Skip to main content

U.S. House Speaker John Boehner (R-OH) speaks during a news conference on Capitol Hill in Washington, November 28, 2012. Boehner voiced optimism that Republicans could broker a deal with the White House to avoid year-end austerity measures, saying on Wedn
Color me shocked.
Who could have predicted this response to President Obama's proposed budget from Speaker John Boehner?
“The president and I were not able to reach an agreement late last year because his offers never lived up to his rhetoric. Despite talk about so-called balance, the president’s last offer was significantly skewed in favor of higher taxes and included only modest entitlement savings. He said he could go no further toward the middle, and that’s why his last offer was rejected.  In the end, the president got his tax hikes on the wealthy with no corresponding spending cuts. At some point we need to solve our spending problem, and what the president has offered would leave us with a budget that never balances.  In reality, he’s moved in the wrong direction, routinely taking off the table entitlement reforms he’s previously told me he could support.

“When the president visited the Capitol last month, House Republicans stated a desire to find common ground and urged him not to make savings we agree upon conditional on another round of tax increases. If reports are accurate, the president has not heeded that call. If the president believes these modest entitlement savings are needed to help shore up these programs, there's no reason they should be held hostage for more tax hikes. That’s no way to lead and move the country forward." [emphasis added]

Once again, Obama offers what the Republicans say they want, beginning another round of negotiations on their ground. Once again Republicans reject it, up the ante, and get the added benefit of having Obama officially on the record behind Social Security and Medicare cuts.

And the Very Serious People will now talk about how very modest Obama's offer on entitlements is, and how if he was really serious about compromising with the Republicans, he would propose some real cuts to these programs. Lather, rinse, repeat.

Originally posted to Joan McCarter on Fri Apr 05, 2013 at 08:21 AM PDT.

Also republished by Social Security Defenders and Daily Kos.

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

  •  more Kabuki, even more Noh /nt (11+ / 0-)

    Warning - some snark above‽ (-9.50; -7.03)‽ eState4Column5©2013 Acedia is essentially a flight from the world that leads to not caring even that one does not care

    by annieli on Fri Apr 05, 2013 at 08:23:09 AM PDT

  •  I always like to hear from the Koch bro's (17+ / 0-)

    press agent. I don't think he looks shocked, I think he's trying to decide whether to swallow or spit.

    A hallucination is a fact, not an error; what is erroneous is a judgment based upon it. Bertrand Russel

    by Wood Gas on Fri Apr 05, 2013 at 08:27:51 AM PDT

  •  blaming the republicans (47+ / 0-)

    doesn't work any more. obama makes these offers himself. the republicans aren't going to deal, so saying this is what they want is but an excuse. austerity kabuki.

    The cold passion for truth hunts in no pack. -Robinson Jeffers

    by Laurence Lewis on Fri Apr 05, 2013 at 08:29:22 AM PDT

  •  "Holding entitlement cuts hostage". Can no one (18+ / 0-)

    grasp what that language means?

    If the President continues to "hold entitlement cuts hostage", the Republicans and the pundits will scream at the President to cut cut cut cut the entitlements and call him all sorts of names for "holding the cuts hostage".

    So WHO'S making the President cut entitlements again?

    How does it look to the people that don't blog?  

    How does it look OUTSIDE the liberal blogoshphere?

    "Nothing in all the world is more dangerous than sincere ignorance and conscientious stupidity." --M. L. King "You can't fix stupid" --Ron White -6.00, -5.18

    by zenbassoon on Fri Apr 05, 2013 at 08:32:44 AM PDT

    •  Outside the liberal blogosphere (20+ / 0-)

      exists the Corporate Information Infrastructure Propaganda Networks.

      This morning's headlines specifically state, either verbally or in print--coordinated and everything--that "Obama is offering up cuts to SS and Medicare again".

      That doesn't look good for our President. You do understand that, don't you?

      It is time to #Occupy Media.

      by lunachickie on Fri Apr 05, 2013 at 08:37:13 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  The OP is right (9+ / 0-)

        It's an incredibly dumb thing for Boehner to say.

        If Boehner wanted to move the debate in his direction, he should have said it's a nice start, but it also doesn't achieve nearly enough deficit reduction.

        But then again, I'm not paid to strategize for Boehner. And I'm not going to give him any tips.

      •  Yes, and the Republican response should be to say (10+ / 0-)

        "No cuts, no how".

        But what did they do?

        Say "You're holding them hostage for tax increases".

        They think tax increases are are worse than social security cuts.

        Message fail 101

        "Nothing in all the world is more dangerous than sincere ignorance and conscientious stupidity." --M. L. King "You can't fix stupid" --Ron White -6.00, -5.18

        by zenbassoon on Fri Apr 05, 2013 at 08:44:24 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  They think the majority of the country (10+ / 0-)

          wants entitlement cuts.

          They totally DO NOT. They want SOME cuts, but not necessarily to entitlements.

          They want the govt to streamline - but that doesn't mean cutting BENEFITS, it means cutting RED TAPE and duplication. And cracking down on the people and corporations that break the rules, bend the rules totally out of shape, and don't pay what they owe.

          Most people would also not be upset if the military got cut, probably pretty dramatically. Not the TROOPS, but the contractors, the out of control spending on weapons that even the generals don't want, the stupid push to privatize everything, spending twice as much in the process.

          •  The Republican Party cannot grasp that the (0+ / 0-)

            Southern Strategy is over outside the deadender states, and will soon be over even there with continuing generational and demographic changes. Only Lindsey Graham said it out loud.

            “The demographics race we’re losing badly,” said Sen. Lindsey O. Graham (S.C.). “We’re not generating enough angry white guys to stay in business for the long term.”
            --Washington Post, August 29, 2012

            Not enough angry and fearful White racists. Not enough angry and fearful White (mostly) bigots. Not enough angry and fearful misogynists. Not enough angry and fearful warmongers. Not even enough angry and fearful Mammonites. Certainly not enough angry and fearful gun nuts.

            But in the short term, there are almost enough who achieved positions of influence from which it will be difficult to displodge them. Those who can get elected in the diminishing set of non-competitive Red states and Red districts will continue to pander to the worst of their constituents, while the rest of us increasingly get on with reality.

            The question for the Better and More Democrats brigade is how to deal with the filibuster and the gerrymander so that we can get to the debate between the Democratic and Progressive agendas as soon as possible. We know how to do this, primarily through organizing to put pressure on Democrats, support Progressives, and GOTV. It is barely possible that Battleground Texas could flip Texas by 2016, when it will be Purple, and nearly certain that we can flip it all the way to Blue by 2020, in time for the next census, and then get even more Texas Democrats elected after an honest redistricting.

            Ceterem censeo, gerrymandra delenda est

            by Mokurai on Fri Apr 05, 2013 at 11:15:45 AM PDT

            [ Parent ]

        •  And???? (2+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          happymisanthropy, RenMin

           

           Those whose corporate task on the air and in print is to skew The Message on the GOPs behalf don't give two shits or a damn if some partisans on a blog laugh at them. How you gonna counter all their mouthpieces?

          You're not. So expect Dems to be blamed for this. Oh, and many, many thanks for helping to perpetuate another myth, and making the rank-and-file's job that much harder in 2014.  
           

          It is time to #Occupy Media.

          by lunachickie on Fri Apr 05, 2013 at 09:22:27 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

    •  Outside the liberal blogoshphere, it will look (14+ / 0-)

      like the Dems want to cut entitlements.

      The Thugs will successfully market themselves as the defenders of the safety net. The fact that they're chortling wildly behind closed doors at once again conning working Americans won't matter at all.

      This proposed budget is an unforced error. It accomplishes NOTHING other than giving the GOP ammunition for 2014.

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

      by PhilJD on Fri Apr 05, 2013 at 08:53:03 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  who could've seen that coming! (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    RenMin, Timothy J, divineorder

    I good Democratic President.

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

    by greenbastard on Fri Apr 05, 2013 at 08:33:05 AM PDT

  •  Pres. Obama already knew they would reject (7+ / 0-)

    His offer...YET the democrats always fall for it each year, instead of blaming the republicans they immediately start attacking Obama for making a proposal he already knows will not become law.

    •  Nope, sorry, that's not gonna fly this time (35+ / 0-)

      Its not an 11 dimensional chess argument that we give Obama a pass because he knew the Republicans wouldn't go for it.

      No. He proposed it. He owns it. He's done this several times now.  

      I am now concerned with pressuring congresspeople to OPPOSE OBAMA. Republicans will anyway, so I say focus on the Democrats who shouldn't be tethered to this crap from Obama.

      •  He's proposing it because it's politically (1+ / 1-)
        Recommended by:
        TexasTom
        Hidden by:
        RichM

        palatable to huge numbers of Americans.  Huge numbers want SS trimmed AND tax raises on the wealthy.  We're deluded if we think they don't .

        From Neocon to sane- thanks to Obama- and Kos.

        by satrap on Fri Apr 05, 2013 at 08:40:56 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

      •  Agree (14+ / 0-)

        I'm so F*c*ing annoyed with this right now. I give up. If the President is incapable of defending Democratic priorities, then shit, let the Republicans impeach him. Good riddance. Maybe Biden has some balls to stand up for reason.

        HOW MANY ECONOMIC REPORTS will it take to prove to these f*c*ing economically illiterate morans to realize austerity sucks in recessions, and that stimulus spending = very smart??

        So yes, cutting pensioned benefits = dumb fuck idea.

        "You know, the only trouble with capitalism is capitalists; they're too damn greedy." - Herbert Hoover (Republican)

        by abdguyBOS on Fri Apr 05, 2013 at 08:43:11 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

      •  you don't need 11 dimensions, dear. just common (6+ / 0-)

        sense.

        these idiots have said no to everything he's ever proposed since day one.

        why on earth would  this time be any different?

        Answer: it wouldn't. it wasn't. and it won't be.

        This isn't about "chess" It's just damned common sense.

        •  Common sense says you don't offer (6+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          DFH, PhilJD, tb mare, divineorder, greenbell, RenMin

          the Republicans what they want, when 80% of the voters reject that; and instead you offer what 72% of the voters want which is Massive Federal Job-Creation Stimulus http://www.gallup.com/...

          Common sense says you don't push agendas which will further damage the Economy, and ignore the ones which will help the economy.

          Use common sense and answer which is better policy and politics:
          "Oh, see the Republicans won't agree to help me cut your income"

          or

          "See, the Republicans won't agree to help you get a secure job again"

          Not tricky, is it?


          If Republicans said every 3rd person named "Smith" should hang, we'd bargain them to every 7th. Then we'll see apologia written praising this most pragmatic compromise. There's our losing formula.

          by Jim P on Fri Apr 05, 2013 at 09:17:17 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  If you're letting yourself get worked up into (7+ / 0-)

            a lather about this deal that would never happen you're as gullible and naive as the GOP who keeps falling for this same shit.

            It's Politics.
            Welcome.

            •  I rec'd cause what you said is true (3+ / 0-)

              but it's bad politics. The thugs will totally use this against the dems in 2014.

            •  You didn't answer the question. (3+ / 0-)

              What's more powerful and effecitve; what's immune from Republicans flipping the topic in 2014?:

              a) We need Jobs and Republicans won't support our Massive Jobs Program

              b) We offered to hurt you personally, but Republicans wouldn't give up anything to do that

              You speak as if you understand politics. Prove it and tell me if a) or b) is the politically right move.

              Common sense.


