Skip to main content

View Diary: AFL-CIO policy director: 'No cover' for politicians on Social Security, Medicare, or Medicaid cuts (162 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  So you are staking out the left's version (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Matt Z

    of the Tea Party position and that's perfectly fine.  But most of America disagrees with the absolutist position that the gap must be closed 100 percent with tax increases or 100 percent with benefit cuts.   We understand that this will have to be negotiated and that your position and the Tea Party's position will be jettisoned at the beginning.  Shoot, people with those positions shouldn't even be allowed into the room to negotiate because they bring very little but ideology to the table and are not going to engage in a constructive dialogue to solve the issue at hand.

    We cannot solve our problems with the same thinking we used when we created them. Albert Einstein

    by theotherside on Fri Oct 18, 2013 at 09:31:29 AM PDT

    [ Parent ]

    •  The most despicable false equivalency (5+ / 0-)

      by one of "my own".

      How nice:

      So you are staking out the left's version of the Tea Party position
      Bullshit like that isn't going to get you very far, either.

      This all started with "what the Republicans did to language".

      by lunachickie on Fri Oct 18, 2013 at 09:38:14 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  Yeah, here we go (4+ / 0-)

        Trying to smear anyone opposed to Social Security cuts as a Tea Party radical.

        Not very original, is it?  

        "The international world is wondering what happened to America's great heart and soul." Helen Thomas

        by Betty Pinson on Fri Oct 18, 2013 at 09:58:50 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  Stupid and short-sighted (5+ / 0-)

          particularly if you witnessed yesterday's Twitter debacle with "fixthedebtqa".

          Yes, the same group of self-important assholes whose Group Leadership is praised by our Democratic President:

          You may wish to know a bit more about "Fix the Debt." As we wrote last week, it's supposedly a bipartisan pressure group, but its leadership is heavily stocked from the potentate wing of both parties -- listed as its Democratic co-founder is Erskine Bowles, a director of the investment bank Morgan Stanley.

          It's an arm of the Committee for a Responsible Budget, which is funded by the Peter G. Peterson Foundation. Peterson is an influential billionaire whose distaste for Social Security and Medicare as they exist today is a byword, as we reported last year. Michael Peterson, his son, is on Fix the Debt's steering committee.


           

          This all started with "what the Republicans did to language".

          by lunachickie on Fri Oct 18, 2013 at 10:28:30 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

        •  No, "theotherside" is a conservative Republican. (2+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          Throw The Bums Out, Betty Pinson

          He has said so, himself.  He's not a crazy Tea Bagger and sometimes has good points.  This is not one of them.

          •  Oh, well (1+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            Dallasdoc

            no wonder he wants to equate the Left fighting for the preservation of Social Security from the clutches of evil accountants with the teahag idiots on his side of the aisle.

            I'll bet he hates it when responses to him aren't spittle-flecked invectives with lots of exclamation points and 1s mixed in...

            This all started with "what the Republicans did to language".

            by lunachickie on Fri Oct 18, 2013 at 12:12:58 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

          •  You are essentially correct (4+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            Matt Z, JerryNA, MikePhoenix, Odysseus

            Although I usually say that I am "conservative" because I don't seem to have a lot in common with my conservative brethren.

            For the record:

            I support single payer.
            I support marriage equality.
            I support raising taxes.
            I support extremely strong measures to address climate change.
            I support ending the war on drugs.
            I am pro-choice (with some limits though).
            I support immigration reform.
            I support Social Security and want it to be "fair" for all generations.
            I support increasing funding for the sciences.
            I support strengthening the social safety net but I favor it being done with a basic understanding that we can all contribute something to this society (except for an extremely tiny handful that are essentially physically or mentally incapacitated or are terminal with a disease)
            And, yes, I voted straight ticket Democratic in 2012.

            So I am obviously not what most people picture when they think of a conservative, hence the quotation marks around "conservative".

            We cannot solve our problems with the same thinking we used when we created them. Albert Einstein

            by theotherside on Fri Oct 18, 2013 at 12:17:35 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

      •  It's not a false equivalency (3+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        Matt Z, coffeetalk, JerryNA

        What is the Tea Bagger position on the debt/deficit?  We should reduce the deficit, balance the budget and we shouldn't increase taxes to do so.  Is that their position or am I mistaken?  Do they or do they not want to balance the budget through 100 percent benefit/government program cuts?

