Hey Unsensible Emo Prog Firebaggers: This Time I'm *Sure* I Got It Right!!!

[MannyGoldstein]

Obama will never call for Social Security to be cut.

Er, but Obama will never offer to cut Social Security.

Er, but Obama never publicly offered to cut Social Security, don't believe what that liar John Conyers said, it never happened.

Er, but the Social Security cuts Obama admitted to offering were reductions in waste and fraud only, NOT BENEFITS.

Er, but Obama's only bluffing with his offer to cut benefits, dammit - he'd never actually allow Social Security to be cut.

Regards,

Third-Way Manny

P.S. If it does get cut, it's your fault for staying home for the 2010 elections, even though the lying press claims you actually went to the polls. Because of you, Obama has NO CHOICE WHATSOEVER and needs to cut it.

[NYC_SKP]

1. For the newbies here, Manny, please explain "Emo" and "Firebagger"...

...both are terms that were not particularly seen as conducive to discussion.

And, seriously, I'll bet only 1 in 4 members reading your OP know wtf these two terms mean.

Peace, and Happy New Year!

[MannyGoldstein]

2. Right, I forgot I'm dealing with ignorant Leftys.

So that others can be almost as smart as me, here are some links:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=2057816
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=439x1771440

Regards,

Third-Way Manny

[NYC_SKP]

5. And third way, wtf is that? =:^)-

Please, think of the freepers visiting here who don't have a clue...

[MannyGoldstein]

6. Third Way is Freepers who know how to spell

Or at least know how to use spell check.

Wait - did I just write a bad thing?

[NYC_SKP]

7. Oh Snap!

Tell me that's not a classic reply, and somewhat, potentially, maybe even.... accurate!

[Fumesucker]

13. DUzy!

Best laugh I've had all day.

[abelenkpe]

19. Lol :) nt

[sabrina 1]

28. Lol! n/t

[TDale313]

36. lol! n/t

[nashville_brook]

87. spit coffee on keyboard.

[KoKo]

88. rofl....

's

[mmonk]

158. LOL

[HiPointDem]

109. third way = democrats who like charter schools.

[Chan790]

204. a bit more than that...

they like big business, low taxes, anti-labor positions and whatever centrist-seeming sellout position on social issues they think they can pitch...they are for all intents and purposes sane republicans that got tired of the loonies in their party and decided to co-opt our party and turn it into a non-loonie version of their own.

They're center-right political sophists. As far as I care, they can call themselves whatever they want and think whatever they want...but they're not Democrats and I will never stop advocating their purge from the Democratic Party and DU.

[rhett o rick]

129. The Third Way are the Republicans that abandoned their Party to help us with ours. nm

[Samantha]

52. Oops!

"Right, I forgot I'm dealing with ignorant Leftys Lefties."

also

"So that others can be almost as smart as me I, here are some links:"



Sam

[MannyGoldstein]

53. Oh, you fancy Leftys with your "facts" and "grammar"

How do you expect our Tea Party friends to trust us if we're "literate" or "sober"?

[Samantha]

64. Teapartiers take their motto from Mr. Dooley's Philosophy

"Thrust, ivrybody--but cut th' ca-ards."

Relax -- you are a natural to them.

Sam

[annabanana]

3. hey put that back!

don't neuter teh funny

[MannyGoldstein]

4. OK nt

[banned from Kos]

8. disappointed you didn't work "bank griefers" in somehow

my term for one who feels daily anguish because Lloyd Blankfien is not in prison on some trumped-up imaginary criminal charge.

[MannyGoldstein]

12. Ooh, I like it!

And I can tell from your post that you're not a Third Wayer. Congratulations!

[sabrina 1]

16. Llody Balnakfien WOULD be in prison if he had been in Iceland where the rule

of law is still in effect.

Hopefully soon, we can elect enough real Democrats to make sure that people like Blankfein are held accountable for the devastation they caused to the world's economies, and the huge profits they made from other people's suffering will be confiscated and returned to the people they stole them from.

[Sekhmets Daughter]

124. Let's not forget about hiding Greek debt from the EU. n/t

[sabrina 1]

153. Yes, I forgot about that. But the rules do not apply to them sadly.

[Sekhmets Daughter]

154. Matt Taibbi named them well

"a great vampire squid wrapped around the face of humanity, relentlessly jamming its blood funnel into anything that smells like money."

Blankfein was on CNBC calling for 'entitlement" reform...if I could have reached through the t.v. and punched him in the head, I would have.

[sabrina 1]

156. Omg, I would have joined you to give him a double whammy. They are

so arrogant, on top of everything else. You'd think they would go hide somewhere happy to have gotten away with their crimes and not wanting to remind people again. But no, they can't help attacking the poor at every opportunity.

And I love that Matt Taibbi description. Very, well, colorful, AND appropriate! Lol!

[Sekhmets Daughter]

165. We'd fix him! LOL

Taibbi is the absolute best reporter on all things Wall St.

[sabrina 1]

196. Lol, yes we would! I love Taibbi, one of the few real journalists left in this

country.

[Berlum]

160. Bloodsucking vampire squid

[Rex]

34. 'Bankster cheerleaders' sounds better.

Their daily poutrage at the facts is hilarious!

[madfloridian]

9. What about us "sensible" Emo Prog Firebaggers

Yuh? What about us?

[MannyGoldstein]

26. Sensible Emo Prog Firebagger? That would be like a

Republican who we can't make a deal with - such a thing cannot exist.

Regards,

Third-Way Manny

[tblue]

27. Like compassionate conservatives, you don't exist.

I don't either. Somebody is acting out and wants us all to know it. Yes, Manny, we are paying attention to you. Proceed, Governor.

[theKed]

200. Wait...

They don't exist...you don't exist...what if NONE of you exist...??!
What if everybody here is a sockpuppet of my subconscious?!!

OH GOD

WHAT IF I'M A SOCKPUPPET OF MY OWN SUBCONSCIOUS!

[downandoutnow]

133. Firebaggers aren't Woodchucks! Silly.

[madfloridian]

145. That is a timeless piece from TM

Thanks.

[WorseBeforeBetter]

10. Kicking... Pragmatically yours, WBB. (n/t)

[JaneyVee]

11. Emo Prog is the new Pinko Commie.

[cthulu2016]

14. He's a good man. If he cuts SS it must be for my own good.

[pa28]

15. Harumph. That's right.

BTW Chained CPI is not a cut. It only means future recipients will receive far less than they expected after decades of paying into the system.

Well ok maybe thats a "cut". It's definitely not slashing though. Cut, not slash.

[sabrina 1]

17. No, you were right the first time. If you close your eyes and remember that

those 'greedy old geezers' and those veterans who were 'heroes when they were fighting in Iraq but are not heroes now that they are taking their benefits' (credit to Obama's choice of Alan Simpson for the Deficit Commission) don't need all that money they earned while they were working and paying into the system, then you will understand that a cut is not a cut unless it affects someone in the top 1%.

[rhett o rick]

112. If it isnt a cut why offer it to the Repubicans? Dont think the Republicans would accept it

if it "strengthens" SS.