              If Republicans said every 3rd person named "Smith" should hang, we'd bargain them to every 7th. Then we'll see apologia written praising this most pragmatic compromise. There's our losing formula.

              by Jim P on Fri Apr 05, 2013 at 09:34:26 AM PDT

              [ Parent ]

              •  I think "a" is still a possibility. (1+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:
                sweatyb

                I personally believe a jobs bill will be offered up once the economy starts to contract as a result of  the sequester. and people start to panic and jobs are starting to be lost. My guess on timeframe: spring 2014 and into summer.

                (remember americans have short memories and many don't pay attention at all).

                As for B, I'll say this again: people on this blog (and I include myself in this category at one time) seemingly have very little understanding of what's going on in the apolitical world. Since I've been here much less frequently, I can now see the differences. Your phrasing about issue b is your micro-attentive political framing. It's not what's happening outside these walls.

                Here's the thing: correct nobody wants their SS fiddled with. But unfortunately, they also believe that it might just be insolvent and that something needs to be done to make sure its "around in 20 years". I know that's not  the answer you want to hear and whenever I hear someone say it (not here) I am quick to tell them that it IS solvent and that all we need to do to sure it up and drop the limit on "percentage of income contribution" that allows someone making 10 million dollars a year to pay in the same as someone making 103k. In fact I did this JUST THIS MORNING with a moderate republican FB friend. He seemed to get and asked me why don't they just do that? and I said: ask the GOP they hate the new deal and always have. Funny he didn't seem concerned about "obama killing social security" or whatever the "line" is around here.

                I guess I'm saying: step away from this place. It's not a healthy or accurate mirror into the populace. So to be direct about your "b": in my experience, they people are not framing it like "we offered to hurt you"...that's not how they are receiving these events.

                I hope you this gives you a different perspective.

                •  Thanks for the work put in your answer. (7+ / 0-)

                  I make it through just barely. By buying a bag of day-old bagels for $1 and freezing them.

                  Multiply me by millions. Maybe tens of millions getting Social Security.

                  The President has offered to make my life harder. As a bargaining chip. Based on what you know, and what he knows, is a Republican lie.

                  When you're in the "hanging on by your thumbs" position, spin doesn't matter, framing doesn't matter. You can count how much money you have, and you can see how close to the bone eating, or paying the electric bill is.

                  The President has just offered to cut my throat, and the same for millions of others. Nobody in my position or close to it is going to admire his political savvy.

                  If his gamble goes wrong -- and he was outplayed on his oh-so-sophisticated Sequester gamble, that's why my formerly Democratic family members with the 10% income cut are furious and will not vote Democratic again -- I am hurt. Really hurt. Multiply me by millions.

                  I think the outcome, electorally, whether the Republicans outplay him again or not (when he's not outplaying himself), ... I don't see how anyone can't grasp that just the offer alone will lose the Democratic Party, at the very least, 2014.


                  If Republicans said every 3rd person named "Smith" should hang, we'd bargain them to every 7th. Then we'll see apologia written praising this most pragmatic compromise. There's our losing formula.

                  by Jim P on Fri Apr 05, 2013 at 10:04:39 AM PDT

                  [ Parent ]

                  •  well my husband is on SS too. (2+ / 0-)
                    Recommended by:
                    Jim P, HipHopAnonymous

                    and yes, it sucks that it's a game. But honestly, it is. it's a problem in our political system but it is what it is. wishing it weren't so won't make it not so.

                    if your friends and you decide you're too hurt and angry to vote democratic again, then the loss will be compounded. I can't tell you what to do. and this shit is real and affects real lives. I get that. and yes, you have right to be angry and outraged.

                    but at the end of the day, what else? seriously. what else? there will not be any major changes to our political system any time soon. it's been this way for a long time. what are our options? yes, it sucks but what are the options?

                    I;m not saying he'll win or lose and I frankly am not defending what he does or raking it over the coals. Maybe i'm too cynical about politics in general. Growing up here in DC and living here will do that to a person, perhaps.

                    And if dems decide to not show up in 2014, well I guess you won't have to worry about SS cuts being part of a risk0taking political game anymore. It'll be (at best) more of the same stalwart we've had for the last 3 years of GOP house. the BEST thing you and other angry dems could do is figure out how to make this work for 2014 (which, as I said, isn't hard outside the deeply political environs like this one). At least then, if we have the house back, you have a firewall against a president who many feel is determined to dismantle the new deal.

                    it's risk that these actions will work. But it's politics. politics is a risk. it sucks, but it is what it is.

                     

                    •  picking up a bit of a (1+ / 0-)
                      Recommended by:
                      mdmslle

                      complacency vibe, mdmslle.

                      WI is doing what Obama will not.

                      by Boogalord on Fri Apr 05, 2013 at 10:16:55 AM PDT

                      [ Parent ]

                      •  not hardly. i would call it perspective. (1+ / 0-)
                        Recommended by:
                        side pocket

                        you know I used to be around here al the time. Now i;m mostly on FB but the benefit to that is perspective. while I don't have any tea bag friends there, I do have more than a few republican friends. and lots and lots or friends who aren;t into politics at all. It's interesting to see how people are digesting and receiving news and information and events.

                        All I can say is that it's not like the way it's received here. Even my political friends range a broader spectum along the liberal continuum than here.

                        I love this place. Don't get me wrong. Ya'll are like my family. I feel like I know people here and I would trust most folks here with my life.

                        But it's not a reflection of the populace.

                        It's not complacency at all. I've been busy working on this and plan to introduce it here in fact in a few weeks and launch officially at NN13 booth! No complacency from me. Ever. Just a different perspective, a little more balance and I think a more rounded approach. I'm choosing my battles and what to expend great "outrage" on. The politics of "outrage" can be exhausting and completely unproductive. So, what if I have just spent the last two weeks ratcheded-up over "Obama's going to cut SS!". Today, I would discover all that energy all those petitions (which are really just email collection schemes) and guess what? No deal. It's a waste of my energy. And (as you can see) I've got LOTS to do and I need energy to do it. I'm not 22 anymore. So yes, I pick and choose which things I get "outraged" about. If it's something that I think isn't going to happen (like this), i pass on it. IN the case of the SS/Med thing, this has happened before with the exact same result. So I didn;t even need to be a genius prognosticator to know how this was likely to turn out.

                        :)

                        •  so you know this is a terrible thing to do (0+ / 0-)

                          but you don't care because the Republicans aren't going to take yes for an answer, just like always, and there are better things to be outraged about?

                          so, your FB friends provide invaluable perspective, but the people here are warped from actually being informed of what's happening? do you think none of us live in the real world, that it's just you? i can assure you that i, too, am a physical person who goes outside. i have yet to meet any middle-to-lower-class person who would respond to "The Dem President is proposing cuts to Medicare and SS" with "aw shucks, he's being so reasonable, that's just the game! play on!"

                          i can't imagine anyone thinking that way, outside of media pundits. perhaps the perspective of your Facebook friends could enlighten us.

                          •  well no, but if that's how you want to say (0+ / 0-)

                            i put it I'm not going to fight with you.

                            of course you are a real person. come on. All I said was that this place is not really a mirror. and if you disagree fine.

                            And no i didn say I didn't care. I said I have to pick and choose. In my mind and in my opinion, this was just a game being played. I didn't say I like it or want it I said it is what it is. I didn't believe a deal would be done so I chose to not get worked up over it. Again you may not like my choice and I'm ok with that. I'm not going to fight with you.

                            As it turns out if I HAd spent the last two weeks steaming about it, it would all be for naught today.

                            Everyone's got their own thing and is entitled to their own reactions. Mine are mine and I was asked to explain how I felt and why and I did. I really just can't spend all day everyday being angry about the buffoonery that's happening in DC. It's exhausting and life-draining. And much of it makes not a whit of difference. By that I mean, the keystrokes and arguing back and forth on the blog ultimately have zero effect on legislation. Think of all the fighting and arguing here (that I also once took part in, too!). All the outrage. I just can't do it anymore all the time. At anytime you can look at the rec list and the diaries are all outrage and anger. I just can't do that anymore - especially not on things that, in my opinion, are not going to change.

                            IMO, this whole SS debacle was nothing more than kabuki and whether I like it or not, we're right back where we were before. Only I didn't spend two weeks being "outraged". And I think I;m better off for it.

                          •  your blood pressure may be better off (0+ / 0-)

                            but you and your kids retirement won't be. if you can be zen about it, all the better.

                            this is a historic day for Democratic Presidents. i think the outrage is especially deserved

                          •  well, as I said, I have to pick and choose. (0+ / 0-)

                            I'm not zen about the SS being gone. Not at all. Don't be silly. It's that I didn't believe that any cuts would happen. I believed it was all a game. And it turns out I was right.

                            And yes, my blood pressure is better for it.

                            I do believe in fighting. And I am a fighter. And I do have the willingness and capacity to exercise outrage. But I won't squelch my energy on something that is not a threat. I never perceived this to be a threat. If you did, fine. Your outrage was rightfully placed, IMO. Perhaps the difference is that we differ in what we believe to be actual threats?

                          •  if the POTUS signals his willingness to cut (1+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:
                            PorridgeGun

                            over and over again in talks with Republicans, and the Republicans refuse but only so they can hold out for more, and this happens over and over again, yes, i think that's a threat to the safety net.

                            now that the POTUS has made it official and proposed the cuts in his budget, yes, i think that makes it even more of a threat because it's obviously something he wants to do or he wouldn't be bringing it up all the fucking time.

                            the sequester was supposed to be a game too. but it's not. it's not a game, it's people, and i for one am tired of Obama using the social safety net as a bargaining chip in his "games" with the Republicans who want only to cut his throat.

                            after so many years of this, how can you believe any good will possibly come of Obama's negotiations with Republicans? i just don't understand

                          •  did i say that? I don't believe Obama is (0+ / 0-)

                            "negotiating" with them at all. That's sort of my point. This is not a negotiation. It's like someone coming to me and offering me something I really want for something Id never do: I'll give you 100 million dollars if you stab your dad to death. No deal. Not now, not ever.

                            Look, all I said was politics, like it or not, is, at least in part, a game. It sucks that it's this way. I don't like it. I never said I did. And I didn't even say it was wrong to be angry over this stuff. You're 100% right. It's NOT a game in the sense that people's lives hang in the balance. Including my own. I never denied that.

                            What I'm saying is, I have to choose what and when to become outraged. I didn't even say I'd never be outraged about THIS ISSUE. There may come a time when I think it makes sense to do so. And when/if that happens I'll do what I can to stop it. (For the record, I'm not sure arguing the issue and expressing my Righteous Outrage here would be the solution even if I chose that NOW was the right time to do something. But that's a whole different subject).

                            I, too, am sick of the politicians playing games with our lives. I never said I wasn't. I only said that this nonsense is part of the milieu of politics. And if I spend time and energy being outraged about all the ways they dick us everyday, I'm going to 1) be exhausted and 2) be unable to actually send time and energy doing anything positive that might make a difference. I just don't have the energy to be outraged all the time, I just can't. At some point I have to make decisions about what I perceive to be something that I need to get active about and I base those decisions on how likely these thing are to happen, in my own opinion.

                            And as I said, these things are fluid. I may decide in two months or two weeks that this needs more of my attention. At which point I'll try to determine what I think is the best, most potentially productive path is toward getting what I (we) want/need. But I'll still need to make sensible decisions because the list of shit to get rightfully amped up about, is seemingly endless, unfortunately.

