Skip to main content

Given that Mitt Romney has won the election it is only the most pragmatic view that we reaccessed progressive policies!

We know that tax cuts for the rich create prosperity for all!  Finally that zombie lie that they increase the deficit and have no real impaction except to be a drag on the economy can die!  

We can finally acknowledge that that those deep thinkers at the Washington Times were right when they called Social Security a Ponzi scheme.

We can move past partisan divides and understand that Alan Simpson was right when he said Social Security Is Like a "Milk Cow with 310 Million Tits!" Those greedy seniors! We have to accept that we were wrong to think that people deserve those earned lifetime benefits they worked for. President Obama is right. He understands that Social Security contributes to the deficit and people should be forced between a healthy diet and fast food.

Finally we can say that both the war in Afghanistan & Iraq were worth fighting and that we found WMD's thanks to the visionary leadership of Donald Rumsfeld. We have to accept that because those people are brown - and they live someplace over there - that all they are is collateral damages. We have to accept that drones are the future and that war is hell.

We also must accept finally that public schools have failed. They were wrong from the start and wrong now. Only private charter schools can successfully teacher our future generations how to cope with all the equality they will experience in the job markets. Public workers are not the answer and it is high time we realized that. For-profit schools are the future & we have to ensure that only the lucky few in our society - the job creators children have the opportunity to succeed.

We were wrong to think that Americans should have a living wage and that employers should offer health insurance at a reasonable price to its workers!  It is time to give up on single payer. It is a pipe dream. Even when we controlled both chambers of congress and had a congressman with guts willing to introduce the legislation we had speaker Nancy saying No! No! No! We have to accept that Medicare and Medicaid are programs for the moocher class! Not for hard working real American(TM) tax payers!

Time and time again we have victimized Walmart and the Walden family. They only have more wealth then the bottom 40% of the US population or about 100 million families. We were wrong to ask these people to pay more and this election proves it!  Income inequality is not the problem in the United States!

It is our historically high tax rate that has effectively killed businesses. Thank goodness Romney won. We all know that President Obama has raised taxes countless times and as progressives we have to accept that we are just paying too much in taxes.

Everything we have tried has failed. Elections have consequences. Republicans have won and we have to rethink and accept that progressives lost.

This chained CPI to social security is not a cut - it is a bonus - and the sooner we get behind the president on this - the sooner he can tackle climate change by lifting caps on carbon - the sooner he can raise the medicare eligibility age to 70 - the sooner we can expand Guantanamo bay - the sooner we can all get along.

Mitt Romney won the election. I'm just being pragmatic.

EMAIL TO A FRIEND X
Your Email has been sent.
You must add at least one tag to this diary before publishing it.

Add keywords that describe this diary. Separate multiple keywords with commas.
Tagging tips - Search For Tags - Browse For Tags

?

More Tagging tips:

A tag is a way to search for this diary. If someone is searching for "Barack Obama," is this a diary they'd be trying to find?

Use a person's full name, without any title. Senator Obama may become President Obama, and Michelle Obama might run for office.

If your diary covers an election or elected official, use election tags, which are generally the state abbreviation followed by the office. CA-01 is the first district House seat. CA-Sen covers both senate races. NY-GOV covers the New York governor's race.

Tags do not compound: that is, "education reform" is a completely different tag from "education". A tag like "reform" alone is probably not meaningful.

Consider if one or more of these tags fits your diary: Civil Rights, Community, Congress, Culture, Economy, Education, Elections, Energy, Environment, Health Care, International, Labor, Law, Media, Meta, National Security, Science, Transportation, or White House. If your diary is specific to a state, consider adding the state (California, Texas, etc). Keep in mind, though, that there are many wonderful and important diaries that don't fit in any of these tags. Don't worry if yours doesn't.

You can add a private note to this diary when hotlisting it:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from your hotlist?
Are you sure you want to remove your recommendation? You can only recommend a diary once, so you will not be able to re-recommend it afterwards.
Rescue this diary, and add a note:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from Rescue?
Choose where to republish this diary. The diary will be added to the queue for that group. Publish it from the queue to make it appear.

You must be a member of a group to use this feature.

Add a quick update to your diary without changing the diary itself:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary?
(The diary will be removed from the site and returned to your drafts for further editing.)
(The diary will be removed.)
Are you sure you want to save these changes to the published diary?

