Skip to main content

President Barack Obama is scheduled to make a 1:15 PM ET statement from the White House urging Congress to replace the automatic spending cuts of the budget sequester with a balanced set of deficit reductions including both additional revenue and spending cuts.

Republicans have already responded, with House Speaker John Boehner saying he would rather proceed with the draconian austerity of the budget sequester than agree to a compromise including both revenue and spending cuts. Boehner said he would agree to replace the spending cuts with a different set of spending cuts, but according to his spokesman that would mean cutting programs like Social Security, Medicare, and Medicaid to pay for defense spending.

Follow along for live updates as the president delivers his remarks and for the discussion in the comments.

10:13 AM PT: Funny note: Obama's statement comes at roughly the same time as Eric Cantor is delivering his fourth attempt to rebrand the Republican Party. And yes, it has Republicans pissed off because nothing is more important than letting the GOP try to reinvent itself.

10:17 AM PT: The CBO is forecasting the budget deficit to be $845 billion this year, a dramatic drop from the $1.4 trillion deficit President Obama inherited from George W. Bush in fiscal 2009.

10:17 AM PT: President Obama takes the podium.

10:19 AM PT: Obama starts by outlining signs of economic growth in the private sector, but says that political dysfunction is an economic threat. "Deep, indiscriminate cuts" will hurt the economy and cost jobs, says Obama. "The good news is that this doesn't have to happen."

10:20 AM PT: The president says $2.5 trillion in deficit reduction has been achieved, which he says is more than halfway towards his goal of $4 trillion. He says everything he's offered to Boehner in the past are still on the table. "I've offered sensible reforms to Medicare and other entitlements." At the mention of "Bowles-Simpson" a Camera makes a very strange whirring noise. Laughter ensues.

10:22 AM PT: "In order to achieve the full $4 trillion of deficit reductions, these modest reforms to our social insurance programs must go hand-in-hand" with revenue increases from closing loopholes. "If we're serious about paying down the deficit, the savings we achieve from tax reform should be used pay down the deficit."

10:23 AM PT: Basically, Obama is saying that he still wants a Grand Bargain. However, he says that the sequester is scheduled to go into effect on March 1. And he knows that a Grand Bargain isn't possible by then. So, at the very least, Congress should act now to delay the sequester to provide more time. To accomplish this, a set of smaller revenue increases and spending cuts should be enacted, he says, to replace prevent the automatic cuts from kicking in.

10:24 AM PT: And with that, the statement is over. The President leaves behind Jay Carney to take questions from the media.


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

  •  Hopefully Obama Admin and Dems are not falling (10+ / 0-)

    for the ruse that the GOP House is okay with the sequester cuts.  Or are both in cahoots and Obama will HAVE to cave in to GOP because otherwise the economy would go back into recession and national security would be put at risk.

    Call their bluff.  Let's see if the MIC and the CoC are willing to see if the GOP is bluffing or not.  

    How about some bloody spending now to get more people back to work.  The is the last time Pres Obama really talked in depth with any real focus on Jobs.   "Jobs" is now treated as an abstract at best, and a political catchphrase/buzzword at worst these days.

    Keystone XL Pipeline - Canada gets the money, Asia gets the oil, America gets the toxic refinery pollution and potential for a pipeline leak ecological disaster.

    by Jacoby Jonze on Tue Feb 05, 2013 at 10:15:21 AM PST

  •  Heartless Bastard (24+ / 0-)

    So Boehner would cut medical spending for senior citizens so we can have more war.

    Talk about a death panel... it's called the Republican House Caucus.  No, just the Republican Party.

  •  The only path worth pursuing for each side (7+ / 0-)

    is the one most likely to bring about its respective desired outcome, or the closest facsimile thereof. Boehner still seems to believe that getting Obama to propose drastic cuts to entitlement programs--his desired policy outcome--is the best way to make it happen, because it will also bring about his desired political outcome, being able to paint Dems as the ones who cut entitlements, not Repubs. As for what Obama's desired outcome is, it's hard to tell since he's been all over the map on these issues. But I believe that it should be for there to be no benefit cuts to entitlements while at the same time bringing down their costs, along with revenue increases, in a way that's economically sound and politically smart--i.e. paint Repubs, not Dems, as the party that wants to cut benefits. Seeking any other outcome is foolish and unnecessary.

    "Liberty without virtue would be no blessing to us" - Benjamin Rush, 1777

    by kovie on Tue Feb 05, 2013 at 10:20:17 AM PST

    •  I think that is exactly what Obama just said. (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      wishingwell

      Just when you thought there wasn't a dime's worth of difference between the two parties, the Republicans go and prove you're wrong.

      by shoeless on Tue Feb 05, 2013 at 10:53:31 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  So long as he doesn't propose cuts to benefits (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        shoeless, vigilant meerkat

        then I'm ok with that. Even if we do end up cutting them (which I believe are unnecessary, stupid and cruel), then let the GOP be the side that gets saddled with most of the blame. And since they clearly don't want that, I think that that is precisely the way to avoid any benefits cuts at all.

        "Liberty without virtue would be no blessing to us" - Benjamin Rush, 1777

        by kovie on Tue Feb 05, 2013 at 11:04:12 AM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  he already has proposed them... (6+ / 0-)

          ...and they're still on the table.

          He says everything he's offered to Boehner in the past are still on the table. "I've offered sensible reforms to Medicare and other entitlements."

          "Sensible reforms" in this case mean CUTS to Medicare and Social Security benefits in the form of raising the eligibility age for Medicare and chained CPI.
          Proposed/offered by the President and still on the table.  
          And it's obviously the only cuts that Boehner and co. really want, cuts that screw the middle class/working class/poor, not Republican benefactors.  

          It's why I say let the sequester go through, I'll take the short term pain and damage over the long term damage that would result from SS and Medicare benefit CUTS.  Is there anyone who doesn't see through this use of "reform" by the "very serious people" who won't be hurt by the CUTS?

          •  that's what concerned me... (4+ / 0-)

            It seemed that President Obama used the term "entitlements" almost in the pejorative sense, the same as Republicans do, and he said -- twice, if I recall correctly -- that all of his prior offers are still on the table.  It was almost like he was begging for the Republicans to help him cut the programs while he, solely, would claim the responsibility/blame.  

            It is increasingly clear that no one in Washington listens to the people, none of whom have requested cuts to Social Security, Medicare or Medicaid and have, in fact, said just the opposite, that these programs are important and must be preserved.  

            And, as mentioned above, job creation is mentioned as an abstract concept if it is mentioned at all.  

            •  This REALLY gets me to rant (3+ / 0-)

              It is just exactly that disdain for "entitlements" that just sets me off!!  

              There needs to be an intensity meter on this issue.  These are CORE middle class programs that are FUNDAMENTAL to what it means to be a Democrat.

