Skip to main content

View Diary: President Obama considering putting social insurance cuts in his budget (295 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  I asked for the citation for the SECOND (0+ / 0-)

    block quote.  It is NOT on the White House web site.  I checked.  

    •  Perhaps it is from the AARP website (0+ / 0-)

      http://blog.aarp.org/...

      I sincerely doubt the WHitehouse would refer to itself in that manner.

      But that the administration has offered up the chained or superlative cpi is on their website, and is fairly well documented as part of the Grand Bargain White Whale from the start.

      Growth for the sake of growth is the ideology of the cancer cell. --Edward Abbey

      by greenbastard on Fri Mar 29, 2013 at 12:14:44 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  Yes, I agree, the President has been very (0+ / 0-)

        transparent about Superlative CPI.  That's why it is puzzling to me why the continued freak-out every time it is mentioned.

        I would love for the Democrats to put the GOP on the spot by saying okay, we will all agree to "look at" the CPI changes if you will agree to additional revenue for deficit reduction (not this net neutral crap they have been peddling).  Just watching not on the GOP squirm but the press as well would be priceless.  The media constantly obsesses with their false equivalence and it would be highly educational to see how they would cover this artificial debt crisis.  

        I already know how the GOP would respond.  No deal.  In their view, the poor have too much and the rich not nearly enough.  

        •  Because what chained-CPI (i'll not use the new (2+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          joanneleon, eaglecries

          propaganda relabeling of "superlative") means to me is that right now I make it to the end of the month barely able to eat the last three days. And that means, while inflation keeps rising for my necessities, if my SS doesn't rise as much, I'll be looking at four or five or six days next year.

          Which bothers me. Then, multiply me by a few tens of millions of voters in a similar position, and every one of them is going to despise the Party which keeps putting forward the idea of literally hurting them in their daily lives.

          Where's your confusion. "Vote for me 'cause I'll fuck you over" is going to hurt Democratic elections. How is that mysterious?

          Take the Sequester. A "kabuki" which the Republicans would never swallow. But they did. Today, my Federally employed daughter is coming up short 10% of her income. Same for her husband. She voted for Obama in 2008, and 2012. Now she .... well, I save you from the actual words she attaches to him now, but they are not lady-like, you can be sure.

          In the real world Obama is saying: "Hey I'll fuck over the average person if you'll agree to very very mildly slightly inconveniencing the filthy rich who are exporting our jobs and wrecking our economy." The bolded part is what Republicans get to advertise, whether they go for the deal or not. Which increases Republican power in the next election.

          See? Not tricky. Experience. Common sense. Screaming bloody obvious, actually. So now you have at least more answers than you did.


          If Republicans said every 3rd person named "Smith" should hang, we'd bargain them to every 7th. Then we'll see apologia written praising this most pragmatic compromise. There's our losing formula.

          by Jim P on Fri Mar 29, 2013 at 02:52:22 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

    •  link here (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      joanneleon, gooderservice
      Spending Savings from Superlative CPI with protections for vulnerable $ 130  billion
      http://www.whitehouse.gov/...

      "Who are these men who really run this land? And why do they run it with such a thoughtless hand?" David Crosby

      by allenjo on Fri Mar 29, 2013 at 01:00:16 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site