Comment Preferences

  •  I admire you restraint (8+ / 0-)

    by not mentioning the two biggies: energy & education.

  •  Umm (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    MinistryOfTruth, JeffW

    The Mayans knew about Chained CPI!!!!

    by GoGoGoEverton on Thu Dec 20, 2012 at 11:29:39 AM PST

  •  Mitt who™? n/t (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Tool, Brown Thrasher

    Float like a manhole cover, sting like a sash weight! Clean Coal Is A Clinker!

    by JeffW on Thu Dec 20, 2012 at 11:34:25 AM PST

  •  Yeah, yeah, yeah (0+ / 0-)

    Thats all wishful thinking....and more hand wringing.  Please think about what has ACTUALLY happened instead of what most people FEAR happening.

    FACT: Is SS Chained CPI technically on the table
    FACT: The GOP has not agreed to any deals Obama has put forth over the last four years
    FACT: He knows no matter what he puts on the table, the GOP will NEVER agree to it
    FACT: Obama is smarter than a good majority of people
    FACT: All of this hand-wringing, will solve NOTHING

  •  The good news is, since we lost (8+ / 0-)

    Nancy Pelosi and the other Dem leaders are steadfast in their fervent opposition to Romney's proposed cuts to the safety net.

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

    by PhilJD on Thu Dec 20, 2012 at 11:45:22 AM PST

  •  We must accept that "progressives" election (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Terrapin, doroma

    strategy of constantly demanding that we punish Democrats for not delivering the impossible immediately has failed, sure.

    Progressives have better ideas, but worse attitudes and strategy than their opposition. And until that's reversed, progressive ideas will continue to lose, not gain, ground.

    "The future of man is not one billion of us fighting over limited resources on a soon-to-be dead planet. . .I won't go back into the cave for anyone."

    by Whimsical on Thu Dec 20, 2012 at 11:46:14 AM PST

    •  Who said I was (9+ / 0-)

      asking for the impossible immediately? Mitt Romney won the election! It was his right to offer up Social Security on the chopping block with the house before the house offered any deal.

      non-snark - Expecting a sitting democratic president who has just won reelection with a huge mandate to not offer up social security as a bargaining chip before the other side has offered anything is not "Wanting a Pony"

      Before the 2010 elections we had a month to pass a democratic controlled budget resolution for the next year. Did we do that? No - the President said we have to respect the consequences of the American people and let the Republicans have a turn at offering a budget.

      How did that work out for us btw?

      We do not have worse attitudes. We have feckless capitulating leaders who look for every turn to bulk up on their insider-beltway-Serious-Person credentials while selling out the promises of the people who elected them to govern - you know - as liberals?

      When the other side is so devoid of any policy prescription that does not include cuts to the social safety net - the only acceptable response is derision - mocking - and marginalizing.

      Instead we have Obama throwing the GOP a lifeline.  

    •  Just make sure and blame progressives (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Tool, JesseCW

      and all this bad will go away

      I'm sure the American people will blame progressives when the Social Security cuts go through. Not the Democratic party.

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

      by SouthernLiberalinMD on Thu Dec 20, 2012 at 01:17:15 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

    •  Asking that Democrats not cut Social Security (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      triv33, Tool

      is "asking for the impossible".

      Yeah.

      How's that great attitude working for you?  Is it getting the policies you support passed?

      "Furthermore, if you think this would be the very very last cut ever if we let it happen, you are a very confused little rabbit." cai

      by JesseCW on Thu Dec 20, 2012 at 02:33:49 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  No. Because "progressives" (0+ / 0-)

        are causing perfectly acceptable Democrats to lose elections.

        And they were dumb enough to do so in a distrcit re-drawing year, which means the House is going to be Republican till at least 2020.

        I could get the policies I support passed, but I understand that in large part thanks to "progressives" that's going to take at least a generation, now.

        "The future of man is not one billion of us fighting over limited resources on a soon-to-be dead planet. . .I won't go back into the cave for anyone."

        by Whimsical on Thu Dec 20, 2012 at 03:05:48 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  Really? (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          JesseCW

          That is a bullshit statement.

          Progressives are not causing democrats to lose elections.

          In the 2010 election how many blue dog centrist sell out dems lost their seats compared to Progressive populist touting democrats?

