Skip to main content

President Obama delivers his 2011 State of the Union address
President Obama is scheduled to official unveil his budget proposal for fiscal year 2014 with a statement form the Rose Garden at 11:00 AM ET. You can watch it here and we'll post live updates throughout.

As you probably already know, compared to previous years, the biggest new element of Obama's budget is that it would cut Social Security benefits through chained CPI. Somewhat bizarrely, the White House is saying the proposal is actually a Republican idea and that the president is just including it as a sign of good faith for ongoing fiscal negotiations. Republicans, however, didn't propose the cut in their budget and have already rejected the president's overall plan.

At the summary level, the president's budget is a dollar-for-dollar replica of his proposal earlier this year to replace the sequester. It even includes the same Social Security cut. So what's new here isn't the proposal, but the fact that it is being formally included in the budget. Republicans, obviously, repeatedly rejected the plan in its former life.

The plan calls for a total of $1.8 trillion in deficit reduction compared to the sequester's $1.2 trillion in deficit reductions. It includes $100 billion in defense spending cuts and $580 billion in revenue increases. It also includes $50 billion in stimulus spending and would fund pre-K education for lower- and middle-income families, paid for by raising tobacco taxes.

8:00 AM PT: President Obama takes the podium.

8:00 AM PT: By the way, House Speaker John Boehner and Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell have already "prejected" the president's plan earlier this morning.

8:01 AM PT: Deficits are already dropping, says the president, but "we can do more." Obama then pivots to criticizing the negative impacts of the sequester spending cuts. He wants "smarter" cuts instead.

8:02 AM PT: "We can grow our economy and shrink our deficits ... nothing shrinks deficits faster than a growing economy." He's right, but the budget doesn't fully reflect that sentiment.

8:04 AM PT: The president pivots from his comments on deficits to talking about supporting investments in education, from pre-K to high school to college.

8:05 AM PT: Calls out members of Congress who voted for spending cuts and are now complaining about them. "My budget replaces these cuts with smarter ones."

8:07 AM PT: "Our deficits are already falling. Over the past two years I've signed legislation that will reduce our deficits by $2.5 trillion, more than two-thirds through spending cuts. [...] My budgets will reduce deficits by nearly another $2 trillion. [...] It does so in a balanced and responsible way."

8:08 AM PT: "If we want to keep Medicare working as well as it has, if we want to keep the ironclad guarantee, then we need to make some changes [...] The reforms I'm suggesting will strengthen Medicare ... by reducing the cost of health care, not by shifting costs to seniors or their families."

8:10 AM PT: "My budget does also contain the compromise I offered to Boehner" (aka Chained CPI). The president basically tries to disclaim ownership of the proposal, saying it's a Republican idea, but that he's willing to accept it as part of a comprehensive deal, as long as there are "protections" for lower-income seniors. Definitely seemed defensive on that subject.

8:13 AM PT: President Obama has concluded his remarks—nothing we didn't already know, but he did seem defensive on Social Security, which he talked about without explicitly calling it Social Security. He's got a nearly impossible task, trying to explain why he's proposing something that he says he doesn't really want to support but is nonetheless willing to accept.

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

  •  Re: whether or not it's a "Republican idea": (47+ / 0-)

    there are two things going on there.

    One is that it sure is a Republican idea to cut benefits and social programs.  Reminding people that this is what Republicans have insisted on all along is not a bad thing.

    Another, separate issue, is the President's infuriating and bizarre insistence on keeping chained CPI on the table and offering it to Republicans repeatedly within some kind of "good faith" framework.  Bizarre that a Democrat would do this; bizarre that the man would accord to such a treacherous the mantle of "good faith" with regard to their dealings with him and their policies for the American people.  

    That's one more thing to add to my long list of small problems. --my son, age 10

    by concernedamerican on Wed Apr 10, 2013 at 08:00:16 AM PDT

    •  Jedi Mind Trick. I was Never Tricked Into Thinking (4+ / 0-)

      Obama was a better Democrat but many people were.

      "The problem with posting quotes off the Internet is you never know if they're genuine."--Gen. George Washington at the Battle of Gettysburg, February 30, 1908

      by Aspe4 on Wed Apr 10, 2013 at 08:16:46 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  that's "jedi mind meld," remember? (3+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        Aspe4, CanyonWren, JesseCW

        If the plutocrats begin the program, we will end it. -- Eugene Debs.

        by livjack on Wed Apr 10, 2013 at 08:22:03 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  Obama Did Some Nice Triangulation (0+ / 0-)

          Combining elements of Star Trek and Star Wars. That's the only triangulating he should be doing though!

          "The problem with posting quotes off the Internet is you never know if they're genuine."--Gen. George Washington at the Battle of Gettysburg, February 30, 1908

          by Aspe4 on Wed Apr 10, 2013 at 08:38:51 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

      •  When the Sith use it, I think it's called... (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        TheUnknown285, Aspe4

        Mind Domination, or...

        Qâzoi Kyantuska (translated as Suppress Thought in Basic) was a Sith magical ability that made the wielder effectively able to control and influence the minds of anyone they chose.

        Employers of Qâzoi Kyantuska were capable of using the Force to telepathically dominate a single mind, or a multitude of individuals simultaneously. There didn't appear to be any incantation or gestures required, as known users were shown to have simply been in the presence of their victims. The affected were seemingly in a trance, hypnotically paralyzed and unable to control their own faculties. Should the conjurer choose, the victim could end their own life, usually against their own will. If the caster was in direct physical contact with an individual, they could tap directly into the individual's mind, and force them into whatever action they so desired.

        http://starwars.wikia.com/...

        Am I saying Obama is a Sith Lord?  Maybe not, but he's no Jedi.

        Tell me what to write. tellmewhattowrite.com 'To know what is right and to do it are two different things.' - Chushingura, a tale of The Forty-Seven Ronin

        by rbird on Wed Apr 10, 2013 at 08:24:05 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

    •  At this point... (10+ / 0-)

      I'm not even sure this is 'A Democrat'.  I think this budget would make Reagan blush.

      'Where free unions and collective bargaining are forbidden, freedom is lost' - Ronald Reagan, Communist

      by RichM on Wed Apr 10, 2013 at 08:17:50 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  I would settle for (5+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Dem Beans, stewarjt, jaf49, greenbell, DSPS owl

      Democrat without the better at this stage of the game. He is a Republican, said so himself.

  •  He also specifically kills the Jumbo IRA law (21+ / 0-)

    ie, Romney's $100million tax-free IRA account.

    That's a nice loophole to close and would be HILARIOUS to try and watch the GOP defend.

    Красота спасет мир --F. Dostoevsky

    by Wisper on Wed Apr 10, 2013 at 08:01:36 AM PDT

    •  Yeah, each part is part of a comprehenisve whole (8+ / 0-)

      I don't like the Chained-CPI aspect, but I understand the political and macroeconomic reasoning that goes into its inclusion.  (Basically, it's a way to make cuts more gradual, and phased out when the economy is likely to be experiencing stronger growth).  In dollar terms, it's also far from the "biggest new element," and any programs that rely on means testing already are excluded.  Not perfect, but also not as awful as some claim.  

      These tax loopholes to be targeted contribute to inequality and speculative bubbles; and there are specific provisions to replace the sequester and indeed to include short-term stimulative measures, a boost to the minimum wage, and a strong doubling-down on cost-savings aspects in Obamacare, which, if health care costs come down, will do more to help the elderly than Chained CPI would on average cut.  

      If I were in Congress, I'd lobby against Chained CPI, but I'd only do so by proposing alternative cuts that Republicans might adopt (for reasons of realism) or would show them to be as extreme on taxes as they are; and I wouldn't let this aspect defeat the fact that, on balance and in real dollar terms, the budget does more good than not, especially in terms of the most vulnerable populations and when compared to the sequestration baseline.

      Difficult, difficult, lemon difficult.

      by Loge on Wed Apr 10, 2013 at 08:24:24 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  I do want to see more details (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        Loge, Beetwasher

        on the infrastructure stuff.

        I think this whole budget is DOA anyway, but there are some more structured priorities here that should come into play in the "negotiations" between the House's Ryan plan and the Senate's Murray plan.

        ...if you can even use the word "negotiations" when you are talking about things that are nearly mutually exclusive.

        Красота спасет мир --F. Dostoevsky

        by Wisper on Wed Apr 10, 2013 at 08:32:59 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  In a sense, (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          yorkiedoglover

          the worst case scenario and the best case scenario (from the point of view of the hard right and left) are one and the same -- continued sequester cuts and a baseline of CR after CR, with the administration never being able to move off of that to any other legislative priorities.  This might mean, cynically, that Obama could propose the CPC budget just for the hell of it or to make that case.  But if you believe that the sequestration cuts are affirmatively damaging, the best thing to do is to what Obama did in the 2010 lame duck -- offer the Republicans just enough they can't reject it, because making a deal then was better than making a deal with the next Congress.

          How Chained-CPI fits into that is complex -- the remotely plausible tax increases are limited to the politically unpopular low hanging fruit and there has to be some sense in which the deficit comes down in the medium to long term; and as long as means-tested benefits are excluded and there are cost savings measures for health care, it's politically volatile because of the emotional reaction, but economically and politically just barely defensible (the whole budget, by contrast, looks much better).  And while the Republicans haven't proposed it, what they have proposed are entitlement cuts that are designed to fall on means-tested programs, not cuts that are, yes, cuts, and, yes, painful, but are structured to mitigate that.

          At the very least, however, criticism of the proposal should acknowledge that it's in alternative to the sequester, not a reflection of the same economic theory, except to the extent that it's the economic theory forced on the country by two consecutive House of Representative elections won by John Boehner.

          Difficult, difficult, lemon difficult.

          by Loge on Wed Apr 10, 2013 at 08:43:47 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

      •  You've bought the austerity agenda (10+ / 0-)

        Your assumption is LESS far into the future.   What this budget offers the American middle class is a declining standard of living.  The propaganda is so pervasive that some people believe that is a good thing.  