                          •  "it is what it is" is an empty phrase (0+ / 0-)

                            "I only said that this nonsense is part of the milieu of politics."

                            Do not forget that Obama chose to put himself in this position. you can try to blur the distribution of blame by blaming "politics" in general, but the fact remains that Obama chose to "pivot" to the deficit and accept the Republican framing of the issue. He bears responsibility for the negotiations as well, and he has chosen to offer safety net cuts time and time again.

                            i'm simply at a loss as to why you think this is nothing to be worried about. after unofficially offering cuts to the safety net repeatedly, he makes if official in the budget, and you don't think there's a chance the R's will actually take yes for an answer and hang him with it? do you think this isn't something Obama himself wants to do? what else is he spending his political capital on, besides drone strikes?

                            and yes, i've made my calls today. you can be active while still acknowledging the catfood delivery service

                          •  ok, well whatever. you can continue as you will. (0+ / 0-)

                            You keep reading things that I didn't say at all. I can't do anything about that.

                            i'm simply at a loss as to why you think this is nothing to be worried about
                            .

                            Not what i said. I said, I don't think this is going to happen. And therefore AT THIS TIME, i;m not going to get myself tied up in knots about it.

                            after unofficially offering cuts to the safety net repeatedly, he makes if official in the budget, and you don't think there's a chance the R's will actually take yes for an answer and hang him with it?

                            No. I don't. I said that 100 times. What do I base that on? Past behavior and the fact that they will never agree to "revenue increases". At any rate, I can't predict the future. So if it looks like they're going to take a break with historical behavior, it'll be time to get involved. Right now, what good is my "outrage"? It's in there. Either Boehner and the house will accept it or not. If it looks like he might, or that the votes seem to be there for it (which I don't see), then yes, time to get active. There's nothing else to be done right now. This is called: wisely choosing how to expend energy.

                            do you think this isn't something Obama himself wants to do?

                            Doesn't matter. No, really. It doesn't. If he does, then what? If he doesn't, then what? I hope not. But shit, if he wants to do it, and it looks possible, then I will fight. If he doesn't, then he's got some other reason for whatever he's doing. Again, there's no practical use in trying to read tea leaves. It's exhausting and pointless anyway. I called, you called. Many called. He did it anyway. OK. Do I like it? No, but it's in there and we did what we could. Now we wait until there's something else that can be done. This is called: wisely choosing how to expend energy.

                            what else is he spending his political capital on, besides drone strikes?
                            I won't even bother with this because...you know...wisely choosing....and all.
                          •  Observing Obama's consistent offering of cuts (0+ / 0-)

                            throughout all of the negotiations including his recent inclusion of them in the official budget, and concluding that he is willing and eager to sacrifice the safety net for the goodwill of the Republicans is not "reading tea leaves". it's mostly just "reading". i'm not just pulling this out of my ass, there is some context and history to back it up.

                            it "doesn't matter" if Obama actually wants the cuts or not? i guess if i can't use the word "zen" i'm gonna have to go with "complacent" again.

                          •  Ok so it's what he wants to do. (0+ / 0-)

                            Now what?

                          •  let your congresspeople know they lose your vote (0+ / 0-)

                            if they support the budget

                          •  Done already. Now what? Spend two (0+ / 0-)

                            Weeks stewing about the budget and rending my garments because Obama put it in and Boehner rejected it? (Which he now has)?

                            Spend time arguing over whether its strategy or evil intent? Spend weeks feeling "betrayed" and threatening the party on a blog?

                          •  only reason i replied in the first place (0+ / 0-)

                            was because because of your condescending response to Jim P.

                            you're the one who accused anyone of actually believing the Republicans might actually take this deal of being gullible. i'm just the guy with the relatively easy task of pointing out Obama's eagerness to cut the safety net is very real, considering he's putting it in the fucking official budget.

                            Obama's negotiations with the R's are indefensible, and they're going to end with cutting the safety net. if you don't believe that, it sure as hell isn't me who is the gullible one.

                          •  he's not offering the cuts to the R's (0+ / 0-)

                            so they can refuse them. how anyone can still believe this is beyond me

                          •  I'm just glad I didn't spend the (0+ / 0-)

                            Last three weeks being outraged. I sent a couple emails. And here we are.

                          •  Well I do think its gullible, but that's my (0+ / 0-)

                            Opinion. Same as the GOP who keeps walking into this nonsense too.

                            And I gave my reasons. I don't think it will happen, and I gave my reasons. And right on cue Boehner rejected it.

                            Good. On to the next battle.

                          •  That isn't zen. (1+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:
                            mdmslle

                            Please do not make thoughtless comments about other people's religion. I know that misuse of Zen is part of our popular culture, just as calling satisfaction of material desires is called Heavenly in despite of Judaism, Christianity, and other religions. We can't stop all of it, but we can take responsibility for our own part in it.

                            There is a Zen practice that involves complete withdrawal from the affairs and cares of the world, but it is undertaken to help those still stuck in them. It still includes Right Speech, Right Action, and Right Livelihood along with the rest of the Eightfold Path.

                            My Zen is to work on world poverty and its various attendant ills via the One Laptop Per Child program and its many partners, and to understand the nature of delusion in general, and particularly political delusion, so as to help counter it.

                            I consider offering up Chained CPI to the God of Mindless Bipartisanship to be a serious delusion, though by no means the worst. With so many to choose from, how do we strategize which to direct our efforts to? I have no quarrel with those who pick one issue over the others, and work hard on it. We need people committed to working on each of them.

                            I have my own notions of what will do us the most good on the most issues as quickly as possible, which I am pleased to be able to discuss here. For example,

                            Ceterem censeo, gerrymandra delenda est

                            by Mokurai on Fri Apr 05, 2013 at 11:58:30 AM PDT

                            [ Parent ]

                    •  The game is horribly played by Obama, then. (1+ / 0-)
                      Recommended by:
                      RenMin

                      Again, the game of "let Republicans insist that the safety-net be cut in the face of 2/3s (4/5s in some polls) public opposition" and the game of "Offer massive Job Stimulus which 3/4s want" would be the smart one, neh?

                      Dress it in any rationale available, he really sucks at governing.

                      I'm sorry, but the President plays the game the Filthy Rich wants to play, over and over and over. The game the American people want? Outside of a couple of social issues, nope.


                      If Republicans said every 3rd person named "Smith" should hang, we'd bargain them to every 7th. Then we'll see apologia written praising this most pragmatic compromise. There's our losing formula.

                      by Jim P on Fri Apr 05, 2013 at 10:28:24 AM PDT

                      [ Parent ]

                      •  ok. i respect your right to your opinion. nt (0+ / 0-)
                        •  But you'll not say he's playing the game well, (0+ / 0-)

                          or even the right game, I hope.


                          If Republicans said every 3rd person named "Smith" should hang, we'd bargain them to every 7th. Then we'll see apologia written praising this most pragmatic compromise. There's our losing formula.

                          by Jim P on Fri Apr 05, 2013 at 11:28:00 AM PDT

                          [ Parent ]

                          •  It is what it is, JimP. When you play a game (0+ / 0-)

                            sometime you win. And sometime you don't.

                            The funny thing is if you play and win, you look like a genius. If you lose, you look like an ass.

                            I'm not getting into the sux/rox drama. Never have, never will. As much of an aversion as I have to Outrage Politics, I have zero tolerance for that sort of internet drama.

                            So I guess if it comes out OK, the answer will be he played it well. If not, he played the wrong game or played it poorly.

                            Either way, you're right, our lives are in the balance. I don't see how to change that. I may not like it but being Outraged here on DKos and being "through" with the party and/or Obama or whatever...isn't going to change that. I find that whole string tiresome.

                          •  I believe in action. Now, I'll say this: (0+ / 0-)

                            I;ve sent a couple of emails to the WH on this issue. Haven't made a phone call yet. But I will, if I think it looks like I need to. Hell, I'm a co-admin of a 2500 member FB group - all of whom are ready to work our asses of for 2014 house. We've actually done some phone calls (not on this issue) using phonebank.org. I would have no problem calling up that action again on my FB group.

                            But all the anger and outrage and rending of garments and threats about 2014 elections and discussions about being "done" and "removing myself from OFA emails" - god, really?! really? It looks crazy, especially to me who hasn't been around as much as I used to. It just honestly looks crazy.

                            Would it be great if every person who wrote or tipped an outrage diary and threatened not to vote in 2014 would DO SOMETHING productive on the issue? I know we all have a need to vent from time to time, but the shelf-life of it here is way too long and actually I think distracts people who SHOULD eb active from actually BEING active. It's fun to be pissed and complain and find camaraderie in angst. Its not so fun or organzine a phonebank.

                          •  no (0+ / 0-)

                            your opening statement in this thread was an assertion that DKOs users are out of touch with the world outside the blogosphere, implying that there are lots of working class voters who are pleased by the POTUS's proposal for safety net cuts. that statement was absurd on its face and was called out as such.

                            now that it's obvious how indefensible this latest action from Obama is, you make noises about how you're the one who is dedicated to action while implying the rest of us are being unproductive with our outrage while the adults try to get things done. it is a typical fallback position on this website. also you seem to believe laws and budgets are not worth being worried about or taken as threats until after they are already passed, because that's worked so well in the past.

                            i hope you're not planning on organizing a phonebank for any Dems who vote for this budget

                    •  In fact, there are major shifts happening in our (0+ / 0-)

                      political system, and now is not the time to give up. As I said above, the Southern Strategy is over (apart from the deadenders still needing to be replaced), and the Republicans are in national decline at an average rate of 1% of the population annually. Once we deal with the filibuster and the gerrymander, which we know how to do, we can get down to debating the differences between a Democratic and a Progressive agenda. DKos can shift its mission from Better and More Democrats to Better and More Progressives.

                      For a time. Until the rich figure out some other set of wedge issues. It took decades after the implosion of the Federalists, and decades for the rich to ally themselves with the racists after the defeat of the Confederacy.

                      Ceterem censeo, gerrymandra delenda est

                      by Mokurai on Fri Apr 05, 2013 at 11:45:13 AM PDT

                      [ Parent ]

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

                    why are your relatives mad at Obama for the sequester?

            •  It could happen if the President were trying to (0+ / 0-)

              channel FDR rather than his perverse notion of Lincoln. (Lincoln tried to reach out to the South for a time. But after three years of war, he went for the Emancipation Proclamation and then the Thirteenth Amendment instead.) For example,

              Franklin Roosevelt's Address Announcing the Second New Deal
              October 31, 1936

              For nearly four years you have had an Administration which instead of twirling its thumbs has rolled up its sleeves. We will keep our sleeves rolled up.

              We had to struggle with the old enemies of peace—business and financial monopoly, speculation, reckless banking, class antagonism, sectionalism, war profiteering.

              They had begun to consider the Government of the United States as a mere appendage to their own affairs. We know now that Government by organized money is just as dangerous as Government by organized mob.

              Never before in all our history have these forces been so united against one candidate as they stand today. They are unanimous in their hate for me--and I welcome their hatred.

              See? You don't have to change one word. Well, maybe "twiddling" for "twirling".

              Ceterem censeo, gerrymandra delenda est

              by Mokurai on Fri Apr 05, 2013 at 11:27:11 AM PDT

              [ Parent ]

        •  I'm not understanding this line of logic. (8+ / 0-)

          And I haven't every time its been offered.

