Skip to main content

View Diary: Toomey says Republicans opposed expanding background checks because they don't like President Obama (70 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  ahhhh. I see. so the way to avoid cutting SS is to (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    DSPS owl

    propose yourself to cut SS. That way the other side won't WANT to cut SS anymore. Or something.

    Gee, it's a good thing I don't play 12-dimensional chess, huh.

    (sigh)

    •  A false choice, which seems typical of a certain (0+ / 0-)

      POV.

      The c-CPi was offered as part of the overall deal he proposed.  It was offered specifically bc Thugs kept saying in media that entitelment 'reform' by which they meant cuts (how else does one consture 'spend less on'?) was the minimun buy-in to avoid their b-monthly f--kjob to the economy and lock in higher revenues as % of GDP (absolutely essential if we hope to spend anything near what progressives want) and it was in preference to other, worse, deeper cuts Thugs want.  Added to that was the belief that long-term obligations (contingent debt iow) must be reduced and the least bad way to do it is smaller cuts to the growth of same now.

      Finally, of course, since c-CPi cuts occur cumulatively and do not become significant until years down the road, this is not 'austerity'.  Austerity is deep cuts in present and next years budget.  c-CPi may be stupid and bad policy and politics, but it is not austerity.  Indeed, bc it seeks to avoid deep cuts now by smaller cuts over time, it is just the opposite.

      There are many grounds to attack the c-CPi proposal, but 'austerity' is not one.  All I am asking is for the argument to be honest and to stop doing Thugs work for them in the guise of 'progressive' argument.  Doesn't seem much to ask to me.

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site