Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

brentspeak

(18,290 posts)
Fri Oct 31, 2014, 12:25 PM Oct 2014

Obama gave the GOP the greatest gift of all

When he idiotically proposed to cut Social Security benefits by means of adopting a chained CPI, he gave away the Democratic Party's hard-earned 80-year-long status as the party which promised to protect Social Security against all attacks from Wall Street billionaires. Now, for the first time ever, Democrats seeking office or fighting for reelection can't really claim that their Republican opponents are seeking to dismantle or weaken Social Security without also being vulnerable to counter-attacks that it was the Democratic president himself who actually proposed similar measures to cut Social Security.

Have you seen much talk from campaigning Democrats on the issue of Social Security and how vital it is to prevent Social Security-hostile Republicans from getting into office? Not really. A massive weapon in the Democrats' campaigning arsenal has been surrendered -- by the party's own leader. It does not matter that Obama eventually dropped talk of the chained CPI; he never disowned it, and it's a matter of record now that the Democratic president supported it.

So, in sum, the New Democrats who have finagled their way into controlling the Democratic party have succeeded in giving away almost all of the Democratic party's traditional strength and appeal to the American people:

-- By enabling "free trade" agreements such as NAFTA, CAFTA, MFN for China, KORUS, etc. they have shrunk union membership -- a major chunk of Democratic support -- as well as giving away the party's claim to protect and strengthen the middle class.

-- By joining with Republicans to do away with things like teacher tenure, they have severely diminished support from another major component of the Democratic rank-and-file: the nation's teachers.

-- And by openly accepting GOP policies to begin the process of undermining Social Security, the New Democrats have toilet-bowled one of the defining differences between the Democratic and Republican parties.

Do you see how utterly important it is for the Democratic rank-and-file to once-and-for all remove the corporate Democrats and their flunkies from party leadership?