        Your position is that SS can be fully funded and your solution to do so is 100 percent through tax increases.  Now, on right wing websites Tea Partiers will get cheered on for their position on the deficit/debt.  On this site, you might get cheered on for your position on SS.  But the truth is that you and the Tea Partiers are taking maximalist positions that are widely rejected by most Americans.  

        It's your right to do so.  It may even be a decent negotiating tactic to have more on the left take this position.  But I don't see how factually pointing out that both you and the Tea Partiers take maximalist positions on important issues of our times is a false equivalency.

        Like I said it's perfectly fine that you hold your position, just as it's perfectly fine for Tea Baggers to insist all reforms muct be from cuts.  I just disagree with your position and their position and I know that most of the country disagrees as well.  It's nothing personal against you.  

        We cannot solve our problems with the same thinking we used when we created them. Albert Einstein

        by theotherside on Fri Oct 18, 2013 at 11:10:46 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  Just keep telling yourself that (5+ / 0-)
           taking maximalist positions that are widely rejected by most Americans.  

          Widely rejected, my ass.

          Raise the cap.

          Create jobs.

          are not positions rejected by the decent people of this country. They do seem to be rejected, however, by leading lawmakers on "our side". Decent people are not supporting them on their "Chained CPI" bullshit.

          Decent people understand that Social Security is derived from the sweat and toil of "middle-class" and "working-class" Americans. And decent people are not going to stand by and be maligned and ridiculed for telling these Leaders to back off their lying-ass creative accounting when it comes to those earned benefits.

           There's nothing to "take personally". This is not all about me. This is about ALL OF US. You want to cast aspersions on me despite all that? Go right ahead. Compare the left fighting for Social Security preservation to the Tea Party. Go right ahead and help this party once again snatch defeat from the jaws of victory come next November over something that should not be on the table.

           This POV is NOT some fringe minority lunatic POV except maybe to this blog, a place which in no way represents "most Americans". So those of you who think otherwise better understand, sooner rather than later, that neither I nor anyone else of this POV will be backing down.

          This all started with "what the Republicans did to language".

          by lunachickie on Fri Oct 18, 2013 at 12:08:21 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

        •  I think the difference here is (3+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          JerryNA, Odysseus, Dallasdoc

          That the left's position is a reasonable one and the tea party's is not. That's what the posters mean by a "false equivalence". I've recced your comments though for the civil discussion which I think the people who are mocking you should actually learn something from.

          Why do I have the feeling George W. Bush joined the Stonecutters, ate a mess of ribs, and used the Constitution as a napkin?

          by Matt Z on Fri Oct 18, 2013 at 03:32:21 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  I guess the way I would put it is (1+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            Matt Z

            if the choice was between solving the funding gap in SS with 100 percent tax increases or 100 percent benefit cuts, I too would support the 100 percent tax increase position.  So  from that perspective perhaps it is more reasonable.  But I would think it is likely, even here at DKOS, that most people would favor a solution that contained some combination of tax increases and some combination of benefit cuts (whether that be means testing, different inflation calculations, different bend points, raising the retirement age again, etc.).  I'm pretty sure that the independents would also heavily favor that solution and Republicans would most likely favor benefit cuts over tax increases.

            If that is how the electorate views it, then we need leaders to try and develop policies that represent that sentiment.  And the first ideas thrown out would be the solutions on the far left and the far right.

            Anyway, SS or Medicare reform seems really far off at this point and there is no benefit for this community to get mad at each other over battles that have not yet commenced.  "We" have a great opportunity to make gains in the House, if not control it out right after 2014.  The GOP civil war is still going on, the Dems are united, how do we make maximum use of these strengths to win over the moderates and turn out "our" base in the elections a year from now?

            We cannot solve our problems with the same thinking we used when we created them. Albert Einstein

            by theotherside on Fri Oct 18, 2013 at 04:56:48 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

  • Recommended (153)
  • Community (73)
  • 2016 (52)
  • Elections (50)
  • Bernie Sanders (45)
  • Environment (38)
  • Climate Change (37)
  • Culture (36)
  • Hillary Clinton (34)
  • Republicans (33)
  • Science (31)
  • Education (30)
  • Media (30)
  • Civil Rights (29)
  • Barack Obama (28)
  • Law (24)
  • Labor (22)
  • Trans-Pacific Partnership (22)
  • Economy (21)
  • Congress (21)
  • Click here for the mobile view of the site