          Basically, you're saying Obama is proposing things he knows they will reject so as to accomplish what, exactly?

          •  there are voters who aren't dailykos. (1+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            kickbass

            in about 9 months when we're amping for 2014 and the economy is contracting because of the sequester and there's still been no jobs bill or new tax fairness policies (to "lower the deficit") these will make very good, very understandable and TRUE talking points. I know it doesn't make sense to many partisans on the left but there are those people who still are able to be convinced when it looks like you've done all you can do.

            This time, we have to fix the house. We have to make the case that the GOP there is the real problem. People are already mostly there but lets not fool ourselves: americans have a short attention span AND there will be other battles to fight like the one in September. I'd also guess that there will be a massive jobs/stimulus bill offered. But it won't be until next year when the economy is contracting and we're closer to the election. It will be tied to tax reform, maybe some wall street thrown in. And of course, i can say this with 100% surety, the GOP will reject it.

            maybe we'll get the house back as a result.

            The bottom line is this: there's not going to be a single piece of meaningful legislation coming out of DC for the rest of the year. So this is all politics all positioning all game all the time. That's it. And anyone here should be savvy enough to realize that and not let themselves be yanked around emotionally by this that is all a huge fucking  game.

            Does it suck that it's a game? Yes. But fuck. It's politics. And there is no legislature right now. So play. Play on.

            •  I haven't seen any polling whatsoever that (11+ / 0-)

              supports this worldview. Or justifies any of what you seem to believe is a brilliant electoral strategy for winning back the House.

              in about 9 months when we're amping for 2014 and the economy is contracting because of the sequester and there's still been no jobs bill or new tax fairness policies (to "lower the deficit") these will make very good, very understandable and TRUE talking points.
              "So, the economy isn't growing. I signed the sequester into law, but what I'd prefer to do is cut your Social Security and Medicare. Republicans voted for the sequester I signed into law and they also want to cut your Social Security and Medicare. Vote for Democrats."

              Seriously, I'm just not seeing how that makes any sense as a convincing political argument. TO any voters, not just those on the left.

              The bottom line is this: there's not going to be a single piece of meaningful legislation coming out of DC for the rest of the year. So this is all politics all positioning all game all the time. That's it. And anyone here should be savvy enough to realize that and not let themselves be yanked around emotionally by this that is all a huge fucking  game.
              This is perhaps the most non-sensical statement of all. Show me polling that says cutting Social Security and Medicare is popular, and then perhaps you have a case. But it isn't. It isn't popular with the left, the middle, and even half of Republicans. The only people who support this are people who will never support Democrats anyway. So who exactly does this move better position us with?

              Still not getting it.

            •  a few bad assumptions here (3+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              greenbell, paytheline, RenMin

              the assumptions underlining your arguments are

              1: The Obama administration is currently powerless to Republican opposition. It is clear that the Obama administration would enjoy overwhelming public support on many issues if they were to embrace historical fundamental Democratic values

              2: Liberal ideas have no power in politics today because the conservatives are all just so mean, therefore watering-down liberal policy is the only way to survive

              no, and no

              WI is doing what Obama will not.

              by Boogalord on Fri Apr 05, 2013 at 10:22:32 AM PDT

              [ Parent ]

    •  Oh, he's frigging brilliant (14+ / 0-)

      He's now to the right of Paul Ryan on SS.  

      •  Nonsense. (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        TexasTom

        "All other workers will have a choice to stay in the current system or begin contributing to personal accounts. Those who choose the personal account option will have the opportunity to begin investing a significant portion of their payroll taxes into a series of funds managed by the U.S. government. The system would closely resemble the investment options available to Members of Congress and Federal employees through the Thrift Savings Plan [TSP]. As these personal accounts continue to accumulate wealth, they will eventually replace the funding that comes through the government’s pay-as-you-go system."

        http://roadmap.republicans.budget.house.gov/...

    •  Halfway (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      TexasTom

      If Republicans take it, they have to also agree to shorter term spending increases and cuts in tax expenditures; and if they reject it, they're painted into a corner.  It's a win win.

      Put another way, John Boehner's absolutely right - Obama's driving a wedge into the Republicans.  The difficulty with the reaction here is that, ordinarily, getting rid of aspects of the tax code that distribute wealth upwards and trading longer-term cuts for shorter term increases would ordinarily be a good thing.  Can't have it all.

      Difficult, difficult, lemon difficult.

      by Loge on Fri Apr 05, 2013 at 09:05:35 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  No (5+ / 0-)

        He's driving a wedge straight into the Democratic Party. He's forcing democrats in congress to choose between supporting their president / party leader vs upholding basic democratic (and moral) principles. Unfortunately there are far too many democrats who have no spine, and Obama ONLY twists arms of progressives.
        I detest that guy more than I ever did Bush ...because only a "Democrat" can shitcan the New Deal.

        The Goldstone Report: Still accurate, relevant, and damning.

        by DFH on Fri Apr 05, 2013 at 09:25:04 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

      •  As long as... (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        Loge

        ...the president refuses to decouple these benefits cuts from tax increases, I'm not going to panic.  And he's been holding that particular line for a couple years now.

        Unlike some here, I don't believe that Obama is making these proposals only because he knows that Republicans will reject them -- the reality is that he does seem to be willing to trade some SS cuts in order to get the rest of what he wants.  At the same time, I think he probably is aware that Republicans will continue to reject these proposals, and that the result is that he comes across looking more reasonable than his opponents.

        The bottom line is that while Obama is theoretically willing to see these cuts happen, he also does know that the conditions he is attaching are ones that the Republicans are unlikely to accept.

        Political Compass: -6.75, -3.08

        by TexasTom on Fri Apr 05, 2013 at 10:50:15 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  reasonable analysis (0+ / 0-)

          but so what? how is this proposal helping anything? how has anything he done since accepting the Republican frame for deficit reduction as his presidential focus helped?

          •  The one benefit is... (0+ / 0-)

            ...that by making proposals that seem reasonable even to many of the beltway pundits, he makes the Republicans look more and more unreasonable.  Slowly, even the professional centrists are being forced to acknowledge that the problem is on the Republican side.

            Is that worth the political costs?  Perhaps not...but it's what he is getting from this.

            Political Compass: -6.75, -3.08

            by TexasTom on Fri Apr 05, 2013 at 10:56:21 AM PDT

            [ Parent ]

    •  You mean like the Sequester? Tell my former (9+ / 0-)

      Democratic voter relatives who've lost 10% of their income it won't happen, and that Obama doesn't really mean it, eh?

      Reid and Pelosi already showed their openness to chained-CPI.

      You need to understand: for Democrats, the ones who are Democrats whether they are in love with Obama or not, even allowing the thought of hurting the social safety net is lunatic.

      You want to play "Democrats are better than Republicans" for the benefit of the low-info, and vast majority, voter? Then play "We need Job stimulus for the American people, here's our plan, where's the Republican's?"

      This is the thing 72% of the voters think we need, deficit be damned. http://www.gallup.com/...


      If Republicans said every 3rd person named "Smith" should hang, we'd bargain them to every 7th. Then we'll see apologia written praising this most pragmatic compromise. There's our losing formula.

      by Jim P on Fri Apr 05, 2013 at 09:09:37 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  Um, okay, if his budget is going to be rejected (6+ / 0-)

      anyway, then why not start with something more ideal? I'm all for starting with realistic budgets. I'm not saying a budget needs to be a wish list. But Jesus, he could have started with the Senate Democrats' budget.

      It just doesn't make sense from the 11-dimensional chess perspective. I really, truly don't understand what good you think will come out of this. We're talking about beginner-level negotiating here.

      I don't mind if you're straight. Just don't flaunt it in public.

      by Chrislove on Fri Apr 05, 2013 at 09:33:56 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  No, the Democratic plan also gives too much away (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        PorridgeGun

        Better to start with the Congressional Progressive Caucus plan, which the public actually likes, and throw a real panic into the Republicans, while forcing the Democrats back toward the actual center.

        I don't know how to manage the Very Serious People's mindless reaction to such a proposal in detail, but I have some ideas, and I expect that there are people available who would know how much better than I, if permitted to try.

        Ceterem censeo, gerrymandra delenda est

        by Mokurai on Fri Apr 05, 2013 at 12:38:49 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  I understand what you're saying, but (0+ / 0-)

          my point is simply that he did not have to start with a plan that Republicans indicated they would like. He should have at least started with a plan that is more on our side than theirs, even if it isn't the Progressive Caucus plan. Common sense dictates that the Republicans aren't going to accept any plan the President puts forward, so we need to start with something so it isn't whittled away completely. It just seems like this is Deal-Making 101. When I negotiated the price for my car, I didn't start close to the asking price...that would have been asinine.

          I don't mind if you're straight. Just don't flaunt it in public.

          by Chrislove on Fri Apr 05, 2013 at 01:18:56 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

  •  Tax increases are key. (7+ / 0-)

    The thing about this proposal is that it's basically dead on arrival because of the president's insistence on tax increases to go along with Chained CPI.  Such a proposal is dead in the Republican House.

    Chained CPI is toxic to the Democratic electorate, but I seriously doubt the president or the Democrats will walk off that plank without tax increases which are currently toxic to the Republican electorate.

    •  I agree with you jds. People (5+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      skillet, jdsnebraska, cactusgal, Loge, TexasTom

      freak out too quickly.  Politics is about compromise and, if the Repubs don't, none of this gets done.  It's all negotiating.

      From Neocon to sane- thanks to Obama- and Kos.

      by satrap on Fri Apr 05, 2013 at 08:37:10 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  Tax increases are necessary (20+ / 0-)

      and cuts to SS and Medicare are not.

      That's the basic reality. The one truth in this "debate."

      Republicans are insisting on unnecessary cuts that will hurt America and hurt and kill Americans and the President is offering to hurt America and hurt and kill Americans for no good reason other than "bipartisanship" which has never been and never will be. How many times must we go down this road?

      This entire "debate" is about how many Americans must suffer and die to placate the blood lust and greed of the GOP.

      The GOP has no serious economics to go on, they have no empirical evidence their plans will do any good at all. All they clearly want is to do as much damage to America and kill as many Americans as they can.

      The GOP is a clear and present danger to the United States. Traitors one and all.

      •  Right, but that cuts both ways, (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        happymisanthropy

        the more necessary a tax increase is, the more palatable cuts elsewhere become.  Without committing to a dog in this fight, the reality is that these are priorities acting in opposition, not conjunction.  The least Obama can do is force Republicans to face the same wedge, from their perspective.  Whether he could have accomplished the same thing with different figures is a separate question.  After all, defense sequestration cuts were supposed to hurt the Republicans, but they're unmoved.  Probably because they don't actually care about national defense -- shit, anything bad happens, they just blame Obama, the way they ran against Truman "losing" China for 50 years.

        Difficult, difficult, lemon difficult.

        by Loge on Fri Apr 05, 2013 at 09:12:35 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

      •  I understand the politics of resentment, (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        RenMin

        but is there really an electoral core that believes that seniors subsisting on Social Security payments are living too large?

        •  Yes, there is (0+ / 0-)

          They even believe that people on Food Stamps live too large, and are buying luxury foods with them rather than running out in the last week of each month and living on not enough rice and beans until they get more stamps.

