Skip to main content

View Diary: Entire Obama Campaign Machine Reactivating to Win Back House in 2014. UPDATED x1 (597 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  I disagree with the policy, (19+ / 0-)

    but wonder how much it will impact the votes.  Seniors on the whole supported Rs.

    Boehner already rejected the Obama budget, surprise, and demanded chained cpi without any tax increases.  

    I think we should oppose the bad parts of the proposed budget, but becasue they are bad, not because of polcitcial tactics, cause I'm not sure it really matters in the next elections for Congress.  

    Join us on the Black Kos front porch to review news and views written from a black pov—everyone is welcome.

    by TomP on Fri Apr 05, 2013 at 09:16:12 AM PDT

    [ Parent ]

    •  Hey - I'm a "senior" (euphemism for old person) (53+ / 0-)

      and I've always supported Democrats. But starting with the Congressional Dems votes for the PATRIOT ACT, domestic spying, and military commissions, I've been getting pretty discouraged with the point that I quit the county Executive Committee., Obamacare...was just another Dem fail.
        The House actually passed a single payer plan, only to have the Dems in the Senate (and White House) piss it away.
        If the party can't be counted on to support Social Security, what the hell good is it?
         Old people voted Republican by a slight margin in the 2012 election, and guess what: They got a Republican.
         Good luck  trying to pick up seniors in 2014 after you screw them on chained CPI.

      •  Barack Obama is not a "Republican." (25+ / 0-)

        When you push such memes, you help defeat progressive opposition to these polices.

        I'm 57.  

        What good is the Dem Party even if they pass chained cpi?  There are so many other issues like the environment, labor rights, etc., where it matters.  

        It's a policy I oppose.

        This amuses me:

        Good luck  trying to pick up seniors in 2014 after you screw them on chained CPI.
        I wonder if it will have an impact.  Maybe seniros should organize.

        Join us on the Black Kos front porch to review news and views written from a black pov—everyone is welcome.

        by TomP on Fri Apr 05, 2013 at 09:35:12 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  Hey, I'm 57 too. Maybe we're twins! (9+ / 0-)

          Cats are better than therapy, and I'm a therapist.

          by Smoh on Fri Apr 05, 2013 at 09:42:32 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

        •  BO himself (12+ / 0-)

          called himself a republican, didn't he?

          The banks have a stranglehold on the political process. Mike Whitney

          by dfarrah on Fri Apr 05, 2013 at 10:00:34 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  he said that he's a Reagan Democrat (15+ / 0-)

            or that if this was Reagan's era, he'd be a moderate republican

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

            by greenbastard on Fri Apr 05, 2013 at 10:02:36 AM PDT

            [ Parent ]

          •  PBO said that "he would have been considered a... (22+ / 0-)

            ...moderate Republican twenty-five year ago".
            (ABC News, 12/14/12).

            And this was in response to the question: "Are you, sir, a socialist?"

               "The truth of the matter is that my policies are so mainstream that if I had set the same policies that I had back in the 1980s, I would be considered a moderate Republican."
            PBO described himself as "Mainstream", not "Republican".

            The statement was less about himself, and more about the extremism of the TeaPuppet GOP.

            “It is useless to attempt to reason a man out of a thing
            he was never reasoned into” - Jonathan Swift

            by jjohnjj on Fri Apr 05, 2013 at 11:05:17 AM PDT

            [ Parent ]

            •  Thank you..................... (6+ / 0-)

              but that won't stop the lie.  Some here just love it too much to give it up.

            •  Not alot of daylight (9+ / 0-)

              between "I am a republican" and "I would be considered.....".

              The fact is, he rebuffed being called a socialist by claiming to be a republican rather than defending Democratic policies.

              The banks have a stranglehold on the political process. Mike Whitney

              by dfarrah on Fri Apr 05, 2013 at 11:36:43 AM PDT

              [ Parent ]

              •  If you can't see the difference (8+ / 0-)

                between "I am a Republican", and "I would be considered a moderate Republican", in the EIGHTIES, you clearly haven't been paying attention to the changes in the GOP. These are not the same thing. I didn't agree with everything they stood for thirty years ago, but at least you could have a sane conversation with them. I imagine a large number of today's Dems would have been moderate Republicans back then.