          Answer that please and maybe we can have a discussion

          •  Thank you for proving my point (0+ / 0-)

            EVERY last "Blue Dog" that voted for the Health Care bill couldve and shouldve won their seat overwhelmingly.

            But no, "progressives" called for punishing them because they couldn't deliver single payer (never mind that single payer is impossible right now), and the non stop bashing ensured they lost their seats instead, leading directly to the loss of the House, two the past two years of Hell and to where we are now.

            All because "progressives" wanted to punish the Democrats for not delivering the impossible, immediately; continuing the same strategy that has failed so miserably for 40+ years.

            There will be NO progress on progressive goals until that strategy is consigned to the ash heap of history for the failed piece of junk it is.

            "The future of man is not one billion of us fighting over limited resources on a soon-to-be dead planet. . .I won't go back into the cave for anyone."

            by Whimsical on Fri Dec 21, 2012 at 04:40:37 AM PST

            [ Parent ]

        •  When Politicians elected on Left Wing platforms (0+ / 0-)

          enact right wing policies, they can expect to lose elections.

          That's how this representative democracy thing works.

          I do notice that your amazingly positive attitude didn't change that.

          "Furthermore, if you think this would be the very very last cut ever if we let it happen, you are a very confused little rabbit." cai

          by JesseCW on Thu Dec 20, 2012 at 04:25:06 PM PST

          [ Parent ]

          •  "Progressives" have no clue how things (0+ / 0-)

            ACTUALLY work; preferring to embrace the delusion that things work the way "progressives" think they SHOULD work.

            That's a large part of the reason we're in the mess we're in.

            "The future of man is not one billion of us fighting over limited resources on a soon-to-be dead planet. . .I won't go back into the cave for anyone."

            by Whimsical on Fri Dec 21, 2012 at 04:41:50 AM PST

            [ Parent ]

  •  You have feckless capitiulaiting leaders (0+ / 0-)

    BECAUSE of your attitude problem.

    Since the early 70's when Ted Kennedy rejected Nixon's health care offer because it wasn't everything he wanted, progressives have been laboring under the missaprehension that if they get rid of Democrats who dont give them everything they want right now, progress would be made on progressive goals.  That strategy has completly failed, is failing, and will always fail.  All it does is marginalize your voices.

    2010 is a perfect example- the nonstop Obama bashing from the far left is a direct cause of the "enthusiam gap" that cost us so dearly.

    You do have worse attitudes- "progressives" are rapidly becoming the equal of the tea party.  And just like the tea party, you're on your way to becoming a complete non-factor in politics.

    Unless and until that changes, and you start to reward Democrats for what small steps left they feasibly can make rather than calling for their punishment every time they don't go left enough to suit you- you're gonna end up yelling into the wind and continuing to wonder why you're being ignored.

    We do not have worse attitudes. We have feckless capitulating leaders who look for every turn to bulk up on their insider-beltway-Serious-Person credentials while selling out the promises of the people who elected them to govern - you know - as liberals?
    Perfect example-Obama was elected to gover then entire country, period. He was NOT elected to govern as a "liberal", because that disenfranchises everybody who isn't liberal.  Now, if you give him cover, he may be able to move a little to the left- calling for his head over a move that has a 50% 50% chance of being his way of boxing the GOP into a trap is just going to convince him youre unserious and not worth paying attention to.

    And if you punish Democrats again for not being left enough, all you'll do is make them go further right, just like you've been doing for 40 years.  Arent they right enough for you yet?

    "The future of man is not one billion of us fighting over limited resources on a soon-to-be dead planet. . .I won't go back into the cave for anyone."

    by Whimsical on Thu Dec 20, 2012 at 12:29:18 PM PST

    •  Everything that you just (3+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      aliasalias, JesseCW, triv33

      wrote above this proves my point. You're the problem. Third way pragmatic centralism does not inspire people.

      Why is it that Obama only regained an approval rating above 50 percent after his second debate performance? Oh that's right! It is because he doubled down on agreeing with Mitt Romney instead of fighting for what people wanted him to fight for.

      Heck - I voted in 2010 & phone banked for the DNC trying to convince people to vote and donate. I kept hearing - How dare he not go for a public option if we can't have Medicare for all - Why won't he raise taxes? Why did the banks get bailed out and not home owners? Why have we not drawn down the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan?

      Obama caused the enthusiasm gap - So did congressional and Senate Democrats. Blaming the voters for not turning out when they are offered nothing to vote for is a Very Serious Person argument.

