Skip to main content

View Diary: Obama's Biggest Crime Is "Putting 'It' On The Table"? Really? (458 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  Obama is on record (16+ / 0-)

    offering chained CPI as part of a deficit deal. End of story.
       When you open with an offer, you're not negotiating. What do you do if the other guy accepts?
        Face it: Our unicorn offered to cut Social Security. He can't be trusted on that issue.

    •  Obama also knew it would not be accepted! (9+ / 0-)

      Just like Harry Reid conned McConnell into filibustering his own bill and showing the people what a complete ass the republicans are.

      Republicans piss on you and tell you it's raining, Democrats hand you an umbrella!

      by Nica24 on Sat Dec 22, 2012 at 08:27:30 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

        •  It's not at risk... (3+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          AdamR510, Beetwasher, cotterperson

          It's not mind reading, it's letting the negotiations play out without stabbing the guy in the back.

          Republicans piss on you and tell you it's raining, Democrats hand you an umbrella!

          by Nica24 on Sat Dec 22, 2012 at 08:50:37 AM PST

          [ Parent ]

        •  Was I mind reading about McConnell? (3+ / 0-)

          Did it not play out exactly as Reid knew it would?

          Republicans piss on you and tell you it's raining, Democrats hand you an umbrella!

          by Nica24 on Sat Dec 22, 2012 at 08:51:49 AM PST

          [ Parent ]

        •  "If you put something out there, you risk it" (8+ / 0-)

          not if you know 1) that the GOP will strike it down regardless and 2) (fallback) Reid is standing there saying that Chained CPI or any other cut to SocSec will not even make it to the floor of the Senate if the GOP DID bite.
          It's about as risk-free as anything he's done.
          The only risk is from his own party, his "supporters" that turn on him on a regular basis over just about ever move he makes.

          If I ran this circus, things would be DIFFERENT!

          by CwV on Sat Dec 22, 2012 at 09:11:59 AM PST

          [ Parent ]

          •  Exactly! Thank you for saying it so well. (4+ / 0-)

            What happened to all those people that posted the pics of him with the saying "we got your back, Mr. President" We had his back alright, with the knife in the other hand to stab him.

            Republicans piss on you and tell you it's raining, Democrats hand you an umbrella!

            by Nica24 on Sat Dec 22, 2012 at 09:33:16 AM PST

            [ Parent ]

            •  stab in the back (1+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:

              hardly.  To criticise Obama was doing the wrong thing is hardly stabbing him in the back.

              Obama said "Yes we can".  Putting pressure on Obama to make the change is hardly stabbing him in the back

              Blake: I am an enemy of the Federation but it is corrupt and oppressive. I will destroy it if I can

              by GideonAB on Sat Dec 22, 2012 at 10:19:54 AM PST

              [ Parent ]

          •  In reality the political risk is small, if any (7+ / 0-)

            I was getting somewhat worried about it after reading the discussions here lately, so I conducted an informal poll of my friends, family, co-workers, and a number of people I didn't know at a social gathering this past week. All told I asked about 25 people what they thought about the "fiscal cliff" situation right now.

            The number of people who were even aware this discussion was taking place was just over half, and of those, the number who had heard of "chained CPI" or knew what it is or that it is being discussed as part of the negotiations was zero. Zero.

            All of those who said were aware of the discussion had heard only that yet again there was a lot posturing and brinksmanship going on in the government about taxes and stuff, and that in general people feel negative about it and expect to get screwed over in some way. As for blame they said either "republicans" or "congress" or "politics" -- no one I spoke to blamed the president (but I did not talk to any hard core teabaggers). And not one mentioned anything about SS or chained CPI, which when I tried to explain it caused glazed eyes and lost in the weeds reaction.

            I do have a few strongly progressive friends who frequently rail about the drone wars and other issues they have with President Obama, who are also not tuned in on this particular fight. They just said "it's more bullshit" and were not even interested.

            This totally nonscientific polling begin to set my mind at ease about this whole drama and the idea that by "putting it on the table" -- during the few days right before Christmas, as part of an ongoing fight that very few people are even paying attention to -- the President has somehow "destroyed the Democratic brand" and betrayed everyone and everything the party stands for ... are being extremely overblown here.

            But to expand my sample I was forced to go check in on Andrew Sullivan's take -- even though I really dislike his opinions on most things and have mostly stopped reading him, but he does have a huge audience of millions of readers and represents the view of "Obama conservatives" -- and he was calling it a "very reasonable proposal" and was going off on the republicans and their insanity.

            So overall political effects seems to me either nil or possibly positive. He may have "put it on the table" as a way to call their bluff. If so, it worked.

            He may also be quite willing to enact chained CPI as part of any actual deal or grand bargain, if congress were to pass one. The evidence of his own words over the years certainly suggests that to be the case. He's never hidden it, and yet people voted for him in droves. And there are a lot of democrats and even liberal and progressive policy groups that have said it's an acceptable and small adjustment in the COLA formula, not the end of the world.