[Sekhmets Daughter]

126. Well, they haven't acepted it have they? n/t

[rhett o rick]

128. Why would he offer it if it didnt cut SS? nm

[Sekhmets Daughter]

142. It's the least offensive "entitlement" cut

he can put on the table. Look, Obama is trying to play the long game here, IMHO. He is trying to demonstrate to millions of Americans that Democrats are the reasonable and responsible party of government. Looking ahead to 2016, there will be bruising primaries for both parties and the party that comes across as the best suited to govern will win. I doubt we'll find another candidate with Obama's built in constituency. Historically, Americans rarely keep the same party in the WH for more than 2 terms...so 2016 is going to be tough sledding.
What the country needs, in order to recover some semblance of fiscal and social sanity is at least 12 more years of Dems in the WH and controlling the senate. 2013 through 2024. We also need to take back the House. If we do all that, the GOP will have no choice but to dump the extremist right wing agenda. If we make ourselves appear as incompetent as the current teabagger/GOP the nation will be mired in this mess for decades.

[rhett o rick]

144. It is a horrible place to bargain from. He should tell the American people that

he will not ever, ever cut SS or Medicare. And tell them that the repukes want to. He should not be the Democratic President that is willing to cut SS.

We have to draw the line somewhere.

[Sekhmets Daughter]

147. I agree wth your premise, but not with your reason.

It should not be about drawing lines.... It should be about the very real principle upon which the Democratic party is based....

There are 2 things that worry me about this offer. (A) That it is a trap being laid by the repukes who will have no problem whatsoever running on "Obama cut Social Security, after promising not to" and "Obama cut Medicare to pay for Obamacare"

(B) I am worried that it is being proposed because the government has seen projections of double digit inflation in the very foreseeable future.

Here's the thing rhett o rick...we do not have an unlimited supply of money and the repukes have been brilliant in framing the issue as one of bloated entitlements. The Dems don't do a very good job of showing where the real bloat can be found. I find it very frustrating that a party that considers itself to the peopled by the "best and the brightest" does such a lousy job of messaging.

[rhett o rick]

130. Do you support linking SS to the CPI? nm

[Sekhmets Daughter]

137. Not particularly...but

it will only cost me about $3.00 a month in 2013 and the average recipient $4.00 a month. So no one will be reduced to eating dirt (cat food ain't cheap). Everyone seems to think that any changes made now can't be reversed, that's simply untrue. All these really horrible projections we see going out, 10, 20 and 30 years appear to be based on the maximum benefit and very few Americans get the maximum benefit. I think we are becoming hysterical to go good purpose and being diverted from what is the real problem with Social Security...wages are too low.

Having said that, I have already written to the WH pointing out that an overwhelming majority of those 65 and over voted for Mitt Romney, and asked if Obama wants to confirm they were correct in doing so?

[historylovr]

18. I thought I was a teaLeftist. So hard to keep up.

+1, by the way.

[Rain Mcloud]

20. I reckon this post will have the Blew dogs frothing

at Pavlov's closing bell.
Shame about that nice young vice president stepping down,Jomentholatum or sumsuchazat.

[SheilaT]

21. I've been here since 2001, and I have no clue

what you mean by Emo Prog Firebaggers. I'm guessing that Prog may possible stand for progressive, but am not sure.

Oh, and I voted in 2010, so I what's my fault exactly?

[MannyGoldstein]

22. Here ya go

http://www.democraticunderground.com/10022076444#post2

If you had ACTUALLY voted in 2008, both houses of Congress would be overwhelmingly Democratic, and we'd all have ponies.

[L0oniX]

24. Wha??? you didn't get one???

[TDale313]

32. Dammit, I want my

Frickin' pony already!!!

[Cracklin Charlie]

37. Perfect.

The, what was it? Emo-progs?

The Emo-progs kinda wear me out.

This thread is funny.

[tblue]

25. I voted. So what's your gripe exactly?

This is the most convoluted op I've ever seen. I feel like Faye Dunaway in that scene from Chinatown, "She's my sister! She's my daughter! She's my sister! She's my daughter! She's my sister AND my daughter!"

Which is it?!

[Fumesucker]

29. Oh, it's worse than that

[SheilaT]

89. I have voted in every election

since 1972. Alas, my one vote in my one state did not make Congress overwhelmingly Democratic, although I do have a two Democratic Senators and my Representative is a Dem.

Can't quite figure out why I'm to blame for the Dems who didn't vote, or the Repubs who did.

[L0oniX]

23. Stop it ...you're making me cry...

[blue neen]

30. This is confusing.

I don't know what your OP is referring to...I voted in 2010. So, what's my fault?

[TDale313]

31. Thank you. Third-Way Manny.

I'm so happy I finally have a label. I'm now a proud Emo Prog Firebagger. Cause just plain liberal is so 2 Decades ago.

[madfloridian]

33. Some examples of Emo Progs....

http://goldenplatform.tumblr.com/post/23780098603/have-a-nice-life-what-is-an-emo-progressive-and-why-is

Some of my fav folks fall in that category. Over at DU2 I was called that a lot because I believe in public education..

[TDale313]

38. thanks n/t

[blue neen]

40. Wow.

Interesting excerpt from your posted link:

"What is even more disgusting is the fact that the attacks being levied against Greenwald by Obama supporters are dripping with so much homophobia that if Rush Limbaugh were to utter them, the partisans at Think Progress and all of the Internet would convulse in outrage."

That quote is pretty divisive and seems to be painting a lot of people with a broad brush. I doubt if that's what you intended to do.

[madfloridian]

42. Well, I did not write the post.

But I don't disagree with most of it. Those of us who point out the harm in the president's policies in education reform and saving the safety nets for seniors and the needy.....have plenty of battle scars.

There is no need for the divisiveness. I stayed away almost a year because of it, yet hubby and I supported Obama both times.

[blue neen]

44. You chose to post it.

As I stated before, the excerpt therein is not helpful or productive. There is nothing in that quote that has anything to do with education or safety nets.

No one here has a need for divisiveness, do we?

[madfloridian]

47. I do agree. There is no need for divisiveness.

And that goes for both sides. Those who question the president's policies as I do yet support him....and those who protect him completely from criticism.

He's a brilliant man. He needs no one protecting him.

[blue neen]

49. He is a brilliant man, indeed.

I'm sure he is capable of weathering both "questions" and "protection."

Have a good evening.

[madfloridian]

54. And for your peace of mind...I do not like the first paragraph

and I disapprove of the term Obamabots. I never use it. But there is much in that link with which I agree.

I am a retired teacher, and it is breaking my heart to see a Democratic president turning public schools over to private companies. Therefore I speak out a lot.

I do NOT believe Social Security should be on the table during deficit cuts. It is against all that Democrats are supposed to stand for.

I know it is not popular, but after 10 years and 76 thousand posts plus....I just don't worry. I have been posting here again less than 2 months....11 people have blocked me.

So I can't worry about it.

[Fumesucker]

51. Yes, the Emo Prog overreaction to the comments is far worse than the comments themselves

You made that point skillfully.