          The term "welfare queen" is most often associated with Ronald Reagan who brought the idea to a national audience. During his 1976 presidential campaign, Reagan would tell the story of a woman from Chicago's South Side who was arrested for welfare fraud:
             "She has eighty names, thirty addresses, twelve Social Security cards and is collecting veteran's benefits on four non-existing deceased husbands. And she is collecting Social Security on her cards. She's got Medicaid, getting food stamps, and she is collecting welfare under each of her names. Her tax-free cash income is over $150,000."
          They believe that Blacks and Latinos and others are getting more than their share of Social Security and Medicare, so that "entitlement" for them means welfare, while Whites are being gouged, so that they are paying too much for their "social insurance", and the programs should be cut. Similarly, they believe in cutting welfare for the shiftless, cheating, undeserving poor, but not for themselves because they worked hard and they deserve it. Nancy Pelosi's daughter Christina has done documentaries in which people say these very things.

          In the original Southern Strategy, as Lee Atwater explained, the Dog Whistle of cutting taxes and social programs was OK as long as Blacks got hurt worse than Whites.

          Ceterem censeo, gerrymandra delenda est

          by Mokurai on Fri Apr 05, 2013 at 01:36:01 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

      •  Two thirds correct (0+ / 0-)

        I agree that tax cuts are necessary and the SS cuts are not.

        But Medicare is indeed on an unsustainable course, along with health care costs in general in the US.  I think that where we go our separate way from most of the austerity hawks on Medicare is in the belief that the way to cut costs in Medicare is to fix our overall health care system rather than just shifting costs to retirees.

        Political Compass: -6.75, -3.08

        by TexasTom on Fri Apr 05, 2013 at 10:53:12 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

      •  I'm speaking (0+ / 0-)

        strictly politically.  No policy analysis whatsoever here.

    •  Taxes without benefits (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      RichM

      Taxation without benefits in return is just theft.  I mean if both parties are going to cut my Social Security and Medicare, I might as well vote for the party that is going to lower my taxes.  

    •  If its DOA, why bother (7+ / 0-)

      when the net is just pissing off your supporters?? to make his poll numbers drop like a stone?

      Makes no fucking sense.

      Is President Obama the last moderate Republican?

      by al23 on Fri Apr 05, 2013 at 09:01:36 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  The trouble is, (0+ / 0-)

      the tax increases are also necessary, from a budget perspective and because the specific tax expenditures on the block are a massively unjust wealth redistribution.  If you want to target those, the only plausible alternative to chained-CPI is further, deeper continuation of the sequestration. On the assumptions that (a) the cuts are phased out over 10 years, (b) a cut 10 years form now is better, (c) CCPI has exemptions for the most hard up, and (d) a future Congress can always undo it or shift to CPI-E (having laid the philosophical groundwork), the proposal is not awful, and the rest of the budget is kind of good.

      Difficult, difficult, lemon difficult.

      by Loge on Fri Apr 05, 2013 at 09:09:04 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  If tax increases were necessary (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        RenMin, schnecke21

        He could have let the Bush tax cuts expire on incomes over $150K instead of screwing seniors who have incomes of $15K.

        •  then, we'd have also seen (0+ / 0-)

          tax increases go up on everyone else.  Here, we got a tax increase on income over $450,000 already, and now the attention is turned to be much more important question of tax expenditures, in the form of truly awful deductions, which should be a high priority to try to eliminate.  

          And it's very likely the people you describe wouldn't be exempted from the proposal, once detailed, at least per the description given.  That's not to say it's costless or not a cut at all, but the actual suggestions are contentious enough without inventing new ones.

          Difficult, difficult, lemon difficult.

          by Loge on Fri Apr 05, 2013 at 10:57:56 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

    •  So he's gambling with my personal income (9+ / 0-)

      and I'm to be happy about that, because of his political savvy? Really? I make the last three days of the month eating day-old Bagels on sale, and he wants to extend that another few days, and that's smart politics, is it? Multiply me by millions, btw.

      And exactly why wouldn't he accept some Republican offer of 0.01% increases (which will be offset by some little provision somewhere) given that his main goal seems to be to "make a deal."

      You've not noticed how the brilliant Sequester ploy worked out?

      "Hi, I'm on your side, and I've just offered to fuck you over. Because that's what your enemies want so I can have a Legacy of Accomplishment."


      If Republicans said every 3rd person named "Smith" should hang, we'd bargain them to every 7th. Then we'll see apologia written praising this most pragmatic compromise. There's our losing formula.

      by Jim P on Fri Apr 05, 2013 at 09:23:44 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  The President is doing a good job on his (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    skillet, mmacdDE, sweatyb

    desire to achieve a grand bargain.  I'm serious.  Freaking out over every gambit is just too tiring.....

    From Neocon to sane- thanks to Obama- and Kos.

    by satrap on Fri Apr 05, 2013 at 08:35:52 AM PDT

  •  Bingo! Right on cue. (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Lady Libertine

    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 Fri Apr 05, 2013 at 08:36:57 AM PDT

    •  What? Read the diary before posting, Zed, you . (0+ / 0-)

      idiot.  What a fricking idiot (This time Boehner).  He just snatched the blame back from Obama.  Deeper cuts to entitlements?  Oh, somebody give me a pillow, my stitches are gonna come loose.  Now we'll see how hard Obama tugs to get it back.

      lol   This is political comedy at its most lame.  This is amateur hour at a Tennessee hoedown.

      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 Fri Apr 05, 2013 at 08:43:07 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  Oh, good lord, not again! (9+ / 0-)

    When will Obama stop trying to win the love of Republicans and start doing what's good for America?

    Has he taken his utter defeat at the hands of the NRA and teh media on gun control as a sign that he is utterly impotent?

    Why the hell won't he fight for what America believes in and he, supposedly, believes in?

    Is it simply that he believes in nothing? Or has he, simply, no backbone at all?

  •  "Modest" (4+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    satrap, Little Lulu, mmacdDE, sweatyb

    So, there you go.  A nice response to all the potential GOP attack ads you all want to quiver in fear at. They want deep cuts akin to a leg and arm being removed in comparison to the president's offer to trim some finger nails. I think Obama understands the politics of all this much better than people here give him credit for. Not spin just my opinion.

    "What do you mean "conspiracy"? Does that mean it's someone's imaginings and that the actual polls hovered right around the result?" - petral

    by conspiracy on Fri Apr 05, 2013 at 08:37:30 AM PDT

  •  Holding Entitlement Cuts Hostage. (14+ / 0-)

    Well, that really says it all doesn't it?

  •  For the last couple of weeks, I've been (9+ / 0-)

    unsubcribing from all Democratic Pary emails for our congress critters, etc. I even mail their crap back to them!

    Call me when the progressive Democrats start their own political party...those are the Better Democrats that Markos wants.

    Poverty and Income Inequality isn't Democratic, Justice or American. It is Tyranny.

    by Wendys Wink on Fri Apr 05, 2013 at 08:38:00 AM PDT

    •  Yes - Don't give money to help an abuser! (5+ / 0-)

      If someone asks you for any donation to any political party or charity, tell them to call the White House and make them end their plans to cut Social Security and Medicare. We can't afford cuts and charity!

    •  Heh. I did the same thing back in December. (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Wendys Wink

      Move Single Payer Forward? Join 18,000 Doctors of PNHP and 185,000 member National Nurses United

      by divineorder on Fri Apr 05, 2013 at 10:30:39 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  Nader tried it, and handed the 2000 election to (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Wendys Wink

      the Supreme Court to hand to Bush. If you want Progressives to have a say in our government, you have to start with More Democrats. Then when we have control, and Nancy Pelosi is Speaker of the House again, we can shift the debate to the space between the Democratic and Progressive agendas. Once we are in a position to pass a new Voting Rights act to deal with voter suppression, we can also discuss outlawing the gerrymander.

      I had to hold my nose and vote for our Blue Dog Joe Donnelly here in Indiana over that troll Richard "Rape babies are God's Will" Mourdock. Donnelly has started to evolve on gun control, and we are working on him on other issues where the public is ahead of the Beltway Bubble and Republican paranoia.

      Ceterem censeo, gerrymandra delenda est

      by Mokurai on Fri Apr 05, 2013 at 02:40:51 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  This Kabuki is ridiculous (5+ / 0-)

    Round and round they go. Hmm. Let's see. What are we not supposed to pay attention to today? It IS Friday, after all....

    It is time to #Occupy Media.

    by lunachickie on Fri Apr 05, 2013 at 08:38:05 AM PDT

  •  I. Fucking. Quit. (19+ / 0-)

    From this point on, every fucking OFA email I receive get trained to go right in my fucking junk mail file.

    Fuck. This. Guy.

    Flaccid, vacillating, spineless Tory.

    He just signaled that we're all on our own.

    Guess what?

    So is he.

    Good luck, Mr. President. You're gonna fucking need it.

  •  Protecting & Preserving Social Security Act could (12+ / 0-)

    use some movement in Congress.  Begich's Senate bill is S. 308, House version is H.R. 649:

    http://www.dailykos.com/...

    Get on the phone with your Senator and Congressman, tell them no cuts to SS & Medicare:

    https://www.senate.gov/...

    http://www.house.gov

    Flood those lines now and when they get back from break.  You can also get involved with the Strengthen Social Security Coalition:

    http://strengthensocialsecurity.org/

    Funny Stuff at http://www.funnyordie.com/oresmas

    by poopdogcomedy on Fri Apr 05, 2013 at 08:41:18 AM PDT

  •  Meh (17+ / 0-)

    At the end of the day, all I can promise is that:

    I will not vote for any politician that signs a bill that cuts Social Security in any way. I simply do not support this policy and I will not support any politician who votes for the cuts. I've already written to my Representative and Senators and informed them of this. They are all Dems and they will not have my support in the next election if they vote to cut this program.

    "I'll believe that corporations are people when I see Rick Perry execute one."

    by bink on Fri Apr 05, 2013 at 08:42:33 AM PDT

  •  Obama's budget will be rejected and Obama (3+ / 0-)

    should stop negotiating and just have the House and the Senate go through regular order.

    President Obama, January 9, 2012: "Change is hard, but it is possible. I've Seen it. I've Lived it."

    by Drdemocrat on Fri Apr 05, 2013 at 08:42:36 AM PDT

  •  this is why i refuse to get my dander up (5+ / 0-)

    whenever this happens. Obama is not a dumbass. I just can't believe the GOP keeps falling for this shit.

    There are house elections coming up and this is a good enough bludgeon since STILL even 68% or so of republicans want fair tax reform.

    What a bunch of idiots.

    There's nothing else to do in DC right now BUT play politics. There will be NO meaningful legislation happening until we take the house back in 2015 except POSSIBLY immigration reform (which is nothing more than a desperate GOP survival tactic).

    So without any legislation in DC happening or possible, the only thing to do is politics. And this president knows how to do politics.

    •  I'm not sure they're "falling for it" (4+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      PJEvans, emal, mmacdDE, sweatyb

      obama seems to genuinely believe he needs to compromise to prevent another recession, which would devestate dems electorally.

      But that doesn't mean the GOP won't play their little role perfectly and dig themselves even deeper. As they seem to be doing.

      and I 100% agree on no meaningful legislation happening any time soon. As I said elsewhere here today, look at California. The GOP there was like a bunch of pit bulls that couldn't let go of their dying ideology. Only a supermajority got rid of them. They're still hanging out in bakersfield, wondering what hit them.

      filibuster reform could help a bit in the short term, but a house majority, hard to achieve with gerrymandering, is the only long term solution.