            So I think even if he did include it and congress voted for it, if the overall deal is good enough it would not be a big political hit. Yes of course there are ideological progressives on this blog and others who  are highly tuned in and consider even discussing it to be an unforgivable sin, and will abandon any pretense of supporting the president if it happens. I am sorry to see that but realize I cannot change their minds. If their conscience tells them it's better to stop voting for Democrats for good if they agree to a COLA formula adjustment, that's their right. I think the number of people overall who feel that way is not many.

            I think those "supporters" who are truly ready to abandon him, and all Democrats forever, over something that he openly said during the campaign that he would do: attempt to secure a "grand bargain" that includes republicans, and a willingness to include entitlement programs in the process, are not making much sense. It seems very emotional and not reality based as they claim. And the viciousness with which they go after anyone who does not agree with the "Obama wants to starve old people" interpretation is disturbing too.

        •  war of ideas (3+ / 0-)

          in addition, I would say that we are in a war of ideas.

          Just suggesting a change to SS, especially if the idea is going nowhere, is ridiculous nonsense.

          "Yes we can" becomes "No I am pretending"

          Blake: I am an enemy of the Federation but it is corrupt and oppressive. I will destroy it if I can

          by GideonAB on Sat Dec 22, 2012 at 10:23:24 AM PST

          [ Parent ]

      •  So now the next (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        greenbell, 3goldens

        Republican president can offer it up in good conscience by saying "it's nothing more than what a democratic president offered."  And there you go, the most significant and successful Democratic govt. program in the last 100 years goes down the tubes.  It is called precedent and Obama has set it.

        Any man's death diminishes me because I am involved in mankind. Therefore, send not to know for whom the bell tolls, it tolls for thee. John Donne

        by scurrvydog on Sat Dec 22, 2012 at 10:26:30 AM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  OMG! (3+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          artmartin, CS in AZ, v2aggie2

          Social Security is going down the tubes because Obama discussed the possibility of slowing the rate of inflation in benefits!!!!!!!

          Hyperbole much?

          Almost everything you do will seem insignificant, but it is important that you do it. - Mahatma Gandhi

          by NLinStPaul on Sat Dec 22, 2012 at 10:53:58 AM PST

          [ Parent ]

          •  and the fact that Candidate Obama explicitly (4+ / 0-)

            promised seniors in 2008 that he would support raising the Social Security cap rather than changing the way the cost of living adjustment is calculated...

            that doesn't bother you at all?

            When you triangulate everything, you can't even roll downhill...

            by PhilJD on Sat Dec 22, 2012 at 10:59:15 AM PST

            [ Parent ]

            •  and how do you know he didn't (1+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:

              We get leaks of what happens in negotiations but you have to know we don't get all.  Some of the things discussed could just end up being really embarrassing to Democrats if it turned out that they couldn't even muster up a Democratic majority on an idea.  How do you know that a majority of Democrats (remember we have this Blue Dog faction) actually endorse a Social Security cap increase?  

              "A celibate clergy is an especially good idea, because it tends to suppress any hereditary propensity toward fanaticism." -- Carl Sagan

              by artmartin on Sat Dec 22, 2012 at 11:25:34 AM PST

              [ Parent ]

              •  I don't know that. I do however know (3+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:
                scurrvydog, 3goldens, joanneleon

                that a majority of Democrats oppose a shift to chained CPI accounting--even if many could be bludgeoned into voting for it in the name of party discipline... yet somehow that is on the table anyway.

                These "negotiations" have little to do with what a majority of Democrats want.

                How do you know that a majority of Democrats...actually endorse a Social Security cap increase?  

                When you triangulate everything, you can't even roll downhill...

                by PhilJD on Sat Dec 22, 2012 at 11:31:49 AM PST

                [ Parent ]

    •  Yes, We Know That, It's Been Established. So What? (3+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      glynis, jiffypop, cotterperson

      If he accepts you live with the consequences. Those being, nothing would happen because nothing would get through congress.

      The results speak for themselves.

      But why is it such a big deal? Really? I don't get it? He discussed the possibility of something being part of a deal with terrorists holding our nations treasury hostage, and real lives at stake.

      Why is that such a problem for you?

      This post is dedicated to myself, without whom, I'd be somebody else. Though I'd still be an asshole. My Music: []

      by Beetwasher on Sat Dec 22, 2012 at 08:28:33 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

    •  He's been remarkably honest about all this (5+ / 0-)

      He said that his views on Social Security are very similar to Mitt Romney's.

      apparently that presents no logical problem to the ardent supporters of the President who are also ardent haters of Mr. Romney.

      A thousand Sharkeys are invading a thousand Shires every day across our country.--James Wells

      by SouthernLiberalinMD on Sat Dec 22, 2012 at 10:54:10 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site