                "The Democrats are the lesser evil and that has to count for something. Good and evil aren't binary states. All of us are both good and evil. Being less evil is the trajectory of morality." --SC

                by tb92 on Fri Apr 05, 2013 at 11:51:25 AM PDT

                [ Parent ]

                •  Moderate Republicanism circa 1984 (9+ / 0-)

                  is nothing to crow about.

                  •  You don't understand (0+ / 0-)

                    Half of the Democratic party is now conservatives, who think that the Republicans were fine 20 years ago. Because all the mostly-sane Republicans left the Republican party in the last 20 years, and had nowhere to go but the Democratic party.

                    So saying Obama is a Republican means something very different to them: it means he is one of today's Republicans (without whom, remember, they would still be Republicans themselves.) And they know that's not true.

                    Those of us who were liberals 20 (or 40) years ago understand it somewhat differently. But we don't control the Democratic party any more, really, so we have to be a little more careful how we phrase things if we want to be understood.

                •  the point of saying which is (5+ / 0-)

                  to persuade reagan democrats to bail on the 'pugs and cross back over to our side so we can win enough of those gerrymandered seats to put Nancy back in charge of congress.

                  Sad to be reminded of how so many here can't understand that national politics is mostly about generating perceptions among people who don't care all that much (involved as they are in living their busy and difficult lives) and almost never about appealing to the passions of the self appointed arbiters of righteousness who spend their time on blogs.

                  •  Even sadder people who think manipulating (1+ / 0-)
                    Recommended by:

                    the public's perceptions is what politics is about, rather than giving them substance in policy and governance.

                    And yes, our whole politics has degenerated to the point where manipulating perceptions is the entire game. Offering actual solutions to actual problems is automatically rejected as not being pragmatic; playing asinine point-scoring games among the politicians is considered the height of sophistication.

                    That's how a nation crumbles in face of its problems. That's how the common person sees their lives and their futures ruined. And look at the state of the West and of the US in particular, and see where the "generating perceptions game" has gotten us.

                    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 Apr 05, 2013 at 04:32:28 PM PDT

                    [ Parent ]

                    •  This--- (2+ / 0-)
                      Recommended by:
                      Urizen, Larsstephens
                      our whole politics has degenerated to the point where manipulating perceptions is the entire game.
                      is not a degeneration. It has ALWAYS been true, and not just in politics.  Perception IS reality. It's the wall between you and your goals, because if the "perception" is that your ideas are wrong, doesn't matter if they're right, ain't gonna fly.  We see this in a hundred ways everywhere in life.

                      We really must get over the idea that no one has ever been so manipulated and abused by politics as we have. History laughs at that notion.

                      "A typical vice of American politics is the avoidance of saying anything real on real issues." Theodore Roosevelt.

                      by StellaRay on Fri Apr 05, 2013 at 04:55:07 PM PDT

                      [ Parent ]

                      •  Silly. (3+ / 0-)
                        Recommended by:
                        devis1, marty marty, Plox

                        My grandparents and parents voted for FDR because he took them from nightly dinners of boiled bone soup to good meals and new shoes. That wasn't a manipulated perception. That was real life.

                        My Russian grandfather fought against his Tsar because the man was letting the people starve. When the Bolshi's came in and didn't deliver, instead went to terror, he fought them.

                        That wasn't a manipulated perception. That was real life.

                        You could talk to Dr. Rev. Martin Luther King, Jr about the differences between real life and generated perceptions as well.

                        There's a vast difference between real life political choices and manufacturing "I perceive the Republicans are being obstructionist" or "I perceive the Democrats are soft on crime" bullshit.

                        It's our fat bellies and the most sophisticated and pervasive propaganda machine in history (you must have noticed!) what's taught people to take trivial nonsense as substance; to take horseshit and petty maneuvers as meaningful politics.

                        Not to worry. The numbers banished from the middle class into low-wage and poverty are now larger than half the nation. And the numbers will grow as DC, and their Stockholm Syndrome captives in the population, jerks off over how clever they all are.

                        Reality. Perception. Different things. A difference clarified as the belt tightens. And the belt tightens on more and more Americans every day.