              I mean you think I'm going to vote for you because I just love drone strikes?  Ah, no, not going to happen.  I might overlook about 100 other things that peeve me but I'm not overlooking anything on this issue.  

              You do not diss me on this issue, Democrats.  I will hold you ALL accountable, at the polls, from the top of the ballot to the bottom.   I am still entitled to do that.

          •  I simply don't get Obama (0+ / 0-)

            He's either a brilliant negotiator we're all too stupid to grasp the genius of, or he's a stupid negotiator who wants to please more than he wants to win.

            He's like the guy who antes up for everyone in a poker game, in the hopes that everyone likes him more, when in reality he's the patsy. Who does that?

            "Liberty without virtue would be no blessing to us" - Benjamin Rush, 1777

            by kovie on Tue Feb 05, 2013 at 04:24:41 PM PST

            [ Parent ]

      •  Obama said a whole lot of nothing (5+ / 0-)

        But we know that whenever specifics for "entitlement reform" emerge, chained CPI is always in there.

        (-2.38, -3.28) Independent thinker

        by TrueBlueDem on Tue Feb 05, 2013 at 11:05:46 AM PST

        [ Parent ]

    •  Regarding . . . (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      kovie

      "As for what Obama's desired outcome is, it's hard to tell since he's been all over the map on these issues."

      Respectfully, I am truly confused as to how you come to this conclusion.

      Here's an excerpt and a link to the WaPo article, dated January 16, 2009, from then President-Elect Obama's interview with the WaPo Editorial Board.

      "Obama Pledges Reform of Social Security, Medicare Programs,"

      President-elect Barack Obama pledged yesterday to shape a new Social Security and Medicare "bargain" with the American people, . . .
      Please take a moment to read the entire article, and then tell me that you think that he is proposing these cuts to satisfy John Boehner.  

      That's just not the case.  For whatever reason, he clearly has always intended to cut the social insurance programs.

      It is an "inconvenient truth."  But it is a fact, nonetheless.

      Mollie

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

      "If a dog won’t come to you after having looked you in the face, you should go home and examine your conscience.” -- Woodrow Wilson

      by musiccitymollie on Tue Feb 05, 2013 at 05:54:29 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  But in the inaugural and other speeches (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        musiccitymollie

        he keeps repeating that we must not balance the budget on the backs of the old and needy. Either he's trying to play it both ways, or he intends to put in stopgaps to prevent these cuts from hurting the neediest, but screw everyone else who's not quite at the very bottom, but hardly doing well.

        I.e. he's out to remake the New Deal into a welfare program for the very poor, and a shell of its former self for everyone else. I.e. he's a Victorian moralist, believing that only the truly unlucky are genuinely poor, and that everyone else is just lazy and needs to tough love to get with the program.

        In which case, who the hell is he to preach to others, having ridden a gilded path to the top, from getting a scholarship to a top prep school to winning a senate seat due to a succession of scandals to running for president against a really poor opponent at a time when his party was very unpopular. I'm not saying that he didn't work hard and isn't talented, but if he doesn't think that he's one of the luckiest people alive, he's nuts.

        Talk about closing the gate after you've gone through it.

        "Liberty without virtue would be no blessing to us" - Benjamin Rush, 1777

        by kovie on Tue Feb 05, 2013 at 07:24:40 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  You've got some good points, there, kovie. (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          kovie

          But, let me add, that when politicians make that broad statement about "balancing the budget on the backs of the old and needy," listen very carefully to the follow-up statements.

          IOW, they are not saying that they are not going to deeply cut benefits.  They are simply making the case that they must also raise taxes (on the wealthy), to make it fair.  Because, if they didn't raise taxes on the wealthy at the same time that they cuts the old and poor, then they would be "balancing the budget on the backs of the old and needy."

          So, just be sure to listen carefully when you hear this.  I assure you, there is always a "qualifying statement."

          If you think about it, the President often says that their will be "tough or difficult choices and shared sacrifice."  He means cutting entitlements, when he says that.

          In a sense, he is trying to have it both ways.  {BTW, he's not alone in that, LOL!  All politicians do that.}  

          Remember, if he came out forthrightly declaring his support for deep cuts to Social Security and Medicare like he did in 2011 when his popularity tanked, he knows that he'd lose the support of much of his base.

          And I imagine, or guess that he wants to keep his base  engaged to help him with immigration reform, etc.

          Hence, the confusing, contradictory, and often very vague rhetoric.

          That's my opinion.  It's the only thing that makes sense, since all the MSM accounts of the negotiations indicate that he's more than willing to "do" Chained CPI, raise the Medicare eligibility age, etc., etc.

          I agree with you on many things.  Glad that you didn't take my question in a negative way.  [It wasn't intended that way.  :-)]

          You may be correct.  I have heard many folks (including progressives who say that from what he's written in the past (maybe in his books, I'm not sure), that he does have the philosphy of a "meritocratist."

          I'm not saying he does, because I honestly have not read his two books.  But I've heard it mentioned, and by folks who also support the President.

          Namaste.

          Mollie

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

          "If a dog won’t come to you after having looked you in the face, you should go home and examine your conscience.” -- Woodrow Wilson

          by musiccitymollie on Tue Feb 05, 2013 at 08:24:36 PM PST

          [ Parent ]

          •  Or a moral scold (1+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            musiccitymollie

            I think he fancies himself of an earlier and presumably (but not necessarily) purer era, in which a man earned his keep, and if he had no keep, then he hadn't earned it. The closest historical analog I can think of is Victorianism, which balanced high moral standards, hard work and care for the truly needy. Which I suppose came out of Burkian conservatism. I think he view the US as being quite sick at present, both because those at the top are too greedy, and those near but not quite at the bottom are too lazy and want a handout, and he's doing both a favor by being hard on them. I.e. "balance".

            I don't buy the explanation some make that he's in the pockets of big money. Certainly he's too close to them, but it's not just that. It's that he really does appear to believe in the virtue of scaling down the welfare state so that an exceptional people living in an exceptional country can be exceptional again, which an excessively large welfare state discourages them from pursuing. It's a very Reaganesque view, in fact, and benevolent in its view of itself.

            What's that saying about being wary of people with good intentions, moralists out to save you from yourself with their tough love medicine? I suspect that Obama has appointed himself to be our tough nanny. Which is not his place.

            "Liberty without virtue would be no blessing to us" - Benjamin Rush, 1777

            by kovie on Tue Feb 05, 2013 at 09:08:04 PM PST

            [ Parent ]

            •  You may be correct, again. He makes no secret of (1+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              kovie

              his admiration for Reagan.

              I also agree that a "tough nanny" is not what we need right now, LOL!  But it may be what we've got.  :-)

              Mollie

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

              "If a dog won’t come to you after having looked you in the face, you should go home and examine your conscience.” -- Woodrow Wilson

              by musiccitymollie on Tue Feb 05, 2013 at 10:40:42 PM PST

              [ Parent ]

  •  Entitlement reforms still on the table! (22+ / 0-)

    And here we go...