121 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Obama gave the GOP the greatest gift of all (Original Post) brentspeak Oct 2014 OP
Only 3 more Ratfucking Days until the Midterms! FSogol Oct 2014 #1
Jury decision... (here is a hint, someone is losing their alert privileges for a little while...) stevenleser Oct 2014 #7
I would have voted the same way for the same reason. nt Nuclear Unicorn Oct 2014 #18
LOL, thanks for posting the results. n/t FSogol Oct 2014 #31
You're welcome! I was juror #3. stevenleser Oct 2014 #33
I would have voted the same way, for the same reason. eom. 1StrongBlackMan Oct 2014 #42
Which means that you're calling me a "ratfu$#er" brentspeak Oct 2014 #55
"If you are bashing, trashing, undermining, or depressing turnout for our candidates during FSogol Oct 2014 #57
Since it's been Obama who managed to undermine Democratic candidates with brentspeak Oct 2014 #58
I believe this is what he means Yo_Mama_Been_Loggin Oct 2014 #74
If the shoe fits, wear it. If the shoe is uncomfortable ... 11 Bravo Oct 2014 #85
I am afraid I do not understand ... littlewolf Oct 2014 #62
Some things are just mysteries, and doomed to remain so... PatrickforO Oct 2014 #65
Let me explain. To curb frivolous alerts, the admins instituted a rule, if you alert and the stevenleser Oct 2014 #70
thank you for clearing that up for me. sometimes I feel a bit thick. :D nt littlewolf Oct 2014 #71
No. If an alert results in a 7-0 vote to leave the post, MineralMan Nov 2014 #115
Rats need love too IronLionZion Nov 2014 #95
Wow. The person who issued the alert completely misread the post. DesertDiamond Nov 2014 #98
what is this alert???!!!! heaven05 Nov 2014 #108
" 'Rats' is is what the RW calls Democrats." brentspeak Oct 2014 #10
"Rat fucking" is a political term since at least the Nixon era and has nothing to do with Lee FSogol Oct 2014 #30
I think the term goes back to MIT and, especially, CalTech pranksters hifiguy Oct 2014 #38
Yes, I looked up the slang term 'ratfucking' and according to PatrickforO Oct 2014 #64
Tell us all what the "political dirty trick" here is n/t brentspeak Oct 2014 #92
I first heard the term, shortened to RFing, in the 70s from UCLA fraternities.... DesertDiamond Nov 2014 #99
At least we know who lost their alerting privileges. joeglow3 Oct 2014 #52
Ok, who was it? brentspeak Oct 2014 #59
You Better Believe It! Ikonoklast Oct 2014 #32
I predict that sometime before the weekend ... 1StrongBlackMan Oct 2014 #43
true. man. mopinko Oct 2014 #50
I like concise posts sharp_stick Oct 2014 #54
This message was self-deleted by its author brentspeak Oct 2014 #93
+1 LadyHawkAZ Oct 2014 #91
Brava. nt msanthrope Nov 2014 #96
Yes, we are losing Senate races in red states because Obama is too conservative. Ykcutnek Oct 2014 #2
Is Barack Obama running for the Senate in red states? brentspeak Oct 2014 #3
Because Democratic candidates are not losing races for any of the issues you raised. nt Ykcutnek Oct 2014 #4
How would you know that? brentspeak Oct 2014 #6
logic would seem to indicate that.... Takket Oct 2014 #14
You haven't heard the Democratic candidates speak much about how their brentspeak Oct 2014 #17
You did make it clear. Lots of people intentionally misunderstand. Like you, I Nay Oct 2014 #36
Well ... 1StrongBlackMan Oct 2014 #46
That's all we're hearing in Iowa. justgamma Nov 2014 #118
We are losing the Senate ... Trajan Oct 2014 #5
Nowhere else to go? give me a friggin break randys1 Oct 2014 #28
Joe and Jane read the headlines that banks have made profits larger than any in history. The jtuck004 Oct 2014 #44
Karl Rove gets downright giddy when he sees stuff like this, think about it randys1 Oct 2014 #47
I think about it more than you know. But why kowtow to Karl Rove? That's not our only choice. Might jtuck004 Oct 2014 #66
That's the best come back you have? Many voters are staying home. rhett o rick Oct 2014 #83
Oh jesus, Rove loves your comment even more than the first one... randys1 Oct 2014 #84
Maybe you, jesus, and C. Rove can clean it up. You all seem to be the most interested. n/c jtuck004 Nov 2014 #113
I hope you will consider turning this post into its own thread. It's very poetic and KingCharlemagne Oct 2014 #61
Right. JDPriestly Nov 2014 #111
Not to mention that 1/3 of the country are full on hardcore racists......and the vast VanillaRhapsody Oct 2014 #80
Speaking as someone that's done door knocking and phone banking in a red state, JoeyT Nov 2014 #94
Funny ... 1StrongBlackMan Nov 2014 #101
What are coming up as the top 20 issues over all in your area? JDPriestly Nov 2014 #114
I'm not sure where you're getting that. JoeyT Nov 2014 #117
Reducing the number of democrats is the best way to punish the president IronLionZion Nov 2014 #97
No ... 1StrongBlackMan Nov 2014 #103
We must punish the American people! IronLionZion Nov 2014 #105
Something like that! ... 1StrongBlackMan Nov 2014 #107
The point is that Democrats win when they focus on key economic issues that favor working people. JDPriestly Nov 2014 #116
Only Nixon could go to China. Erich Bloodaxe BSN Oct 2014 #8
Ridiculous OP...it comes down to the people who are actually on the ballot BeyondGeography Oct 2014 #9
"attacked from the left by Karl Rove" brentspeak Oct 2014 #12
Here's what it means BeyondGeography Oct 2014 #13
That link supports the issues raised in my post brentspeak Oct 2014 #15
You really need that explained to you after reading the article? BeyondGeography Oct 2014 #21
Thanks for contributing nothing that makes sense to this discussion. n/t brentspeak Oct 2014 #24
Your link does NOT support your claim. bvar22 Oct 2014 #78
More reading comprehension issues BeyondGeography Oct 2014 #79
Total BS! nt Andy823 Oct 2014 #11
Near as I can tell the GOP hasn't been running on SS reform. nt Nuclear Unicorn Oct 2014 #16
More to the point, the Democrats haven't been running on protecting Social Security brentspeak Oct 2014 #20
Protect it from what? As I noted the GOP isn't running on SS reform. Nuclear Unicorn Oct 2014 #26
At least one prominent GOP senate candidate actually is running on SS "reform" brentspeak Oct 2014 #27
And Braley's running ads against all that. justgamma Nov 2014 #119
Retraction please ... 1StrongBlackMan Oct 2014 #53
They have attacked Democrats for having proposed cuts to SS. Marr Oct 2014 #22
Correct. It's a nonsense OP. I happen to have disagreed with the President publicly on chained CPI stevenleser Oct 2014 #37
Who cares if you disagreed or not with Obama on chained CPI? brentspeak Oct 2014 #45
Actually it doesn't cut benefits catnhatnh Oct 2014 #19
Christ, I can't believe anyone is still trying to sell that garbage. Marr Oct 2014 #23
+1 an entire shit load. Enthusiast Oct 2014 #63
Agreed. It was an utter betrayal of the voters and the party. Marr Oct 2014 #25
BS. still_one Oct 2014 #29
Great post, thank you. Broward Oct 2014 #34
I publicly disagreed with the President on this but it is having zero impact on the election stevenleser Oct 2014 #35
Republican lite and there are those that want Obama II with Hillary INdemo Oct 2014 #39
bullfuckingshit! She is to the Left of Obama....about equal to EW....I have shown over and over... VanillaRhapsody Oct 2014 #81
You keep thinking that and when the corporate dollars are tallied INdemo Oct 2014 #87
You keep thinking YOU know something VanillaRhapsody Nov 2014 #120
I don't know where you are ... staggerleem Oct 2014 #40
Welcome to DU wryter2000 Oct 2014 #68
Thank you, elleng Oct 2014 #76
Many are deep inside a fantasy world where republicans don't exist IronLionZion Nov 2014 #106
Like Governor Wallace said many years ago " there is not a dimes worth of difference between the geretogo Oct 2014 #41
I just KNEW Nader didn't come up with that all by himself! 11 Bravo Oct 2014 #86
Why we need a real Progressive INdemo Oct 2014 #88
With out a doubt . geretogo Nov 2014 #121
GOP have chained CPI in their RSC budget spedtr90 Oct 2014 #48
I'm sorry, but you're mistaking your audience for one that cares about the quality of the MontyPow Oct 2014 #49
Tragically true. blackspade Oct 2014 #51
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/bob-cesca/democrats-social-security_b_6071482.html stupidicus Oct 2014 #56
Proof? Drunken Irishman Oct 2014 #60
If you removed all of the Democrats that voted for those terrible trade agreements and Dustlawyer Oct 2014 #67
Bingo Yo_Mama_Been_Loggin Oct 2014 #72
his term has been a debacle for the party. The repukes were on the ropes in 2009 Doctor_J Oct 2014 #69
Well said. The people of the country and the world were behind him... polichick Oct 2014 #73
You will never have to vote for President Obama ever again IronLionZion Nov 2014 #100
"remove the corporate Democrats and their flunkies from party leadership" brooklynite Oct 2014 #75
k&r for the truth, however depressing it may be. n/t Laelth Oct 2014 #77
The reason Germany and Sweden have strong unions is not a lack of trade or trade agreements. pampango Oct 2014 #82
K&R The hard, cold truth. This is your party on corporate cash. woo me with science Oct 2014 #89
Henry Paulson, Ben Bernanke, Timothy Geithner, Larry Summers, and the band plays on. L0oniX Nov 2014 #112
Yes--Simpson Bowles fucked us over royally in 2010 eridani Oct 2014 #90
Yes, We Do Need To Elect More Middle To Left Democrats... ChiciB1 Nov 2014 #102
It's too late vi5 Nov 2014 #104
Well, - fact is SS benefits are not a top voter priority. maced666 Nov 2014 #109
K&R. Because the perfect example of a Democrat who will make the same mistakes JDPriestly Nov 2014 #110
 

stevenleser

(32,886 posts)
7. Jury decision... (here is a hint, someone is losing their alert privileges for a little while...)
Fri Oct 31, 2014, 12:46 PM
Oct 2014