      People like leaders who fight for something. Fact is Obama had a huge mandate after the 2008 election and chose not to use it. It is people like you who blame me, and others for not acting all loving and hopeful when fed a shit sandwich of center right policies that are the problem.

      •  And you wonder why there's no progress (0+ / 0-)

        on the goals you claim to want. Re-read your post and then address your attitude problem.

        Heck - I voted in 2010 & phone banked for the DNC trying to convince people to vote and donate. I kept hearing - How dare he not go for a public option if we can't have Medicare for all - Why won't he raise taxes? Why did the banks get bailed out and not home owners? Why have we not drawn down the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan?
        I phone banked too, and here's what I heard- "Why should I bother to vote? Even the Democrats own people say they're worse then the Republicans- what's the point?"  And once I debunked the BS bashing that the far left was manufacturing, damn near every one of those voters was a persuadable Democatic vote.
        Fact is Obama had a huge mandate after the 2008 election and chose not to use it.
        Absolute nonsense.  The 2008 election was about hatred of Bush and Republicans, most decidely NOT a mandate for progressive policies.  Embracing this delusion has hurt progressive causes worse than ANYTHING Obama and the democrats have done.

        You want change? Start with your attitude. You want change? Look in the mirror.  Or keep wondering why you're being ignored and why the Democratic party- and by extension the country- keeps going right (here's a hint- you're PUSHING THEM)

        You've demonstrated to me that you're not serious about making progress and not worth paying attention to.  Multiply that by 1000X and that's what you've done to the Democratic party.

        You can face that fact and adjust your tactics accordingly and get some progress, or keep going the way you're going and get no progress and collapse, and right wing rule.

        Your call.

        "The future of man is not one billion of us fighting over limited resources on a soon-to-be dead planet. . .I won't go back into the cave for anyone."

        by Whimsical on Thu Dec 20, 2012 at 01:11:16 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  How many elections have (5+ / 0-)

          resulted in the president's party winning all both chambers of congress with solid majorities?

          2006 was about hatred of Bush and republicans. 2008 - was about hope & change & the soul of the democratic party.

          I must not be serious is a cop out argument. If no deal is reached I'll lose my unemployment benefits which I've only worked for 7 years to obtain. I've got "skin in the game." and am directly effected by the consequences of this deal.

          I'm willing to trade my financial lifeline and go over the cliff if President Obama continues with this soft negotiation.

          You've proven to me - that you're one of those people who want compromise for the sake of compromise. One will betray core democratic principles like "Never cutting social security" in return for a small marginal tax increase that can be reversed in two years by another congress.

          I've gone down to Washington 6 times in the last year and had meetings with congressional democrats including the head of the Progressive Caucus. Unless they were just paying me lip service they seem to be very much on the side of resisting third way conventional DLC style politics.

          Did you even read my diary? There is nothing in it that any progressive or democrat should be against.

          •  Progressivism doesn't work like it used to, (1+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            Tool

            it ended 30 years ago with the dismantling of the unions and the defeat of organizations to the left of the Democrats; or within the Dems like Minnesota's DFL. Read TR, progressivism was a compromise between Debs and the robber barons. Today it so happens that progressive programs don't cost much, so grassroots lobbying can work in individual cases. But money in politics generally vetoes progressivism. Without some loud socialist and populist alternatives, people going to jail, there is ordinarily no bargaining position for the progressive middleman. Rather, the robber barons own the tea party and the media, giving them the advantage.

          •  CLAP HARDER MOTHERFUCKER!!! (1+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            Tool

            Tinkerbell murdering assholes....I fucking swear.

            Why do you fucking progressives have to be so goddamned negative?!?!? It just fucking frustrates the shit out of me@!

            If you'd pull your fucking head out of your ass and beam some fucking Love Energy at the White House with some serious fucking positive intent we wouldn't be in this fucking mess!

            "Furthermore, if you think this would be the very very last cut ever if we let it happen, you are a very confused little rabbit." cai

            by JesseCW on Thu Dec 20, 2012 at 02:36:31 PM PST

            [ Parent ]

          •  There is only one thing Im against in your diary. (0+ / 0-)

            But you're letting the stars in your eyes blind you to the way things actually work, and as a result aren't making any progress.

            "Never cutting social security"
            This is as lame and useless a position as "Never ever raise taxes".  Its what kids say on the playground, not adults trying to work out a compromise that's best for the nation.