    Keystone XL Pipeline - Canada gets the money, Asia gets the oil, America gets the toxic refinery pollution and potential for a pipeline leak ecological disaster.

    by Jacoby Jonze on Tue Feb 05, 2013 at 10:20:52 AM PST

  •  1.4 trillion deficit= good if for war and tax (5+ / 0-)

    breaks for Cheneys buddies (deficits don't matter)
    $845 billion deficit after cuts to government programs=not so good because Obama

    FUCKING HYPOCRITCAL ASSHOLES!

    CALL THEM OUT DEMOCRATS!

    I am pro-life. Bring our troops home ALIVE!

    by Doc Allen on Tue Feb 05, 2013 at 10:22:49 AM PST

  •  Why oh why is Social Security "on the table" (28+ / 0-)

    I cannot believe he's going down this road again, cutting Social Security to get a pittance in tax "reform".  sigh.

    •  believe it. (5+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      irate, Woody, tb mare, acramer, conniptionfit

      And who the hell is Grover Norquist???

      by ZedMont on Tue Feb 05, 2013 at 10:29:44 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

    •  Same here (5+ / 0-)

      probably one of the top one or two things that disappoints me most about Obama, he's willing to sell out future generations of retirees for his precious grand bargain and approval of all the "very serious people" who know that you can't be very serious unless you're screwing those who live paycheck to paycheck, or benefit check to benefit check.

      •  Not certain what the reference to "future (0+ / 0-)

        generations" is about.

        Implementation of the Superlative or Chained CPI applies to even today's retirees. In the past reform efforts, to my knowledge, the current and near-retirees never had their benefits cut.

        If I am mistaken, please correct me, and provide documentation.  

        I've heard the Greenspan Commission in a forum on C-Span, and from the description of their reform package, the benefit cuts were always many years out.

        This is done so that those who are affected, will have reasonable notice, and therefore a reasonable expectation that they can prepare, accordingly.

        Mollie

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

        "If a dog won’t come to you after having looked you in the face, you should go home and examine your conscience.” -- Woodrow Wilson

        by musiccitymollie on Tue Feb 05, 2013 at 06:57:00 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

  •  Obama has reduced the deficit he inherited (10+ / 0-)

    from the Republicans by 40%. Please don't tell Eric Cantor that or he'll get really mad, and stomp his foot TWICE.

    Economics is a social *science*. Can we base future economic decisions on math?

    by blue aardvark on Tue Feb 05, 2013 at 10:25:06 AM PST

    •  F**K Eric Cantor. That is all. n/t (7+ / 0-)

      How is taking a hundred dollars worth of food from hungry kids or from old poor sick people equal to taking a hundred dollars from billionaires? -- howabout, 19 Dec 2012

      by billlaurelMD on Tue Feb 05, 2013 at 10:26:16 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

    •  Don't bother telling the teabaggers that. (3+ / 0-)

      They won't believe you anyway.

      Just when you thought there wasn't a dime's worth of difference between the two parties, the Republicans go and prove you're wrong.

      by shoeless on Tue Feb 05, 2013 at 10:54:48 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

    •  No, he hasn't reduced deficit by 40% (0+ / 0-)

      First off, Jed is incorrect when he says:

      The CBO is forecasting the budget deficit to be $845 billion this year, a dramatic drop from the $1.4 trillion deficit President Obama inherited from George W. Bush in fiscal 2009.
      That budget number was derived at the end of 2009 fiscal year.  It included TARP and Freddie and Fannie bailout as well as part of the stimulus.  Much of that was passed by Obama in February.

      It is disingenuous to call it a "budget".  The deficit that fiscal year was a combination of the original deficit built into Bush's budget, combined with all the spending Obama and the Dem Congress added on throughout the year.  You cannot really assign that extra spending by Dems to Bush.

      Plus.. TARP has mostly been paid back.  

      It is really nearly impossible to assign 2009 spending to either President or party.

      Yes, the deficit will be reduced this year.. mostly from the tax increases passed to avoid the fiscal cliff and the payroll tax holiday sunsetting... but, not because of any spending cuts.

      •  In no way (0+ / 0-)

        Has TARP been mostly paid back.  Banks have been allowed to "pay back" TARP Money by borrowing from other treasury programs at tiny interest, and to use that borrowed money to "pay back" their TARP loans.  Read " Bailout" by Inspector General for TARP Neil Barofski.

      •  but some of the extra spending (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        blue aardvark

        was just adding all of Bush's off budget spending, back to the budget,  much of the war spending was accounted for when it hadn't been before.  TARP was passed for $700 billion in October, 2008, before Obama was elected, though he was in favor of it as Senator.  So that belongs to Bush as much as anyone.

        http://en.wikipedia.org/...

        http://www.nytimes.com/...

        The NYT article has some graphs,   and the projection for Bush's budget and recession effects for 2009 was $1.2, Obama brought it in at $1.4 even with the stimulus.

        Loss of revenue from the recession is a big factor which hopefully start to ameliorate.  Getting some tax increases help some long term.  See the third chart in the NYT article for projected net deficit effects of GWB terms v. Obama.

        Further there have been significant spending cuts,  salary and benefit freezes, many jobs not being filled at the federal level, some savings from ACA, some relatively small cuts at the Pentagon, some department combinations, etc.

        His proposal for 2012, which was not voted into law, but some cuts made in appropriations:

        http://money.cnn.com/...

        cuts made in his first year:

        http://www.washingtontimes.com/...

        The "Obama never has cut spending" meme is undeserved.  If he spent like Bush, the deficit might look good, because if its not in the budget, it wasn't spent, but the debt would have skyrocketed even more.

  •  Ugh, fuck deficit reduction. (21+ / 0-)

    As long as the return on bonds is less than inflation, the deficit is completely unimportant.

    They tortured people to get false confessions to fraudulently justify our invading Iraq.

    by Ponder Stibbons on Tue Feb 05, 2013 at 10:25:36 AM PST

  •  This was done to step on Cantor... (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    MPociask, slinkerwink

    because those remarks were all over the place and seem rather rushed.  

    Not that I don't think Cantor should be stepped all over, but way to make it obvious WH.  

    Keystone XL Pipeline - Canada gets the money, Asia gets the oil, America gets the toxic refinery pollution and potential for a pipeline leak ecological disaster.

    by Jacoby Jonze on Tue Feb 05, 2013 at 10:25:37 AM PST

  •  I smell a shit sandwich deal coming... (10+ / 0-)

    because Pres Obama is acting like the sequester cuts are a big bad deal for the economy.  So he'll have no choice but to cave and give all cuts and no revenues because of those dastardly evil GOP.  

    Keystone XL Pipeline - Canada gets the money, Asia gets the oil, America gets the toxic refinery pollution and potential for a pipeline leak ecological disaster.

    by Jacoby Jonze on Tue Feb 05, 2013 at 10:28:35 AM PST

    •  We already got the shit sandwich tho (3+ / 0-)

      I'm pretty confident he will not agree to replace the sequester with only cuts. I also don't think he'll agree to eliminate all defense cuts.