[Bluenorthwest]

116. The attacks on Greenwald were homophobic as hell, right here on DU.

An example thread, in which Greenwald's sexuality is seen as reason for his criticism of Obama and this is used to smear LGBT DUers. That paragraph is true as can be. You don't have to like it. But it sure is the gospel truth. That bs changed my view of DU for all time.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/100297376

[Luminous Animal]

127. I think I ended up with 4 hides in Meta that night trying to get that off of DU.

[Warren Stupidity]

149. At least that fucker is gone.

[cui bono]

136. How do you like this one?

People who deny that Obama put SS on the table are like climate change deniers. They often claim, "it hasn't happened yet" - contrary to the fact that it did, Carney told us that already - or "there's no deal yet" and "I'll believe it when I see it" or my favorite, "he could just as easily have put a unicorn on the table" (yes, a DUer actually said that). This is the exact same line of thinking that climate change deniers use (except for the unicorn idea, brilliant as it is) and I think we all know how ridiculous is really is. Once you see it with your own eyes it will have already happened and it will be too late, SS will have been altered and many lives ruined or ended because of it. Not to mention denying things called facts just to defend their preexisting belief that Obama would never do that.

Oh, no link, that one's mine.

[MannyGoldstein]

50. Glenn Greenwald? Noam Chomsky? Naomi Wolf? Code Pink?

Clearly, you need help.

Tomorrow, I want you to listen to Rush and try to take his perspective. Put yourself in his shoes. What makes him so upset? How can we prove to him that Democrats are people he can trust?

It is only by meditating on the dharma of capitulation that we can achieve the oneness of bipartisanship.

Om.

Third-Way Manny

[madfloridian]

55. .....

Yeh, let me know when you are done listening to Rush. Ha.

[KoKo]

90. Thanks for link... quote from article:

"It appears that partisan Democrats who pretended to care about war, torture, and the rule of law and then ignore them under a Democratic president find it acceptable to mock the sexuality of prominent liberals still brave enough to question the Empire.

The same Democrats who are rejoicing that their guy in the White House is a manly terrorist-killer—who has the “balls” to use military force whenever and whether—are the same Democrats who find it so offensive that a bunch of “sissy faggots”—like Bradley Manning and Glenn Greenwald—are embarrassing Barack Obama.

In other words - “emo progressives” are people with ETHICS and MORALS and understand concepts like JUSTICE and LAW, things that RepubliZombies and DemocraZombies will never be able to comprehend. Obamabots and (the previous incarnation) the Bushbots don’t care about law, humanity, rights, and justice etc.- to them it’s all about cheering for the right team."

[bvar22]

94. Mad, it HAS been explained to you Over & Over that Charter Schools ARE Public Schools.

The ONLY difference is that Charter Schools:

*are NOT controlled by the School Board,
but by a Board of Directors,

*are not transparent

*don't have Teachers Unions

*can be selective about WHO they enroll (ultimately)

*have no Public Accountability

*can "teach" whatever they want

*are an open conduit for transferring Public Resources & Money to Private hands

*compete with our Public Schools

*the buildings, property, and infrastructure are not owned by The Public,
but by "private"entities

SEE?
They are exactly the same.
All these threads about people, especially YOU School Teachers (ugh!), getting upset about the privatization of our Public Schools don't make ANY sense at all.

Private, Market Based Solutions ARE The Answer to EVERYTHING!
That IS "The Uniquely American Solution!"
Get With the Program.

The Giant Invisible Hand Will Save Us ALL!
All Hail The Invisible Hand!!!

[madfloridian]

106. lol

Ha, just saw this. Love it.

[Fumesucker]

35. A Tour de Farce, Manny

Some of the replies are textbook

[TDale313]

39. +1 n/t

[Egalitarian Thug]

77. + another 1

[loyalkydem]

41. Well excuse me for loving and supporting my President. We dont need people like you

[madfloridian]

43. By that you mean...whom?

[MrSlayer]

46. Right, so let's just support any right wing bullshit proposed.

Because we love him so much. Sycophants are what we don't need.

[MjolnirTime]

75. Manny has been a knife in Obama's back from the word go.

[loyalkydem]

79. He's not the only one

I'm getting sick and tired of the naysayers dominating this site. I thought this was democratic underground, not let's kick the President in the behind every chance we get.

[rhett o rick]

115. The Democratic Wing worries about programs, issues and policy and doesnt have time for hero worship.

While the right-side of the Party apparently thinks that when the election is over, they get to go back to watching American Idol.

[loyalkydem]

132. or kicking th e President every chance they get then

they pretend to care. I thought this was Democratic Underground, not Republican underground.

[rhett o rick]

134. You are exposing yourself. Democrats have historically argued and debated among themselves.

It's the repukes that walk in lock-step with their noses up their fuhrer's behind.

This is Democratic Underground where we hold our representatives accountable and not kiss their feet.

[loyalkydem]

135. and you are exposing yourself as well.

[rhett o rick]

138. Yes I am. I am a Democrat. I believe that my representatives work for me. What do you believe in? nm

[cui bono]

140. Well you should expose yourself some more.

Particularly to facts, objectivity and critical thinking.

[rhett o rick]

146. So pray tell me what issues you disagree with us progressives. Give me some facts from your

prospective.

[cui bono]

150. Me? I am a progressive. Did you mean to reply to loyal... that person? n/t

[frylock]

103. funny, but in another thread you blame people like us for losses in 2010..

however misguided and ill informed that opinion may be, you now state unequivocally that you DON'T need us. so what gives?

[bvar22]

108. ....because 3rd Wayers are ALSO...

...Want-It-Both-Wayers,
and subscribe to
The Rovian Postulate Governing the Mitigation of Cognitive Dissonance

The Rovian Postulate Governing the Mitigation Cognitive Dissonance

When REALITY presents an Inconvenient TRUTH,
we REJECT it, and substitute our OWN fictitious truth.
"We create our OWN Reality!"

Google: Carl Rove "We create our own reality"

The 3rd Way claim that The Left Stayed Home in 2010
has been de-bunked too many times to count,
and, yet,
this myth continues to be propagated at DU.

[font size=3]"See in my line of work you got to keep repeating things over and over and over again for the truth to sink in, to kind of catapult the propaganda."
---George W Bush, May24, 2005[/font]




You will know them by their WORKS,
not by their rhetoric, promises, or excuses.
[font size=5 color=green]Solidarity99![/font][font size=2 color=green]

[Egalitarian Thug]

114. You're right, you don't need us

to lose elections. DLC turned New Way turned 3rd Way have a record of losing surpassed only by the tea party.

Every time you guys get the means to do what you want, you do it and then you lose.

[rhett o rick]

120. It was the right-wing of our party that didnt vote in 2010 or voted Republican. nm

[cui bono]

139. What we don't need is people like you.

People who just love and support and don't do any critical thinking and ignore facts. You are no different than a Teabaggger if you don't look at things objectively no matter if it is about a Repubican or a Democrat.

Do you believe Obama put SS on the table or that he didn't?

[madfloridian]

45. MSNBC's Joy Reid and blogger/tweeter @shoq redefine emo prog as “Puritopian.”

http://shoqvalue.com/an-extended-definition-of-emo-progressive-and-why-it-matters

[TDale313]

48. So Emo Prog's already...

Outdated? Bummer.

[madfloridian]

56. Emo Progs are now “Puritopian.” Not sure which is more degrading.

[TDale313]

58. Personally, I find

Puritopian more degrading. I actually kinda like Emo Prog. Maybe why it needed to be changed. Not quite enough of a put down.

[madfloridian]

60. Then Manny could do a post calling all "Puritopians."

That would be fun.