On Fri Oct 31, 2014, 12:30 PM an alert was sent on the following post:

Only 3 more Ratfucking Days until the Midterms!
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=5740343

REASON FOR ALERT

This post is disruptive, hurtful, rude, insensitive, over-the-top, or otherwise inappropriate.

ALERTER'S COMMENTS

Calling a fellow DUer a ratfucker is a personal attack.

You served on a randomly-selected Jury of DU members which reviewed this post. The review was completed at Fri Oct 31, 2014, 12:45 PM, and the Jury voted 0-7 to LEAVE IT.

Juror #1 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #2 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: i don't think they were calling the poster a ratfucker...
Juror #3 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: FSogol is right.
Juror #4 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: He didn't call a fellow DUer a ratfucker. He called the remaining days until the midterms "ratfucking days" "Ratfucking" as slang has a specific definition with a proud and distinguished history. It applies quite aptly to politics in this midterm season.
Juror #5 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: I don't think the intent was to call the poster a "rat fucker". Perhaps frustration in general, not aimed at an individual.
Juror #6 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: He did not call a fellow DUer a ratfucker. It looks like it was supposed to be an ironic comment to remind us of Rove's famous remark.
Juror #7 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given

Thank you very much for participating in our Jury system, and we hope you will be able to participate again in the future.

brentspeak

(18,290 posts)
55. Which means that you're calling me a "ratfu$#er"
Fri Oct 31, 2014, 02:20 PM
Oct 2014

Coupled with how you abused your role in the jury process should call into question your posting privileges here.

FSogol

(45,481 posts)
57. "If you are bashing, trashing, undermining, or depressing turnout for our candidates during
Fri Oct 31, 2014, 02:24 PM
Oct 2014

election, we'll assume you are rooting for the other side." - Albert Einstein

brentspeak

(18,290 posts)
58. Since it's been Obama who managed to undermine Democratic candidates with
Fri Oct 31, 2014, 02:28 PM
Oct 2014

his actions, it can be inferred that you believe Einstein would have believed Obama was actually rooting for Republicans.

Yo_Mama_Been_Loggin

(107,956 posts)
74. I believe this is what he means
Fri Oct 31, 2014, 04:58 PM
Oct 2014

"Ratfucking is an American slang term for political sabotage or dirty tricks. It was first brought to public attention during the Watergate scandal investigation that during the 1972 presidential campaign the Nixon campaign committee maintained a "dirty tricks" unit focused on discrediting Nixon's strongest challengers.

According to Woodward and Bernstein, Nixon aide Dwight Chapin hired fellow USC alumnus Donald Segretti to run a campaign of dirty tricks (which Segretti dubbed "ratfucking&quot against the Democrats in 1972. The purpose of the operation was to create as much bitterness and disunity within the Democrat primary as possible. One notable example of Segretti's wrong-doing was a faked letter on Democratic presidential candidate Edmund Muskie's letterhead falsely alleging that U.S. Senator Henry "Scoop" Jackson, a fellow Democrat, had had an illegitimate child with a 17-year-old."

And I have to ask how old are you if you're not familiar with the term?

11 Bravo

(23,926 posts)
85. If the shoe fits, wear it. If the shoe is uncomfortable ...
Fri Oct 31, 2014, 07:16 PM
Oct 2014

stop trying it on. (I believe it was Thom Mcan who said that.)

littlewolf

(3,813 posts)
62. I am afraid I do not understand ...
Fri Oct 31, 2014, 03:03 PM
Oct 2014

If someone alerts and it is over turned by the jury system
they lose their alert privileges ?

I have been on juries I think I even alerted once.
but I did not know this.

PatrickforO

(14,572 posts)
65. Some things are just mysteries, and doomed to remain so...
Fri Oct 31, 2014, 03:12 PM
Oct 2014

I've never, ever been able to totally get my head around moderation rules.

 

stevenleser

(32,886 posts)
70. Let me explain. To curb frivolous alerts, the admins instituted a rule, if you alert and the
Fri Oct 31, 2014, 04:28 PM
Oct 2014

alert goes against you 0-7 in other words, the jury votes 7-0 NOT to hide, you lose your alerting privileges for 24 hours.

MineralMan

(146,288 posts)
115. No. If an alert results in a 7-0 vote to leave the post,
Sat Nov 1, 2014, 01:18 PM
Nov 2014

the alerter won't be able to alert again for 24 hours. The idea is to discourage bogus alerts. It seems to be working pretty well, really.

brentspeak

(18,290 posts)
10. " 'Rats' is is what the RW calls Democrats."
Fri Oct 31, 2014, 12:50 PM
Oct 2014

Your own words. Is there something you want to get off your chest?



http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=4591988

FSogol (21,783 posts)

95. All I hear is online malcontents that refuse to do the hard work of getting good people elected

in lieu of supporting mythical pure candidates that never seem to win or get their bills out of subcommittees.

