Weird! Anonymous is *horrible*, but harming the 99% is nothing to worry our little minds about?

[MannyGoldstein]

154. IIRC, the only things that I predicted are that Obama would eventually call for cuts

(once he named Simpson and Bowles to head up a deficit committee), that he would actually call for cuts in his 2011 SOTU after Simpson and Bowles (surprisingly!) recommended an eventual 22% cut in the average benefit, and that he would use last year's fully-fake debt-ceiling "crisis" to try for cuts.

I'll leave it to you as to whether those came to pass.

If you find any other predictions from me, I'll send $10 to your favorite charity for each one you find (limit $100 in case I'm having a huge brain fart here - in that case I'll need the $100 to pay for serious medical treatment).

As to predictions moving forward... at this point, reducing SS benefits may be a little tougher for Obama... Harry Reid seems to be genuinely offended by this savagery, we now have Liz Warren who'd likely fight until she's "left blood and teeth on the floor". AARP seems to have replaced their chief lobbyist since the old one called for cuts, 29 Senators signed a letter stating they wouldn't vote for SS cuts as part of a Grand Bargain, and so forth. And Republicans are pretty wounded, they may not want something this repugnant potentially blamed on them, which Obama might be able to do "I was forced...".

As to which it is... you're the one who's claiming that "slash" is hyperbole. I'm thinking a reduction of up to 10% is a slash, but I'm curious as to *your* thinking? And, what do you think will happen to 90-year-olds whose benefits would be cut by 10%?