[WorseBeforeBetter]

193. Neither are... embrace them.

And ask yourself whether this puffed up "Shoq" is someone whose opinion really matters:

http://shoqvalue.com/shoq

Seriously, who has time to keep up with this sort of nonsense?

"Shoq, you used to follow me on twitter untill I Rt'd a disgusting tweet to show what the hate towards the so called 'professional left' is producing. AngryBlackLady then accused me of attempting to smear her with this tweet and got all her friends, including yourself to have a go at me, to call me a racist etc. and they took it off twitter too, without my prior knowledge."

Shoq, AngryBlackLady (who was dumped by Raw Story)... they're lightweights highly effective at whipping The Sensibles into a Dittohead-like lather.

Fun thread:

Raw Story apologizes to Glenn Greenwald and Jeremy Scahill
http://www.democraticunderground.com/1002795887

[MADem]

62. Fascinating definition at that link.....

Emo Progressive (or “emoprog”) is a self-described liberal or progressive, often with strong libertarian leanings, whose primary political orientation is to be angry, dissatisfied and unhappy with the state of the nation at any given time, because in their view, liberal policies are not being implemented quickly enough or articulated forcefully enough. They have particular contempt for Democratic presidents.

Emoprogs are ideological purists who disdain compromise and incremental change, which they see as “selling out” classical liberal ideas like full employment, an end to all wars, state secrets, and liberal social policy.

Emoprogs dislike Republicans but reserve their greatest disdain for Democratic presidents, whom they relentlessly attack for not meeting a set of ideological goal posts that are constantly adjusted to ensure that the president will be deemed a disappointment, “not progressive enough” or “just like a Republican” no matter what policy achievements are made.

Emoprogs routinely dismiss or ignore congress’ role in making or impeding policy, believing presidents can simply “use the bully pulpit” and “fight” in order to overcome constitutional or legislative obstacles...

[Number23]

67. Damn. That nail was hit so hard, there's no seeing it ever again.

Perfectly said. Brutally true and honest.

Wonder if there's a clause in the emo prog-nosis about being desperate seekers of attention? That's gotta be in there somewhere....

[Fumesucker]

68. Emo Progs crying out for attention by using the words of Sensible Pragmatists

It makes perfect sense.

[MADem]

69. They certainly don't like to be ignored, do they?

Like they were this last election...!

[Number23]

107. Ha!!

Like they were this last election...!

And the previous 10 and the next 100.

[madfloridian]

70. And as I said below, the definition and label are shameful. Not to be used by Democrats

against other Democrats.

This post is some of the source of the anger and the sounding off.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=2057816

There is or should be plenty of room for all of us. I disagree strongly with Obama on two issues...public education and senior safety nets. But I supported him as did my hubby, we donated and worked for him.

[MADem]

71. I'm a fan of the Big Tent, myself. I don't like it when I'm told that I'm

not "sufficiently a Democrat" because I don't fall in line or tear my hair out over this issue or that, or if I dare to support the POTUS and take exception when people start trashing the guy and acting like he's a king who out of pique refuses to issue a decree to solve a matter of importance to one group or another.

I think teachers aren't paid enough, I would like to see more states get involved with MONEY to plus up school districts across counties/parishes/what-have-you and make them less dependent on a particular community's tax base, and I like senior safety nets, myself. I do think Congress -- where the laws are initiated-- need to take some heat about these issues, instead of getting a free ride, pretty much. So that last paragraph I cited--and the one that followed it--did resonate with me, as I catch a lot of this kind of crap here on this board:

Emoprogs routinely dismiss or ignore congress’ role in making or impeding policy, believing presidents can simply “use the bully pulpit” and “fight” in order to overcome constitutional or legislative obstacles.

Emoprogs have a strong affinity for third party politics as a way to punish Democratic presidents. They are especially hostile to President Barack Obama and deem anyone who expresses a lack of ill will toward him to be “Obamabots” and enemies of liberalism.

[frylock]

104. your "big tent" has become overcrowded disaffected republicans

[MADem]

166. Instead of excoriating them, welcome them and teach them ....

It really isn't hard to sell people on good ideas.

Once they're in the tent, their ears are open.

[BlueCaliDem]

76. Yep. That pretty much sums it up for me how I view

Emo-Progs like Jane Hamsher, Markos Moulitsas, and especially Glenn Greenwald (although he's never admitted to being Liberal and is more of a Libertarian which should be 180 opposite of Liberals). I believe that's how Joy Ann Reid sees these people, too.

Some have called me a "third-wayer" (I believe it's because they're under the mistaken assumption that I'm a DLC-Dem {I'm not} or a CorporateDem {I'm not}, or a Repub-Lite {definitely NOT}), but mostly it's because they believe President Obama is all the above and I support him. I'd rather like to consider myself a Prag-Prog; pragmatic progressive. I want things to get done, I want to move this country forward, but I understand (and am frustrated by) the political realities facing this very progressive president who finds staunch opposition in Congress from both sides of the aisle.

[MADem]

82. +1!!! nt

[Dyedinthewoolliberal]

119. Ahhhhhhhh I see now.

Big Babies...........

[madfloridian]

65. And that definition as well as the label are crying shames.

And as Manny is pointing out....should not be used against fellow Democrats

Please note that Joy Reid speaks out for our side on MSNBC, so I find that rather upsetting.

[TDale313]

66. Agreed. And yes, was surprised

And disappointed to see Joy Ann Reid's name connected to these names/put downs.

[MADem]

168. Well, I think anyone who takes such an authoritarian approach is not a Democrat, so

no worries, there.

People who hold that POV are masquerading as Democrats, but they're chaos-creators. They delight in shitting in the punch. They're more about whining about problems than working towards solutions.

I don't go for "My way or the highway" approaches. As we've seen, that's what has screwed the GOP royally. It worked for a while, that "lockstep discipline," but now the effort has gone all pear-shaped, and they are on the ropes.

It's important to duke it out in the arena; throw down those ideas and argue 'em out. Offering up a laundry list that is preceded by "Obama is an asshole if he (fill in the blank)...." is not engaging in discussion or argument, it's dictating terms-- and I've seen an awful lot of that on this board. Frankly, I'm not impressed.

[Demo_Chris]

57. It's Hyper-Dimentional Non-Euclidean Chess

But I should think that even political simpletons can understand this much...

If the Champion of the People, President Obama, believes that Social Security needs to be cut, then Social Security DEFINATELY needs to be cut! Call your congressman and DEMAND cuts today!

Also, it's not a cut anyway. It's really an increase disguised as a reduction. Allow me to explain. Today a senion can feast on a can of regular cat food that costs about a buck. In ten years a can of savory cat food will cost two bucks. Now you might wonder how our senior will get by, considering that he will no longer have enough money to buy cat food for the entire month. But here's the amazong secret. According to the magic of Chained CPI, the genetically modified cat food of 2022 will be so far superior to today's cat food that it is actually worth exactly twice as much, so even though the price doubled and your check got smaller, there wasn't actually any real inflation at all. It just looks that way because you have to spend twice as much for what looks like exactly the same thing. But really you totally ended up ahead of the game.

And in any case, there is no reason that responsible thrifty seniors cannot bypass the 'elite' brand cat foods and go with something generic. Even if their preferred brand doubles in price, if there is a cheaper alternative we still say that there was no inflation. Only when we can no longer find a generic substitute OR explain the increased price with increased quality will we then say that there was some inflation.