Bonus points for working "third way," "rats," and "fascist" into your rant. BTW, "rats" is is what the RW calls Democrats. How did you ever pick up that?

There are no Democrats in my state that support privatizing SS. Do they exist or is that just the hair-on-fire reaction to offering something to start a dialogue with a party intent on gridlock?

LOL at the "in the know" crowd.

FSogol

(45,481 posts)
30. "Rat fucking" is a political term since at least the Nixon era and has nothing to do with Lee
Fri Oct 31, 2014, 01:17 PM
Oct 2014

Atwater's slur of "rat" in Democrat.

 

hifiguy

(33,688 posts)
38. I think the term goes back to MIT and, especially, CalTech pranksters
Fri Oct 31, 2014, 01:41 PM
Oct 2014

in the 1960s. A famous "ratfuck" was changing the cards fans held up at the Rose Bowl back in 1961 played by Minnesota and Washington and hackng the scoreboard at the 1984 Rose Bowl:

Caltech has a long history of off-campus pranks, which are sometimes referred to as "RFs". (RF is short for "ratfuck", referring to the shattering of a frozen dead rat in someone's room.)[5] The most notable of these pranks include the 1961 Great Rose Bowl Hoax, where a card stunt was altered to display "Caltech" rather than the name of one of the competing teams.[6][7][8] Caltech students also altered the scoreboard display during the 1984 Rose Bowl to show Caltech beating MIT 38–9,[9][10] and in May 1987 changed the Hollywood Sign to read "CALTECH".[11]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Caltech%E2%80%93MIT_rivalry

PatrickforO

(14,572 posts)
64. Yes, I looked up the slang term 'ratfucking' and according to
Fri Oct 31, 2014, 03:10 PM
Oct 2014

Wikipedia, it means political dirty tricks. So, the post was apropos, if a bit vulgar, and the jury made the right decision.

DesertDiamond

(1,616 posts)
99. I first heard the term, shortened to RFing, in the 70s from UCLA fraternities....
Sat Nov 1, 2014, 10:17 AM
Nov 2014

It referred to pranking, usually another fraternity or another college.

 

1StrongBlackMan

(31,849 posts)
43. I predict that sometime before the weekend ...
Fri Oct 31, 2014, 01:51 PM
Oct 2014

there will be a post saying, {something to the effect: "DEMOCRATS DESIRE TO LOSE BECAUSE {insert reason here}, SO TELL ALL YOUR FRIENDS NOT TO VOTE!"

Maybe, not that blatant, but still ...

Response to sharp_stick (Reply #54)

brentspeak

(18,290 posts)
3. Is Barack Obama running for the Senate in red states?
Fri Oct 31, 2014, 12:40 PM
Oct 2014

Lame attempt at deflecting from the issues I raised in my post.

Takket

(21,563 posts)
14. logic would seem to indicate that....
Fri Oct 31, 2014, 12:55 PM
Oct 2014

If Obama is going to lose a senate seat in a traditionally red state, like Montana for example, it is because people there are "buying into" the MSM idea that he is an ultra left wing tax-and-spender, not because he proposed a "right wing" idea on Social Security.

to be honest I have not seen or heard chained CPI mentioned on anything I have seen or heard about this election.

brentspeak

(18,290 posts)
17. You haven't heard the Democratic candidates speak much about how their
Fri Oct 31, 2014, 01:00 PM
Oct 2014

GOP opponents are looking to undermine Social Security, either. That is the germane point of my post, which I think was made clear to begin with.

Nay

(12,051 posts)
36. You did make it clear. Lots of people intentionally misunderstand. Like you, I
Fri Oct 31, 2014, 01:26 PM
Oct 2014

think that statement by President Obama has caused Dem candidates to stop talking about protecting SS, just because there does indeed exist clips of Obama saying the opposite. That's why he should NEVER have said it. It's still a mystery to me why he did. I'd hate to think he'd really do it. . .but how would you really know that?

 

1StrongBlackMan

(31,849 posts)
46. Well ...
Fri Oct 31, 2014, 01:56 PM
Oct 2014

in the AZ market, Ron Barber's ads have stated that Martha McSally plans to "gamble away your SS" through privatization. So have Raul Grijalva and Anne Kirkpatrick.

As far as national ad runs, I am not certain but I believe I have seen ads stating exactly what you claim isn't happening.

 

Trajan

(19,089 posts)
5. We are losing the Senate ...
Fri Oct 31, 2014, 12:46 PM
Oct 2014

Because the regular Joe's and Jane's ... the working families ... the providers of the daily bread for families everywhere - Have nowhere else to go ...

They have nowhere else to go, because the party that once defended working families, and protected them from the ravages of unregulated capitalism and rapacious corporate policies, have abdicated that position ...

Thanks to condescending attitudes like your own, it has been difficult to try and return to those values ...

You like conservative policies? ... fine - vote for the fucking GOP ...

randys1

(16,286 posts)
28. Nowhere else to go? give me a friggin break
Fri Oct 31, 2014, 01:11 PM
Oct 2014

If Joe and Jane either dont vote or vote Republican because Obama at one point in time when being obstructed more than any previous president in history, said what he said (to this day it makes me mad too), it wont be because they feel they have nowhere else to go, it will be because they arent paying attention and have bought the propaganda and lies of Rove and the Koch's.



 

jtuck004

(15,882 posts)
44. Joe and Jane read the headlines that banks have made profits larger than any in history. The
Fri Oct 31, 2014, 01:53 PM
Oct 2014

newspaper was wrapped around the food they got from the food bank.

They voted in the 2008 election for Democrats. They were one of 4 million families that were foreclosed on and thrown in the street, following the 3 million before them, and adding to the additional 10 million people who have entered poverty in this administration, or the one out of 4 kids who aren't eating because there isn't enough food for them for that meal.