        We've had the opposite in the past.  We had a President like FDR whose vision was a better future for the middle class even in the middle of the Great Depression and as the country prepared for global war.  

        Believing that the future must be worse is a relatively new feature of the Democratic Party and many of us find this to be a fatal bug.

        •  you're overusing that word (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          GoGoGoEverton

          the current implementation of austerity is the sequester, which this is an alternative to, not a partner of.  What this budget gets is that the deficit is not a problem now, but it will be when medical costs keep rising and the economy is no longer in a liquidity trap.

          In terms of the middle class, the budget offers two steps forward and one step back.  I would tentatively support it in spite of the Chained CPI, not because of it.  (The fact you're discussing the middle class is good, though, a fair acknowledgement that the nightmare scenario of cutting the most vulnerable is specifically contradicted by the terms of the actual document.)  

          Not everyone who disagrees with you is either ideologically committed to one thing or another or else a victim of propaganda.  I think your position is theoretically reasonable, but it has to be more explicit and built around plausible alternatives.  Otherwise, it's just the inversion of Republican obstruction.  There's a case to be made from a progressive standpoint that we should rather keep the sequester cuts because of the anticipated political reaction to them and where the modified Chained CPI might fall -- it's an empirical case, not an ideological one, and it needs more than a strawman ad hominem to make it.

          Difficult, difficult, lemon difficult.

          by Loge on Wed Apr 10, 2013 at 08:50:50 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  for anyone intersted, here is a good link (3+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            nanorich, hyperstation, JesseCW

            "Mike Koszcal has efficiently pulled together all the relevant arguments in favor of the Chained-CPI --- and then very properly demolishes them one by one"

            at hullabaloo

            http://digbysblog.blogspot.com/...

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

            by greenbastard on Wed Apr 10, 2013 at 09:01:41 AM PDT

            [ Parent ]

            •  that might be relevant (0+ / 0-)

              if i were offering a defense of chained CPI on the merits, which i'm not.  I'm just not subsuming $3.7 trillion to $130 billion.  And in any event, his discussion assumes CCPI applies to every federal program, which this does not.

              And if we believe the Chained CPI rises and falls with the rest of the budget, if the response is to oppose everything, it's a vote to keep letting medical costs grow faster than inflation, and who does that effect?  What if the assumptions behind CPI-E were no longer true?  The elderly would net benefit from this entire budget, therefore, though not as much as if there were no chained CPI.

              So, let's try to improve the budget, not go all meta and blast Obama based on selective reading of a very large, complex document.

              Difficult, difficult, lemon difficult.

              by Loge on Wed Apr 10, 2013 at 09:35:07 AM PDT

              [ Parent ]

          •  Well both are austerity (2+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            JesseCW, DSPS owl

            And Obama had the audacity to accept the first and propose the second.

            What he doesn't have is the audacity to propose something else entirely.  

            To my mind, the broader problem is that Democrats have abandoned ideology for expediency.  This did not start with Obama but he is unable to tell the difference.  
            Budgets are battles in the war.  You can lose one budget.  But if you've lost the ability to understand why you are fighting the war, you're done.

            You can hire budget wonks to run the numbers but a President can't get so lost in numbers that he loses touch with the heart and soul of his political party and his country.

            •  Yes, he could have hit the debt ceiling (0+ / 0-)

              and defaulted.  Awesome.

              I don't think the relationship between expedience and ideology works the way you're saying -- first, I take Obama to be telling the truth when he says the budget would look different with a Democratic Congress, just as the sequester wasn't anything he wanted, just was better than various alternatives.  And believing we can just wait the House R's out is (a) risky (we're back where we are a year later, with a federal hiring freeze still in effect and none of the short term good stuff passed), and (b) irrelevant -- if we do retake the House and fix the filibuster, the stakes are lower.  Secondly, the whole budget shows that the premise of "losing touch with the heart and soul" is not sound.  The budget is a progressive one in spite of the chained CPI aspects (and indeed some of the discretionary cuts made and not made), not because of it.  But this specific cut, while very important to the people most directly affected, hits different people from the absolute most vulnerable, and is a smaller percentage of what's economically at issue than the attention it's getting.  Paradoxically, this make it easier to take out; but then there's no commensurate political risk that would presumably justify Republicans in offending their own base.

              I don't like it, but I like closing the tax loopholes more than I dislike this.  And I've actually worked to elect candidates, not just claimed to be the heart and soul of anything based on the immanence of my feelings.

              Difficult, difficult, lemon difficult.

              by Loge on Wed Apr 10, 2013 at 09:30:47 AM PDT

              [ Parent ]

              •  the President chose to pivot to the deficit (3+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:
                TheUnknown285, JesseCW, DSPS owl

                you can trace all of this budget dickery to there. he chose that route and accepted the Republican framework of "we need to focus on cutting things", and it has put himself, Dems, and the working class at a disadvantageous position ever since. it was an unforced error, but consistent with his dealings with Republicans - always on their terms.

                "protecting the poorest of the poor" rings hollow in a time when money troubles aren't just for poor people anymore. one of the biggest problems in the healthcare system right now is how many people make too much to qualify for state aid but not enough to make ends meet. seniors, of course, even moreso. this is another hit for the suffocating middle class, for what? Republican good faith? there's no way that's the real reason, and it's a terrible reason anyway.

                CCPI may not be the only part of this budget, and it may push some other things in the right direction, but the consequences of what Obama is doing is definitely going to haunt the Dems for a good while, whether it passes or not. i don't even see how the people who consider themselves "pragmatic" could see it as a net benefit.

        •  Yeah... (3+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          TheUnknown285, jaf49, greenbell

          I wish these "Fix the Debt" fans would actually look at what austerity has done to Europe before they swallow the Ross Perot charts and graphs,

          and recognize that the German obsession with inflation simply isn't an issue anywhere in the world.

        •  Hey Obama, (7+ / 0-)

          Reagan and Thatcher just called from Hell and gave you two thumbs up.

          The NRA - defending the indefensible - 83 guns deaths a day.

          by jaf49 on Wed Apr 10, 2013 at 08:57:25 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

    •  Wow (5+ / 0-)

      as if that's the only loophole they can drive a semi-truck through.

      How many loopholes does Grandma have in her grocery budget?

      "The “Left” is NOT divided on the need to oppose austerity and the Great Betrayal. The Third Way is not left or center or even right. It is Wall Street on the Potomac."--Bill Black

      by lunachickie on Wed Apr 10, 2013 at 08:28:30 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  I know.. my case about this being (0+ / 0-)

        the biggest largest issue and cure for the entire world's pain was clearly overblown and unfounded.  I appreciate you pointing that out for me.

        I will try to hate the Tyrant Obama more in the future, I promise.

        Красота спасет мир --F. Dostoevsky

        by Wisper on Wed Apr 10, 2013 at 08:31:06 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  Disabuse yourself of the fantasy (7+ / 0-)

          that this is all about Obama-hating because people have nothing else to do.

          Spewing lame Third Way insult-bullshit isn't going to win you any converts. Which you desperately appear to need.

          "The “Left” is NOT divided on the need to oppose austerity and the Great Betrayal. The Third Way is not left or center or even right. It is Wall Street on the Potomac."--Bill Black

          by lunachickie on Wed Apr 10, 2013 at 08:39:14 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

        •  We're in the majority. All we have to do to win (0+ / 0-)

          is raise the heat and get people to tune you out.

          70%+ of the public already agrees with us.  All we have to do to win is keep them from listening to you.

          If want to help us, that's cool.

          Michelle and I send our thoughts to the Thatcher family and all the British people as we carry on the work to which she dedicated her life" President Obama, on the passing of Margaret Thatcher.

          by JesseCW on Wed Apr 10, 2013 at 01:56:02 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

  •  "You can watch it here..." (28+ / 0-)

    No I can't. Obama's speeches affect me the same way Bush's speeches always did. It's not good for my blood pressure to watch his speeches so I no longer do.

    “The probability that we may fail in the struggle ought not to deter us from the support of a cause we believe to be just.” – Abraham Lincoln

    by Sagebrush Bob on Wed Apr 10, 2013 at 08:01:41 AM PDT

  •  Wow, $50 whole birrion in stimulus? (6+ / 0-)

    Happy days are here again.

    I see what you did there.

    by GoGoGoEverton on Wed Apr 10, 2013 at 08:02:11 AM PDT

  •  Btw: reminder for people that watch this stuff (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Aunt Pat, Loge

    Judiciary hearing on Sri Srinivasan, Obama's nominee for the Court of Appeals for the DC Circuit, is at 2:30 and will be live-streamed.  The link is supposed to be up on the site 2-hours before it starts.

    ...at least thats what the person that answered the phone in Leahy's office told me when I called to ask.

    Красота спасет мир --F. Dostoevsky

    by Wisper on Wed Apr 10, 2013 at 08:04:06 AM PDT

  •  Disappointed (13+ / 0-)

    Better than the alternative - but really, really disappointed.

    I'll take Obama at his word - and can observe by his actions that he's a crap negotiator.

    I had hoped that since he doesn't have to run for re-election he'd be just a wee bit progressive - hell, I'd settle for just straight-up Democrat!

    Hard to rally support for a man who's starts out by caving in.

    "The price of a memory is the memory of the sorrow it brings" Adam Duritz/Counting Crows... Or if you prefer... "Extraordinary claims require extraordinary proof" Carl Sagan

    by zipn on Wed Apr 10, 2013 at 08:04:38 AM PDT

  •  One upside of sequester, Blue Angels grounded (9+ / 0-)

    Great story out of San Francisco.

    Real people and the real economy are suffering real harm from reckless sequestration cuts to social programs that have been inflicted by the anti-government ideologues sent to DC by the plutocrats and their minions. To keep the Blue Angels flying high against that backdrop would have been simply obscene, and surely a sign of decadent late empire in decay.

    http://www.sfbg.com/...

    "Work for something because it is good, not just because it stands a chance to succeed." -- Vaclav Havel

    by greendem on Wed Apr 10, 2013 at 08:04:53 AM PDT

  •  Talking out both sides of his mouth...again. (23+ / 0-)

    No Mr. President, saying you are doing something and then actually doing the opposite isn't "smart."