Cool huh!

But anyway, since I don't want to be banned or called a GOP secret agent, I am supporting President Obama, Champion of the People, in his very necessary crusade to trash social security. It's the liberal thing to do.

[Luminous Animal]

59. +1

[progressoid]

72. It's way too complicated for us common folk to understand!

[bvar22]

95. Well Done, Demo_Chris

Your explanation of the Chained CPI is On-the-Money.




You will know them by their WORKS,
not by their rhetoric, promises, or excuses.
[font size=5 color=green]Solidarity99![/font][font size=2 color=green]

[djean111]

105. Perfect! And you can get big cans of cat food at Sav-a-Lot for 79 cents.

I kinda thought this place was called Democratic Underground and was supposed to work to get any and all Democrats elected.
I didn't think it was gonna be Obama Underground and I was supposed to think he is perfection.
Can I send away for an Emo-Prog t-shirt?

[RetroLounge]

61. Emo Prog?

In the Court of the Crimson King?



RL

[MannyGoldstein]

63. Cat Food For You!

http://m.

[wilsonbooks]

73. Don't forget the peas.

Eat your peas and be grateful. Tough love is good for you.

[MjolnirTime]

74. wow, you're completely losing your shit, Manny. This is what a Second Obama term has made of you?

Gobama!

[Fumesucker]

78. Having a memory longer than a week = Completely losing your shit

Good one.

Nice of you to join in the spirit of things.

[MjolnirTime]

206. My memory is long enough to know that Manny has always detracted form Obama.

How about yours?

[alcibiades_mystery]

86. Progressive Dems didn't abandon the President

as those with "memories longer than a week" threatened and predicted. They never got their long anticipated "I told you so" moment. They've also been exposed as completely ineffective politically. So of course they lash out and carry on and insult and throw their little tantrums. Ultimately, none of it matters. These people have no political clout, so thry're relegated to fighting little message board wars, as the OP clearly demonstrates. Most of the so-called leftists on this board care much more about what happens on this board than what happens in government or policy. I'm happy to have them be the cleverest ineffective voices in all of DU. It serves as an outlet for their frustrations, and it's been demonstrated to be totally harmless.

[Fumesucker]

91. Reciting just a few lines we've all heard dozens of times has sure got you jacked up

Why does that bother you so?

[alcibiades_mystery]

92. Keep pretending that you're having an effect

Harmless.

[Fumesucker]

93. Rahm? Is that you?

[Skraxx]

99. Is Mutual Masturbation Effective?

It's their own little epistemic closure, I guess. Yeah, harmless, but gag inducing.

[bvar22]

110. That is an interesting post, alcibiades.

Especially THIS line, delivered with a gloat.

[font size=3]
"They've (The Left) also been exposed as completely ineffective politically."[/font]
---alcibiades_mystery, post#86

What is interesting about this statement is that The Progressive Caucus
IS the largest and most popular Caucus in the Democratic Party,
and, yet, it HAS been completely ineffective (as you state),
and completely MARGINALIZED by the Democratic Party leadership,
so much so that:

* not a single spokesman for Expanding Medicare was even allowed at the table for the debate on Health Care Reform

*not a single Democrat who voted against the Invasion of Iraq was given a position of authority or power in the Obama Administration

*not a single member of the Progressive Caucus was given a position of authority or power in the Obama cabinet or Administration

You are correct in that The Left has been ineffective,
and I wonder WHY considering that the Issues and Policies that The Left champion
are popular with the Majority of Americans, Democrat & Republican.

Your post started me thinking:
[font size=3]WHY has "The Left" been so ineffective inside the Democratic Party despite supporting traditional Democratic Party Values & Policy?[/font]

I see an clear pattern:

*Paul Wellstone... KIA

*Howard Dean.... discredited, marginalized, banished for cheering too enthusiastically!

*Cynthia McKinney..... attacked, isolated, marginalized, cut off from Party support, expelled

*Eliot Spitzer...... Honey Trapped, discredited, isolated, expelled

*Anthony Wiener..... marginalized, discredited, isolated, expelled

*Russ Feingold.... attacked from The Center, marginalized, isolated from party support, exiled

*Alan Grayson .... attacked from The Center, marginalized, isolated from party support, exiled, won Re-election with hard work and shoe leather running a Grass Roots campaign

*Dennis Kucinich ... attacked from The Center, discredited, marginalized, isolated, redistricted, exiled

*Shirley Sherrod... Blackballed by the Party Leadership over an exaggerated allegation (BY BRIETBART!), expelled

*Van Jones... Blackballed by Party Leadership and expelled over a contrived and over-hyped Republican allegation

*John Edwards.... expelled and demonized for weakness in his personal life that regularly goes unpunished for others

*Dan Rather... set up and bitch slapped by the Conservative Media over a minor offense, and left hanging

The downfall of some of the above can be partially attributed to their own personal foibles,
but in every case, the party leadership was quick to condemn and abandon, and made no effort to embrace or assist any of these Liberals in their time of need. There ARE politicians in BOTH parties guilty of far more serious transgressions who managed to survive their troubles because of Party support.

*Maxine Waters... currently under attack

*The Congressional Black Caucus..... admonished by the President to quit whining, "Take off your bedroom slippers. Put on your marching shoes" and get behind the President's agenda.
(When has he EVER spoken to the "Blue Dogs" like that?)
http://news.yahoo.com/obama-tells-blacks-stop-complainin-fight-015928905.html

*The Progressive Caucus.... no seats in the cabinet, almost none appointed to positions of any power in the Executive Branch, the White House doesn't take their calls.

*ACORN.... quickly thrown under the bus by Party Leadership over a hyped and contrived allegation.
The Party leadership literally could not run away fast enough!

*Organized LABOR... while holding up a facade of supporting Unions, the Party leadership continues to advance Anti-UNION policy (unregulated International Trade with Slave Labor countries), and attack UNIONS as a major problem in Education, Government Employment, and the Work Place.
An "anonymous White House Spokesperson" even ridiculed LABOR for "wasting $10 Million Dollars" by supporting a Pro-LABOR challenger to virulently Anti-UNION Blanche Lincoln in the Arkansas Democratic Primary, 2010.
To rescue Lincoln's failing Primary Campaign, Party Leadership gave Lincoln an Oval Office Endorsement, and even sent Bill Clinton back to Arkansas to help out poor, Anti-LABOR Blanche.
http://www.salon.com/2010/06/10/lincoln_6/



*Democratic Primaries 2010.... Strong pattern of endorsing and supporting Blue Dogs and Big Business Conservatives,
even including one "former" Republican running against more Liberal, Pro-Working Class challengers.
(See: Arkansas, Pennsylvania, Colorado and others)



The pattern is clear, and frightening.
It seems that The left has much more work to do than just Getting Democrats Elected.
Thanks for the Heads Up.

---bvar22
A mainstream/Center loyal FDR/LBJ Working Class DEMOCRAT, now relegated to the "Fringe Left" wing of the "New Democrat" Centrist Party.