      •  And as in California (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        happymisanthropy, decembersue

        it takes TIME for them to be recognized as the idiots they are. But eventually, as things people liked, and wanted to keep, get cut, and they watch the rich thumbing their noses at the bulk of the people, they wake up.

        And they vote the morons out. Eventually.

      •  Hence the Battleground Texas campaign (0+ / 0-)

        to turn Texas Blue. It will happen anyway, but we can speed up the process. Obama beat Romney in 26 states to 24, and in the Electoral College by 332-206. If we flip 38 votes from Texas, that comes to 370-168, generally considered to be landslide territory, and the set of paths to a Republican Presidential victory becomes vanishingly small, requiring victories in almost every other recent swing state, while they become gradually ever Bluer.

        Ceterem censeo, gerrymandra delenda est

        by Mokurai on Fri Apr 05, 2013 at 04:37:27 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

    •  no need for that exception (0+ / 0-)

      I would be flabbergasted if the immigration reform bill they're working on proved to be meaningful.

  •  i want off this ride (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    tardis10, RichM, happymisanthropy
    If the president believes these modest entitlement savings are needed to help shore up these programs, there's no reason they should be held hostage for more tax hikes.
    said the hostage taker in chief..................wtf

    ''A conservative is a man with two perfectly good legs who, however, has never learned to walk forward.'' FDR

    by lostinamerica on Fri Apr 05, 2013 at 08:43:23 AM PDT

  •  Lather, rinse, repeat. (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    GreyHawk

    I can't scrub hard enough to get the ka-ka off!

  •  G0d I wish he was holding entitlement cuts hostage (5+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Armando, OldSoldier99, PJEvans, emal, Timothy J

    That would be a good thing.

  •  Now it's time to say "Stuff it" to the GOP. (5+ / 0-)

    They've rejected the compromise that would've hurt far too many people and actually undercut the economy. For the wrong reasons, of course - the cuts didn't destroy their targets, and didn't do enough damage to the economy to ensure that the people put the GOP back in charge.

    So now it's time to say "Stuff it."

    Put a REAL progressive budget forward. Tell the GOP to put up, shut up and do their jobs.

    We're quickly running out of time to make a big enough difference to ensure they get gutted before 2014.

    •  You know Obama won't do that. (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      GreyHawk, RenMin

      It's "unserious", and - more importantly - it won't please his money men enough. He wants a cushy lecture circuit after leaving the White House, and so he'll toady up to Wall Street at every opportunity between now and January 2017.

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

      by Australian2 on Fri Apr 05, 2013 at 10:17:03 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  This guy leads on SS marriage, the (3+ / 1-)
    Recommended by:
    Little Lulu, mmacdDE, sweatyb
    Hidden by:
    Australian2

    Affordable Care act and countless numbers of things in the face of a nihilist right and people on DKOS scream like cut swine whenever the WH makes a move that's not of their precise liking.

    Please.

    From Neocon to sane- thanks to Obama- and Kos.

    by satrap on Fri Apr 05, 2013 at 08:43:48 AM PDT

  •  The two parties are just engaged (5+ / 0-)

    in kabuki theater.

    “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 Fri Apr 05, 2013 at 08:44:25 AM PDT

  •  What's wrong with Obama? (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Timothy J, RichM, happymisanthropy

    To answer my own question, nothing -- that couldn't have been foreseen.  He has talked since before his first inauguration about doing a grand bargain.  For some reason he is fixated on the subject and doesn't care what the substance is, as long as he can say he cut a deal.  He is ignorant of economics and probably sincerely believes that cuts to entitlements will help the economy.  As I've said here many times before, Obama is an Eisenhower Republican.

    "[W]e shall see the reign of witches pass over . . . and the people, recovering their true spirit, restore their government to its true principles." Jefferson

    by RenMin on Fri Apr 05, 2013 at 08:44:45 AM PDT

  •  Oh, and to those of you telling (12+ / 0-)

    everyone to remain calm? This is the whole game.
    The political attacks from the left by the likes of Paul Ryan and Ted-Fucking-Cruz is more than I can bear. If you want to pretend that this isn't a big f$%#ing deal, by all means, have at it.

    I'm done.

    Roll on, boys and girls. Your president just hung you out to dry.

  •  The Gauntlet has Been Thrown (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    RenMin

    It's time to raise tens of millions to assure Nancy Pelosi is returned to Speaker of the House!  There is only one thing that Republicans will understand and that is being in the political fight of their lives.  Start raising that money - we're there!!!

  •  LOL, well, if they keep on that message (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Armando

    they eliminate any advantage obama gave them by proposing the cuts.

  •  Well, this can go three different ways (4+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Supavash, RenMin, PhilJD, PorridgeGun

    1 - Obama ups the ante and offers even more drastic cuts to entitlement programs, Boehner rejects them, Obama sweetens the deal even more, we go through several more rounds of this, until we get a deal that makes Obama's original offer look practically socialist in comparison.

    2 - Same as #1, but with Boehner refusing even Obama's most generous, cut Social Security by 20% offer, because he not only isn't willing to raise taxes in exchange, nor put the GOP on record as supporting cuts to SS, resulting in a far more modest budget that doesn't cut spending or raise taxes much.

    3 - Obama walks away, having earned the right to say that he was willing to make painful cuts but Boehner wasn't and thus the seal of approval of the Morning Joe crowd he clearly plays to, and is now free to start negotiating from a genuinely progressive position, and starts doing so, putting political pressure on Repubs to abandon the 1% and help the 99%.

    I think that even Obama isn't weak and stupid enough to let #1 happen, yet isn't tough and progressive enough to do #3, making #2 the by far likeliest outcome. I.e. punting, which is his MO, and what he'll be remembered for--or the guy who called a home run, then bunted and barely squeezed out a single.

    Talk big, act small. The operative paradigm of modern liberalism.

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

    by kovie on Fri Apr 05, 2013 at 08:48:12 AM PDT

    •  hre's the wall I keep running into when I hear: (0+ / 0-)
      Talk big, act small.
      as if that's what he's done, to date.

      it's my understanding that the left of the time wasn't completely with Social Security as passed, but the left of today thinks it was an amazing and groundbreaking achievement.

      I think the same will be said, generations from now, about the ACA, meaning it will be held as no small act.

      that's just a "for instance."

      for the record, I'd love to see #3 happen as well, and don't share your opinion that he's not tough or progressive enough.

      This comment is dedicated to my mellow Adept2U and his Uncle Marcus

      by mallyroyal on Fri Apr 05, 2013 at 09:18:21 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  What's tough and progressive about his proposed (3+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        lunachickie, greenbell, RenMin

        cuts to SS & Medicare, unless as seen from an 11DC pov? As for the ACA, who cares what happens in 40 years, something Obama had no way of predicting, when in the short run it may well make things much tougher for many people who might be guaranteed insurance now---that they still can't afford?

        He's done a lot of good small to medium stuff, but on the big stuff, he's either failed, or punted--which to me is the same thing. We're still in Iraq, we'll be in Afghanistan for years, Wall St. hasn't been punished or meaningfully reformed, health care is still effectively unavailable for tens of millions, decent jobs aren't coming back, etc. I didn't expect any of these to be fully fixed by now, but I did expect some serious attempt at doing so, which we have not seen.

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

        by kovie on Fri Apr 05, 2013 at 09:26:34 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  I made a specific point. (0+ / 0-)

          This comment is dedicated to my mellow Adept2U and his Uncle Marcus

          by mallyroyal on Fri Apr 05, 2013 at 09:30:26 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  So did I (2+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            lunachickie, divineorder

            Several in fact. Mine were, though, actually specific.

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

            by kovie on Fri Apr 05, 2013 at 09:32:55 AM PDT

            [ Parent ]

            •  I'll respond to this, since it was almost (0+ / 0-)

              an actual reply:

              as for the ACA, who cares what happens in 40 years, something Obama had no way of predicting, when in the short run it may well make things much tougher for many people who might be guaranteed insurance now---that they still can't afford?
              really?  your comment to my thesis of how this will be remembered is "who cares?"

              I was giving you a chance to do better. guess you can't.

              This comment is dedicated to my mellow Adept2U and his Uncle Marcus

              by mallyroyal on Fri Apr 05, 2013 at 10:05:24 AM PDT

              [ Parent ]

              •  You responded with an impossible (1+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:
                lunachickie

                to meaningfully criticize hypothetical of what might happen in decades. That is by definition as far from specific as possible.

                I am not impressed by what might someday prove to be a good thing. Tell me what good has come from the ACA right now.

                The weird thing is that you could have done this, but chose not to.

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

                by kovie on Fri Apr 05, 2013 at 10:12:01 AM PDT

                [ Parent ]

                •  because you know the good parts of it as well as (1+ / 0-)
                  Recommended by:
                  WB Reeves

                  I do.  I'm making a totally legit comparison and you're asking me to tell you things you already know.

                  This comment is dedicated to my mellow Adept2U and his Uncle Marcus

                  by mallyroyal on Fri Apr 05, 2013 at 10:14:30 AM PDT

                  [ Parent ]

                  •  Like I said (0+ / 0-)

                    He's done a lot of small to medium-sized good things, which are not trivial let alone nothing. But he's failed to even try to take on the really big, systemic problems that, left unsolved, will likely undermine and negate if not reverse these smaller accomplishments. E.g. systemic financial risk, a health care system based on a for-profit model, a growing MIC, etc. Any of these are capable of destroying us someday and making these smaller gains moot.

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

                    by kovie on Fri Apr 05, 2013 at 10:31:48 AM PDT

                    [ Parent ]

      •  Pretty sure the ACA will be held as a failure (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        lostinamerica, RenMin

        No nation on earth has ever made a system like that work.  Pretty sure the Obama admin isn't close to being that good.

  •  So deliberate, all of it (7+ / 0-)

    It's obvious the GOP AND Obama (and others who are owned by the big banks and Wall St) want to end FDR and the Democrats' legacy after the last century's big crash. They know this yet they're willing to allow people to die to steal more power and money to gamble for themselves. It's so utterly shameful and disgusting. I hope the masses of American people realize how meaningless they are to these corporate oligarchs and wake up!

  •  Who could have predicted this? (4+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Apost8, RichM, lunachickie, tb mare

    I was assured that the Republicans would strew flowers in Obama's path, if only he would meet them halfway on entitlement cuts.  How could anyone predict that they would cash in his preemptive concession and then ask for more?  They have always behaved so honorably and reasonably in the past, I can't blame the administration for being totally shocked and caught unawares.  

    "[W]e shall see the reign of witches pass over . . . and the people, recovering their true spirit, restore their government to its true principles." Jefferson

    by RenMin on Fri Apr 05, 2013 at 08:49:48 AM PDT

    •  I was assured (0+ / 0-)

      that Republicans would use Obama's CCPI proposal to judo flip the issue of entitlements.  And that they would relentlessly hammer the Democrats over the head on the issue of cutting SS.

      And here's the leader of the Republican House saying the President isn't cutting SS enough.

      What gives?

  •  For the last and final time..... (8+ / 0-)

    SOCIAL SECURITY DOESN'T ADD A FUCKING DIME TO THE DEBT OR DEFICIT.

    Someone had better talk me off this ledge and they had better have a very good argument.

    One that is grounded in reason and truth.

    Can't wait for Krugman's answer to this.

  •  Please Don't Try And Make Republicans Look (6+ / 0-)

    Like the bad actors here.  The only reason this wasn't done before in the Grand Bargain is they were to crazily stubborn to accept victory.