    Republicans...What a nice club...of liars, cheaters, adulterers, exaggerators, hypocrites and ignoramuses. Der Spiegel -6.62, -6.92

    by CanyonWren on Wed Apr 10, 2013 at 08:05:39 AM PDT

    •  And (3+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      jaf49, CanyonWren, HCKAD

      And out of his ass too.  Anybody who can still use the term "good faith" for the GOP is talking out of his ass.  

      •  It's his pathological need to be accepted by the (3+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        rlochow, TheUnknown285, HCKAD

        Republican elite, imho. He's been sucking up to them since Day 1, and is evident by how many times he has exalted Reagan and the Republicans as the "party of ideas."  Our choices were dim, he was/is a gifted charlatan, our country was ready for someone who spoke to all Americans, and we were on the financial precipice. Perfect cocktail for denial on a massive scale.  

        Republicans...What a nice club...of liars, cheaters, adulterers, exaggerators, hypocrites and ignoramuses. Der Spiegel -6.62, -6.92

        by CanyonWren on Wed Apr 10, 2013 at 09:43:32 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

  •  "We can do more" (27+ / 0-)

    Beatings will continue even if morale improves!

    Government and laws are the agreement we all make to secure everyone's freedom.

    by Simplify on Wed Apr 10, 2013 at 08:07:23 AM PDT

  •  Call 1-202-456-1111 (10+ / 0-)

    That's White House line. You can also sign a petition:
    https://petitions.whitehouse.gov/...
    Also contact your members of Congress, not just your Democratic members.
    It is not fruitful just to complain on dailykos.

    Censorship is rogue government.

    by scott5js on Wed Apr 10, 2013 at 08:07:38 AM PDT

  •  he needs to stop saying "middle class" -- a lot of (8+ / 0-)

    people want to see the middle class destroyed.  He should say "working people."  

    If the plutocrats begin the program, we will end it. -- Eugene Debs.

    by livjack on Wed Apr 10, 2013 at 08:07:53 AM PDT

  •  Smart? I'm puking!!!! (13+ / 0-)

    Thanks so much Mr. President for completely ruining our chances in 2016!

    Dissent is Patriotic

    by mwjeepster on Wed Apr 10, 2013 at 08:08:35 AM PDT

  •  We can cut SO MUCH from medicare (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Loge, Beetwasher

    if we could really push Health Care reform.  What we're cutting is provider profit.  This is why they hate ACA so much... they know its coming.

    Красота спасет мир --F. Dostoevsky

    by Wisper on Wed Apr 10, 2013 at 08:08:45 AM PDT

    •  Big deal (9+ / 0-)

      he left "Chained CPI" in there anyway.

      Too bad there's some decent stuff here and there--cutting Social Security is the Line in the Sand. No praise for anyone insisting that somehow, that's a smart thing, when economists from across the spectrum show otherwise.

      Thanks for making 2014 that much harder. Nothing like snatching defeat from the jaws of victory. Fool me once, sweetheart. I haven't forgotten 2010, and neither has anyone else.

      "The “Left” is NOT divided on the need to oppose austerity and the Great Betrayal. The Third Way is not left or center or even right. It is Wall Street on the Potomac."--Bill Black

      by lunachickie on Wed Apr 10, 2013 at 08:15:35 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  ok. (5+ / 0-)

        I get that you are outraged on Chained CPI, but I don't quite get the "no praise for anything else ever" approach, but that's your call and your vote.

        And I think this actually makes 2014 easier.  GOP will AGAIN be labeled with the "will not even accept $1 of tax increases for larger cuts" which resonated well in 2012.  And if they try to play the "the dems are trying to cut Soc Sec but WE want to protect it!" ... the public never believes them.  They tried it with the Ryan budget and his Medicare Mom or whatever... plus the GOP will need to play to their base and GOP candidates running on the "We need to protect Social Security and Medicare" aren't going to do well with the base.

        Unless we just have a lot of people on our side that decide to sit out.  Then yeah... that will help the GOP.  We'll see what happens....

        Красота спасет мир --F. Dostoevsky

        by Wisper on Wed Apr 10, 2013 at 08:27:03 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  Good luck with this.... (4+ / 0-)
          GOP will AGAIN be labeled with the "will not even accept $1 of tax increases for larger cuts"
          Who will be labeling that? Oh, "the media"? Right.

          And frankly, if you believe this

          GOP candidates running on the "We need to protect Social Security and Medicare" aren't going to do well with the base.
          you're nuts.

          "The “Left” is NOT divided on the need to oppose austerity and the Great Betrayal. The Third Way is not left or center or even right. It is Wall Street on the Potomac."--Bill Black

          by lunachickie on Wed Apr 10, 2013 at 08:31:04 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  Were you around last year? (4+ / 0-)
            GOP will AGAIN be labeled with the "will not even accept $1 of tax increases for larger cuts"
            ...was a repetitive meme brought up in almost every debate and interview.  It had solid poll numbers showing that the GOP was being written off by the average voter as "unreasonable".  It was working great.
            GOP candidates running on the "We need to protect Social Security and Medicare" aren't going to do well with the base.
            Um.. right.  So again, aside from the fact that this actually happened last year and the GOP base was cheering the Ryan plan and shouting "let him die" at a primary debate.... what GOP office holder has run on a "we need to protect entitlements from any cuts" platform?  

            maybe I am nuts...

            Красота спасет мир --F. Dostoevsky

            by Wisper on Wed Apr 10, 2013 at 08:37:56 AM PDT

            [ Parent ]

            •  I've been around for a lot longer than that (2+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              Dem Beans, JesseCW

              See my sig and spare me. Your "defenses" are trivia at best.  

              "The “Left” is NOT divided on the need to oppose austerity and the Great Betrayal. The Third Way is not left or center or even right. It is Wall Street on the Potomac."--Bill Black

              by lunachickie on Wed Apr 10, 2013 at 08:43:16 AM PDT

              [ Parent ]

        •  At least you won't have to stand in line (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          Dem Beans

          at the polls.

  •  Hell No! (11+ / 0-)

    we're also livebloggin it over here

    If I can't dance I don't want to be part of your revolution. ~ Emma Goldman

    by Lady Libertine on Wed Apr 10, 2013 at 08:09:35 AM PDT

  •  Raising the tobacco tax (11+ / 0-)

    is highly regressive.  Oh, well, better than raising taxes on people making 400k per year in Obama-land.

    you don't need a weatherman to know which way the wind blows

    by Dem Beans on Wed Apr 10, 2013 at 08:09:50 AM PDT

    •  How the hell are poor people supposed to be able (11+ / 0-)

      ..to die quickly if they can't afford their cancer-sticks?

      We can have democracy in this country, or we can have great wealth concentrated in the hands of a few, but we can't have both - Louis D. Brandeis

      by Anthony Page aka SecondComing on Wed Apr 10, 2013 at 08:14:06 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  Tobacco and alcohol taxes should be higher (3+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        Heart of the Rockies, gof, TomFromNJ

        than Obama's proposing (or that Congress would ever agree to), and throw in a soda tax while we're at it.  If we must subsidize the high-fructose corn syrup lobby while we're at it, let's at least let the Treasury get some of that money back in order to pay for the foot amputations and coronaries.

        Difficult, difficult, lemon difficult.

        by Loge on Wed Apr 10, 2013 at 08:30:06 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  Legalize Pot....And Tax it...... (0+ / 0-)
          •  sure (0+ / 0-)

            i think we should at least let it play out at the state level for a few years first, though.  Will probably make the federal case easier.  

            Horrible environmental effects from unregulated pot growing, though.  Something to consider, pro OR con.

            Difficult, difficult, lemon difficult.

            by Loge on Wed Apr 10, 2013 at 09:21:20 AM PDT

            [ Parent ]

        •  Great. Turn around and use that cash (0+ / 0-)

          exclusively for addiction treatment programs and to make community gardens more available in poor communities, and we can talk about higher taxes.

          For now, it's just more baggage the poor can't stand up under.

          Michelle and I send our thoughts to the Thatcher family and all the British people as we carry on the work to which she dedicated her life" President Obama, on the passing of Margaret Thatcher.

          by JesseCW on Wed Apr 10, 2013 at 02:02:46 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  If it's really too much to bear, (0+ / 0-)

            your proposed earmarking wouldn't help.  (Another way to do that is just to raise local consumption taxes.). It's still a redistribution from heavier users to others.  The public health costs avoided by the greater deterrent effect of higher taxes is its own benefit to the affected community, especially for tobacco.  I think you're just being petty.

            Difficult, difficult, lemon difficult.

            by Loge on Wed Apr 10, 2013 at 03:19:13 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

            •  I think you're just excusing looting the poor (0+ / 0-)

              to avoid taxing the well off in order to provide essential services we all should be chipping in for according to our means.

              I think you're not interested in helping sick people get better, and that you want to create a perverse incentive that makes governments reliant on tobacco tax revenue, thereby encouraging the very people who should be trying to help the victims of the tobacco industry to instead harm them.

              I think you're just attacking and looting addicts you've been told it's ok to villainize and exploit, and I think it's both selfish and cowardly.

              Michelle and I send our thoughts to the Thatcher family and all the British people as we carry on the work to which she dedicated her life" President Obama, on the passing of Margaret Thatcher.

              by JesseCW on Wed Apr 10, 2013 at 04:28:46 PM PDT

              [ Parent ]

              •  I think we should tax both, (0+ / 0-)

                negating the reliance premise.  And I don't care to subsidize smokers, rich or poor, which is what setting the tax level below the social cost of smoking does.  Smoking itself is what's selfish.  I'm happy to also spend more on treatment, but I am very comfortable with the notion that people who can't afford a cigarette tax probably can't afford cigarettes either.  A higher tax would marginally incentivize the people I apparently don't care about, to in fact live longer.  Unless your prepared to argue the sin tax should be set at zero, there's not a deep disagreement, and I'm prepared to let the tobacco industry do its own lobbying.  Invoking the poor to defend their interests is what's cowardly.