Now Joe and Jane are in poverty, statistically will be the rest of their lives and so will their children. Among people who traditionally don't vote. Will voters who used to vote, who had the education and money and time and a job that would let them still vote if their economics have gone downhill? Will millions of them? Will the tens upon tens of millions who now live in near poverty, who didn't live in poverty, and were much more likely to vote, before?

We gonna see goin' forward how easy it is to motivate people to vote who have been waiting years, and who will continue to wait, for hope that is never, ever gonna come.

 

jtuck004

(15,882 posts)
66. I think about it more than you know. But why kowtow to Karl Rove? That's not our only choice. Might
Fri Oct 31, 2014, 03:18 PM
Oct 2014

find a Democrat to go to war on poverty instead of inflating bankster's pocketbooks with opportunities denied working people.

I don't mean to presume that I know better than you what to be concerned about, and if you want to live your life around K Rove, that's your business.

Seems like it would be more useful, however, instead of spending so much time worrying about what he thinks one might be in working people's homes (where the teabaggers organize, btw) finding out what THEY think. Me, I don't even think of him. I think about my neighbors and how we can find opportunity, since we all know the government that used to protect us now works for the banksters.

Btw - if you think that last paragraph is unsubstantiated, feel free to check out a copy of "Stress Test" by Timothy McVeig...I mean Geithner (I get my killers mixed up - the CDC, police departments, and hospitals have documents listing the reason for suicides and injuries as the very foreclosures that were not prevented, as well as a large number of disabling health issues, because of the actions of the banksters), the last Treasury Secretary - he explains in excruciating detail about how it was necessary to save the banksters at the expense of the lives of millions of people, for their own good. He explains how they came up with the plan and President Obama made the banks take it. For our own good.

Jon Stewart interviewed him about the book: said "The perception is that you went to hell and back for the banks, but not for working people". Geithner tried to spin it another way, but an entire audience of voters laughed - at him.

I would bet Karl Rove watched that and got an even bigger kick at the nationwide audience of voters who watched it with him. He's not reading my comments which are just simple, publicly available information provided by the government and competent authorities.

I suspect he has an autographed copy of the book, from the person appointed by this President.

Some years ago, years I lived through and remember very well, the governments were concerned about action, getting things done, concerned about the people, and worked on solutions. Sure they had to win, but the people knew who was on their side and responded. When the people thought they had been left behind, they went another direction. Just an aside - I bet most of them don't know who this Karl Rove thing is.

Like then...

When Poverty Was the Enemy, Not the Poor Here.


...
It has been 50 years since America launched the War on Poverty. The Economic Opportunity Act and legislation to outlaw racial discrimination were the centerpieces of President Lyndon B. Johnson’s vision to create a Great Society.

Today, rather than a war on poverty, we seem to have a war on the poor. Wealth inequality is growing. State support for education is withering. Social safety-net programs are under attack in Congress. Many Americans believe that if people are poor, it’s their own fault. The only “solution” for poverty that many people advocate is allowing companies to create jobs offering wages too low to support a family.
...
“Dad worked in the coal mines and did other jobs. He was a very hard worker, but he didn’t have an education,” said Darlene Sharp, 61, who was a teenager with six brothers and sisters when the War on Poverty came to Knox County. Her father managed buildings that housed the new educational programs, and her mother got a job at one of the factories West helped create. “A lot of people worked there,” she said. “I’m sure that every one of them was people who had no employment before. Without the programs, there weren’t very many jobs. It helped them be able to take care of their families and meet needs. I know
it helped my family.”

At its core, the War on Poverty was not about a handout, but a hand up. It was about creating economic opportunity and giving poor people the skills and support they needed to take advantage of it. And it was about giving poor people a voice in decisions affecting their lives. A half-century ago, Americans made a commitment to fight a war on poverty, and we could do it again. Creating a society that is more fair, just, and prosperous for everyone is a fight worth winning.
...



I didn't write the plan that left all those people homeless or hungry, and I offer what I can to provide opportunities for others, because I think we all do better when that philosophy is followed. Maybe if more people were concerned about that they could quit obsessing about unimportant people with a serious deficiency in their humanity.


 

rhett o rick

(55,981 posts)
83. That's the best come back you have? Many voters are staying home.
Fri Oct 31, 2014, 06:18 PM
Oct 2014

Even if they admit there is a difference they think that both parties work for the same 1%.

 

KingCharlemagne

(7,908 posts)
61. I hope you will consider turning this post into its own thread. It's very poetic and
Fri Oct 31, 2014, 02:41 PM
Oct 2014

evocative and deserves far wider exposure.

Here's what a radical had to say on these matters 100-some years ago:

“Ask for work. If they don't give you work, ask for bread. If they do not give you work or bread, then take bread.”
~Emma Goldman, Anarchism and Other Essays (1910)

 

VanillaRhapsody

(21,115 posts)
80. Not to mention that 1/3 of the country are full on hardcore racists......and the vast
Fri Oct 31, 2014, 05:42 PM
Oct 2014

majority of them are Republican...

JoeyT

(6,785 posts)
94. Speaking as someone that's done door knocking and phone banking in a red state,
Sat Nov 1, 2014, 09:20 AM
Nov 2014

Free Trade agreements are fucking killing us in them. Everyone hates that shit.

Obama's promise to renegotiate NAFTA never materialized, and now they're pushing worse stuff.

So you can laugh all you like, because you don't know what the fuck you're talking about.

 

1StrongBlackMan

(31,849 posts)
101. Funny ...
Sat Nov 1, 2014, 10:18 AM
Nov 2014

Living, and having knocked on doors and phonebanking, in this Red state (a border state, at that) ... the Free Trade Agreements only comes up as a top 20 issue among progressives.