    President Obama now OWNS Social Security cuts.  And the Democrats will go down in flames in 2014.

    Maybe that's the 12 dimensional chess he's playing.  He's out to destroy the Democratic party's base and the Democratic party.

    If I was a communist, rich men would fear me...And the opposite applies. The history of all hitherto existing society is the history of class struggles.

    by stewarjt on Fri Apr 05, 2013 at 08:51:57 AM PDT

    •  listen to yourself: (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      mmacdDE, sweatyb
      Please Don't Try And Make Republicans Look (3+ / 0-)

      Like the bad actors here.  The only reason this wasn't done before in the Grand Bargain is they were to crazily stubborn to accept victory.

      so.  the "crazily stubborn" lawmakers are NOT the "bad actors."  

      wanna go again?

      This comment is dedicated to my mellow Adept2U and his Uncle Marcus

      by mallyroyal on Fri Apr 05, 2013 at 09:14:36 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  Dick Comment Alert (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        divineorder, RenMin

        Do you want to comprehend what you read?

        Save time by not commenting if you're only going to attack someone and not constructively contribute to the conversation.

        Yeah, that's right.  The crazily stubborn refuse to accept a deal or Social Security benefits would have been cut long ago.

        If I was a communist, rich men would fear me...And the opposite applies. The history of all hitherto existing society is the history of class struggles.

        by stewarjt on Fri Apr 05, 2013 at 09:49:06 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  you defended the repubs against scorn while (0+ / 0-)

          characterizing them as "crazily stubborn."

          what'd I miss in my reading comp?

          This comment is dedicated to my mellow Adept2U and his Uncle Marcus

          by mallyroyal on Fri Apr 05, 2013 at 10:18:12 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  Mally Dumba (0+ / 0-)

            The bad actor is President Obama.  The "crazily stubborn" Republicans have saved the working class from Social Security cuts until now by being unwilling to compromise.  Just because they're crazy and stubborn doesn't make them bad actors in this case.  Geez.

            I'm sorry that I had to explain my comment to you because you were unable to comprehend it on your own.  

            Again, steer clear of my comments unless you have something constructive to add.  'kay?

            If I was a communist, rich men would fear me...And the opposite applies. The history of all hitherto existing society is the history of class struggles.

            by stewarjt on Fri Apr 05, 2013 at 10:22:08 AM PDT

            [ Parent ]

          •  Houston, We Have A Reading Comprehension Problem (0+ / 0-)

            I'm not defending Republicans against scorn.  Please indicate where I did this.  I'm absolving them of blame for proposing Social Security cuts.  President owns that and deserves scorn for it.  Geez!  Enough of your obtuseness.

            If I was a communist, rich men would fear me...And the opposite applies. The history of all hitherto existing society is the history of class struggles.

            by stewarjt on Fri Apr 05, 2013 at 10:24:38 AM PDT

            [ Parent ]

            •  Absolving? (0+ / 0-)

              I didn't know there was such a thing as a political priesthood. I figured that the electorate made such judgements.

              You may turn out to be right or you may turn out to be wrong about how this shakes out but your opinion doesn't have the status of fact. Mally is quite right to point out the possibility that you may have the politics of this backwards.

              Nothing human is alien to me.

              by WB Reeves on Fri Apr 05, 2013 at 10:33:39 AM PDT

              [ Parent ]

              •  Christ! (0+ / 0-)

                There's more than one meaning of absolve.

                Absolve - to set free from an obligation or the consequences of guilt.

                If I was a communist, rich men would fear me...And the opposite applies. The history of all hitherto existing society is the history of class struggles.

                by stewarjt on Fri Apr 05, 2013 at 10:37:57 AM PDT

                [ Parent ]

                •  So? (0+ / 0-)

                  You think you're in a position to "absolve" the GOP? I think not.

                  The point stands. The politics of this will be decided by the electorate as a whole. How this is seen outside the blog squabble bubble is what counts, not a lot of ideologically driven blather.

                  Nothing human is alien to me.

                  by WB Reeves on Fri Apr 05, 2013 at 11:10:17 AM PDT

                  [ Parent ]

      •  shhh, you're gonna get in trouble (0+ / 0-)
  •  Whaever (8+ / 0-)

    Obama is a traitor, regardless what the Republicans do.

    He never campaigned on this budget, nor did I vote for this.

    Complete and total sellout.

    We need a revolution in the Democratic Party, since we stand for ABSOLUTELY NOTHING now.

    Thank-you neoliberals, now go fuck yourselves.

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

    by Jazzenterprises on Fri Apr 05, 2013 at 08:52:00 AM PDT

    •  but don't you see (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      RenMin

      Obama was simultaneously never going to cut entitlements, but he's also hinted about a grand bargain all along. So even though it was never going to happen, you can't blame him because he warned you about it from the beginning or something.

      "with rights come responsibilities." Wrong. Responsibilities continue to exist even if you abdicate your rights.

      by happymisanthropy on Fri Apr 05, 2013 at 10:26:08 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  Eliminate Social Security! Gut Medicare! (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    lunachickie, RenMin

    Tax cuts for retirees!

    kidding

    Suggested liberal gun lovers' motto: "More liberal than the NRA on everything except guns."

    by Bob Johnson on Fri Apr 05, 2013 at 08:53:14 AM PDT

  •  Gee, you mean that move which every (4+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    TomP, stewarjt, RichM, happymisanthropy

    Democrat will hate, didn't work?

    What, Mr. President, what can you be thinking?  What?

    sh

  •  It's not really that hard to understand (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    mallyroyal, mmacdDE

    The only thing the republicans can agree to bitch about is cutting, cutting, cutting. If you take away that and do a deal with the President, what do they have left but issues which are already largely radioactive with the majority of Americans? Abortion? Gay marriage? More war?  Pearl clutching over Sharia law?
    They will never do a deal, because then they'll have nothing to oppose him on and Obama knows it.

    Just another day in Oceania.

    by drshatterhand on Fri Apr 05, 2013 at 08:53:45 AM PDT

  •  Wow. you people are nuts. Reading (5+ / 0-)

    these comments is amazing. It's not healthy folks, to micro-examine politics too much. It makes you crazy. Step away for a little bit and get some perspective. I say this as family. Ya'll are my family and you should know politics better than this.

    Yes, it's a game. What else is there in DC right now? What else is going to ACTUALLY GET DONE? Nothing, that's what. So now it's all about gamesmanship and positioning. That, and campaigning for the 2014s.

    By this time next year the economy will have taken a bit of a dive as a result of the sequestration. This is predictable. Also predictable, the GOP will not move on taxes. Also 68% of republicans favor tax fairness. This is not complicated.

    Please go enjoy the spring day. Or do something else to balance your micro-attention to politics. It's healthy.

    •  word. (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      mdmslle

      This comment is dedicated to my mellow Adept2U and his Uncle Marcus

      by mallyroyal on Fri Apr 05, 2013 at 09:13:25 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  Why are you not (6+ / 0-)

      out enjoying a spring day?  And why are you focusing your microattention on your "family"?

      Seriously, that's not healthy.  Kind of crazy even, according to your logic.


      "Justice is a commodity"

      by joanneleon on Fri Apr 05, 2013 at 09:36:35 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  I'm just impressed (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      WB Reeves

      Wasn't the great fear that Obama and the Democrats would own cuts to SS/Medicare.  Wasn't that the huge political miscalculation?  

      Well that lasted for all of three minutes.  Out walks Boehner to say, "Nuh-uh.  We want bigger cuts, more drastic cuts.  We demand more pain for seniors and the poor and we want it now now now."

      •  so what else will Obama give to them sweatb? (0+ / 0-)

        How much further down can a democratic go after offering up cuts to social security?

        Or will the president take the social security cuts off the table since Boehner didn't accept?

        Which would of course be the wisest path and then to demand that social security benefits be increased and negotiate then on how much of an increase in benefits as an opening bargaining tactic.

        We demand more pain for seniors and the poor and we want it now now now."
        The president has not been shy about demanding that pain for the poor, seniors, disabled and disabled veterans even - and stating that he can deliver the democrats votes because he is a democratic president.

        "Who are these men who really run this land? And why do they run it with such a thoughtless hand?" David Crosby

        by allenjo on Fri Apr 05, 2013 at 03:24:50 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

    •  These people are playing games (0+ / 0-)

      with the future of this country's retirees. They have no right.

      Seriously, patronizing lectures aren't going to win you many converts.

      It is time to #Occupy Media.

      by lunachickie on Fri Apr 05, 2013 at 10:20:54 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  Obama just lost big time. (8+ / 0-)

    Obama makes an offer that was going to be obviously rejected by Republicans.

    And all Obama got was the stench that he wants to cut SS and Medicare.

    God, what a dumb move.

    •  Please remember (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      RenMin

      OBAMA doesn't have to run again.

      But the Congress does.

      So this gives the Dems, both those from red districts and those from the South, a way to run against both Obama AND the GOP.

      You think a GOP congress member is going to say they didn't agree with more cuts? No way. And this gives the Dem running against them a way to be anti-Obama and anti-GOP, all at the same time.

      I think it's brilliant, really. Because Obama knows that as long as there's some tax hikes for the rich in the deal, the House will never agree, and will propose even MORE cuts.

      Brilliant, I tell you.

      •  Now that's an interesting observation (0+ / 0-)

        But it only works if Dem candidates in red states have the wit and skill to play it that way without alienating the base. That's no short order.

        Nothing human is alien to me.

        by WB Reeves on Fri Apr 05, 2013 at 10:39:58 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

      •  Yes, brilliant as in Michele Backmann. (0+ / 0-)

        I watched the 12 Noon News on my local station.
        The lead story: "Obama wants to cut Social Security".

        I think his legacy is already in the toilet.

        •  Who cares? (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          mmacdDE

          This isn't about the President's legacy. It's about whether his actions/ploys are going to have negative impact on Dems in 2014.

          I don't know whether Dem candidates in red states have the requisite subtlety to play both ends against the middle as suggested but putting the onus on the President is no bar to them doing so.

          Nothing human is alien to me.

          by WB Reeves on Fri Apr 05, 2013 at 11:35:17 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

  •  Yes, and he does the mirroring (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    tardis10

    strategy: now Obama is the "hostage-taker."

    On the bright side, chanied cpi is less likely to happen.  

    Join us on the Black Kos front porch to review news and views written from a black pov—everyone is welcome.

    by TomP on Fri Apr 05, 2013 at 08:59:47 AM PDT

    •  Really? How so? (3+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      TheMomCat, happymisanthropy, RenMin

      Even Ryan didn't put this on the table.

      Barack Obama did.

      Now the Republicans with truth and sound bites on their side get to claim this is Democratic policy.

      What will it take Tom?  What will it take?

      •  Amusing Ek. (0+ / 0-)

        Like you care what happens to Democrats.  Crocodile tears, I think.

        You  make assertions, but I see no data.   Obama is not running again.  We will see the impact of this proposal, WHICH I OPPOSE, in November 2014.  

        As for your dramatics at the end of your comment, you're not a star on a stage, except perhaps in your own mind.    

        Join us on the Black Kos front porch to review news and views written from a black pov—everyone is welcome.

        by TomP on Fri Apr 05, 2013 at 09:25:37 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  So nothing, ever, will shake your devotion. (2+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          TheMomCat, happymisanthropy

          Not biting the noses off babies.