                Difficult, difficult, lemon difficult.

                by Loge on Wed Apr 10, 2013 at 05:55:31 PM PDT

                [ Parent ]

    •  Or, stop killing yourself with a cancer-stick. (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Heart of the Rockies, TomFromNJ

      Let's not pretend it's a gas or food tax.

      I see what you did there.

      by GoGoGoEverton on Wed Apr 10, 2013 at 08:28:43 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  It's still a regressive tax. (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        Chi, Rick Aucoin

        you don't need a weatherman to know which way the wind blows

        by Dem Beans on Wed Apr 10, 2013 at 08:40:05 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  Regressive against the uneducated and (0+ / 0-)

          undisciplined.

          I see what you did there.

          by GoGoGoEverton on Wed Apr 10, 2013 at 08:51:45 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  It's still a regressive tax. (2+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            TheUnknown285, JesseCW

            you don't need a weatherman to know which way the wind blows

            by Dem Beans on Wed Apr 10, 2013 at 08:57:14 AM PDT

            [ Parent ]

          •  Beans you just don't get it (3+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            TheUnknown285, Dem Beans, JesseCW

            taxes are an intolerable burden on society and it's only right to stick them with the poor and stupid.

            $8.10 for a pack of Marb Reds here

            •  Good; it should be expensive to kill yourself. nt (0+ / 0-)

              I see what you did there.

              by GoGoGoEverton on Wed Apr 10, 2013 at 09:12:20 AM PDT

              [ Parent ]

              •  They're going to do it anyway. (1+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:
                JesseCW

                If the current prices, the current taxes, Surgeon General's warnings, and other health effects aren't enough to make them stop, then I highly doubt adding more taxes will do it, especially if it's done incrementally (think of the metaphor of the frog in a pot that is slowly heated up vs. one thrown into a boiling pot).  

                •  Raise the price of heroin 30% and I bet all those (1+ / 0-)
                  Recommended by:
                  TheUnknown285

                  junkies will quit, right?

                  The "logic" they us to justify this doesn't pass the laugh test.  NYC has much higher taxes than CA, yet it also has much higher smoking rates.

                  There is clearly a point of diminishing returns.  When smokes are dirt cheap, more people smoke.  But that doesn't mean we should expect that endless price increases will lead to endless decreases in use.

                  Michelle and I send our thoughts to the Thatcher family and all the British people as we carry on the work to which she dedicated her life" President Obama, on the passing of Margaret Thatcher.

                  by JesseCW on Wed Apr 10, 2013 at 01:45:57 PM PDT

                  [ Parent ]

              •  You don't get exploit a common societal (0+ / 0-)

                predjudice against sick people and then try to claim its for their own good.

                If it was about helping the people being targeted, all the resulting funds would be earmarked to help them quit and to prevent new people from becoming addicted in the first place.

                Instead, you just want to use their illness to leverage cash out of them, no different than Phillip Morris.

                Michelle and I send our thoughts to the Thatcher family and all the British people as we carry on the work to which she dedicated her life" President Obama, on the passing of Margaret Thatcher.

                by JesseCW on Wed Apr 10, 2013 at 01:44:08 PM PDT

                [ Parent ]

          •  Yes. People deprived of educational opportunities (0+ / 0-)

            really don't face enough challenges in America.

            Michelle and I send our thoughts to the Thatcher family and all the British people as we carry on the work to which she dedicated her life" President Obama, on the passing of Margaret Thatcher.

            by JesseCW on Wed Apr 10, 2013 at 01:41:59 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

            •  Even if you're homeless, you know smoking is (0+ / 0-)

              bad for you. But this about whether or not we should care whether a smoke tax is regressive, not about pontificating on heroin addicts and whether or not you grew up in a cave and never saw public awareness advertising or the warning labels on the cig boxes you're smoking.

              I see what you did there.

              by GoGoGoEverton on Wed Apr 10, 2013 at 06:36:40 PM PDT

              [ Parent ]

      •  Let's not pretend gas is any more essential (0+ / 0-)

        than cigarettes.  It sure as fuck does a hell of a lot more harm to health of people not in the users household.

        But...you use it.  So that's different.

        Michelle and I send our thoughts to the Thatcher family and all the British people as we carry on the work to which she dedicated her life" President Obama, on the passing of Margaret Thatcher.

        by JesseCW on Wed Apr 10, 2013 at 01:41:31 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

  •  Instead of announcing a plan (25+ / 0-)

    ..to break up the big banks, and a create a jobs program?

    Who exactly do "Democrats" stand for again?

    Surreal.

    We can have democracy in this country, or we can have great wealth concentrated in the hands of a few, but we can't have both - Louis D. Brandeis

    by Anthony Page aka SecondComing on Wed Apr 10, 2013 at 08:09:58 AM PDT

  •  NOW Do you believe he wants to cut SS? (24+ / 0-)

    And Medicare Next, IF NOT today.

    When it is OFFICIALLY in HIS Budget?

    A Democrat Cutting Social Security...

    Or do we have to say someone who happened to be elected on the Democratic Ballot Line..

  •  Not a lot of smoke and mirrors in here (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Words In Action

    Just some.

    The trouble with the world is that the stupid are cocksure and the intelligent are full of doubt. Bertrand Russell

    by accumbens on Wed Apr 10, 2013 at 08:10:57 AM PDT

  •  Anyone know (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    jaf49, Heart of the Rockies

    ...is there any combination of circumstances in which chained CPI would result in an INCREASE in Social Security benefits?  Is it inevitably negative?

    America, we can do better than this...

    by Randomfactor on Wed Apr 10, 2013 at 08:11:11 AM PDT

    •  The only reason it's being proposed is because (6+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Dem Beans, jaf49, Losty, Chi, dss, JesseCW

      it is inevitably negative.  Inevitably negative seems to be Obama's vision of the American future.

    •  Chained CPI? Depends on who's asking. (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Losty, jaf49

      Wall Street, Pete Peterson, and now this President,

      Is it inevitably negative?
      Love it.
    •  Don't see how since it's based on what people (5+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      tardis10, greenbell, Chi, Bozmo2, rlochow

      are suppose to do to cope with inflation, namely lower their standard of living.  Perhaps, just on semantics, if there is deflation it could work the other way, but then people are usually hurt even worse since the value of their assets go down in a deflation and they would be switching from wet to dry cat food too.

      It's a pointy-headed neoliberal intellectual confection that bears little or no relation to real life.  It's a theory that will probably, if it hasn't already, make some academic careers.  But it ain't gonna help anyone else.

      The trouble with the world is that the stupid are cocksure and the intelligent are full of doubt. Bertrand Russell

      by accumbens on Wed Apr 10, 2013 at 08:20:31 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  Depends what you're saying is "the benefit". (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      TomFromNJ

      The complaints come from assertions that the future benefit under chained would be less than the future benefit under the status quo.

      However, I've yet to see anyone claim that the future benefit would be less than the present benefit; that is, I've yet to see anyone say that chained CPI is an inaccurate measure of the increases in the cost of living for people receiving social security.

      If you're saying that the entitlement is the status quo measure of inflation, then it's a cut.  If you're saying that the entitlement is the present benefit, then it's not.

      That's not even "gun control". It's more like "massacre control".

      by Inland on Wed Apr 10, 2013 at 08:32:42 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  Sorry, (0+ / 0-)

        didn't think this posted the first time so did it again.

        The NRA - defending the indefensible - 83 guns deaths a day.

        by jaf49 on Wed Apr 10, 2013 at 08:34:06 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

      •  Of course it is an inaccurate measure - example (4+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        schnecke21, JesseCW, DSPS owl, draghnfly

        CCPI assumes I will make substitutes when costs increase.

        My real world example from this week is my water bill. The city is raising the rate 3%.  So what do you expect me to substitute for water?  

        There is no substitution but using LESS water.  Now, that might a good thing for reasons totally unrelated to Social Security but the point is there is no real substitution only doing with LESS.  

        The goal of CCPI is a lower standard of living.  Hamburger instead of steak in year 1.  Pasta instead of hamburger in year 2.  Ramen instead of pasta in year 3.

      •  If you understand that the purchase power (0+ / 0-)

        of a dollar is what matters, and not the nominal number of dollars, it's a cut.

        Michelle and I send our thoughts to the Thatcher family and all the British people as we carry on the work to which she dedicated her life" President Obama, on the passing of Margaret Thatcher.

        by JesseCW on Wed Apr 10, 2013 at 02:04:39 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

    •  I think this is a courteous, reasonable (0+ / 0-)

      question that deserves a courteous, reasonable answer.

  •  What a jerk - I just lost my president n/t (9+ / 0-)
  •  Hey! How soon before he backs down on the (7+ / 0-)

    revenue increases?  

    If the plutocrats begin the program, we will end it. -- Eugene Debs.

    by livjack on Wed Apr 10, 2013 at 08:15:31 AM PDT

    •  5, 4, 3, 2, .... (5+ / 0-)

      The trouble with the world is that the stupid are cocksure and the intelligent are full of doubt. Bertrand Russell

      by accumbens on Wed Apr 10, 2013 at 08:22:49 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  It doesn't really matter (5+ / 0-)

      how or when he backs down on any revenue increase.  He's destroying the Dem party from inside and the second we get a repub prez with today's repub House, there will be enough Pretenda-Dems in the Senate to roll back any and all revenue increases and cut taxes even more for the oligarchy.  

      Hell of a legacy you are going to leave Obama.

      The NRA - defending the indefensible - 83 guns deaths a day.

      by jaf49 on Wed Apr 10, 2013 at 08:24:39 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  He doesn't need to back down (0+ / 0-)

      on the revenue increases.  He's destroying the Dem party from the Oval Office and as soon as we get our next repub prez, the repub House along with the Pretenda-Dems in the Senate will roll back any and all increases along with cutting taxes and regulations even more for the oligarchy.

      Hell of legacy you are going to leave Obama.

      The NRA - defending the indefensible - 83 guns deaths a day.

      by jaf49 on Wed Apr 10, 2013 at 08:26:56 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  Sellout. (13+ / 0-)

    There goes the Democratic Party.  