                        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 Apr 05, 2013 at 05:12:04 PM PDT

                        [ Parent ]

                        •  Did your grandparents (4+ / 0-)
                          Recommended by:
                          Urizen, zizi, Larsstephens, gramofsam1

                          mention to you that FDR compromised with the southern Dixie-crats, refusing to help support an anti-lynging law---something the south did not want to give up because that's the kind of justice they liked to deliver to Blacks--- to get the votes he needed for SS?

                          Or that FDR was pressured in 1937 to accept the republican "austerity" fling of that day, and thereby drove the country into a second dip in the great recession, rescued from it only by WWII?

                          Hey, I'm a great admirer of FDR, but he was a CONSUMATE politician, for the better and the worse, and hero worship of him is not only not useful, and out of any realistic context, it denys the hardest parts of any president's jobs, and papers over it with idealistic bull pucky.

                          And with all due respect, your grand father and MLK did not have to run for office. Their roles were important but different. When you have to get elected, how folks perceive you is everything. How they perceive things may not be the reality, but I'm telling you, perception will win out every time---and I could give you hundreds of examples of that truth, but really, it should be painfully obvious.

                          Reality and perception are not mutually exclusive and do come together at times---but as many times they are not even in the same ball park, and if you're a politico, you should get that in spades.

                          Most folks don't keep up, don't know the facts, don't google their lives away, don't blog. They form their opinions/perceptions based on what they choose to know, sample or learn. That's how you get so many republicans who perceive that Obama is a socialist, regardless of all the facts that say this is not the reality.

                          "A typical vice of American politics is the avoidance of saying anything real on real issues." Theodore Roosevelt.

                          by StellaRay on Fri Apr 05, 2013 at 05:41:33 PM PDT

                          [ Parent ]

                          •  FDR delivered for people. Obama's not in the (1+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:
                            marty marty

                            same league. Neither in intention nor in action. Look at his appointments: corporatists all.

                            btw, did you know that Black voters were overwhelmingly Republican, something like 70% in FDR's first run for office, and after his first term they went 67-75% for FDR? I imagine they knew who helped them or not. iirc, it was 77% for Truman, who inherited FDRs approval.

                            Again, the topic is not "perception" -- of course, perception is everything in the end. My response was to "generated" (i.e., manipulated) perception. Different thing entirely.

                            Playing bullshit games so as to make the voters perceive a certain way --- saints in heaven! how can anyone not know that manipulating people is wrong, wrong, wrong!

                            And how you get so many republicans thinking Obama is a socialist is through the manipulation of perceptions. None of these people know anything at all about what Socialism is, nor that Neoliberalism exists, nor that Obama is a Neoliberal (ie., shares with Conservatives that "Business is the Be All and End All").

                            They are parroting a manipulated, a generated, perception.

                            This kind of politics, aside from the cynicism, contempt for people, and the moral/practical imbecility of it -- that's how a nation dies when such becomes the conventional wisdom of what politics is about. Instead of delivering, or at least furiously trying to deliver what people NEED. Not making them think what they are getting is what they want, that's the opposite thing.

                            Here's what over half of America knows today: they're hurting, and nobody in DC is doing shit to help turn that around.

                            That's why 50% of the population won't identify with either the D or R, and when polled, half the Ds & Rs said they wished they had another option. Three of four Americans find both Parties as relevant to their lives as the Whigs.

                            Which is the course both parties are set upon as they figure out how to manipulate a less- and less-manipulable population. Go talk to someone who isn't a politico, a working stiff, storeowners, cabdrivers, about our "recovery," and see if they can't tell the difference between what the real world is and what perception is in DC.

                            The games played in DC are killing us. And the Democratic Party. Remember that brilliant strategy of the Sequester? It's cost two relatives of mine -- as of a few weeks ago Democratic voters, now FORMER -- 10% of their income. This is the shit I'm talking about.

                            Obama playing oh-so-DC-sophisticated games, trying to "generate a perception," real people getting fucked over as a result. You think they buy "oh that was a very smart thing to try" for one second?

                            Bad politics. Dumb politics. Suicidal politics.

                            All I can tell you is go watch "The Century of the Self" especially the fourth part on how Obama tailored his message pretty much on a district by district level.

                            See how DC plays the people:

                            Delivering on his promises? Even trying to deliver? We have a track record on that, don't we?

                            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 Apr 05, 2013 at 06:32:14 PM PDT

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  Would Rep. Hondas' near ancestors (1+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:

                            appreciate that O was not in FDRs league?