      That said, I also think that if Republicans are willing to play ball on tax reform, he'll definitely do Chained CPI, Medicare age, and other stuff.

      What I think would be best would just be to nuke sequester. But I don't think think that'll happen. Nor do I think the GOP will replace it with purely cuts.

      That means it'll either be sequester as-is OR replace sequester with grand bargain.

      •  I completely disagree. (7+ / 0-)

        Pres is acting like sequester cuts are dangerous and cannot happen while GOP is saying "Hell, we hope they do happen" - so you can see where this negotiation is going to go.  Just like the original debt ceiling deal where GOP was "Let's not raise it" and Obama was "Man, you really gotta raise it".  And Boehner got 98% of what he wanted.  

        Pres Obama should have came out and said - Sequester Cuts are deep and harsh, but fine by me as SS, Medicare, Medicaid and Vet's are all walled off from any of these cuts.

        He is wholly unwilling to call the GOP's bluff again.  We'll look at a cuts only kicking of the can down the road - that much I am very sure of.  We'll get a shit sandwich forced on Feb 27th or 28th that will be cuts only to get only a couple more months until another sequester trigger - and the GOP will keep playing this game because the Pres swallowed their bluff hook, line and sinker.  

        Keystone XL Pipeline - Canada gets the money, Asia gets the oil, America gets the toxic refinery pollution and potential for a pipeline leak ecological disaster.

        by Jacoby Jonze on Tue Feb 05, 2013 at 10:51:35 AM PST

        [ Parent ]

      •  Wait for it ... (4+ / 0-)
                                              Bait and Switch II
        They told me if I voted for Romney we'd cut entitlements.  Sure enough, I voted for Romney and now we're headed to cut entitlements.  

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

        by accumbens on Tue Feb 05, 2013 at 10:54:40 AM PST

        [ Parent ]

      •  I don't think the republicans (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        wishingwell

        will play ball on tax reform.  Obama is talking specifically about the carried interest clause which is very near and dear to the GOP heart.  

        My bet---they'll find a way to kick the whole thing down the road again with little or no specific actions taken. So the sequester ends up hanging over us, but not hurting us, yet.  Meantime the win with any delay is on Obama's side as he's already made huge cuts to the deficit and if he can't get more his way, he'll let it stand as is.  Which ain't all that bad.  No entitlement cuts, and an economy not under the threat of austerity.

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

        by StellaRay on Tue Feb 05, 2013 at 10:55:37 AM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  Regarding . . . (0+ / 0-)

          "Meantime the win with any delay is on Obama's side as he's already made huge cuts to the deficit and if he can't get more his way, he'll let it stand as is.  Which ain't all that bad.  No entitlement cuts, and an economy not under the threat of austerity."

          Please, "don't bet the farm on it."  :-)

          Mollie

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

          "If a dog won’t come to you after having looked you in the face, you should go home and examine your conscience.” -- Woodrow Wilson

          by musiccitymollie on Tue Feb 05, 2013 at 05:41:20 PM PST

          [ Parent ]

    •  He already got the revenues.. (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      vigilant meerkat

      remember the "fiscal cliff"?

      They were supposed to deal both tax increases and spending cuts before the end of the year to avoid both the fiscal cliff and the sequestration.  They only agreed to the tax increases.

      I would like to see real tax reform that restructures all the tax laws and does away with most deductions.  But that's not what I heard Obama asking for.  He simply wants to avoid the spending cuts and wants quick revenue increases.  Ain't gonna happen.  He's in a very poor bargaining position.

      •  Raising taxes (which is what Bowles-Simpson calls (0+ / 0-)

        for in their proposal) mainly on working and middle class folks at the same time that all social insurance programs are slashed is called "Austerity."  

        That's the very definition of AUSTERITY.

        Just out of curiosity--"Why do you want that?"  [Which is not to say that you aren't entitled to, I suppose.  But that's exactly what they've done in Britain--an we all know where that's gotten them, right?]

        And remember, regardless of Dem rhetoric that they would like to see the tax deductions cut ONLY for wealthy Americas, I don't believe for a second that this round of tax reform will get more revenue from the wealthiest Americans.  

        This round, it will be the lower and middle classes who "take a haircut."  Just watch.

        [And I mean on both taxes, and cuts to the social insurance programs.]

        Mollie

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

        "If a dog won’t come to you after having looked you in the face, you should go home and examine your conscience.” -- Woodrow Wilson

        by musiccitymollie on Tue Feb 05, 2013 at 06:44:50 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

  •  Putting a good face on it: (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    wishingwell

    So apparently he did not say much.  Maybe he is just trying to look amenable to reason and when the Republicans refuse any compromise they will look worse?

    "A developed country is not where the poor have cars. It's where the rich use public transportation." - Mayor of Bogota

    by Time Waits for no Woman on Tue Feb 05, 2013 at 10:29:39 AM PST

  •  Since "the sequester" is a poison-pill (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    nchristine, shoeless

    I'm betting that a few Patriotic Teahaddis in congress will be insisting everyone has some hemlock to wash it down.

    Everyone except their precious bloated military, of course.

  •  1936 Reprise. /nt (9+ / 0-)

    Happy little moron, Lucky little man.
    I wish I was a moron, MY GOD, Perhaps I am!
    —Spike Milligan

    by polecat on Tue Feb 05, 2013 at 10:31:42 AM PST

  •  it was already a pissy day (12+ / 0-)

    in little ways,  cloudy again,  red buds and jonquils already in bloom,  but now the frosting on the cake, the President walks out in public to offer cuts again in Social Security and Medicare instead of forcing the Republicans' hands.

    I am gravely disappointed,  and am revising my long held opinion that he was a smart man.

    •  The "Grand Bargain" serves the interests of the (0+ / 0-)

      elites.  

      That's not stupid, if you want to be wealthy beyond your wildest dreams when you leave the White House.

      Think President Clinton's done well?  I would guess that any President who can achieve (for the One Percent) the feat of dismantling the social insurance programs, would stand to make him look like "a piker."

      Now, I don't claim to know if this is the Administration's motive, or if it's purely ideological.  Heck, I have no idea "why" this path is being followed.  

      But one thing that we all know, is the fact that the President is not dumb, and therefore, not likely being fooled (IMHO).

      And bear in mind, folks, when you hear the following laundry list:

      education, research and development, and infrastructure,

      which you've heard a million times, right?

      This is Peter G Peterson's wish list.

      Please read this excerpt, and then follow this link to the entire Q&A from October 2011.

      Why did you start the Peter G. Peterson Foundation?

      I think of my life as one of those great, only-in-America stories. And I want to do all I can to make sure that my own grandchildren and future generations of Americans benefit from a growing economy that provides abundant opportunities for success. This will require investments in areas such as education, research and development, and infrastructure that give rise to innovation and new jobs.