    Shirley Chisholm was right. Our Republic is in deep trouble.

    by Big River Bandido on Wed Apr 10, 2013 at 08:15:36 AM PDT

  •  he's misled. . . (10+ / 0-)

    and he's misleading. I get very little Social Security, my sole income, and I can't even afford living on what I get. . .I am thinking of asking him for a personal loan (not that I would or could ever pay for it). Question is twofold: What are going to do about it and what can we even do about it? I mean, besides, voice opposition?

    Treat the world (yourself, and others) as part of a living organism. Everyone and everything will benefit.

    by richholtzin on Wed Apr 10, 2013 at 08:16:09 AM PDT

    •  Apparently nothing. (3+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      jaf49, CanyonWren, rlochow

      He knows the poll numbers.  He knows that Americans across the political spectrum overwhelmingly oppose this.

      But he's proposing it anyway.  He'll find some way to cram it down our gullets.  He doesn't represent us.  None of them do.

      you don't need a weatherman to know which way the wind blows

      by Dem Beans on Wed Apr 10, 2013 at 08:30:48 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  pants on fire (5+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Dem Beans, jaf49, TheUnknown285, rbird, rlochow

    Can't hide it.

    try habitat restoration - good for you, good for all

    by jps on Wed Apr 10, 2013 at 08:16:25 AM PDT

  •  Lower income seniors? (9+ / 0-)

    What about ALL seniors and future seniors that will be chopped to the bone due to the loss of this income?  

    I'm all for protecting lower income seniors, but apparently everyone else is fair game for his cuts.

    This is just fake compassion.  It'll drive everyone's standard of living down to bare survival.

    you don't need a weatherman to know which way the wind blows

    by Dem Beans on Wed Apr 10, 2013 at 08:16:59 AM PDT

    •  Designed to trick (5+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      jaf49, smiley7, Dem Beans, rlochow, JesseCW

      What he's doing is TAKING from middle class seniors and giving a PITTANCE to poor seniors and trying to CON the middle class seniors into believing he's helping them out.  

      This is the kind of deceit we have come to accept as the norm from Republicans so I guess I've got to say that when they adopted their ideology their propaganda tactics came too.

  •  Weasel words aren't going to work this time (11+ / 0-)

    be as defensive as you want, in as many creative ways as you possibly can, Mr. President. It does not change the fact that you're WRONG. It does not change the fact that millions of Americans feel betrayed, as well they should.

    President Obama has concluded his remarks—nothing we didn't already know, but he did seem defensive on Social Security, which he talked about without explicitly calling it Social Security.

    "The “Left” is NOT divided on the need to oppose austerity and the Great Betrayal. The Third Way is not left or center or even right. It is Wall Street on the Potomac."--Bill Black

    by lunachickie on Wed Apr 10, 2013 at 08:18:15 AM PDT

  •  Your failure is complete, (7+ / 0-)

    Obi-Wan Kenobi.  The young Jedi you trained has turned to the Dark Side.

    The thing about democracy, beloveds, is that it is not neat, orderly, or quiet. It requires a certain relish for confusion. Molly Ivins

    by MufsMom on Wed Apr 10, 2013 at 08:18:19 AM PDT

  •  12 Republicans invited for dinner tonight (7+ / 0-)

    No wonder he looked peppy. Ugh.

  •  The 4th term of GW Bush... (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Dem Beans, jaf49, rlochow

    Got Hope?

    "Tout le monde wang chung ce soir"

    by mrgrandefromage on Wed Apr 10, 2013 at 08:21:12 AM PDT

  •  Dear Mr. President: (9+ / 0-)

    It's time you remembered that you're dealing with a bunch of bribe-addicted John Birch Society halfwits that can't be reasoned with.

    If you want to strengthen Social Security and Medicare, then eliminate the cap on the payroll tax.

    While you're at it, lower the retirement age too, so that younger people can enter the workforce and others can move up in their careers.

    I write a series called 'My Life as an Aspie', documenting my experiences before and after my A.S. diagnosis as a way to help fellow Aspies and parents of Aspies and spread awareness. If I help just one person by doing this, then I've served a purpose.

    by Homer177 on Wed Apr 10, 2013 at 08:21:20 AM PDT

  •  Take it off the d...ed table (8+ / 0-)

    I already called one of my (very good, I live in Ca) Senators and told them I don't plan to vote for any Democrat who will cut SS.

    Take it off the table.

    2.3 million signatures.  2.3 million.  And that is just a tiny number of the people who oppose this.

    sh

  •  Dude's a traitor. There. I said it. (10+ / 0-)

    He straight up threw the entire Democratic base under the bus. All to continue his neoliberal agenda and legacy.

    Next up, Trans-Pacific Partnership, in which corporations can pretty much piss all over sovereign governments in their singular pursuit of profit above all else--planet, people, and countries be damned. With the spawn of CISPA/PIPA caked into it, for added devastation of free expression and information sharing.

    What a fucking disaster. We needed better, and all we got was missed opportunities and betrayal most foul.

    Any Democrat who votes for this will crash and burn in 2014. Yeah, they'll have a cushy job at a think tank or at a lobbying firm, but they'll be out of office.

    Guess that won't matter much, because this Grand Bargain will have obliterated the Democratic Party and its legacy for decades to come.

    This budget cannot pass. My congressperson, Corrine Brown signed the Grayson-Takano letter stating that she will vote 'no' on anything that cuts Social Security. Bill Nelson might be a lost cause. But call your congress critters and tell them that they can stand with the people, or they can stand with Obama's 1% budget proposal.

    It's now or never.

    The Grand Bargain must be stopped at all costs to protect the 99%.

    by cybrestrike on Wed Apr 10, 2013 at 08:23:26 AM PDT

    •  agreed. (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      TheUnknown285

      Dems who vote for this should lose, no matter what. it's not the end of the world. if we're really one more governor or congressman away from the complete collapse of America, then all of Obama's valiant efforts against it will have been in vain anyway.

  •  Screw you, Obama (10+ / 0-)

    Call it whatever the hell you want to call it, chained CPI is a cut to Social Security.  

    I love how he tries to worm out of it by claiming it's a Republican idea.   Obama proposed it in a formal budget and now he owns it.

    Where's his big plan to cut the god-awful unemployment among 18-34 year olds?  Where is his big plan to hold the big banks accountable for their criminal behavior?  After all, he's only had 4 years to investigate.

    Here's hoping the Democrats run against him in 2014.  It's a sad day when Democrats have to fight their own supposed Democratic party leader to win an election.  But it can be done.  

    I'll end the way I started off:

    SCREW  YOU, OBAMA.

    Btw, I can almost guarantee my Senator Nelson will not go for cutting Social Security.  Obama might as well have proposed Bill Nelson cut his own throat.  I also have my doubts Rubio will go for it.  His future, assuming he has one, is in Florida.  

    What the hell, once again, with feeling:

    SCREW YOU, OBAMA.

  •  His healthcare plan was a GOP idea as well (9+ / 0-)

    by his own admittance when he met with House Republicans, he said as much.

    But really, these Austerity plans are the plans of the 1%, and Obama is their champion it seems.

    http://digbysblog.blogspot.com/...

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

    by greenbastard on Wed Apr 10, 2013 at 08:25:37 AM PDT

  •  Waiting for the cheerleaders to chime in .... (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Dem Beans, TheUnknown285, stevej

    A soft early spring breeze covers us like a light flannel blanket on a cool summer's night in the mountains.  A cloud passes over the sun and the birds and insects quiet to barely a murmur.

    The trouble with the world is that the stupid are cocksure and the intelligent are full of doubt. Bertrand Russell

    by accumbens on Wed Apr 10, 2013 at 08:26:19 AM PDT

  •  President officially (5+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    TheUnknown285, jaf49, Bailey2001, Chi, rlochow

    exposes his death-wish for the Democratic Party and personal legacy among the Left.

    What's the point of letting neoliberals into the tent when neoliberalism is burning down the campground?
    Since elections will never change the ownership of government, why does our strategy rely entirely upon them?

    by Words In Action on Wed Apr 10, 2013 at 08:28:54 AM PDT

  •  We told you so. (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    TheUnknown285, Dem Beans
    As you probably already know, compared to previous years, the biggest new element of Obama's budget is that it would cut Social Security benefits through chained CPI.
    We told you so.

    it fitfully blows, half conceals, half discloses

    by Addison on Wed Apr 10, 2013 at 08:29:25 AM PDT

  •  I don't know, is chained CPI really so bad? (0+ / 0-)

    It's estimated to be between .1-.3% per year. Considering that we have a lot more people on SS, and that number is going to continue to grow, isn't it an acceptable concession for more revenue?
    I don't think it matters, the GOP won't negotiate in good faith.

    •  I'll see your 0.1-0.3% and raise you .... (9+ / 0-)

      It is a cut in a core Democratic Party program that is tied directly to a core Democratic Party value.  For a so-called Democratic President to even suggest such a thing is a betrayal to the Party and to his voters and, most importantly, to the American people.  This is a watershed moment in US political history.

      The trouble with the world is that the stupid are cocksure and the intelligent are full of doubt. Bertrand Russell

      by accumbens on Wed Apr 10, 2013 at 08:34:56 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  The inflation measure is a core democratic value? (0+ / 0-)

        Seriously?  I don't remember voting on that.

        I thought people's welfare was the core value, and nobody is able to say will actually make future retirees worse off than today's retirees...that is, nobody can say that the chained CPI is an inaccurate measure of the increase in the cost of living for recipients.

        Why don't you focus a little more on what's actually an accurate measure and stop being so excited about being a vocal part of a watershed moment?  Because you're not.

        That's not even "gun control". It's more like "massacre control".

        by Inland on Wed Apr 10, 2013 at 08:44:45 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  Didn't say the inflation adjustment (not measure) (4+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          Dem Beans, rlochow, schnecke21, JesseCW

          is a core value.  Said it's a cut to a core program that is tied to a core value, which I agree is people's welfare.  Maybe you should focus on what people say rather than on what you think they are saying because you don't like what they're saying.