                            Didn't FDR 'deliver' some of them to camps?

                •  plus, the hint of socialist? (0+ / 0-)

                  he was only correcting the overton window

              •  Lots of daylight (3+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:
                zizi, Larsstephens, gramofsam1

                if you understand that Obama's policies today are the outcome of the right's 30 plus year agenda, that his policies can't help but be defined by the swing of the Overton window to the right, for obvious reasons.

                You continue to say Obama "claimed" he was a republican. He did not. This is not what he said.

                When YOU claim to define Democratic policies as agreeing with progressives down the line you underestimate the centrist Democratic view, which is very prevalent and like everything else, has been dragged to the right.  Took thirty years to get there, ain't going to be pulled back in 4 or 5 years.

                "A typical vice of American politics is the avoidance of saying anything real on real issues." Theodore Roosevelt.

                by StellaRay on Fri Apr 05, 2013 at 04:43:11 PM PDT

                [ Parent ]

            •  Would have been a moderate Republican in the 80s (3+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              gustynpip, liberaldemdave, Jim P

              before the Republican party went batshit crazy.

              So, he'd be  a Republican if they weren't all batshit crazy.

              if necessary for years; if necessary, alone

              by SouthernLiberalinMD on Fri Apr 05, 2013 at 11:57:38 AM PDT

              [ Parent ]

        •  Well considering how lousy they are on labor (14+ / 0-)

          and the environment I don't know why you think it still matters  Yeah, it does matter at the state level.  There are still some dedicated true believing Democrats in my legislature for sure.  

          But a national party that sells out Social Security and Medicare in a short term deficit deal is beyond contempt.  They can screw me out of Social Security and Medicare but I will not pay them with my vote to do it to me.

        •  I take issue with (15+ / 0-)

          the description 'moderate', there is nothing moderate about the chained catfood SS 'reform'. There is also nothing moderate about  Obamacare  or having Government Sachs running our party and country. Talk about cart before the horse politics. Don't you care about the common good or the rule of law or justice? Are you so  scared of the RW Republican maniacs that your willing to support the same agenda with a more palatable cosmetic face? It should have an impact. What the hell is the point of winning when we the people end up calling these extreme Third Way, new democrat's moderate. Oh thank you Dems you beat the evil back and then implement the agenda of Simpson Bowles and Government Sachs.      

        •  He's a Democrat who accepts Republican (16+ / 0-)

          Principles, and appoints Republicans and Republican-lite Democrats to Cabinet and other key positions.

          So, yes, there's a (D) after his name, but... Eternal War on Everywhere; The deficit is more important than Job Creation; Social Security needs fixing; every American needs to be Stalked by the various secret police; habeas corpus is gone; The Trans-Pacific Partnership (and that's coming up in the next few months, and you think NAFTA screwed us read this and puke, charter schools; protect Wall Street first; allow Wall Street to do the same things which caused the current Depression ("recovery," my ass!); not mention the poor and increasing poverty, like, ever; ... this is only a partial listing of Republican agendas he shares and promotes.

          But he's Democratic on some social issues. So there's that. To claim that he's a Democrat more than he is a Neoliberal, which shares with Conservativism the "Business is All That Matters,' world-view... well, on what grounds other than formal conventional politics?

          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 Apr 05, 2013 at 11:49:48 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  Well, he's Democratic on some social issues - (7+ / 0-)

            when pushed to the wall on them.  He didn't exactly come out swinging for equality for LGBT early on; not until the writing was on the wall that there would be no political risk for him.  His rejection of single payer guaranteed we'd not have it.  He's long been a heavy supporter of "education reform".  I don't remember him standing up for unions more than once or twice, when it was politically beneficial at the time.  I've never heard him become passionate with concern for the poor or disabled.  

            Come to think of it, I'm not sure how I could consider him Democratic on social issues, either.  

            There was so much possibility when he was elected.  There are two options.  One, he squandered his chances.  Two, he never had an intention of working toward those possibilities.  I don't much care which one is accurate.  He's been a sad disappointment as far as I'm concerned.  I don't "hate" him, I'm not even angry because it was apparent from day one we would be getting a somewhat more conservative Clinton.  But, considering his background, I did hope he'd grow into the position and actually use it to help the bottom third of the country rather than the top 1%.

