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 Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

kenny blankenship

(15,689 posts)
11. If you keep voting for it
Thu Oct 4, 2012, 10:33 AM
Oct 2012

is it really betrayal?

It's not their fault that their constituencies keep doing the same thing, expecting a different result. Sure they can say "Tough shit - you have nowhere else to go!" But no matter what they say or do you still have free will. The similar positions shared between the tops of the two parties include slashing the New Deal safety net and enriching and shielding the Banksters while ratcheting up the Police State for everyone else, but they begin with the proposition that Suckers deserve to get taken. Repetitively extending trust to such people after repeated "betrayals" is not much of a refutation of that motto, if you ask me, but more like confirmation of their shared elitist disdain for powerless, ordinary, working Americans. It's enabling their abuse of the majority. If that's "betrayal", then it is for the vast majority of us a self-betrayal.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

"That must mean that Romney won't cut a cent from Social Security Benefits" ProSense Oct 2012 #1
Do you think that's what the President meant? MannyGoldstein Oct 2012 #2
Here: ProSense Oct 2012 #4
I don't see any reassurance that SS won't be cut. MannyGoldstein Oct 2012 #10
Indeed. 'Tweaked in the way Reagan tweaked it...' Marr Oct 2012 #17
"tweaked the way it was by Ronald Reagan and Speaker" = having workers pay more than the HiPointDem Oct 2012 #12
There was an actual problem that needed to be solved under Reagan MannyGoldstein Oct 2012 #15
The problem that needed to be solved was simply that the trust fund balance had gone nearly HiPointDem Oct 2012 #18
I think it meant that Romney will run away from a similarity...... Sheepshank Oct 2012 #3
The Simpson-Bowles Commission report is being touted............ socialist_n_TN Oct 2012 #5
The poorer you make them, the more fearful and docile they become jsr Oct 2012 #7
The deck was stacked by 'our' guy. appal_jack Oct 2012 #8
Thank you. woo me with science Oct 2012 #16
Oh now now, Woo Oilwellian Oct 2012 #37
It seems woo me with science Oct 2012 #38
Cutting... but not slashing... MannyGoldstein Oct 2012 #40
The "save-the-safety-net" side had token representation Art_from_Ark Oct 2012 #45
Had she been chair... appal_jack Oct 2012 #55
It's just easier for most folks to push realities like this out of their mind. Poll_Blind Oct 2012 #6
We are bought and sold. woo me with science Oct 2012 #9
If you keep voting for it kenny blankenship Oct 2012 #11
explain to me, if you can, where the 22% cut in benefits comes from? hfojvt Oct 2012 #13
It's calculated by the Chief Actuary of Social Security MannyGoldstein Oct 2012 #14
SS will still be able to pay out about 80% of presently scheduled benefits if no changes at all are HiPointDem Oct 2012 #19
Why are we talking about a 75 year horizon? abumbyanyothername Oct 2012 #33
Because that's the way the politicians set it up in 1982 -- on an 'actuarial basis'. HiPointDem Oct 2012 #35
"And it's pure fraud." Occulus Oct 2012 #20
how many benefits it cuts depends on income level hfojvt Oct 2012 #23
"Scaled Medium Earner" from the Chief Actuary's letter MannyGoldstein Oct 2012 #24
Cost of living is a relative measure... ljm2002 Oct 2012 #22
Excellent & true points, n/t. appal_jack Oct 2012 #48
I did a double take when I heard that remark... ljm2002 Oct 2012 #21
that one quote is DISTURBING- W H comment line here I come !!! tokenlib Oct 2012 #29
Post removed Post removed Oct 2012 #39
Kick woo me with science Oct 2012 #25
Any second now. JoePhilly Oct 2012 #26
And people wonder why I characterize compliments you might give him as backhanded... nt stevenleser Oct 2012 #27
right on fucking cue... Whisp Oct 2012 #28
I seriously cringed when he said that. nt NCTraveler Oct 2012 #30
I think it was a rhetorical strategy BarackTheVote Oct 2012 #31
"...and Obama went after him with incensed incredulity. It was a win." rudycantfail Oct 2012 #34
Write and call your representatives today. Call the White House. woo me with science Oct 2012 #32
As I type this, the post above says "What advice would you give the president for the next debate?" lumberjack_jeff Oct 2012 #36
Kick. Luminous Animal Oct 2012 #41
Obama's Social Security Answer Leaves Democrats Utterly Baffled Lasher Oct 2012 #42
Obama's been straight about his position since MannyGoldstein Oct 2012 #43
I recall that during the 2008 primary DURHAM D Oct 2012 #49
It's a lot easier to be the "tweak-er" than the "tweak-ee"--think about it "grand bargainers"... tokenlib Oct 2012 #44
Kick. This is important. nt woo me with science Oct 2012 #46
Kick woo me with science Oct 2012 #47
Kick woo me with science Oct 2012 #50
I can see having to adjust SSI if Politicalboi Oct 2012 #51
Austerity is coming regardless of who wins. CrispyQ Oct 2012 #52
For the moment this is still a democracy..we don't have to roll over and take the "tweaking." N/T tokenlib Oct 2012 #53
Kick in response to Axelrod inferring this needs to be discussed in "quiet rooms" when on Fox News.. tokenlib Oct 2012 #54
After the election, it will be too late to find out... kentuck Oct 2012 #56
Latest Discussions»General Discussion»Obama praises Romney: &qu...»Reply #11