But maybe YOUR red state is different from mine!

JoeyT

(6,785 posts)
117. I'm not sure where you're getting that.
Sat Nov 1, 2014, 01:30 PM
Nov 2014


Pretty much the only group that consistently support Free Trade Agreements are libertarian and their neo-con/liberal friends.

IronLionZion

(45,433 posts)
97. Reducing the number of democrats is the best way to punish the president
Sat Nov 1, 2014, 10:14 AM
Nov 2014

and once the last red state democrats are defeated, then the republicans will allow all sorts of liberal goodies to pass through. Since red state dems are the problem.



but more like:

 

1StrongBlackMan

(31,849 posts)
103. No ...
Sat Nov 1, 2014, 10:22 AM
Nov 2014

You missed a step ... Once the last red state Democrat is defeated, then the red staters, Democrats and republicans, alike, will recognize the error of their way, and elect full-bore progressives!

IronLionZion

(45,433 posts)
105. We must punish the American people!
Sat Nov 1, 2014, 10:31 AM
Nov 2014

Make them suffer. that will teach them! Then they'll know to never vote against liberals ever again.

 

1StrongBlackMan

(31,849 posts)
107. Something like that! ...
Sat Nov 1, 2014, 11:06 AM
Nov 2014

Never-mind the apparent, thin bench of progressive candidates, waiting in the wings of the Democratic Party to lead this red state charge.

JDPriestly

(57,936 posts)
116. The point is that Democrats win when they focus on key economic issues that favor working people.
Sat Nov 1, 2014, 01:18 PM
Nov 2014

Issues like organizing labor, protecting and creating American jobs, investment in infrastructure and education, health care for all . . . .

But when protecting bankers, leaving unions to their own devices and not really supporting them, entering into trade agreements and protecting imports, privatizing education, neglecting infrastructure and failing to offer a public option for health care are what you focus on, then voters don't see the Democrats as being on their side.

Democrats have focused on social issues like discrimination -- gender equality, racial equality, etc. for the past 50 years. That is good. We need to have gender, race, sexual orientation equality. But discrimination issues focus on the things that separate people and should not separate people while economic issues focus on the things that unite us.

In other words, at this time, Democrats need to more strongly communicate the message that we want everyone to have opportunity and a fair chance. We care about discrimination because we want everyone to be able to do well. We need to be the party that unites and not the party that fragments.

I say this at the great risk of being misunderstood.

But it needs to be said.


Frankly, I think that we Democrats will do better on Tuesday than the pundits expect -- not a whole lot better, but better. I do think that the leadership of the Democratic Party is not presenting the Democratic message effectively. They are doing a bad job of it.

We need to be inclusive in our approach to discussing issues. We care about racial equality, about gay marriage, about public education, about unions because we are and INCLUSIVE party and we want an INCLUSIVE nation and not because we are just a bunch of separate interest groups that are trying to improve their lot at the expense of others.

Erich Bloodaxe BSN

(14,733 posts)
8. Only Nixon could go to China.
Fri Oct 31, 2014, 12:47 PM
Oct 2014

It takes members of a given party to actually damage that party with voters. Let Republicans throw all the mud they want, but unless voters actually see that some of that mud really 'sticks', because there's a core of truth, it's not going to tarnish the party. What hurts Republicans with voters is what Republicans do and say, and what hurts Democrats with voters is what Democrats do and say.

You want to win, you've got to choose whose votes you want, and make sure there are more of them than there are of the votes you leave for the other person (people). If you take positions that alienate one group of voters, you better have other stances that pick up the slack in exchange of the voters you abandoned.

BeyondGeography

(39,370 posts)
9. Ridiculous OP...it comes down to the people who are actually on the ballot
Fri Oct 31, 2014, 12:48 PM
Oct 2014

And yes, those who have played footsie with Simpson-Bowles are being attacked from the left by Karl Rove, which is a pretty fucking dumb thing to leave yourself open for. That's a gift from them, not Obama.

brentspeak

(18,290 posts)
15. That link supports the issues raised in my post
Fri Oct 31, 2014, 12:58 PM
Oct 2014

As well as having nothing to do with your statement, "attacked from the left by Karl Rove", which remains as weird as before.

BeyondGeography

(39,370 posts)
79. More reading comprehension issues
Fri Oct 31, 2014, 05:38 PM
Oct 2014

Candidates are paying for their own SS stances, not Obama's, which are misstated (and unsupported) in the OP to begin with.

Nuclear Unicorn

(19,497 posts)
26. Protect it from what? As I noted the GOP isn't running on SS reform.
Fri Oct 31, 2014, 01:07 PM
Oct 2014

The GOP is running on "The Dems, lead by Obama, are a disaster!" Our candidates have, in turn, chosen to campaign while playing silly games where they refuse to say they voted for Obama -- which no one believes and take as further evidence that Obama is radioactive.

Was Obama's broaching of SS reform a strategic error? Yes. But that has no bearing on this election cycle.

brentspeak

(18,290 posts)
27. At least one prominent GOP senate candidate actually is running on SS "reform"
Fri Oct 31, 2014, 01:11 PM
Oct 2014


http://www.newsweek.com/joni-ernsts-big-gamble-iowa-279641

During the primary, (Joni) Ernst endorsed the idea of privatizing Social Security by shifting future contributions to personal accounts, called the idea of a federal minimum wage “ridiculous” (she later said she supports it), called President Obama a dictator who should perhaps face impeachment (she walked that back almost immediately) and appeared concerned about the Agenda 21 conspiracy that she described as a United Nations effort to forcibly move Americans into urban centers and confiscate their property (she later walked that back too). In 2012, she told a libertarian group that she would support legislation to nullify the the Affordable Care Act and allow state law enforcement to arrest federal officials trying to implement it. In 2013, she backed “personhood” amendment to the Iowa state constitution that would ban all abortions and some contraception and turn miscarriages into murder investigations.
 