          In any case, if chained CPI results in a lower adjustment for inflation than the current formula, it must result in a lower increase for inflation.  And the fact that it is tied to people's lowering their standard of living and quality of life in order to cope with inflation also means it creates an ever increasing downward spiral.  And the reality is that you cannot compensate for inflation by changing your choices for many critical needs, like water, transportation, medicines, etc.  Chained CPI is an intellectual exercise that will help advance some academic careers but hurt those most in need.

          The trouble with the world is that the stupid are cocksure and the intelligent are full of doubt. Bertrand Russell

          by accumbens on Wed Apr 10, 2013 at 08:54:23 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  But that's all that's at issue. (1+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            TomFromNJ

            The inflation measure.  That's it.

            And the fact that it is tied to people's lowering their standard of living and quality of life in order to cope with inflation also means it creates an ever increasing downward spiral
            You're implying that the quality of life is going to be lower in the future than it is in the present.

            That would be true if chained CPI is a bad measure of the actual cost of living for retirees.

            That's what nobody knows.

            Chained CPI is an intellectual exercise
            No less academic than any other CPI or inflation measure, which are constantly being rejiggered in the search of being more accurate.  Nobody ever started throwing around "core issue" before there became a competition on outrage.

            That's not even "gun control". It's more like "massacre control".

            by Inland on Wed Apr 10, 2013 at 09:00:55 AM PDT

            [ Parent ]

            •  I recommend this link (2+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              accumbens, JesseCW

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

              by greenbastard on Wed Apr 10, 2013 at 09:08:51 AM PDT

              [ Parent ]

            •  It depends on what basis you are trying to (1+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              JesseCW

              improve accuracy of inflation estimates.  Most of the effort has been in finding more accurate ways of accounting for actual price changes.  Chained CPI throws in another, new (as far as I can tell), element, namely people's behavioral response to inflation.  That's a huge difference in approach and, given how poorly we understand human behavior and how obviously detached the theory is from reality, it makes chained CPI a poor substitute for simple accounting.  It's like figuring profits based in part on how hard the employees worked rather than on just the difference between income and expenses.

              The trouble with the world is that the stupid are cocksure and the intelligent are full of doubt. Bertrand Russell

              by accumbens on Wed Apr 10, 2013 at 09:09:51 AM PDT

              [ Parent ]

          •  The COLA first started in '75 (1+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            accumbens

            It wasn't part of SS before. Here is a chart of all the adjustments.

            "The scientific nature of the ordinary man is to go on out and do the best you can." John Prine

            by high uintas on Wed Apr 10, 2013 at 09:19:27 AM PDT

            [ Parent ]

            •  From the creation of SS until the mid 1960's (0+ / 0-)

              inflation wasn't much of a factor.

              When SS was created, the challenge we were facing was prolonged deflation.

              Michelle and I send our thoughts to the Thatcher family and all the British people as we carry on the work to which she dedicated her life" President Obama, on the passing of Margaret Thatcher.

              by JesseCW on Wed Apr 10, 2013 at 02:09:45 PM PDT

              [ Parent ]

      •  Ideological rigidity? (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        yorkiedoglover

        Listen to yourself. You sound like a Norquist pledge taker. It's called compromise. I would love to leave SS untouched, but I think we have to leave all our options open. My point is, IF we can get real revenue in exhange, it might be a fair deal.
        I also think we need to means test SS. There is no reason why multi-millionares should benefit from a program designed to assist the retired working class.

        •  I don't think standing by your principles is in (7+ / 0-)

          and of itself a bad thing.  It depends what your principles are.  Protecting a program that has been a boon for the elderly is something to stand for.  Drowning the government in a bathtub and letting the 1% keep and make more money at the expense of everyone else is not a principle that is defensible or moral.

          I think a means test is unfair because the rich also contribute to SS.  I think raising the cap on SS taxes is the way to go.   As for the negotiation, I don't see why anyone would use the welfare of the elderly as a bargaining chip.

          The trouble with the world is that the stupid are cocksure and the intelligent are full of doubt. Bertrand Russell

          by accumbens on Wed Apr 10, 2013 at 08:59:45 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  Standing by your principles is fine.. (1+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            yorkiedoglover

            but what are we talking about here? We're talking about how the SS COLA's are calculated. We're not talking about privatizing SS, or any radical change. Let's be honest, SS needs to be examined, right along with our asinine "defense" budget, new revenues, healthcare, etc..
            I think it's important we keep our options open, and leave that whole ideological rigid, intransigence to the petulant children on the right. Someone has to be the adults here, if not us, then who?

            •  "SS needs to be examined" (3+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              Patango, accumbens, JesseCW

              please clarify, considering how future issues with SS already have solutions that don't involve benefit cuts, and that the purpose of these cuts is to pay off the Bush deficit.

              •  It began to run a deficit in 2010... (1+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:
                yorkiedoglover

                Estimating payouts 20% more than it takes in by 2030. These are CBO numbers, not fox "news" or Heritage Foundation numbers.
                I want to see SS healthy, if not, the GOP will use those numbers to burn it to the ground (or they'll just make them up.) Anyway, it is a Democrat landmark achievement, we need to protect it.
                There are a lot of ways to do this. Increase FICA tax incrementally similar to earned income, means testing, chained CPI, etc..

                •  how about removing the (1+ / 0-)
                  Recommended by:
                  TheUnknown285

                  earnings cap? people have been saying that for awhile now, why are we cutting benefits instead? because the Republicans want to?

                  •  I think Obama is... (0+ / 0-)

                    using it to try to entice the GOP with it as an entitlement reform concession to get additional revenues, infrastructure upgrade, etc.. Not to worry, it won't work.
                    As others have pointed out, chained CPI is a conceptual notion, it can be tweaked. Which is to say it can look just like the current CPI. I'm not afraid of it.
                    But you are right, there are a lot of ways to address the SS deficit, we should look at them all.

                    •  "not to worry, it won't work"? (0+ / 0-)

                      really how much longer do you think thats going to last? the Rs arent as stupid as the Ds, they're just more evil. they know that they can always get Obama to bullshit with them and "negotiate". they basically have till the end of this term to take the deal. i'm sure this isn't the last time something like this is going to be offered, since it probably won't this time, again, for the same reasons as always. sooner or later they're just going to say "fuck it" and go for the cuts. the Dems will take the blame anyway. 2010 anyone?

                      "using it to try to entice the GOP with it as an entitlement reform concession"

                      you mean using seniors as bait for the fucking Goopers? why is that necessary? is it really true that the President can make no case against cutting Social Security? that the "political environment" just makes it impossible because he's so powerless?

                      in the end, the question is always the same: why is my Democrat president doing the work of the Republicans?

                      •  The GOP won't agree to more revenue.. (0+ / 0-)

                        no way, no how. I just don't see it happening.
                        Lets start with agreeing that SS is in the early stages of a fiscal crisis, and work from there. We need to increase the funding, and/or shore up the payouts. There are a lot of ways to do this.
                        Chained CPI is notional, it just doesn't warrant the drama behind "seniors as bait" statement the left is throwing out there. Let's not adapt a baggeresque hysteria. Lets logically analyze the options, work from there. Chained CPI being one of them.

                        •  CCPI is a notional change (1+ / 0-)
                          Recommended by:
                          JesseCW

                          that will result in less benefits over time. why do you think the President is trying to distance himself from it and say it's what the Rs want? you are pretending that CCPI isn't a real cut, or that there's no way to know if it will hurt middle-class seniors. it does, and that's why the president squirms when talking about it.

                          CCPI isn't "one of" the options, it's THE option. this is supposed to take SS off the table, remember? this is taking our medicine.

                          you buy into the notion left-wing arguments against austerity are so useless as to not even be tried. Obama doesn't make neolib arguments all day because the mean old Republicans force him to, he makes them because he's a neoliberal. if he really wanted something else, he should have put it in the budget. but no. he starts with what the other side wants in his budget. my social security to pay off the Bush years.

                          if you accept the notion that the R's dominate the D's even as the minority because That's The Political Reality, you are helping that become real. the R's were down and out in 2008, and then Obama played patty cake with them while they gathered steam against the communist muslim president. there's no excuse for it.

            •  Proposing is not examining - it's proposing as in (2+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              TheUnknown285, JesseCW

              I want to do this, do you?  It not about how COLA is calculated, it about let's do it this way.

              The trouble with the world is that the stupid are cocksure and the intelligent are full of doubt. Bertrand Russell

              by accumbens on Wed Apr 10, 2013 at 10:04:01 AM PDT

              [ Parent ]

          •  What about Pensions? (1+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            draghnfly

            My Mom's income from SS is about $1200 a month.  Her pension kicks in another $75.  Not easy to make a go on that kind of income.  But she is in her 80s and we've been able to find other funding though a reverse mortgage.  Before Dad passed they lived comfortably on his pension and SS.  When he died his pension stopped....

            What about the folks with NO pension.  How many people out there currently have any pension?  And have limited savings because they couldn't afford to save, either on their own or via a 401K?  I really think this is the coming disaster for the elderly.  It is not clear how much the Chained CPI will impact seniors.  $10 a month?  While every little bit counts that isn't going to be a big deal compared to people with or without pensions.  SS is a safety net.  That net will not be enough to stop the crash that is coming if people expect to be able to maintain a reasonable std of living.

            Read it and weep....

            Retirement Heist

            ''Ellen Schultz documents the biggest heist in history, all the more horrifying because it is legal. Accounting tricks, perverse tax incentives, and bonus-hungry executives have taken the retirement money American workers have saved over decades. Meticulously researched and as gripping as a crime novel, this is essential reading for anyone who has, had, or hopes to have a job.'' --Nell Minow, cofounder of The Corporate Library and author of Watching the Watchers: Corporate Governance for the 21st Century
            •  Because some people are in worse shape (2+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              TheUnknown285, JesseCW

              economically doesn't justify hurting others just a little (although what's a little is another matter).  The point is you help them both.  If chained CPI is just a little cut, then how could the savings there amount to enough to help those who have nothing?  I simply cannot see any benefit to chained CPI - none.