          Oh I'm laughing all right.

          2010 not enough for you?

          Your analysis is as shallow as you are.

          •  Personal insults are pointless (0+ / 0-)

            How about some substance? 2010 was fought over "Obamacare" as part of a larger strategy for unseating Obama in 2012. It succeeded tactically but failed strategically.

            Why should we assume that 2014 is going to be a repeat of 2010?

            The GOP was campaigning then on rolling back the President's policy. Now they are arguing the opposite: that the President's initiative, clearly unpopular, isn't draconian enough. How is this predictive of GOP victory?

            Nothing human is alien to me.

            by WB Reeves on Fri Apr 05, 2013 at 10:54:09 AM PDT

            [ Parent ]

  •  Boehner wants the "hostage" to stay alive (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    mmacdDE, happymisanthropy, RenMin

    In other words, he's complaining that the President won't let his entitlement cuts "go free."
    That seems like a pretty clear-cut statement to me: the Republicans want to cut SS, and now they are pissed off that the President is "holding their cuts hostage."
    I think Boehner stepped in it with this complaint, now we just need to get people to pay attention to what he said.

    Everybody got to elevate from the norm....

    by Icicle68 on Fri Apr 05, 2013 at 08:59:48 AM PDT

  •  No place better to battle than on ground the (8+ / 0-)

    enemy chooses.

    If Obama were to say, along with 72% of the voters "the deficit isn't that big of a problem, and a massive Jobs program would fix it anyway, so let's talk what Jobs program the Republicans want"...

    then I'd think he has a fucking clue. Fact is the man's internalized the Wall Street First worldview of both Conservativism and Neoliberalism and has abandoned reality.

    Proof?

    • "We're for Jobs, Republicans aren't" trumps "Republicans don't play nice" by miles if the object is winning the political optics game
    • If Republicans take the deal, offering what will amount to a 0.01% hurt on their rich folks (to be made up in other ways to be sure), then Obama deals another gaping cut to the real-world Economy which Austerity by any name has proven to deliver.

      Seriously, he's trapped in a bubble of delusion, and one of Republican construction if he thinks this is smart politics, sane policy.


    If Republicans said every 3rd person named "Smith" should hang, we'd bargain them to every 7th. Then we'll see apologia written praising this most pragmatic compromise. There's our losing formula.

    by Jim P on Fri Apr 05, 2013 at 09:01:06 AM PDT

  •  So... (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    emal, divineorder

    What are we going to do?

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

    by RichM on Fri Apr 05, 2013 at 09:03:05 AM PDT

  •  Surprised there's little discussion (4+ / 0-)

    of the tax haven revelations.  With an estimated $32 trillion squirreled away offshore, eliminating this loophole for big corporations and the wealthy would go a long way toward balancing the US budget and others.

  •  While Boehner won't even consider any tax hike! (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    mmacdDE
  •  With all due respect, f*ck Speaker Boehner. (0+ / 0-)
  •  Then, Boehner, "Lawdy, lawdy..." (0+ / 0-)

    "Do what he says, he's desperate."

    America, we can do better than this...

    by Randomfactor on Fri Apr 05, 2013 at 09:08:12 AM PDT

  •  Negotiating with the house goopers is like (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    RenMin

    negotiating with a honey badger.....Honey badger don't care.

  •  the President, maybe? I dunno why folks keep (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    mmacdDE

    assuming this guy's either dumb or a closet Repub.

    and as to this:

    And the Very Serious People will now talk about how very modest Obama's offer on entitlements is, and how if he was really serious about compromising with the Republicans, he would propose some real cuts to these programs. Lather, rinse, repeat.
    absolutely.  and sites like daily kos will do what they're supposed to:  make noise to the effect that Dems won't stand for cuts.  they'll even insult the prez for good measure.

    lather, rinse, repeat.

    This comment is dedicated to my mellow Adept2U and his Uncle Marcus

    by mallyroyal on Fri Apr 05, 2013 at 09:12:38 AM PDT

    •  Obama's out of the closet. (0+ / 0-)

      He admitted his policies are 1980s Republican policies in an interview last year.

      •  Such tired stuff (0+ / 0-)

        The President made the comparison in order to underline the extremism of the current GOP. Hardly a confession of faith policy wise.

        Nothing human is alien to me.

        by WB Reeves on Fri Apr 05, 2013 at 10:58:51 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  What's tired... (0+ / 0-)

          ...is when people refuse to even acknowledge reality, which is just because the current Republican party is insane doesn't mean that Reagan-Republicanism is suddenly liberal. Obama, by his admission, is a Reagan Republican. It's inconvenient, of course, for those who want to pretend that Obama is the most super awesome liberal of all time, but he isn't. Many of is his policies, were they being implemented by a Republican president, would be condemned for being the pro-corporate, pro-1% policies that they are. Just because he has a D after his name doesn't change the nature of his policies.

          •  Hah! (0+ / 0-)

            Where, pray tell, did he ever describe himself as a "Reagan Republican"? Never. That's a frame you've imposed on a far more limited observation as to how particular policies would have been viewed in the past.

            Invention in the promotion of an ideological agenda isn't acknowledging reality. It is the exact opposite.

            Nothing human is alien to me.

            by WB Reeves on Fri Apr 05, 2013 at 11:19:57 AM PDT

            [ Parent ]

      •  Really? Obama cherry-picks Reagan (0+ / 0-)

        to show that current Republicans are insane, and you get your knickers in a twist?

        Six times President Obama has quoted Reagan

        Gun control, what we now call the Buffett Rule, a balanced approach to cuts and tax increases, infrastructure, Are you better off?, religion—making five and a half liberal points, and only conceding budget cuts. I think he could have gone for all six, but this is not the President trying to sell us out. Nor does he channel Reagan on racism, class warfare, knee-jerk anti-Socialism (ha-ha), Voodoo Economics, Star Wars, and other goofiness. (Yes, I know that he has kept some seriously obnoxious policies from W. I don't see how he could get Congress to repeal them, or to do anything else Progressive on them. But what has he actually championed from Reagan?)

        Besides, what about the bigger picture?

        The GOP Crackup: How Obama Is Unraveling Reagan Republicanism

        On the surface Reagan's GOP celebrated Norman Rockwell's traditional, white middle-class, small-town America. Below the surface it stoked fires of fear and hate of "others" who threatened this idealized portrait…The 2012 election exposed something else about the GOP: its utter lack of touch with reality, its bizarre incapacity to see and understand what was happening in the country. Think of Karl Rove's delirium on Fox election night.

        All of which has given Obama the perfect opening—perhaps the opening he'd been waiting for all along.

        Obama's focus in his second inaugural—and, by inference, in his second term—on equal opportunity is hardly a radical agenda. But it aggravates all the tensions inside the GOP. And it leaves the GOP without an overriding target to maintain its fragile coalition.

        In hammering home the need for the rich to contribute a fair share in order to ensure equal opportunity, and for anyone in America—be they poor, black, gay, immigrant, women, or average working person—to be able to make the most of themselves, Obama advances the founding ideals of America in such way that the Republican Party is incapable of opposing yet also incapable of uniting behind.

        History and demographics are on the side of the Democrats, but history and demography have been on the Democrats' side for decades. What's new is the Republican crackup—opening the way for a new Democratic coalition of socially liberal young people, women, minorities, middle-class professionals, and what's left of the anti-corporate working class.

        If Obama remains as clear and combative as he has been since Election Day, his second term may be noted not only for its accomplishment but also for finally unraveling what Reagan put together.

        Reich follows this up with a video clip on The Hoax of Entitlement Reform.

        Ceterem censeo, gerrymandra delenda est

        by Mokurai on Fri Apr 05, 2013 at 05:11:09 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

  •  No...Actually John Boehner, there are whole (0+ / 0-)

    helluva lot of Boomers out there who are not going to get even half the Entitlements their parents had.  And the Generation after that, I am really scared to death for them.

  •  This just in..armed bank robbers being held... (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Batya the Toon

    hostage by unarmed customers who are unwilling to part with their savings.

    Bizarro Boehner must have switched places with the real one again.

  •  Utter Insanity (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    RenMin

    The GOP already got their Chained CPI from Obama on Obama's OPENING 2013 BUDGET PLAN.

    And now they've got him right where they want him. "Hey, that's not enough to slash SS and Medicare, we want MORE".

    2:1 cuts:revenue -- and the GOP doesn't accept it?

    I guess the obstinance of the GOP has saved us from Obama's willingness to capitulate so easily.

    Deficits don't matter, jobs do.

    by aguadito on Fri Apr 05, 2013 at 09:50:56 AM PDT

  •  Who could have predicted? (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    lostinamerica, RenMin

    Only anyone with the pattern-recognition ability of your average housecat.

    It's impossible for someone to have risen to be the President in this day and age, with the kind of stupidity it would take to be unable to predict precisely this response from the GOP and their Very Serious People (aka "The Village") enablers.

    Therefore, I can only presume that Obama wants to cut Social Security and Medicare, and to "surrender" further ground he's not interested in defending to the Republicans, all in exchange for a semi-functional government for another year or two.

    Like I've said elsewhere, any Democrat who votes for this abomination of a budget needs to be primaried. I don't care where they "represent" or how impossible it will be to "hold" the seat (hint: if the person sitting in it votes for this, real Democrats don't hold it as is) - because any Democrat who votes for this represents Wall Street first and foremost.

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

    by Australian2 on Fri Apr 05, 2013 at 10:06:22 AM PDT

    •  I agree with everything you say . . . (0+ / 0-)

      But couldn't you tell my comment was snark?

      "[W]e shall see the reign of witches pass over . . . and the people, recovering their true spirit, restore their government to its true principles." Jefferson

      by RenMin on Fri Apr 05, 2013 at 11:33:09 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  As always, (0+ / 0-)

    Boehner's definition of "forward" does not jibe with reality.

    I am not religious, and did NOT say I enjoyed sects.

    by trumpeter on Fri Apr 05, 2013 at 12:41:20 PM PDT

  •  Ya know (0+ / 0-)

    There is no such thing as a "modest" cut to SS. I really thought my days of forcing my govt to arrest me for non-violent resistance ended in 2008...

    But I can tell you..If there is consideration for cuts (see chained) time to drag my sorry ass back to the front
    Would even take commercial bus to D.C....

    It pisses me off that Obama is using the wife and I as fucking chips in this game..and we can't sit at the tale without being arrested by the White House Fence...

    ashes..ashes..we all fall down...

  •  Boehner speaks of Obama's commitments last year, (0+ / 0-)

    forgetting he won the presidency and Democrats won the popular vote for the Senate and House, in the interim , based on his policies. Elections have consequences, John.

    "...stories of past courage can define that ingredient..... But they cannot supply courage itself. For this each man must look into his own soul." JFK Profiles in Courage " Ontario

    by ontario on Fri Apr 05, 2013 at 01:26:25 PM PDT

    •  One of the best-known and longest-established (0+ / 0-)

      consequences of elections is the losers denying that that means they lost the contest of principle. There are examples from the Classical period of Athenian democracy.

      Ceterem censeo, gerrymandra delenda est

      by Mokurai on Fri Apr 05, 2013 at 05:17:49 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  Yes (0+ / 0-)

        "...stories of past courage can define that ingredient..... But they cannot supply courage itself. For this each man must look into his own soul." JFK Profiles in Courage " Ontario

        by ontario on Fri Apr 05, 2013 at 09:02:04 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site