      This is the wish list of the One Percent.  They want as much taxpayer money as possible to be funneled to them (corporations) for their own business interests.  

      I am convinced that the evisceration of the Social Safety Net will be a result of our elites' inordinate greed, and the weakness of the politicians who serve at their behest.

      So, we all need to be "burning up the phone lines" to the White House.  Now!

      Mollie

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

      "If a dog won’t come to you after having looked you in the face, you should go home and examine your conscience.” -- Woodrow Wilson

      by musiccitymollie on Tue Feb 05, 2013 at 06:33:03 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

  •  IS SS is really on the table...and from our side?? (16+ / 0-)

    Hey, didn't we just go down this road....and weren't we told it would not happen again?!?!?

    •  Same guy who voted FOR Telecom-Immunity (4+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Woody, MPociask, acramer, vigilant meerkat

      doesn't surprise me at all.

      Happy little moron, Lucky little man.
      I wish I was a moron, MY GOD, Perhaps I am!
      —Spike Milligan

      by polecat on Tue Feb 05, 2013 at 10:35:51 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

    •  It is "on the table," Bailey2001. Below is the (0+ / 0-)

      link to Jay Carney verifying this on February 5th (in the Daily Press Briefing):

      MR. CARNEY:

      The President, again, in his negotiations with the Speaker of the House put forward a broad $4 trillion deficit reduction package that remains available -- the parts that haven't been acted on -- to the Speaker right now.

      So when it comes to specific plans -- again, we had this debate at the end of the year -- the specificity attached to the President’s proposal to Speaker Boehner is considerable compared to what we saw in return.  Specificity is there.  It remains available to be acted on.

      If you Google, you'll find that the proposal from last year's Lame Duck included the implementation of the Chained CPI and raising the Medicare eligibility age to Age 67.

      Look, none of the politicians, or their spokespersons, want to repeat the specifics "out loud," out of concern of a voter/citizen backlash.  That's why they constantly refer to a document, Carney does throughout this briefing.  [He always makes somewhat oblique references to the President's proposals.]

      The reason for this is that if he actually speaks the words:  "The President is asking Repubs to pass legislation which will implement a Chained CPI, and raise the Medicare eligibility age," it would make FRONT PAGE NEWS, and the MSM would have to report it. (The MSM does their best to provide "cover" for all of these negotiations, if you notice.)

      Anyway, Carney knows this.  

      So he purposefully stays away from making DIRECT references to the names of the social insurance programs.  He almost always simply says "cuts, or savings," and refers the pool reporters to "the President's written proposals," in order to avoid such headlines.

      Got a bit redundant--apologize.

      Hey, don't take my word for it--please read the Daily Briefing transcripts.  :-)

      Mollie

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

      "If a dog won’t come to you after having looked you in the face, you should go home and examine your conscience.” -- Woodrow Wilson

      by musiccitymollie on Wed Feb 06, 2013 at 09:17:17 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

  •  How does the President DARE to speak... (0+ / 0-)

    ... at the same time when someone else in the world is speaking?

  •  Heh. Switched it to Bowles Simpson or BS for short (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    JML9999, musiccitymollie
    •  PS (not BS), as in 'what's for dinner' (0+ / 0-)

      e.g. Pink Slime

      (Answer to the question of what do you substitute for Catfood.)

      Happy little moron, Lucky little man.
      I wish I was a moron, MY GOD, Perhaps I am!
      —Spike Milligan

      by polecat on Tue Feb 05, 2013 at 10:36:50 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

  •  If we could pass comething in the Senate (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    MPociask, penguins4peace

    and send it to the House, we could break their caucus again.

    But no, Harry Reid, something-something is more important than actually getting anything done. McConnell would surely filibuster.

    “Americans are fighters. We're tough, resourceful and creative, and if we have the chance to fight on a level playing field, where everyone pays a fair share and everyone has a real shot, then no one - no one - can stop us. ”-- Elizabeth Warren

    by Positronicus on Tue Feb 05, 2013 at 10:38:20 AM PST

  •  Republican comprimise (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    jfromga, vigilant meerkat

    Boehner's "comprimise" is to include Social Security, Medicare, and Medicaid in the sequester, and exempt defense spending. He only got 98% of what he wanted last time. This time he will comprimise for 100% of what he wants.

    Just when you thought there wasn't a dime's worth of difference between the two parties, the Republicans go and prove you're wrong.

    by shoeless on Tue Feb 05, 2013 at 10:39:10 AM PST

  •  Blame For Debt Ceiling And Fiscal Cliff (4+ / 0-)

    was put on GOP. I'm not sure if the blame for the chicken playing on the sequester will fall fully on the GOP.

  •  Democratic economists do NOT (10+ / 0-)

    Democratic economists (except perhaps a few on Obama's payroll) do NOT want any spending cuts, not this year or next.

    But all the Very Serious People, in the media, in Congress -- and Obama, of course -- have decided that cutting spending now is priority number one.

    Obama and those sharing this thinking are thereby going to  prolong our massive unemployment.

    But who gives a hoot about anyone who is unemployed? Or who even cares about anyone who actually KNOWS someone who is unemployed? (Not one of us, dear.)

    We are governed by an out-of-touch elite, ignorant of basic economics, and leading us to years more of economic pain.

  •  Imagine ..... (10+ / 0-)

    A Democratic President putting entitlement cuts on the table as a first offer.  

    Gotta love this guy.  He's got the pecking order down perfectly: The Repubs piss on his foot and then he pisses on the feet of his base.  What a guy!

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

    by accumbens on Tue Feb 05, 2013 at 10:57:36 AM PST

    •  Obama's offers are, (5+ / 0-)

      as they were last time, dependent on the GOP agreeing to increase revenues. That's the deal, and imo, it's not one the GOP will take. And so, like over the last months and months of this crap, there will be no entitlement cuts.  

      You may not like Obama' idea of compromise, but at least state the situation correctly. Fact is, through all this, there remains no cuts to entitlements, and even if the sequester kicks in that will remain true. Fact is he has not pissed on the feet of his base, yet. As always, the hyperbole here is irritating.

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

      by StellaRay on Tue Feb 05, 2013 at 11:13:43 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  The hyperbole is over the top. (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        StellaRay, HipHopAnonymous

        As expected.

        Impeach Norquist!

        by kitebro on Tue Feb 05, 2013 at 11:27:38 AM PST

        [ Parent ]

      •  OK, so they are dependent on a few tax increases, (6+ / 0-)

        but that simply is a compromise between a right of Nixon/Reagan vision and a right of Genghis Khan one.

        If and when the cuts come - it is very hard to state that the trimming of the safety net is not something this President wanted.  He clearly sees the Grand Bargain as his legacy - which is a perverse thing for a Democrat to value.  But starting with Clinton's chainsaw to Welfare, that Democratic Party has been heading down this road ...