              The trouble with the world is that the stupid are cocksure and the intelligent are full of doubt. Bertrand Russell

              by accumbens on Wed Apr 10, 2013 at 10:07:28 AM PDT

              [ Parent ]

        •  There isn't any significant money to be saved by (0+ / 0-)

          taking SS from the .1% who get .5% of benefits.

          Michelle and I send our thoughts to the Thatcher family and all the British people as we carry on the work to which she dedicated her life" President Obama, on the passing of Margaret Thatcher.

          by JesseCW on Wed Apr 10, 2013 at 02:10:38 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

  •  Here's the big question (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Chi, rlochow

    How much money does this "save"? Unless they can prove that this will cut huge amounts out of the budget deficit, then all is doing is causing the vulnerable pain strictly for its own sake.

    Hige sceal þe heardra, heorte þe cenre, mod sceal þe mare, þe ure mægen lytlað

    by milkbone on Wed Apr 10, 2013 at 08:32:15 AM PDT

  •  1-202-224-3121 (5+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Dem Beans, TheUnknown285, Chi, rlochow, JesseCW

    That is the Capitol Switchboard. I asked for my Rep. Sheila Jackson Lee. I said no cuts to Social Security, Medicare, or Medicaid. I said I did not see why the President was proposing any; I think Republicans will be just as hard-headed as ever. I think a period of high unemployment is the worst time to be cutting the economic safety net. I you can think of a better but concise Keynsian argument, go for it.
    Oh, and I also said if Washington wants to cut spending, there must be some military expenditures to could be cut. Listen carefully: I said MILITARY expenditures, NOT defense expenditures.
    The White House line gave me a busy signal. I will have to try again after lunch.

    Censorship is rogue government.

    by scott5js on Wed Apr 10, 2013 at 08:32:43 AM PDT

    •  the republicans said no before the speech (0+ / 0-)

      the term i heard was "prejected".

    •  You won't have to worry about her, I think, but (0+ / 0-)

      we need to be asking more of the best.

      We need to ask them to actually stand up against this publicly and loudly.  It's not enough just not to vote for it.

      Michelle and I send our thoughts to the Thatcher family and all the British people as we carry on the work to which she dedicated her life" President Obama, on the passing of Margaret Thatcher.

      by JesseCW on Wed Apr 10, 2013 at 02:13:04 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  Blah, blah, blah (4+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Dem Beans, jaf49, Chi, rlochow

    lies, lies, lies. Remove knife from back.

    I didn't abandon the fight, I abandoned the Party that abandoned the fight...

    by Jazzenterprises on Wed Apr 10, 2013 at 08:32:49 AM PDT

  •  Republicans won't agree (0+ / 0-)

    to any budget deal with Obama's name on it so this is just kabuki.

    The activists left being furious over this deal is actually good for the WH because that's why he's getting glowing reviews for the "serious" beltway press for being the only adult in the room.

    As we have learned long ago, a plan is only serious if the left is mad.

    •   It is kabuki but Obama just insured the loss of (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Chi

      the Senate in 2014, make no mistake.  The R's will take this and ram it down the throats of every Dem.  Obama is a crap politician, we made him what he is and without us, he is crap.

      •  You're counting on the Republicans... (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        Heftysmurf, mallyroyal

        ...to be way smarter than they have been.

        They won't accept anything that raises taxes, not without having it beaten through their thick skull.  The leaders in Washington don't have the political capital to negotiate in good faith.

        Simple question: In the years since Republicans successfully urged the disempowering of workers and unions in the Midwest, what has happened to those states economies?

        by Stephen Daugherty on Wed Apr 10, 2013 at 08:45:28 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

  •  Boooooo! (5+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    TheUnknown285, TJ, Chi, Patango, JesseCW

    This is crap, it's time to fight for the soul of this party!
    Who is on our side?

    Can we get a daily update of MOC who are committed to oppose this monsense?

  •  If he seems defensive, then I think... (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    mallyroyal

    ...that's a good sign.

    I think we should be figuring out ways to allow Obama a graceful exit from the Chained CPI compromise.

    Heck, I think the Republicans might just provide him with that.

    If I were him, I would set this as a sort of "take advantage of this deal now, or it goes away" sort of thing.  First round only.  If you don't go for it, that's it.

    I know some might object to that, but we're looking for a way out of it, and it might be useful for the Republicans to get the impression that if they don't take deals in good time, they'll suffer for it.

    Simple question: In the years since Republicans successfully urged the disempowering of workers and unions in the Midwest, what has happened to those states economies?

    by Stephen Daugherty on Wed Apr 10, 2013 at 08:35:11 AM PDT

  •  Is it alright to call him a douchebag now? I'm not (7+ / 0-)

    actually saying it, I'm just asking, in case, you know, I want to grab a bullhorn and shout it out in all caps or something, maybe.

    What's the point of letting neoliberals into the tent when neoliberalism is burning down the campground?
    Since elections will never change the ownership of government, why does our strategy rely entirely upon them?

    by Words In Action on Wed Apr 10, 2013 at 08:38:25 AM PDT

  •   On the long-term Republican strategy to get Democ (0+ / 0-)

    Two must-read pieces by Thom Hartmann

    https://www.commondreams.org/...

    http://truth-out.org/...

  •  Bizarre coda: (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Jerry056, Beetwasher, Susan G in MN
    He's got a nearly impossible task, trying to explain why he's proposing something that he says he doesn't really want to support but is nonetheless willing to accept.
    Actually, that's just about every offer, at least past the first one.

    Is haggling and negotiation so far removed from our experience?   I suspect that the prevalence of set prices and the decline of flea markets means there's a significant portion of people who think that a successful negotiation requires that you get everything and all you want, rather than what you'll accept.  

    That's not even "gun control". It's more like "massacre control".

    by Inland on Wed Apr 10, 2013 at 08:38:47 AM PDT

    •  The Repubs don't want what he has offered. (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      TheUnknown285, speedingpullet

      It's extra, and it goes directly against the Democratic platform. But, he's threatened this since he won the first election (he campaigned vociferously against cutting SS and Medicare, mind you), as an effort to appear like a tough-minded Democrat who is willing to swallow bitter pills all in the name of bipartisanship...or something. That isn't good negotiating skills so much as an eye constantly cast toward the historical record.

      Republicans...What a nice club...of liars, cheaters, adulterers, exaggerators, hypocrites and ignoramuses. Der Spiegel -6.62, -6.92

      by CanyonWren on Wed Apr 10, 2013 at 09:59:20 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  the CPI measure is in the democratic platform? (0+ / 0-)

        Is there someplace I can look that up?  Because I don't remember voting for that, or anyone mentioning it aside from the last time CPIs were tweaked.

        And I'll just repeat again that people just don't have any experience in a negotiation setting.  The sole point of a negotiation is not to get the other party to say yes.  It's to get the other party to say yes to something that is acceptable to you at minimum.  

        as an effort to appear like a tough-minded Democrat who is willing to swallow bitter pills all in the name of bipartisanship...or something. That isn't good negotiating skills so much as an eye constantly cast toward the historical record.
        If history is going to judge it kindly, then that tells me something.

        That's not even "gun control". It's more like "massacre control".

        by Inland on Thu Apr 11, 2013 at 06:57:20 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  I'm an attorney, and have done plenty of (0+ / 0-)

          negotiating.  So have many others here who are critical of Obama's skills.  It doesn't take a master negotiator to notice that Obama pretty much sucks at it.  Further, no, the CPI measure isn't in the platform, that is my point.

          Republicans...What a nice club...of liars, cheaters, adulterers, exaggerators, hypocrites and ignoramuses. Der Spiegel -6.62, -6.92

          by CanyonWren on Thu Apr 11, 2013 at 08:01:28 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

  •  Corporatist Dems VS The Dem Wing (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    TheUnknown285, beverlywoods, Chi

    As this reality sinks in for more people...

    When you hear them speak--It's always about what "they" don't say, while trying Not to say it, that says it all.
    Listen to that.
    MSM will continue to busy themselves with journalistic bs to distract focus....or pulls Jedi Mind Fks everyday-all day long-day in/day out. imo.

  •  Yeah, not a good sign.... (4+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    TheUnknown285, Chi, Patango, CanyonWren

    ...when a Democrat in the Oval Office won't even say the words "Social Security."

    Oh well.  He can punch me.  I'm wearing my anti-hippie-punching facemask.  And cup.  It's all Kibuki theatre anyway.

    -

  •  Is CCPI a strategy to corner Repugs on SS & taxes? (0+ / 0-)

    Wild thinking here.

    Personally I agree that chained CPI (CCPI) sucks.

    Obama doesn't care about his own re-election, so he includes the terrible CCPI proposal in his budget. All the Dems will pile on the criticism.

    But how about the Repugs who will go on record that they oppose the CCPI and would never cut SS benefits. Such public comments become campaign fodder when they are primaried from the Tea Party right. Those Repugs also then (indirectly) would choose payroll tax cap hikes, payroll tax rate hikes, means testing, or raising the eligibility age  as future solutions to balance SS.

    CCPI would also raise taxes. Repugs will obviously and cynically oppose that CCPI apply to taxes, but only to future benefits. What will Lord Grover say?

    So is CCPI a dumbass proposal from a fiscally moderate term-limited President, or is it a wily strategic ploy to obtain public Repug support for the future of SS and tax increases?

  •  Centrist? Sellout? Appeaser? (0+ / 0-)

    Actually, Obama can be psychoanalyzed thusly - he has a belief system that simply does not allow for the possibility that some people (or some political parties) could be selfish, malevolent or cruel. For him there is no such thing as malevolence, only opposing, yet fully equivalent different points of view - equally legitimate and well-intentioned. While it is an astonishing and frightening blindness, it does have a genesis that can be decoded. IMO this is one of the legacies of modern "enlightened" education (which he unfortunately received) - every kid is deep down a good kid and deserves an "A", gets a trophy, even slackers, bullies and juvenile delinquents. The logical behavioral conclusion of this naive belief system is that everyone should win something in a political fight - for him (as Soloman) there wouldn't/couldn't be a right and a wrong - there would be two halves of a dead baby. This is moral relativism at its worst. He is more interested in compromise than what is right - it's as if the only conviction he holds is that everyone should win - there are no "bad" or "wrong" viewpoints.