            "If you trust you are not critical; if you are critical you do not trust" by our own Dauphin

            by gustynpip on Fri Apr 05, 2013 at 01:25:33 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

            •  He just got spanked by a judge (0+ / 0-)

              For his highly political move to require a prescription for minors to get Plan B. He definitely can suck on social issues, too.

              "Victory means exit strategy, and it's important for the president to explain to us what the exit strategy is." - George W Bush

              by jfern on Sat Apr 06, 2013 at 02:42:53 AM PDT

              [ Parent ]

        •  Well, he did say that thing about how (7+ / 0-)

          he would have basically been a moderate Republican in the 80s. In other words, he's only a Democrat because the Republicans went crazy over the last twenty years.

          But for what it's worth, his economic policies are to the right of Nixon and his Social Security policies to the right of Nixon, Reagan, and 50% of current Republican voters.

          if necessary for years; if necessary, alone

          by SouthernLiberalinMD on Fri Apr 05, 2013 at 11:56:41 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

        •  I'm way beyond 57. (6+ / 0-)

          More than half of my income comes from SS.  Thus it is a HUGE deal for me when the president I voted for preemptively offers to give it away...after saying he wouldn't do so.  What's an old grandma to do?    It's getting harder to demonstrate...maybe if I can find a recliner with wheels?

          “... there is no shame in not knowing. The problem arises when irrational thought and attendant behavior fill the vacuum left by ignorance.” ― Neil deGrasse Tyson, The Sky Is Not the Limit: Adventures of an Urban Astrophysicist

          by leema on Fri Apr 05, 2013 at 12:44:53 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

        •  But the problem isn't only the Chained (4+ / 0-)

          CPI, and the several cuts to Medicare (including cuts to seniors' pocketbooks) that concern me.

          I am very concerned that this Administration backs the Fiscal Commission's, and even the (then) Gang of Six's deficit reduction plans.

          The cuts described in The Moment Of Truth (taken as a whole) are nothing short of draconian.  Even Jan Schakowsky says as much.

          And, as is often the case with the Democratic Party's penchant for incrementalism, I worry that this is a ''camel's nose under the tent" circumstance.

          Say the Dems go along with the Chained CPI cuts and the Medicare cuts in the proposed budget (next week's).

          Would they consider it 'a mandate' to make the rest of the cuts (as prescribed by Bowles-Simpson) AFTER the midterm elections?

          Obviously, I don't have that answer.

          I hope that we all recognize that this cut (Chained CPI) is very critical to some--especially the vets and SSDI recipients who really will be on the losing end of the 'compounding.'

          But again, I worry that if we don't fight (and win) this round of cuts--we may really be in for it, after the midterms.  

          I am very concerned.  

          Especially since the other two major cuts to Social Security--raising the retirement age and changing the formula (determining the monthly benefits) for Social Security ARE MUCH DEEPER CUTS THAN THE CHAINED CPI. [And that's not meant as a hateful scream.  Just to bring attention to my point, for casual readers, LOL!]

          IMHO, the ones of us (and I am one) lucky enough to have other retirement plans, need to remember that some folks don't have one, or that it may be only a dinky 401K that's taken a beating several years ago.  

          I just hope that the progressive community can come together on these issues, and not allow itself to be split into factions.  ;-)  


          "Only he who can see the invisible, can do the impossible."-- Frank L. Gaines


          by musiccitymollie on Fri Apr 05, 2013 at 01:23:11 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

        •  I'm 70 ... tell me why Pelosi did not overturn the (0+ / 0-)

          GOP bill that paid corporations to take their factories overseas?  It was passed under Bush and the GOP but when the dems took over they ignored the problem.  Wonder where the jobs have gone?

          The chained CPI will hurt.  Have you seen how the bill at the grocery store has gone up so much?  Groceries, gas, heating, etc are not taken into consideration in the calculation for CPI and now Obama wants to chain it?

        •  Tom, How does name calling (0+ / 0-)

          help "progressive aims?"

          Barack Obama is not a "Republican."  
          When you push such memes, you help defeat progressive opposition to these polices.
          What good is the Dem Party even if they pass chained cpi?
          The Dem Party is not going to pass the Presidential budget. The President is REQUIRED to submit a budget. Do you think Obama thinks for one minute that it would pass even without anything about chained CPI?

