!"?

      The only rational response to someone who proposes, supports or even excuses putting Social Security on the table is a hearty "FUCK YOU AND THE HORSE YOU RODE IN ON!!!"  Regardless of party afiliation.

      You may think that. I couldn't possibly comment.-- Francis Urqhart

      by Johnny Q on Wed Dec 19, 2012 at 03:15:59 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site