        •  All the Repubs have to do is take him up on his (4+ / 0-)

          offer once.  Then we're really screwed.  One half-step away from the dismantling of entitlements - that's comforting.

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

          by accumbens on Tue Feb 05, 2013 at 11:35:45 AM PST

          [ Parent ]

          •  Now there you go again. (0+ / 0-)

            "One half-step away from the dismantling of entitlements."  Really? One half step away from no entitlements?  Do you hear yourself?

            You don't know the plan, you don't know what's specifically on the table except for possibly the chained CPI.  Not a good thing, but far from "one half step away from dismantling entitlements."  

            And again, please balance your view point with all the facts.  "All the repubs have to do is take him up on his offer once." First of all, we don't know what his offer for entitlements is, but we do know he's going after tax loops like carried interest and that's as freaking huge to the GOP as not cutting entitlements is to Democrats. No way the GOP is caving on that to get chained CPI, which so far is all we've heard from the president regarding entitlement cuts.

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

            by StellaRay on Tue Feb 05, 2013 at 01:54:12 PM PST

            [ Parent ]

            •  The first step is all you need. Precedent set (1+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              musiccitymollie

              that entitlements are not safe with Democrats.  No, they won't be eliminated, just made weaker rather than stronger.  Weaker is a dismantling, not a building.  Not comforting in a slippery slope sorta way.

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

              by accumbens on Tue Feb 05, 2013 at 03:44:00 PM PST

              [ Parent ]

              •  That first step has yet to happen. (0+ / 0-)

                Let's start there.  And no, precedent does not always rule.  Good Lord, if it did, we might have say, learned some lessons from Viet Nam.  But, no.

                Not to mention you have not yet offered any argument or response to my point that Obama is NOT WILLING to talk entitlement reform with republicans, till they give more on revenue raising. That's the way it stands today. At least admit to that.

                I understand the slippery slope, and don't entirely disagree with you on this. But I also know that idioms like the "slippery slope" are only important when considered in the context of the facts, which sorry, you seem as allergic to as you accuse the right of being.

                Fact is, entitlements are hugely more safe with Democrats than republicans. This can simply not be argued.  I know you'll want to say to me that it's sacrilege to talk about entitlement reform in any way, but I say the president can not get away with this as you can on a blog.  

                Let this play out, while we fight against any cuts with all our might. Contrary to your opinion, the left does have a voice and does influence policy.  We just don't get everything we want.

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

                by StellaRay on Tue Feb 05, 2013 at 04:45:57 PM PST

                [ Parent ]

                •  Please read the transcript from today's press (0+ / 0-)

                  conference, at the DKos Transcript Group's Diary Page.

                  The President is agreeing to do as Bowles-Simpson (and the Repubs) want--to raise revenue by lowering the marginal tax rates on individuals and corporations, while closing so-called tax loopholes.

                  Okay?  That's not been in contention with the Repubs.  Their problem was with raising the marginal tax rates.  Not closing so-called tax loopholes.

                  And anyway, most of the tax loopholes that Bowles-Simpson recommend closing are on the lower and middle classes.  So Repubs will LOVE IT!

                  Mollie

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

                  "If a dog won’t come to you after having looked you in the face, you should go home and examine your conscience.” -- Woodrow Wilson

                  by musiccitymollie on Tue Feb 05, 2013 at 07:13:40 PM PST

                  [ Parent ]

              •  Hear, hear! N/T (0+ / 0-)

                Mollie

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

                "If a dog won’t come to you after having looked you in the face, you should go home and examine your conscience.” -- Woodrow Wilson

                by musiccitymollie on Tue Feb 05, 2013 at 07:06:21 PM PST

                [ Parent ]

            •  Respectfully, it's called "the slippery slope." (0+ / 0-)

              Once you touch the "Third Rail," it is much easier to do sequentially.

              Mollie

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

              "If a dog won’t come to you after having looked you in the face, you should go home and examine your conscience.” -- Woodrow Wilson

              by musiccitymollie on Tue Feb 05, 2013 at 07:05:44 PM PST

              [ Parent ]

        •  "A few tax increases?!" (0+ / 0-)

          Where the F have you been? The GOP resists ANY tax increase, with a predictability equal to the sun rising in the east.  Now you're going to tell me that Obama going after the carried interest tax loop hole equals "a few tax increases?"

          Here's the deal. The republicans consider these tax loop holes as holy as the Democrats consider entitlements.  When the freaking hell are you going to get that?!! When are you going to stop making short shrift of what Obama's asking for in return for ANY cut in entitlements?

          You guys are all about how you're not ever getting enough from this president, while he unbeknownst or unacknowledged, asks for the crown jewels from the republicans, and you don't seem to have a clue.

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

          by StellaRay on Tue Feb 05, 2013 at 05:08:39 PM PST

          [ Parent ]

          •  Oh you are getting way too inside beltway here ... (0+ / 0-)

            my complaint is not about the horse trade.  It is about policy, purely policy.  The tax increases are not the holy grail of the GOP.  They agreed to a tax increase on the mega rich already with the Cliff deal.  They also got the President in exchange to agree to a massive back door middle class tax increase in return (the payroll tax holiday ending).  

            The complaint is about the policy goal.  These are not entitlements - that is an OMB term.  These are things regular folks worked their lives for - a modicum of grace for old age.  Obama has articulated a balanced approach - where the vulnerable also must be more vulnerable.  He is the one who brought Simpson-Bowles into our lives.  The reason he did not give it up in the Cliff was that the deal was not good enough, but giving it up is very much part of the big vision.

            Cutting government when companies need a customer of last resort is insane, but he has bought it hook line and sinker.  It's not that he is not getting us enough - it is that he is chasing a contrary goal.

      •  So at best he's just risking entitlement cuts. (5+ / 0-)

        That's not comforting at all.  Knowing what he's willing to risk says a lot about where his head really is.  Used to be a time when Democrats would stand up for entitlements, not use them as bargaining chips.

        As for hyperbole, it seems to me a Dem President putting entitlement cuts on the table - for whatever reason - is pretty extreme.  I wonder how much his (imgained) 11th dimensional chess has desensitized people to his moderate Republican tendencies.

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

        by accumbens on Tue Feb 05, 2013 at 11:34:14 AM PST

        [ Parent ]

      •  Our side should never, ever even entertain the (6+ / 0-)

        thought of cutting SS, Medicare or Medicaid.....ever!  Period.

        The words should not even leave their mouths because they should never be formed in their brains to begin with.

        It is utterly ridiculous to believe that the republicans won't use this during elections regardless if the cuts ever happen.

        If the cuts never happen....we can't say the republicans are going to do it....because all they will do is play this little soundbite and say "Nope, he put it on the table first!"

        If the cuts do happen....well we did it.

        Completely and totally wrong on so many levels.  