          What happened last time? The Senate voted down Obama's budget about 96-? because the only reason the Repubs demanded a vote was to be able to pick and choose a provision or two to use against each Dem running.

          There is no way it can pass. None, nada, zip.

          Even if every Dem voted FOR it Repubs would all still vote against it. But of course none of them will vote for it

          It's a ploy.

          And every Dem running for reelection can campaign on having stopped it from happening.

          I'm asking you to believe. Not in my ability to bring about real change in Washington ... *I'm asking you to believe in yours.* Barack Obama

          by samddobermann on Sun Apr 07, 2013 at 01:35:07 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

      •  Well this sounds like defeatism all right (3+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        Mr Robert, Dallasdoc, gustynpip

        But I have to say, I agree. If I could believe the modern dems were also not corporatists, then I could enthuse too. As it is... So how come Obama is talking about changes to social security then?

        Keep constant watch on your mind. - Dalai Lama

        by redstella on Fri Apr 05, 2013 at 09:36:08 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

      •  I mostly agree with you. (9+ / 0-)

        IMO, when people talk about "seniors" voting Repub, they're mostly talking about those who are in their VERY senior years.  We boomers, especially we in the middle and late part of that age group are very much Democratic, and we're VERY, VERY concerned about SS, Medicare, etc. .. after spending our entire working lives paying into the Social Insurance Fund.

        Most of my friends around my age... I just turned 57... are upset, frustrated, and thoroughly disenchanted with the whole system now.  We knew Obama wasn't Progressive (like us), but we honestly didn't understand his strong Repub leanings were intrinsic to him... and not just playing to the "center-right" in a campaign.  

        Of course, we'll vote and vote for Democrats - the alternative is just too horror-filled to consider.  But none of us are planning on knocking ourselves out again until some party puts up someone who actually walks the walks... and not just talks the talk... of a true progressive candidate.

        I never thought I'd live to see the day when a Democrat would compromise EARNED benefits.  I'm sorry... that to me is the worst kind of promise breaking... and it's outright theft as far as I care.

        Meh... democrats will have to change a LOT for me to ever work for them again like I use to.  

        It's like being given a choice of which party do you want to belong to... Republican or Republican lite?  being the rebel I am, I say neither one - especially if they follow thru on -this- betrayal.

      •  You are wrong. The house never (0+ / 0-)

        passed single payer; they passed a public option. It got pissed away when Reid gave in to loud mouth progressives and shoved it into the Senate bill — which everyone advised him he should not do. Sure enough it could not pass with the PO in it, the Senators got dug in and time was lost. Then the 60th vote was lost.  

        The ACA is much more than Romney care. All of the insurance provisions are in Title I. There are 10 Titles in all. Only the ignorant say the two laws are the same.

        And the party is supporting Social  Security. This is a small change which can be changed back or changed to cpi-e.

        Do you what the COLA was when SS started?

        You would prefer that President Obama march around saying not one cent can be changed — perhaps while beating his chest.

        Great. Let's have both sides grandstand. That will help get things on track

        I'm asking you to believe. Not in my ability to bring about real change in Washington ... *I'm asking you to believe in yours.* Barack Obama

        by samddobermann on Sun Apr 07, 2013 at 01:04:41 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

    •  i can only tell you how much it will impact (28+ / 0-)

      my vote

      but nvm that, the angst alone will undoubtedly kill off the oldest and frailest amongst us

      never thought I'd live to see the day EARNED BENEFITS would be on the table under this president

      ...or the chessboard if you prefer

      "Show up. Pay attention. Tell the truth. And don't be attached to the results." -- Angeles Arrien

      by Sybil Liberty on Fri Apr 05, 2013 at 09:29:08 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  I hope you're right. TomP. Gauging the mindset (0+ / 0-)

      of the electorate is slightly more difficult than knowing what's really going on in Kim Jung Un's mind.