[font color=firebrick][center]"There are forces within the Democratic Party who want us to sound like kinder, gentler Republicans.
I want a party that will STAND UP for Working Americans."
---Paul Wellstone [/font][/center]
[center][/font]
[font size=1]photo by bvar22
Shortly before Sen Wellstone was killed[/center][/font]

[madfloridian]

118. Great summary bvar22

[reteachinwi]

122. Voted

for Wellstone, contributed to Feingold, voted for Kerry/Edwards, voted for Tammy Baldwin, etc. There is no third way without us.

[cui bono]

141. GREAT

fucking post.

Bravo.

[Fumesucker]

148. You should make that an OP..

[alcibiades_mystery]

157. Um

I never said that "they" = "the Left."

Indeed, since the title of my post clearly states that progressives Dems DID NOT abandon the President, and since I referred specifically to "so-called" leftists, that's a very odd conclusion to draw from my post. But I agree that the pronoun "they" was never given an antecedent, and so left itself open to this kind of distortion. By "they" I meant not The Left, but the sad Internet forum bloviators who claim to speak on behalf of the Left. As the last election demonstrated, they have a very small constituency indeed.

Nice try, though!

[Capt. Obvious]

159. This was a great post

[Cha]

111. So very sadly true.

[rhett o rick]

113. Third Way Manny lost his "shit" a long time ago. nm

[reteachinwi]

123. Manny is amusing

and I signed his White House petition about SS cuts.

[xchrom]

80. du rec. nt

[NCTraveler]

81. Ahhhh Manny.

You just don't understand our position in this game of chess.

I am just kidding. I fully understand you are aware.

[alcibiades_mystery]

83. Sooooooo meta

[JoePhilly]

84. Your hair has been on fire so many times in the last 3 year, you must be bald by now.

You've be pushing the meme that such cuts were imminent for about 3 years now.

Has not happened.

[Skraxx]

98. And Now That It's Apparent There Will Never Be Any Cuts

They need to shift to redefine "caving" as the thought crime of hypothetical discussions that never materialize into anything tangible.

Pure comedy gold!

[cui bono]

143. Did PBO retract his offer?

I've been busy with xmas, did he retract?

[Skraxx]

151. Is There A Deal That Contains Cuts? Legislation? How About Any Hypothetical Discussions?

Please enlighten me.

[cui bono]

155. Yes. There was a press briefing where Carney said that PBO proposed SS cuts

because the Republicans asked for them. He did it in the form of Chained CPI.

I don't have the link handy, but it happened before xmas. There were a lot of posts and news stories about it.

Not exactly sure why you are being so snarky. I didn't have time to pay attention to things over xmas and you said something about it not happening so I thought he retracted. I sure hoped he had. Guess not then?

[JoePhilly]

163. Is Obama going to make a deal that cuts SS by the end of the year ... yes or no.

What is your prediction?

I ask because for the last 3 weeks, that's what all the screaming has been about. Thread after breathless thread declaring that Obama was, at any second, about to CAVE and make a deal that cuts SS.

Still has not happened. And so those who have been most adamant are now walking back their position. This is about the 6th or 7th time this same phenomenon has occurred here on DU in the last 3 years.

I predict it will happen again in few months. Just like clock work.

[cui bono]

172. I'm not a psychic. I hope he retracts the offer.

But the fact remains that he made the offer.

You can dislike people discussing the facts but that doesn't change them. And I agree with your prediction because in a few months I'm quite certain that PBO will offer/propose something else that is more in line with Republican ideology than Democratic ideology as he continually does, though I certainly hope that I am wrong.

I have not seen anyone "walking back their position" on the fact that PBO put SS on the table. He did it. It's a fact. You can't really take a position on that - although plenty on this board have in denying that it ever happened - since it is not an opinion.

You are talking exactly like a climate change denier. Just because it hasn't happened yet does not mean that what it takes for it to happen didn't happen. If you wait until you see it happen it will be too late.

[JoePhilly]

182. Did he put it on the table this week, during the debt ceiling fight last year or ...

when he created the Debt commission.

Here on DU, that balls moves. Back in 2010 ... Obama was going to announce SS Cuts. DU exploded with that prediction. Then it was going to be in his budget ... did not happen.

And in EVERY fight since, DU explodes in flames with those who are SURE that Obama is going to cut SS.

And it has not happened in the last 6-7 flame fests.

Is you prediction that it will happen "next time"?

This has nothing to do with climate. Some of you START with the position that Obama is working against the middle class. It is your group making the claims that you know his INTENT. You find the secret code in his every statement.

Then DU explodes. Obama is ABSOLUTELY going to make a deal to cut SS ... and then it does not happen. But some hate him just as much as if the evil deed they predicted actually occurred.

In some ways, it parallels the Tea Party hate.

[cui bono]

183. He did it right before Boehner tried to pass his Plan B.

It was explained in the press briefing on Dec. 18.

I'm not "some of you", I am me. Please don't lump me in with a group of people you have decided to categorize when we are discussing something with each other.

I didn't say this issue has to do with climate. I said something to the effect that your reasoning was just like a climate change denier. But since you didn't seem to know that Obama had indeed offered SS cuts in this current negotiation I'll rescind that. And again, I'm not a group, I am me.

This is a huge problem on this board. Putting people into groups rather than having a straight forward discussion. I'm sure I have fallen for it a few times as well, but I don't do it when "speaking" to someone directly. Generalizations are one thing, but when you are speaking to someone directly and you say "your group" and things of that nature you aren't discussing anything in good faith. If you aren't going to simply talk to me directly and continue to refer to me as some group you have predefined in your head then there's no point in continuing as you already have your mind made up as to what I'm going to say.

As to your Tea Party comment, no, the critics on here are criticizing policy, not Obama the man. Tea Partiers don't look at policy at all, they just hate Obama because he's on the other team. They support their team no matter what, even though they are usually voting against their own interests since most of them are no where near being in the 1%. So actually, those who just can't take any criticism of Obama, even when he is doing worse things than GWB who always got criticized, just keep supporting him no matter what he does, even when he offers SS cuts. In that way they are simply idolizing a man, putting party before country and not standing up for principles, and are doing the same thing the Tea Party does when they put their party before their own interests and what is best for the country.

I will be very happy if the SS cuts never happen. I don't want to have to be unhappy with Obama and critical of his negotiating. However, if he does something that no other Dem would ever even think of doing and when he does a whole list of things worse than GWB ever did, then yes, I'm going to criticize him. I would think all Dems would since they are supposed to be in support of civil rights, the constitution, the welfare of the working people and poor, etc... A huge problem with him even having mentioned it, more than once now, and actually putting it in a proposal given to the Republicans is that it is now fair game. It has become common place to casually talk of cutting SS during Obama's time in office and that is on him. No one made him do that. And even Reagan warned against touching SS and explained why it didn't make any sense since it has no effect on the deficit.

[JoePhilly]

185. The claim that Obama has "put SS on the table" here on DU actually goes back to the debt

commission. Many on DU declared ... OBAMA PUT SS on the TABLE!!!

And then during almost every economic fight since, some of the same folks have said the same thing. OBAMA JUST PUT SS ON THE TABLE.

For you, this is the "first time". But here on DU, Obama put SS on the table 3 years ago.

And the predictions that he's going to agree to a deal that actually makes the cuts pop up every 4-6 months.

And the GOP was trying to privatize SS for all of Bush's years. The idea that its only been "on the table" since Obama is ridiculous. Hell, the talk of privatizing was going on when Clinton was President.