        •  The Repubs will realize eventually that cuts to (2+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          penguins4peace, musiccitymollie

          entitlements attributed to a Dem President will hurt the Dems more than an increase in taxes will hurt the Repubs with their base.  They can say they solved a bigger problem and the Dems can say ...... crickets.

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

          by accumbens on Tue Feb 05, 2013 at 11:47:25 AM PST

          [ Parent ]

          •  Sorry, but talk about wishful thinking. (1+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            HipHopAnonymous

            The Republican party's base is NOT so much those sad Tea Party people with misspelled signs, it's corporate America, it's the 1%.  And if you think the GOP is going to move over on the carried interest tax loop hole---which is what the president is talking about--- then even though I'm not a betting woman, I'd be willing to make a whopper bet with you on this. And if you think they're going to do that with the understanding that the Dems will be more hurt by cuts in entitlements, I'll make that bet even bigger.

            Your thinking involves attributing good political reasoning to the current GOP, which they have not in any way proven they're up to.

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

            by StellaRay on Tue Feb 05, 2013 at 11:52:53 AM PST

            [ Parent ]

            •  Do you know how many times when I called people (4+ / 0-)

              during the last election, that the topic of "who is going to cut SS" came up?  

              My response, "Vote straight "D", if you don't want cuts to SS or Medicare."

              I would hear a sigh of relief and a "ok, will do!"

              Apparently, I lied to a bunch of people.

              No way this wouldn't hurt us.  No way.

            •  Let's just say I'm a contrarian. Conventional (0+ / 0-)

              wisdom is all too often proven wrong.  You know, like Dems would never risk entitlements.  And this latest from Obama is not the first time (as you noted), which only means the odds of his succeeding (or failing to pull off a head fake) only increases.  

              As crazy as the Repubs are only makes them less, not more predictable.  And if you are correct, then Obama is basically risking entitlements by depending on the predictability of crazy people.  Comforting?  I think not.

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

              by accumbens on Tue Feb 05, 2013 at 12:09:54 PM PST

              [ Parent ]

              •  Oh, I beg to differ. (0+ / 0-)

                I think the republicans have been TOTALLY predictable and will continue to be for some time yet, despite all their talk about "rebranding."

                And I never said Obama was trying to pull a head fake.  I think he believes he can make "smart" cuts to entitlements if he has to, such as the Medicare cuts that did not come out of beneficiaries pockets. I believe he believes that if he gets enough revenue from getting rid of say, the carried interest clause, he's willing to make what he thinks he can sell as cosmetic changes.

                Not saying that's right. There is no question that the chained CPI is indeed a cut to SS and I'm 100% against it, and have written the president and my reps several times to say so.  We don't need to touch SS in any way, and I'm all in for that fight.

                Medicare is a bit of a different issue as costs will explode as the Baby boomers age. Obamacare will take the edge off that, but it's not enough.  We need single payer, but this country is too backward to understand that.  We DON'T NEED anywhere close to our current defense budget, and multi millionaires like Mitt Romney have no right paying an average of 15% a year in income taxes---that we know of---but again, our country is too backward to correct the obvious.

                My thing is it's possible to disagree with the president without turning to untrue hyperbole and accusation. Yes, we must fight even the suggestion of cuts to entitlements, because that's our job. But we must also be fair to say what's happened, what hasn't happen, and that we don't know what will happen.  

                People here continuously get caught reading their crystal balls when it comes to this president, and often prove just how wrong their crystal balls are---particularly when they're driven by ideological agenda, rather than the facts.

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

                by StellaRay on Tue Feb 05, 2013 at 01:40:44 PM PST

                [ Parent ]

                •  He's the one who keeps putting them on the table (2+ / 0-)
                  Recommended by:
                  Bailey2001, musiccitymollie

                  We don't imagine that.  Maybe he thinks he's clever but when this is your voting issue it just makes me angry.  It makes me unwilling to listen to him on anything else.  I don't care what he does on any other issue if he sells me out on this one.

                  •  He has not put them out there (0+ / 0-)

                    in a vacuum. I think we're all aware that the GOP is and has been demanding cuts in entitlements in loud voice.  It is my belief that Obama seeks to look open to compromise, on his terms. Seems to work for him, judging by the last election.

                    And let's define "them." So far the only thing I've heard put on the table is the chained CPI, and on this round Obama hasn't even been that specific. Not defending the CPI, as you read in my post above. I've heard no specifics on Medicare.

                    IF he sells you out on this.  So far that hasn't happened, yet you feel "unwilling to listen to him on anything else." Seems he's to be judged not for what he's done, but for what he might do, that he hasn't done yet, but just in case.

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

                    by StellaRay on Tue Feb 05, 2013 at 02:23:03 PM PST

                    [ Parent ]

                    •  Obama was certainly open to the Repubs in (0+ / 0-)

                      his first term.  Bent over is more like it.  Whether it's different this time we'll see.  So far, except for this, drone strikes on US citizens, continued spying without a warrant, letting Wall Street off the hook, etc, he's doing ok.

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

                      by accumbens on Tue Feb 05, 2013 at 03:47:13 PM PST

                      [ Parent ]

                      •  Yes, he made mistakes in his first term. (0+ / 0-)

                        But compared to what it would have been with a McCain/Palin presidency, I guess I can get over that. He also achieved much in his first term, which the likes of you will never give him credit for, which reduces your credibility with me.

                        Look, accumbens, I don't wish to argue with your every complaint with Obama. They are in some cases, very reasonable complaints, and I too have my complaints. But it is rather clear to me that you consider the president to be your enemy first, and on that, we're going to have to part ways.

                        I am simply NOT INTERESTED in the unbalanced, whole sale taking apart of this president---from the right, or the left.  I'm interested in a balanced view. Which I kind of think you're incapable of.

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

                        by StellaRay on Tue Feb 05, 2013 at 04:33:31 PM PST

                        [ Parent ]

                        •  I don't consider him and enemy, just your typical (0+ / 0-)

                          politician who does what he needs to get elected.  I also think he is more akin to an old fashioned moderate Republican, which in my mind is not a Democrat - call me old fashioned.  In that sense, I think he has taken advantage of more liberal/progressive Democrats and, at least with his first term pulled off a bait and switch.  We'll see what happens in this one.  

                          I do think he's done some good things, but think overall he's been a disappointment.  And to say he's better than McCain/Palin or Romney/Ryan really doesn't speak to what a real Democrat would do.  That's my baseline.

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

                          by accumbens on Tue Feb 05, 2013 at 04:39:53 PM PST

                          [ Parent ]

                    •  Jay Carney clarified for the President today in (1+ / 0-)
                      Recommended by:
                      accumbens

                      his Press Availability of Conference with reporters, after the President's speech that it did include the Chained CPI.

                      Not to sound like a broken record, but the transcript is up on the DKos Transcript Diary Page, if you'd care to read it.