            Reality is, taxes ARE going to have to be raised AND Social Security and other entitlements ARE going to have to be cut.  Refusing to accept this takes you out of the picture altogether, when you should be negoitating for the best possible outcome of cuts and raising taxes.

            Just like the teabaggers are going to be ignored on their calls for "No new taxes ever", you're going to be ignored when you say "No cuts ever".  

            If you really want to be ignored in all the discussions, I can't stop you. But I promise you, you'll get a worse outcome that way then you would by accepting reality as a starting point and trying to bargain from there.

            Look, I'm all for going over the fiscal cliff- but I understand that the Republicans aren't going to give an inch, and we WILL enter another prolonged recession that they will spend every moment blaming Obama and the Democrats for up until the 2014 midterms, when hopefully the "progressives" will get a clue and not impede efforts to take the House back- the way their bashing cost us the House in 2010.

            I also understand that Obama might want to avoid hurting all those people that a recession would hurt. (I say might, because I am not entirely convinced that his offer to the GOP is not a clever trap); because he has to do what is best for everyone.

            So when my CPA father (who is in a nursing home paid for by Social Security and Medicaid and is ALL FOR this deal) assures me that itll take decades before CPI becomes truly onerous; that in effect Obama is offering up future spending cuts - that can be easily reversed by a future Congress in return for very real rate increases as well as a ton of other stuff we need RIGHT NOW; I'm going to give that far more weight then someone with their fingers in their ears yelling childishly "NO! NO CUTS! NEVER EVER EVER EVER!"

            Mind you, reversing those cuts would require "progressives" to get a clue, which given your responses does seem unlikely to happen.  But given that I've been entirely right about politics since 2000 or so, I maintain my hope they'll take their heads out of wherever they've stuck them and listen, some day.

            2006 was about hatred of Bush and republicans. 2008 - was about hope & change & the soul of the democratic party.
            Utter nonsense. 2006 was a typical midterm election.  2008 was the voters chance to repudiate Bush and that's why they came out in droves. It was NOT a mandate and it certainly wasn't about the "soul of the Democratic party"

            Ridiculous, overheated rhetoric like that tells me that you're indulging in another one of "progressives" favorite delusions- that things work the way "progressives" think they SHOULD work instead of the way they ACTUALLY work.

            You'll get nowhere as long as you cling to your delusions.  Accept reality as your starting point, and don't immediately call for the heads of Democrats when they aren't as left as you would like- and you'll be amazed at what gets accomplished with a little patience and a little frustration tolerance.

            I've gone down to Washington 6 times in the last year and had meetings with congressional democrats including the head of the Progressive Caucus. Unless they were just paying me lip service they seem to be very much on the side of resisting third way conventional DLC style politics.
            The Progressive Caucus doesn't have the muscle to get anything done, and trust me when I say this, when a deal that actually makes progress comes on the table, they will fall in line, because unlike the "progressives" in the voting public at large, they are actually interested in progress.

            Of course, it's very possible they are paying you "lip service".  Lord knows, given both the history of "progressives" abandoning Democrats for not delivering the impossible immediatley over the last 40 years and your unwillingness to act like an adult in negotiations, I'd say whatever was necessary to get you out of my office as fast as possible.

            "The future of man is not one billion of us fighting over limited resources on a soon-to-be dead planet. . .I won't go back into the cave for anyone."

            by Whimsical on Thu Dec 20, 2012 at 03:03:26 PM PST

            [ Parent ]

        •  You have some points but they are not (0+ / 0-)

          all what you think they are. If we had problems in 2010, think about the problems we will have in 2014 if Obama lays down on his promises to protect the safety nets. True, I wasn't much interested in voting for him this time, but I haven't brought myself to Chris Hedges pov where we are nutso to try to participate in the electoral system.  And I knew Romney and Todd Akin were the pits. But that is still voting against something not FOR something. In 2008 we all voted FOR the promise that Barack Obama talked about.

          American Television is a vast sea of stupid. -xxdr zombiexx

          by glitterscale on Thu Dec 20, 2012 at 02:24:40 PM PST

          [ Parent ]

          •  We have problems of communication. (0+ / 0-)

            In large part caused by "progressives" yes.  That's why Im trying to get them to change their tactics NOW, before it's too late.