SS is always on the table. The program exists and the GOP hates it. That is what keeps it on the table.

[cui bono]

187. You keep ignoring the fact that HE PUT SS ON THE TABLE.

He really did it. Just a week and a half ago.

You insist on ignoring the fact that he really did put in on the table and seem to be making the argument that because people are complaining about it that it never happened and it's just a figment of their imagination. But it really happened.

And no, you are flat out wrong when you say that SS is always on the table. It has NEVER been on the table until Obama became president. Never. Show me one other time in history where it was allowed to be put on the table. No Dem would do that before Obama. Even Reagan wouldn't do it.

GOP wanting to privatize SS doesn't put it on the table. It is on the table when the Dems put it there since Dems were the ones protecting it. As long as they wouldn't let it into the negotiations it was "off the table". OFF the table. Never ON the table until Obama.

[Skraxx]

191. Exactly, In Fact, Not Only Has SS Always Been "On The Table"

Last edited Fri Dec 28, 2012, 10:46 PM - Edit history (1)

Ever since it's inception, because Republicans KEEP IT THERE, it's actually been modified, time and again, and not always for the better (see the Reagan era, when there were some pretty shitty changes he got through a Dem House, which even then somehow managed to maintain it's majority into the '90's).

This whole idiotic misdirection that "Obama put SS on the table!", is quite frankly obvious in its attempt to smear Obama via empty semantic pabulum.

[Skraxx]

164. So That's In A Deal? Or Legislation? Part Of Some Current Negotiations Or Hypothetical Discussion?

In your post you say Republican asked for the cuts, how exactly did PBO propose them if the Repubs actually proposed them? Right there, in your own post you said that. Is there some meaning of the word that I'm missing?

[cui bono]

170. I guess you didn't read or hear the press briefing.

It's all over the place, you just have to use the search function on this site or google.

Carney clearly stated that the president didn't come up with it but that he put it in his proposal at the Republican's request.

Really, if you're going to take an attitude like yours you really should read up on the facts first so it can be warranted, if not appropriate.

[Skraxx]

171. So You Admit There Are No Current Discussions, Negotiations, Deals or Legislation Regarding Any Cuts

Have I got that right?

[cui bono]

173. Sorry, but WTF are you talking about?

I said PBO put SS on the table and asked if he had retracted it. Are you saying he didn't put it on the table or that he retracted it?

I don't understand your animosity. (Well I do, but it's not rational. It seems to me that you are one of those that simply won't accept that PBO put SS on the table, presumably because it is something that warrants a valid criticism?)

Just what are you trying to "catch" me saying? It's very simple and if he has not retracted it then he hasn't retracted it. If he has, that's great. That's all I was asking about.

[Skraxx]

174. What Table Would They Be On, If They Are Not Included In Any Discussions, Negotiations, Deals or

Legislation? Are they on the table of your imagination? That table?

[cui bono]

175. Okay, really, you have to accept reality and facts to have a discussion.

You are contorting yourself trying to make it so that something that actually happened in the real world didn't happen in order to fit your preconceived notion of PBO I guess. Cognitive dissonance is trying I suppose.

Last time:

Fact: PBO put SS on the table, verified by his very own press secretary, Jay Carney, at a press briefing that was reported in the papers and on TV. There is recorded evidence that this actually happened.

Apparent Fact: PBO did not retract this offer/proposal. I say apparent because you haven't said he did retract it and it seems pretty clear that if he had you would have provided evidence of this.

That is all that was asked and sort of answered.

So, yes, apparently it's still on the table unless PBO says that it's no longer part of the offer. Did he say that?

All of the above is from reality, not my imagination. But feel free to let your imagination go wild. Yet again.

[Skraxx]

176. What Table? They Are Not In Any Legislation, Deals, Discussions, Hypothetical or Otherwise

So, where are these imaginary cuts of yours?

[cui bono]

178. I see now that you really did miss the press briefing so here's the link.

The relevant portions that pertain to our "discussion" are bolded. Now I anticipate that you are going to pick up on Carney's wording that the president didn't put it on the table, but in reality PBO is the one who included it in a proposal, so he did, in fact, put it on the table at the Republicans' request. So let's not get bogged down by that since that's really just Carney trying to take it off PBO's shoulders. Oh wait... that's exactly what you're trying to do. Oh well, try, at least this one time, to see the facts.

And again, one more time, all this "discussion" of ours is about is whether or not PBO retracted his offer. Which, again, he apparently has not. When someone makes an offer and doesn't retract it it is usually still in effect, unless there was an expiration date, but I haven't heard of one attached to this offer, have you? I hope you have. If so, please, do tell.

http://www.enewspf.com/latest-news/latest-national/39244-white-house-press-briefing-by-jay-carney-december-18-2012.html

White House Press Briefing by Jay Carney, December 18, 2012

Q Yes, Jay, a lot of top Democrats on the Hill, and I think President Obama, spent the campaign season saying, let’s not touch Social Security -- it doesn’t add to the deficit; we can resolve this issue without going to that entitlement program. What is the President’s message to those lawmakers who promised constituents that Social Security would not be touched after the President now has put chain CPI on the table for Republicans?

MR. CARNEY: Well, let’s be clear about one thing: The President didn’t put it on the table. This is something that Republicans want. And it is --

Q But the Republicans --

MR. CARNEY: -- part of his -- if I could please answer Sam’s question, I’d appreciate it. And the President did include it in his counterproposal, his counteroffer, as part of this process, as part of the negotiation process. I would note that this is a technical change -- would be if instated -- to the way that economists calculate inflation, and it would affect every program that has -- that uses the CPI in its calculations. And so it’s not directed at one particular program; it would affect every program that uses CPI. There are also -- as part of the President’s proposals, he would make sure that the most vulnerable were exempted out from this change.

But let’s be clear, this is something that the Republicans have asked for, and as part of an effort to find common ground with the Republicans, the President has agreed to put this in his proposal -- agreed to have this as part of a broad deficit reduction package that includes asking the wealthiest to pay more so that we can achieve the kind of revenue targets that are necessary for a balanced approach to deficit reduction.

Q Right, but there’s a lot -- again, my question was there’s a lot of people who voted for these lawmakers on a promise that --

MR. CARNEY: You heard the President say every time he talked about this --

Q Can I finish my question?

MR. CARNEY: Sure, yes.

Q A lot of people -- I’ll let you answer -- a lot of people voted for these lawmakers for reelection not too long ago on a promise that Social Security wouldn’t be touched, and if it was touched, it would be done separately from these fiscal cliff negotiations. What do those people -- what are these people now supposed to believe about the promises that their lawmakers made, including the President?

MR. CARNEY: Let me again make clear two things. One, the President has always said as part of this process when we’re talking about the spending cuts side of this that it would require tough choices by both sides. And that is certainly the case if you want to reach an agreement.

Secondly, this is a technical adjustment that supporters of it and economists -- outside economists say is meant to make the government’s estimates of inflation more accurate. Thirdly, as part of the President’s proposal, there is a clause that would protect vulnerable communities including the very elderly when it comes to Social Security recipients.

So there’s no question that it represents an effort to compromise, but it is also not -- this is a technical adjustment that economists believe is about getting the proper measure of inflation, and it is one sought by Republicans.