      Of all the preposterous assumptions of humanity over humanity, nothing exceeds most of the criticisms made on the habits of the poor by the well-housed, well-warmed, and well-fed. --Herman Melville

      by ZedMont on Fri Apr 05, 2013 at 09:39:46 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  WFT??? Pretty lame deflection, Tom. (3+ / 0-)

      Adequate health care should be a LEGAL RIGHT in the U.S without begging or bankruptcy. Until it is, we should not dare call our society civilized.

      by Love Me Slender on Fri Apr 05, 2013 at 09:46:50 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  You know it matters (34+ / 0-)

      Obama is President, he either signs it or he doesn't.  I hear that all the flunking time.  The Repubs can deflect deflect deflect and get away with it because they are political shit talkers (until the moment arrives and they take our whole military to Iraq).  They've talked so much shit for so many years though the whole country was in shock, and Iraq is practically forgotten if you aren't military or Iraqi so it's back to business as usual again.  They always get away with being puffed up smack talkers, it is just about socially expected of them at this point.

      And now Obama officially proposed it.  If he gets a deal based on that the Republicans will not only make him wear that diamond choker, he'll be buried in it!  That will end up being his legacy with his base too.  And NOBODY will give him credit for bin Laden, not lefties (because he was irrelevant) and not righties (the god damned United States military got bin Laden and Obama tried to steal their glory).  He'll be the guy who let Wall Street off and broke Grandma down even further, because those decisions have long term consequences and hardships for basic Americans.

    •  Imagine this (7+ / 0-)

      "In his first term, President Barack Obama came after Medicare.  Now, in his second term, he has it in for Social Security.  Unlike President Obama and the Democrats, I'll defend the promises we've made to our seniors."  ~Republican ad that will definitely happen

    •  Can't get exact figures on google, (5+ / 0-)

      but putting together 20M seniors, 75% who voted, 40% who voted Democratic....

      you get six million voters. (Of course, it's insane that we don't get 80% of the senior vote since Repubs want to kill SS & Medicare entirely. Not sure how we got there.)

      Add in the disabled, the Vets... what, 8, 10 million Dem votes?

      How many can we afford to lose?

      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 Apr 05, 2013 at 11:37:21 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  Well, if "on the whole" (7+ / 0-)

      you mean this.

      Senior citizens, who swung to the Democrats during the Medicare and Social Security fights of the 1990s, have swerved to Republicans. Close to six in 10 seniors backed Republican presidential candidate Mitt Romney, according to exit polls Tuesday, up from the 51% of the group siding with Sen. John McCain in 2008.
      Which tells us that if somehow, Republicans could be known as the ones trying to cut SS and Medicare, we might get a good number of them back.  As it stands, we have 40% of them...which is MUCH better than the 15% we'll get in our new role as the Senior Citizen Austerity Party.
    •  What America said Nov. 6, 2012 (0+ / 0-)

      Given the choice of two flawed candidates, America chose the guy who they trusted to have their best interest at heart.

      That said, I believe most Americans have accepted the orthodoxy that so called 'entitlements' need to be reformed. Most folks understand the idea that the boomers are the deer in the anaconda and that to maintain the same level of benefits threatens the SS and Medicare. It may not be entirely factual, but they accept this. Seniors who already collect don't want anyone giving them a cut, but seem perfectly comfortable with the idea of their grandchildren receiving less. Young people appear resigned that SS and Medicare will not exist in their current form once they become eligible. And the rest of us--the squeeze generation--are just hoping that the fight will go on long enough for us to qualify under the old system.

       I, for one, am puzzled as to why the maximum income that FICA is applied isn't uncapped. I certainly don't understand chained CPI although I know that over the course of time it will mean a decrease in expected monetary benefits.

      In the end, like Josh Marshall has opined, this is probably Obama's big gamble.

      If Congress continues to behave the way they have, they will reject Obama's proposal. And Obama will veto a stand alone chained CPI. Thus, going all in in 2014 makes sense. Go for the Congress you need to get things done.

      Keep fightin' for freedom and justice, beloveds, but don't you forget to have fun doin' it. Lord, let your laughter ring forth. Be outrageous, ridicule the fraidy-cats, rejoice in all the oddities that freedom can produce.---Molly Ivins

      by never forget 2000 on Fri Apr 05, 2013 at 05:38:33 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  Obama just drowned entire effort (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      marty marty, Larsstephens

      With a bucket of cold water.  Chained CPI is the stupidest idea I heard to date.

      "The real wealth of a nation consists of the contributions of its people and nature." -- Rianne Eisler

      by noofsh on Fri Apr 05, 2013 at 07:30:13 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site