            "The future of man is not one billion of us fighting over limited resources on a soon-to-be dead planet. . .I won't go back into the cave for anyone."

            by Whimsical on Thu Dec 20, 2012 at 03:09:26 PM PST

            [ Parent ]

            •  Umm (1+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              glitterscale

              I'll say this Whimsical.

              There is a point you are missing and it speaks to your nature.

              Reality is, taxes ARE going to have to be raised AND Social Security and other entitlements ARE going to have to be cut.  Refusing to accept this takes you out of the picture altogether, when you should be negoitating for the best possible outcome of cuts and raising taxes.
              I am aghast that Social Security should have
              any place in these talks. It has a place in these talks because there are still Republicans around that are carrying on a grudge they've held since 1936. They just don't like Social Security. Or any of it.

              Frankly, it's the tax part of this that is really whacked. We can afford all of this if we raised the ceiling on FICA. It's a really quick fix, but unfortunately, unpopular amongst millionaires. Which is why we're having this conversation in the first place.

              Why is the conversation about how we need to "cut social security".

              Where in the country in the conversation about expanding it? All we would need to do is raise the FICA cap. Problem solved.

              No catfood.

              •  It is amazing to me how easy this could be (0+ / 0-)

                once one decides to take responsibility. For instance, during the wrap up of WWII, taxes were very high so as to pay for the wars, pay for the clean up after the wars and pay for the responsibilities of bringing the troops home and getting them prepared to take on civilian responsibility. But with two wars, the Bushco made TAX CUTS! They took on the prescription thing which was a big chunk and benefited pharma and insurance companies as well as the retirees. BUT pharma and the insurance companies didn't have to negotiate the prices. So all in all we have been looking at an era in which the people who have benefited by these policies i.e. the MIC, big insurance companies, big oil, Pharma haven't had to put anything into the game. AND THEN WE HAD THE BANKSTERS who took our taxpayer monies and gave themselves bonuses and never took a bit of responsibility.

                When does this end?

                American Television is a vast sea of stupid. -xxdr zombiexx

                by glitterscale on Thu Dec 20, 2012 at 05:09:46 PM PST

                [ Parent ]

                •  This ends when "progressives" (0+ / 0-)

                  stop using an electoral strategy that puts Republicans in power.

                  "The future of man is not one billion of us fighting over limited resources on a soon-to-be dead planet. . .I won't go back into the cave for anyone."

                  by Whimsical on Fri Dec 21, 2012 at 04:49:25 AM PST

                  [ Parent ]

              •  Uh, because this is not a dictatorship? (0+ / 0-)

                Look, I'd love it if the Democrats were in charge in such numbers that we could ignore the Republicans entirely (which would require "progressives" to get some patience, frustration tolerance, and a basic grasp of electoral strategy -so odds are, it's never going to happen).

                But in the real world, Republicans have the power to block whatever we do (in large part thanks to "progressives" failed election strategy, but I repeat myself).

                Which means that in order to get something accomplished, we're going to have to give a little, and they're going to have to give a little. That's the way it WORKS.

                Now "progressives" on one side and The Tea Party on the other are both being childish and screaming "No! No Ever! NEVER EVER EVER EVER!"

                That accomplishes NOTHING, and is a recipe for gridlock and doom for the country.

                I EXPECT that from the right.  The left used to be better than that.

                "The future of man is not one billion of us fighting over limited resources on a soon-to-be dead planet. . .I won't go back into the cave for anyone."

                by Whimsical on Fri Dec 21, 2012 at 04:48:46 AM PST

                [ Parent ]

  •  From the front page: (0+ / 0-)
    "He needs to recognize what everyone else recognizes, which is that he made an overly generous offer to Boehner, and Boehner threw it back at him," Damon Silvers, the policy director for the AFL-CIO, told me this afternoon. "The appropriate response is to tell Boehner the offer is no longer valid." [...]

    "We want the president to come forward with an offer that reflects the reason why he won," Silvers said. "We want the president to fight for two things: One is an end to the Bush tax cuts for the top two percent, and the other is to protect Social Security, Medicare, and Medicaid." Silvers confirmed that the AFL-CIO wants Obama to pull back on the $400,000 threshold and Chained CPI offers.

    I'm sure the policy director for the AFL-CIO is just dreaming a pie in the sky dream and is gonna lose the election for democrats by telling Obama to act like a damned democrat.

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site