So, again, we’re not going to get everything we want. We knew that the President’s proposal that he put forward to the super committee that we put forward in the beginning of these negotiations would not pass unchanged. But I think your question demonstrates the absolute fact that the President has shown enormous good faith in trying to reach a compromise here. And it would be shocking if Republicans passed up this opportunity for what they say they seek, which is significant deficit reduction, significant spending cuts, simply to protect those just shy of being millionaires from having to pay a dime extra in income taxes.

[Skraxx]

179. Actually, I'm Missing The Table, That Press Briefing Is Irrelevant, You Have Yet To Provide Anything

That shows that any cuts are currently being considered in any form whatsoever, outside of your imagination.

[cui bono]

180. Again, you have to deal with reality and facts, which you refuse to do.

Are you saying that Carney is a liar then? HE SAID THAT PBO PUT IN IN HIS PROPOSAL TO THE REPUBLICANS. What more can be said to make this clear to you? Did you want me to have taken a picture of PBO and Boehner at the actual table??? I really don't know what you need to accept that this really did happen. Really. It did.

At this point I'm just trying to figure out if you lack logic and reasoning skills, if you are on mind altering substances that are keeping you from seeing reality or if you are truly and simply insane.

But you absolutely refuse to deal with facts and you have answered my initial question of whether or not PBO retracted his offer - he has not - so while this is very amusing and I'm quite curious as to just how long you can continue to deny facts and reality when they are presented to you, I actually have things in my life I must deal with now.

[Skraxx]

181. Reality? Like The Reality That There Are No Cuts, In Any Way Shape or Form, In A Deal, Discussion

or legislation. You meant that reality?

[ChisolmTrailDem]

186. For Pete's sake! Did Obama put SS on the table, according to Carney, or not?

And if he did, has he since taken it off the table?

Why is it so hard for you guys to answer cui bono's question?

[Skraxx]

188. What Table?

Why is that so hard to answer? If they are not part of any discussions, deals or negotiations, then they are on some imaginary table you've constructed.

There are no SS cuts on any table that I'm aware of, unless its in your imagination.

[ChisolmTrailDem]

192. So, rather than answer the question you instead want to focus

on the metaphorical 'table" and insult me in the process? Here is the transcript, which happens to include said metaphor:

http://election.democraticunderground.com/10022030190

And you're also laboring under the impression that I have stated my opinion on this. I haven't. I repeated a direct question asked by cui bono: Did President Obama or did he now offer to include chained CPI, on or around Dec 18, as a bargaining chip for the republicans?

You know what's really fucked up? All cui bono did was try to get an answer to a simple question. That's all he or she asked, because he/she was busy. He/she simply wanted to know if chained CPI was included in the President's offer, or not. and if it was included is it now still inlcluded, or not. Yet this sub-thread has turned into a goddamned circus. How do you explain that?

[Skraxx]

194. No, YOU Are Focusing On An IMAGINARY Table, One That Supposedly Has SS Cuts On It

I'm asking you to identify this table, and you can't.

[ChisolmTrailDem]

197. You wanna goddamned table? Here's you one right here -->

Now answer cui bono's original question which is the one I repeated above:

Did President Obama or did he not include chained CPI in his counterproposal at the republicans request on or around Dec 18-19? And if so, which he did as established in the transcript by Jay Carney, has it since been removed.

Just answer the question.

I think once Boehner came back with Plan B and couldn't get his caucus behind him, President Obama withdrew that particular counter offer. Or did he withdraw it, leading to his telling Boehner that he gets nothing?

All we're trying to clear up here is if chained CPI is still a part of Obama's proposal. We're not talking about any muh-fucking table, though I'm sure if Obama's counter-proposal referred to by Carney in that transcript was in paper form it probably was actually on that table pictured above and was no doubt slid across the table for republican perusal. But I digress.

[Skraxx]

199. So That Table Currently Has Cuts On It as Part of A Deal Under Discussion?

Evidence of these cuts being part of some current discussion, deal or legislation, please.

Otherwise they are in your imagination.

[ProSense]

85. I'm enjoying this.

[Skraxx]

97. Indeed, Full Blown Meltdown Into Utter Self-Parody

Too funny!

[rhett o rick]

121. It appears you finally morphed into Sid. nm

[ProSense]

131. We're

doomed: http://www.democraticunderground.com/10022081433#post26

"It appears you finally morphed into Sid."

Nope, I'm having fun. I mean, what's more fun than watching Steve Forbes rope in the same people who love this stuff?

[brentspeak]

152. But not as much fun as reading your old posts

where, in response to someone correctly pointing out that Obama got the idea of a Social Security payroll tax cut from the Republicans, you ludicrously claimed that Obama would fight to raise the payroll tax cap in order to pay for the tax cut.

[ProSense]

162. Learn to read

From the link:

The point at the link in the OP isn't the same as any Democrat is proposing. The Weekly Standard piece is proposing cutting the payroll tax without replacing the lost revenue.

Democrats have proposed using general funds to replace the revenue and, in Reich's case, raising the payroll tax threshold, something the President has also proposed, via Senator Sanders.

FYI: The payroll tax cut isn't in the President's proposal so it expires.

[brentspeak]

169. "and, in Reich's case, raising the payroll tax threshold"

Democrats have proposed using general funds to replace the revenue and, in Reich's case, raising the payroll tax threshold, something the President has also proposed, via Senator Sanders.

That is the accurate way to bold your spin. You claimed, falsely, that Obama was going to push to raise the FICA tax cap, and then later laughably compounded your falsehood by saying that you were really just referring to the opening clause of your statement.

[treestar]

202. If you post a long post with links to the facts

They complain about that. Post a one liner and you're "Sid" or - Sid's way is bad too.

[bvar22]

96. DURec!

Fun Thread!

All Hail the Invisible Hand!
The Invisible Hand will Save us All!

[Melissa G]

100. K&R

[Permanut]

101. Dang, I missed it..

I didn't even get a chance to consider whether to be a "emo prog" or not, and it's OVER? I gotta keep up better.

[great white snark]

102. "Paranoia self destroyer"

This is entertaining and saddening.

[rhett o rick]

117. I get confused as to whether I should rec a Third Way Manny post or not. In any case I sure aint

kicking this stupid thread.

On edit: Oops.

[malthaussen]

125. Third-Way Manny for President!

It would be the best revenge...

-- Mal

[Berlum]

161. EmoProg prophecy

[spanone]

167. boy, this really helps the discussion...an 'i told you so' thread. like used toilet paper.

[Rex]

177. It is more like a 'i told ya so' thread on hold status.

Nothing like playing, 'wait and see' while also playing the 'i told ya so' at the same time! Gutzzy move on Manny's part!

[woo me with science]

184. K&R

[Luminous Animal]

189. Kick.

[Autumn]

190. Had to kick and rec this

I was grateful banned from kos pointed it out.

[woo me with science]

195. Kick

[arely staircase]

201. manny goldstein will never say anything good about the president

pretty sure i got that one right.

[MannyGoldstein]

203. Well...

For example: http://www.democraticunderground.com/10021928167

Sadly, things changed.

[adirondacker]

205. Mannny always brings out the best of DUers...

A+ for a job well done on holding the President's feet to the flames I sure hope his feet are feeling toasty on this cold December day. As some, I'm sure, are freezing.