  •  Do you like living in fantasyland? (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    HCKAD

    Then you'll LOVE this take on Obama's proposed austerity measures:

    Hal Sparks on the President playing hardball with budget talks

    Hal Sparks and Mama talk budget battle issues and the President’s strategy over chained-CPI. Stephanie brings up the fact that Michael Tomasky just wrote a piece for The Daily Beast that implies chained-CPI is on the table as part of a negotiating strategy. Hal agrees and says, “this is a smart, callous, and a jaded political move. Sparks adds that what liberals have wanted for the last two decades is for “the President to play hard ball.”
    /shaking my head

    “The probability that we may fail in the struggle ought not to deter us from the support of a cause we believe to be just.” – Abraham Lincoln

    by Sagebrush Bob on Wed Apr 10, 2013 at 09:19:59 AM PDT

    •  I had to turn that mess off this morning. Hal (0+ / 0-)

      will never stop cheerleading.  So much wrong in his understanding and explanation just to maintain support of Obama.  Steph is funny but completely clueless on policy details.  Stick to comedy Mama!

      End the wars! Single payer now!

      by HCKAD on Wed Apr 10, 2013 at 10:14:02 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  If Obama cuts Social Security, I'm done. (5+ / 0-)

    I'm throwing in the towel. I'm not going to make political donations. I'll give up political blogging and commenting. No more petitions either. Call me what you want but I just can't take it anymore. This betrayal cuts to the bone for me. I've worked sooo hard for this man and to have him and Pelosi stab me in the back is the worst. My COLA was fifteen fracking dollars and now they want that too. Eff you Obama. Go join the republicants you backstabbing SOB. You promised not to cut Social Security and you lied. I’ll never believe another word that comes out of your lying head.

    I'll just spend the rest of my days just trying to survive in a world where words are just words and have no meaning. A promise means nothing and politicians are just paid corporate lackeys.

  •  So splain to me Lucy (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    rlochow

    if it is a republican idea why did YOU put it in the budget?
    you threw in the towel before the fight.

  •  Turning off young voters (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    TheUnknown285, rlochow

    Who see lying hypocrite politicians in Washington. Kiss 2014 election goodbye dems. The Geithner pick was the first warning Obama was a Wall Street apologist. The irony is once repubs take both chambers the first thing they do is hold impeachment hearings. Obama won't have many fiends left.

  •  So much for the guy leading our nation focusing on (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    TheUnknown285

    JOBS JOBS JOBS!!!!!!

    FLOP!!!!!!!!

    I am thinking NAFTA 3.0  will be his real jobs plan now... What a shocker huh? I guess I voted for him the 2nd time to help the USSC not be completely destroyed  , and that will be about it for now

  •  This President Is Not The One I Voted For (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    TheUnknown285

    I voted for the president who said social security would be protected.  Third way is steering him wrong.  Also, wallstreet is the people behind trying to kill social security.  The president should be talking about breaking up big banks and cutting the bonuses for Wallstreet CEOs, not cutting social security, period.  He is a disgrace to the democratic party on being the first democratic president to propose cutting social security.

    "Don't Let Them Catch You With Your Eyes Closed"

    by rssrai on Wed Apr 10, 2013 at 10:02:13 AM PDT

  •  Deficit Nonsense (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    speedingpullet, draghnfly

    Stiglitz and Krugman have made it very clear that the deficit is the least of our problems and Obama well knows it.  Yet, he continues to pander to Republicans using the deficit and now Social Security.  I thought the second term would be different which is why I voted for him the second time.  Now, I just have to conclude that he's a fraud, probably always has been, and I'm a dope for buying what he was selling.  

  •  Obama officially steps off his own ladder.... (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    TheUnknown285

    I think Obama now has officially recognized that he will be untouched by any of these future changes and in the great Republican tradition kicks out his own ladder.

    Seems very odd that such a major case was made about the congressional meetings where they had nothing but old men talking about issues related to women, but there is not the same level of critique applied to the very wealthy dictating the health and well being of lower income brackets?

    "I know the meaning of life. It doesn't help me a bit."

    by dss on Wed Apr 10, 2013 at 10:10:44 AM PDT

  •  The President knows (0+ / 0-)

    this budget will go nowhere. He has, again, made a proposal which is the furthest thing from compromise. I believe it is done deliberately. I think the President wishes to force both sides to see how unproductive they are and how deeply they wish failure for the other side. He is using the Socratic method to tease out the conflict. Thank you, Professor. With a bunch of scholars it works. With politicians, no way.

    This budget proposal makes it impossible for the Congress to act; the hard right can't approve on the grounds of principle, and the hard left can't approve because it begins the destruction of the social safety net when we should be increasing it.

    Why does he keep doing this?

    “The quality of owning freezes you forever in "I," and cuts you off forever from the "we.” ― John Steinbeck, The Grapes of Wrath

    by Miss Pip on Wed Apr 10, 2013 at 10:22:36 AM PDT

  •  I'm officially done with fundraising. (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    TheUnknown285, speedingpullet

    The last straw was a request for money, to "support President Obama's progressive agenda".

    After I finished horking, I methodically unsubscribed from.. let's see.. at last count 12 different "please contribute" emails.

    I'm not supporting Republican Lite.  At least, not anymore.  They're gonna have to prove that they're not wolves in sheep's clothing.

  •  Unless I'm mistaken, what Obama is proposing (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    NDakotaDem, draghnfly

    is an austerity budget: hike taxes (especially on the middle class, such as with the expiry of the payroll tax cuts but not the Bush tax cuts), cut spending (especially on services and those pesky "entitlements") and hope that the Confidence Fairy will sort out matters.

    How's that workin out for ya', Ireland? Oh, you say that your GDP is still lower than in 2008? Fancy that!

    Latvia? Dayum, 15% lower - still! Moving on.....

    Greece? That looks like a Depression there. So very Not Serious.

    Spain? Well, if you ignore the 55% youth unemployment rate (hey, cheap rentboys for evangelical homophobes!), the busted housing market and a bunch of other shit, it's almost OK - if you squint really hard.

    There is no such thing as an austerity success story in this recession. So why, in the name of God and little fishies, is Obama pushing it so very, very hard??

    "Violence never requires translation, but it often causes deafness." - Bareesh the Hutt.

    by Australian2 on Wed Apr 10, 2013 at 11:24:50 AM PDT

  •  Many seem to be concluding that the left is (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    NDakotaDem, SparkyGump

    virtually the only sector pissed off about this.  

    Social Security supporters cut across all party lines and degrees of sanity.

    BEFORE the election I tried to tell a couple of TP'rs that the GOP would cut their social security and medicare.

    "NO," they literally screamed at me, "It's Obama that will cut social security and medicare."  Again, this was BEFORE the election.

    At the time I thought, you poor ignorant buffoons.  Hah!

    The Tea Party will be every bit as pissed by SS and Medicare cuts as the left, except they will be pointing at Obama and saying "See, we TOLD you." And they'll be right.

    Maybe a grassroots effort that cuts across party lines is needed for this insult.  After all the capitalist U.S. teamed up with the communist Russia to fight Hitler.  After knocking him out, of course, they immediately started punching each other out again, but hey, they accomplished what they set out to do.

    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 Wed Apr 10, 2013 at 11:36:09 AM PDT

  •  Hail to the Traitor in Chief (0+ / 0-)

    What a piece of work is President Barack Obama: reelected with a mandate on the promise that above all he will defend Medicare and Social Security from the Republicans' Paul Ryan budget, he instead proposes cuts to Social Security in his own budget.

    To those--Paul Krugman included--who say this is just a move in a Kabuki political theater between Obama and his opponents, a reminder that enough voters believed the 2010 stuff about Obama cutting Medicare that the Democrats lost the House. It's easily possible that the current Social Security gambit is likely to result in 2014 mid-term electoral damage.

    The truth is we really do live in Lester Land:
    https://www.youtube.com/...

    Obama won the Lester election in 2008 and is behaving exactly as Lesters would expect.

  •  The President is trying to shake things (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    draghnfly

    up in DC.  He thinks this proposal is a way to shock the system out of its funk.  It has certainly gotten everyone's attention.  I don't worry too much about the campaign impact of this, because unlike health care, this will never become law. People will have short memories.

    Politically, it's a loser and every Democrat is wisely running away from it.  The Party won't go along with him on this unless the GOP completely folds the tent (which they won't).  

    During the 2008 primary, Obama's weakest position was his view on social security.  He also screwed up debate #1 by saying that he and Romney had the same position on social security.

    I understand what the President is looking for.  He wants to establish a set of budget priorities that will dramatically increase investment in the economy of the future, restructure the tax code to favor the middle class, manage our debt burden, and manage health care costs.  He thinks what Orzag has told him would be a minor adjustment in social security will help trigger that budget realignment which will position America to take advantage of the 21st century economy.

    However, social security is not in trouble and it does not require any reforms (other than perhaps expanding the payroll tax).  He leaves the impression that social security is a cash cow or bargaining chip. That's where he gets into trouble.

    He has not fully thought through the politics of this issue and the politics are very important.  There is no indication that the GOP will ever sign on to a grand bargain.  They are insincere.  Obama still feels the need to go the extra mile, and that is when he is at his worst.  Fortunately, Democrats are putting a stop to this endeavor and are reeling him in.

    Alternative rock with something to say: http://www.myspace.com/globalshakedown

    by khyber900 on Wed Apr 10, 2013 at 02:29:52 PM PDT

  •  what's so impossible? (0+ / 0-)
    He's got a nearly impossible task, trying to explain why he's proposing something that he says he doesn't really want to support but is nonetheless willing to accept.
    I don't see why that's so impossible, unless you assume it's now impossible for the country to stomach compromise.

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site