1StrongBlackMan

(31,849 posts)
53. Retraction please ...
Fri Oct 31, 2014, 02:03 PM
Oct 2014
http://tucson.com/news/blogs/pueblo-politics/ad-watch-barber-campaign-releases-new-ad/article_f06cce04-4d74-5a4d-897a-b64950495d2e.html

Ad embedded after text.

But sense I doubt anyone will click, here's the text of the ad:

Text of the ad:

(Ron Barber, narrating)

"I am Ron Barber and I approve of this message."

(Narrator, speaking off camera)

"These attacks simply not true.

Ron Barber bucked party leaders, working to fix healthcare reform and to protect Medicare.

He even donated his Congressional healthcare subsidy to charity.

But Martha McSally supported a plan AARP said puts traditional Medicare at risk.

She’d cut Medicare, costing seniors six thousand more a year just to cut taxes for millionaires.

Martha McSally – not for us."
 

Marr

(20,317 posts)
22. They have attacked Democrats for having proposed cuts to SS.
Fri Oct 31, 2014, 01:03 PM
Oct 2014

It's a charge that will hurt-- a lot.

 

stevenleser

(32,886 posts)
37. Correct. It's a nonsense OP. I happen to have disagreed with the President publicly on chained CPI
Fri Oct 31, 2014, 01:30 PM
Oct 2014

(See downthread)

but to pretend its having an impact on the election is ridiculous.

brentspeak

(18,290 posts)
45. Who cares if you disagreed or not with Obama on chained CPI?
Fri Oct 31, 2014, 01:54 PM
Oct 2014

You're not the average voter who Democratic candidates are reaching out to. You're not the people who Dems need to convince will have their Social Security benefits cut/eventually eradicated by Republican policies -- should the GOP remain in power. And you're not the Democratic candidate who just had the traditional advantageous issue of protecting Social Security from Republicans taken away from him/her by Obama and the New Democratic flunkies who are advising him.

catnhatnh

(8,976 posts)
19. Actually it doesn't cut benefits
Fri Oct 31, 2014, 01:01 PM
Oct 2014
http://money.cnn.com/2014/02/20/news/economy/obama-social-security-chained-cpi/

It may slow the rate of future increases. It was only offered as a possible concession if republicans agreed to close tax loopholes.
 

Marr

(20,317 posts)
23. Christ, I can't believe anyone is still trying to sell that garbage.
Fri Oct 31, 2014, 01:05 PM
Oct 2014

Chained CPI is a cut to Social Security over time. Stop pretending otherwise-- people aren't that stupid and they'll only resent you for assuming they are.

Enthusiast

(50,983 posts)
63. +1 an entire shit load.
Fri Oct 31, 2014, 03:08 PM
Oct 2014

Third Way hunger for Chained CPI is still a thing. It is one of their top priorities.

 

Marr

(20,317 posts)
25. Agreed. It was an utter betrayal of the voters and the party.
Fri Oct 31, 2014, 01:06 PM
Oct 2014

But right in line with the Third Way's *openly stated* commitment to moving away from the Democratic Party's traditional constituencies and pursuing more corporate funding.

 

stevenleser

(32,886 posts)
35. I publicly disagreed with the President on this but it is having zero impact on the election
Fri Oct 31, 2014, 01:25 PM
Oct 2014

You aren't hearing it discussed at all and no voters are talking about this as their reason for voting a particular way.

INdemo

(6,994 posts)
39. Republican lite and there are those that want Obama II with Hillary
Fri Oct 31, 2014, 01:42 PM
Oct 2014

This President has appointed more Republicans to his cabinet than any other Democratic President in history.
Do the research ..on the campaign trail stump speeches he said Social Security cuts and Medicare are off the table.

If Republicans gain control of Senate..Look out keystone pipeline ,net neutrality is coming and if passed this Republican will sign the bills
Republicans...

Ok Elizabeth Warren where do I send my campaign contribution

INdemo

(6,994 posts)
87. You keep thinking that and when the corporate dollars are tallied
Fri Oct 31, 2014, 08:41 PM
Oct 2014

I will remind you again that Hillary is a corporate Republican lite. Not to be mean just stating facts.

 

staggerleem

(469 posts)
40. I don't know where you are ...
Fri Oct 31, 2014, 01:42 PM
Oct 2014

... but I'm in New York, and I get at least a dozen "Protect and Increase Social Security" e-mails a week from Democratic candidates, and the TV ads for our local Democrats usually DO mention protecting Social Security benefits.

Obama had a brief flirtation with the chained CPI shortly after the Simpson-Bowles cat-food commission released their absurd report. It was something he considered when he still believed in the possibility of bi-partisan economic solutions. When the reality that there was no real interest in bi-partisanship from across the aisle, the chained CPI was the first thing he threw overboard.

geretogo

(1,281 posts)
41. Like Governor Wallace said many years ago " there is not a dimes worth of difference between the
Fri Oct 31, 2014, 01:43 PM
Oct 2014

Republicans and Democrats " .

spedtr90

(719 posts)
48. GOP have chained CPI in their RSC budget
Fri Oct 31, 2014, 01:57 PM
Oct 2014

The conservative Republican Study Committee Budget 2015 contains the chained CPI. About 70% of House Republicans are members of that caucus.