                      Mollie

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

                      "If a dog won’t come to you after having looked you in the face, you should go home and examine your conscience.” -- Woodrow Wilson

                      by musiccitymollie on Tue Feb 05, 2013 at 07:19:15 PM PST

                      [ Parent ]

                      •  I tried to find the "DKos (0+ / 0-)

                        Transcript Diary page," but like absolutely everything I put into the search here, I always get "no results." How do I get to the DKos Transcript Diary page?

                        Also, I can find no news of this anywhere.  I can find no article  on the internet, and hearing nothing about it on MSNBC.  Nothing.  Is it possible that the president has put the chained CPI firmly on the table in this current round of bargaining, and absolutely no one is reporting on it?  

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

                        by StellaRay on Tue Feb 05, 2013 at 08:14:02 PM PST

                        [ Parent ]

                        •  Let me see if I can link to it below, StellaRay. (2+ / 0-)
                          Recommended by:
                          accumbens, StellaRay

                          I was honestly pretty pressed for time, or otherwise, I would have furnished it.

                          Here, see if this works.  I just found this "Group" today.  So I've signed up to follow them.

                          And here's the link to the President's Press Conference "prepared remarks."

                          I've found that transcripts can be very revealing.  Sometimes I pick up on something in them, that I've missed when I heard a speech, etc.

                          Hope this is helpful.

                          BTW, it appears that you may have answered other comments.  Now, I'm one that always answer replies (if I notice them, in time), but it's late for me at this hour, so I'll have to answer the others tomorrow.  But I will.  

                          I was just 'teasing' with my quip about "the farm."  I try to have some fun, too.

                          Respectfully, I have some disagreement on what the President's intentions are in regard to the Chained CPI and Medicare reform.  But it is not personal on my part.  I assure you.

                          The way I see it, last time I checked, you (and everyone else) have as much right to your opinion, as I do to mine.  :-)

                          Mollie

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

                          "If a dog won’t come to you after having looked you in the face, you should go home and examine your conscience.” -- Woodrow Wilson

                          by musiccitymollie on Tue Feb 05, 2013 at 08:42:19 PM PST

                          [ Parent ]

                          •  Thanks Mollie, (1+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:
                            musiccitymollie

                            I really appreciate your efforts here, and I'll be checking out your links.

                            And btw, I also disagree with the Chained CPI, just hadn't heard it was on the table again, hadn't heard anything specific.

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

                            by StellaRay on Wed Feb 06, 2013 at 06:32:41 AM PST

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  You're very welcome, StellaRay. (1+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:
                            StellaRay

                            You know, I "joined DKos" quite a few years ago, but mainly lurked, then did a short spurt of blogging, then quit altogether (until recently).  

                            So, I didn't even know much about "the Groups" here. I was thrilled to find the "Transcript Editors" Group yesterday.  

                            I always Google after debates, major speeches, etc., and usually find a transcript, but this is really handy.

                            I try to listen to at least some of Jay Carney's M-F daily press briefings on XM satellite radio.  But with all the questions and answers, it is easy to miss something.  

                            Now, I won't bother to listen--I'll just read the Daily Press Briefing.

                            Enjoyed "the back and forth."  :-)

                            Mollie

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

                            "If a dog won’t come to you after having looked you in the face, you should go home and examine your conscience.” -- Woodrow Wilson

                            by musiccitymollie on Wed Feb 06, 2013 at 08:46:11 AM PST

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  Glad you're back with us. (0+ / 0-)

                            There's MUCH to this site, it's fathoms deep, lots more to discover.

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

                            by StellaRay on Wed Feb 06, 2013 at 10:33:18 AM PST

                            [ Parent ]

      •  Again, "don't bet the farm on it." :-) N/T (0+ / 0-)

        Mollie

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

        "If a dog won’t come to you after having looked you in the face, you should go home and examine your conscience.” -- Woodrow Wilson

        by musiccitymollie on Tue Feb 05, 2013 at 07:00:01 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

  •  Taxes (0+ / 0-)

    End preferences for "unearned" income; tax it at the same rates "earned" income is taxed.  Then see how bad the deficit problem really is and what we can do about tax rates generally.

    "The test of our progress is not whether we add to the abundance of those who have much. It is whether we provide enough to those who have little. " --Franklin D. Roosevelt

    by jg6544 on Tue Feb 05, 2013 at 11:13:45 AM PST

  •  Whew! For a second there... (5+ / 0-)

    I was worried Obama wasn't going t o take a chainsaw Social Security benefits! That was a close one, but he's sticking by his long-expressed desire to stick it to the greedy geezers. That way Republicans can get their cuts and still demagogue on the issue come election time. Way to go, Mr. President!

    I agree that it's not particularly courageous to solve a problem on the backs of people who are poor, or people who are powerless, or don't have lobbyists, or don't have clout.

    by teknofyl on Tue Feb 05, 2013 at 11:16:38 AM PST

  •  His old offer is on the table ... and the shine (5+ / 0-)

    from his progressive vision articulated in that inauguration speech the press swooned over goes away.

  •  Obama's positives do not involve this area ... (3+ / 0-)

    the economic agenda he has pursued has been largely farcical.  The Congress has been derelict indeed, and the sorts of aggressive government movements have been impossible, obviously.  But he has been a full bore, card carrying member of the deficit scolds club - he said as much in the 2009 inauguration.  Whenever the Grand Bargain comes up, it is selling parts of the New Deal and Great Society with a smile and a Democratic endorsement.  The lack of aggressiveness with the bank swindlers combined with the near total neglect of homeowner relief compounds the errors.  The economy might recover sufficiently - but the unemployed continue to suffer needlessly, while the Federal Government continues to chase policies which are frankly, kind of cruel.

  •  Contractionary policy is contractionary (0+ / 0-)

    Idiots.

    E Pluribus Unum does NOT mean "every man for himself"

    by Daddy Love on Tue Feb 05, 2013 at 11:52:44 AM PST

  •  So much for all that bullpucky... (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    jfromga

    about how his election victory left him in a stronger negotiating position. Forget the old deal! Or not...

    "The Democratic Party is not our friend: it is the only party we can negotiate with."

    by 2020adam on Tue Feb 05, 2013 at 12:20:26 PM PST

  •  A grand bargain isn't happening, it's all kabuki. (0+ / 0-)

    Why can't people on this site see that? The reason why there will be no deal is simple, if Republicans agreed to a grand bargain on deficit reduction they would have absolutely nothing to run on in 2016. Debt is literally the only public policy issue the GOP has an advantage over the Dems on. A grand bargain agreement would make debt arguments moot in 2016 and would in effect ratify the Obama era. In effect it would be the final piece to a truly successful and transformational Presidency which is the absolute worst case scenario for Republicans. Why would Republicans politically checkmate their future nominee by forcing him to run against an Obama legacy they would have just ratified? For the good of the country? Ha!

    Zero chance of a grand bargain, Obama and the Republicans know that.

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site