This budget would slowly phase in an increase in the Social Security full-retirement age. The full retirement age would continue the current-law’s gradual increase of two months per year beginning in 2022 until the full retirement age reaches 70. To further strengthen Social Security’s long-term finances, this budget would change the formula for cost of living adjustments (COLA) by adopting a more accurate measure of inflation (chained CPI-U) that takes into account real-world choices consumers make.

They also favor a voucher program for Medicare:

Transitions Medicare to a solvent premium-support system, as proposed by the Republican House Budget. The RSC budget proposes making this transition in 2019, for workers born in 1954 and later.

In the years the House voted on this budget would have passed, except Republicans realized Democrats were only voting present, and then voted against it - some changing their votes to nay so it would not pass. I suppose if it passed it would have gotten some unwanted attention to what was in it.

 

MontyPow

(285 posts)
49. I'm sorry, but you're mistaking your audience for one that cares about the quality of the
Fri Oct 31, 2014, 02:00 PM
Oct 2014

Democratic politician when all your audience really cares about is the quantity.

And while the President may have been the first to voice the position, it was the support he garnered from the redder Democrats, not the better Democrats, that helped to make Social Security deform the new normal.

blackspade

(10,056 posts)
51. Tragically true.
Fri Oct 31, 2014, 02:01 PM
Oct 2014

The optics on this were terrible and all of us 'lefties' that were shouting "NO!!!" and that the rethugs would beat Democratic candidates with it the next election cycle were told to be quiet, that the adults had this under control, and that it was only a proposal.

Well, guess fucking what......?

Dustlawyer

(10,495 posts)
67. If you removed all of the Democrats that voted for those terrible trade agreements and
Fri Oct 31, 2014, 03:21 PM
Oct 2014

depend upon corporate money for re-election, we would have almost no Democrats left. We need to fight for Publicly Funded Elections and take all of the corporate money away. Our politicians would have a lot more time to learn about the issues facing the country if they didn't have to be at fundraisers year round being told how to vote and what legislation to introduce.
This is the only way to save our Democracy at this point!

 

Doctor_J

(36,392 posts)
69. his term has been a debacle for the party. The repukes were on the ropes in 2009
Fri Oct 31, 2014, 03:25 PM
Oct 2014

The voters had resoundingly rejected them and were ready to send them to the dustbin of history. Obama and, to a lesser extent Reid and Pelosi, handed the country back to them. Besides offering to cut social security, there is more war, fracking, offshore drilling, austerity, school privatization, Bush tax cuts, siegelman, and of course heritage care. What a train wreck. We won't recover during my lifetime (15 more years or so)

polichick

(37,152 posts)
73. Well said. The people of the country and the world were behind him...
Fri Oct 31, 2014, 04:56 PM
Oct 2014

but he capitulated to corporate status quo demands over and over again.

IronLionZion

(45,433 posts)
100. You will never have to vote for President Obama ever again
Sat Nov 1, 2014, 10:18 AM
Nov 2014

I assure you, he's not on the ballot.

You're not going to like what the GOP has planned for us if they take the senate.

brooklynite

(94,520 posts)
75. "remove the corporate Democrats and their flunkies from party leadership"
Fri Oct 31, 2014, 05:13 PM
Oct 2014

Presumably starting with the President -- the only person you call out?

Hey, maybe we could impeach him! You'd probably be able to get the Republicans to go along.....

pampango

(24,692 posts)
82. The reason Germany and Sweden have strong unions is not a lack of trade or trade agreements.
Fri Oct 31, 2014, 05:59 PM
Oct 2014

Indeed trade plays a much larger role in their economies than it does in our.

They have strong unions because their governments enact legal support for unions. IOW, they have no "Taft Hartley" 'right-to-work' states or provinces among many other anti-union legal hurdles that the US has. Quite the opposite they have laws that support unions, not undermine them.

woo me with science

(32,139 posts)
89. K&R The hard, cold truth. This is your party on corporate cash.
Fri Oct 31, 2014, 10:23 PM
Oct 2014

We must get corporate money and power out of politics.

eridani

(51,907 posts)
90. Yes--Simpson Bowles fucked us over royally in 2010
Fri Oct 31, 2014, 11:11 PM
Oct 2014

Every hour I spent at meetings and organizing to fight back against chained CPI was one hour less to devote to doorknocking for Democratic candidates.

ChiciB1

(15,435 posts)
102. Yes, We Do Need To Elect More Middle To Left Democrats...
Sat Nov 1, 2014, 10:20 AM
Nov 2014

But FIRST we need to vote to start that process in motion! I must be a dimwit, but I haven't heard of it's passage, but I did hear he entertained the idea!

Just VOTE, AND GET EVERYONE else you know to VOTE! Who we have right now is all we have!

I need more concrete evidence that this is happening. Could have missed something along the way.

 

vi5

(13,305 posts)
104. It's too late
Sat Nov 1, 2014, 10:25 AM
Nov 2014

The "centrist" parasite has already eaten away at our party to an irreversible degree. The "bipartisan" very serious people who believe in Republican policies at their core but just think it's Democrats job to be nicer about lead and own our party. The chances of the Elizabeth Warrens of our party being anything other than a fringe at this point are slim to none.

 

maced666

(771 posts)
109. Well, - fact is SS benefits are not a top voter priority.
Sat Nov 1, 2014, 11:26 AM
Nov 2014

President Obama has an EXCELLENT record on SS benefits. Benefits have increased during his tenure - not decreased.
National security, the poor economy, no jobs, open borders - these are things on the top of voter lists this election. I don't believe I've seen SS benefits on any voter list.

JDPriestly

(57,936 posts)
110. K&R. Because the perfect example of a Democrat who will make the same mistakes
Sat Nov 1, 2014, 11:37 AM
Nov 2014

that Obama has made is Hillary Clinton.

More about this later.

Latest Discussions»General Discussion»Obama gave the GOP the gr...