If Simpson Doesn't Resign, the President Must Fire Him

[G_j]

http://www.commondreams.org/view/2010/08/25-4

Published on Wednesday, August 25, 2010 by The Huffington Post

"310 Million Tits" -- If Simpson Doesn't Resign, the President Must Fire Him

by Richard Eskow


<snip>

This comment makes something else clear about Simpson: He really hates people who collect Social Security. He already made that feeling pretty clear when he referred to retired Social Security recipients as "greedy geezers." He's not just referring to wealthy Americans who collect Social Security benefits here -- 310 million is the entire population of the United States. He's saying every American who contributes to the Social Security system and is therefore entitled to its retirement benefits is suckling at the teat of the system -- even though they and their employers funded that system!

<snip>

Here's what the President said when he appointed Simpson and his co-chair: "I know they'll take up their work with the sense of integrity and strength of commitment that America's people deserve and America's future demands." Simpson's Commission is charged with undertaking its task in an unbiased manner, then reporting its conclusions to the American people in a way that will instill confidence in their fairness and objectivity. Alan Simpson has proven that he's unable to carry out that task.

<snip>

Simpson's note to Ms. Carson ends with these words: "Call when you get honest work!" Apparently advocating for older women isn't "honest work" -- unlike, for example, serving on the Board of Directors for an insurance and annuity fund or a biotech company. (Simpson's done both.) We can add public interest work to the list of things Simpson reflexively dislikes. As for Ms. Carson's particular area of advocacy, it should be noted that women receive significantly less in Social Security payments after retirement than men do. Given that it provides a marginal income at best, Mr. Simpson should be more interested in her work than he appears to be.

The only fair conclusions that can be be drawn from Simpson's latest outburst are these:

* He has a strong dislike for retired Social Security recipients.
* He is temperamentally incapable of coping with disagreement or criticism.
* He lacks both the judgment and the emotional stability to make unbiased decisions, or to communicate those decisions effectively on behalf of his Commission and the President who appointed him.

Simpson must resign immediately. If he does not, the President must fire him.

(Sign the petition to remove Alan Simpson)
http://www.petitionspot.com/petitions/removealansimpson/

[alstephenson]

1. K & R

Let's make it happen.

[Name removed]

36. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[FSogol]

2. K & R. Simpson, "Are there no prisons?"

"And the Union workhouses?" demanded Simpson. "Are they still in operation?"
"The Treadmill and the Poor Law are in full vigour, then?"

[Major Hogwash]

3. Simpson is a freak from the 19th century. He's so old he was here walking around with dinosaurs.

Seriously, why is this fucktard even connected with anything official anymore?
Retire the mofo already.

[bobbolink]

38. There are plenty of really good old people. Age isn't the problem.

His heartlessness is.

[totodeinhere]

51. Thank you. Progressives of all people should not resort to ageism. n/t

[earth mom]

68. Fuck Simpson and the dinosaur he rode in on!

:grr:

[Vincardog]

4. Signed K & R Lets kick the bastid out, Make Obama fight FOR US not the Corporations.

[Poboy]

5. You mean he hasn't been asked to pull over on the side of the road yet?

Oh, that's right, Simpson is a member of the Professional Right.
By all means then, we must listen to him!

[gratuitous]

6. I submit that the president would fire Simpson under only one condition

And that condition is that Simpson wasn't doing his job on the commission to President Obama's satisfaction. If Simpson doesn't resign and it is then up to President Obama to relieve him of his position, you can draw your own conclusion should that not happen.

[xchrom]

7. indeed. nt

[Poboy]

8. Yes sir.

Obama appointed this fucker for a reason.

[Faryn Balyncd]

19. & if Obama won't fire him, Congress should DE-AUTHORIZE the Deficit Commission immediately!

The Deficit Commission was assigned the job of addressing deficits created by cutting taxes to the rich in the face of unfunded wars.

Instead they are talking about LEGITIMIZING the theft of your retirement funds for the purpose financing the unfunded deficits of corporate welfare and war.

And the leader of this band of pirates so disrespects those whose payroll taxes have provided the milk which Simpson's corporate welfare cronies have suckled for decades, that he accuses those who have funded these surpluses of being the "titty babies".

The entire band of pirates who comprise the "Deficit Commission" have dishonored their job by considering legitimizing the theft of your retirement to finance the deficits of corrupt corporatism.

Congress should immediately REPEAL the act authorizing this band of pirates to submit recommendations that cannot be amended by Congress.

And Congress must act now, BEFORE the November election, and the lame duck session.






:kick:

[scarletwoman]

20. Can Congress de-authorize the Commission when they didn't authorize it in the first place?

The Senate voted against it, so Obama created it by Executive Order.

Can Congress overturn an Executive Order?

[Faryn Balyncd]

26. The House can repeal the rule passed into law that requires a vote on the un-amended commission rec-

.....recommendations.

This rule was embedded in the war funding bill, and can be repealed by specific legislation.



http://firedoglake.com/2010/07/01/breaking-pelosi-sneaks-approval-of-vote-on-debt-commission-recommendations-into-rule-regarding-war-funding/

[scarletwoman]

28. Thank you. Of course, that would take some guts, so we're really going to have to apply

a lot of pressure.

[Radical Activist]

9. I won't talk to anyone who disagrees with me!

[scarletwoman]

10. So you'd defend Simpson's remarks?

I suppose we "little people" should just suck it up when one of our betters insults us and calls us names. In the name of being "agreeable", of course. The Elites just hate it when we get uppity.

[Ignis]

49. Apparently so.

I wish I could feign surprise.

[Hannah Bell]

13. no, you won't.

and much like simpson in your way of dealing with those who disagree with you.

[Poboy]

14. Is 'Radical Activist" posting in defense and support of Simpson?

Wow.

[Radical Activist]

16. Am I?

Please link if I am.

My comment in this thread obviously has nothing to do with my feelings about Simpson.

[scarletwoman]

18. Then perhaps you'd be so kind as to explain your comment, since there's nothing "obviously" about it

[Poboy]

29. Looks like you are defending and supporting Simpson to me,

So I am going to answer your 'Am I?" with a 'yes'.

And again, wow.

[Radical Activist]

40. I double checked and I wrote nothing about agreeing with Simpson

or approving of anything he stands for. You must be seeing other words that the rest of us don't. Are you taking hallucinogenic drugs?

Israel is negotiating with Palestinians. Does that mean they agree with each other? You're taking the same stand Bush did when he refused to talk to other nations he didn't like, such as Venezuela.

[JoeyT]

42. And you take the same stance Bush fans did when people criticized Bush.

There can be no legitimate criticism of an authority figure you like, after all.

Since there's no way to logically defend a lot of stuff, you resort to posting silly images and snark.

[Radical Activist]

74. I'm all for legitimate criticism.

I wish there were more of it at DU.

[Poboy]

71. More pics?

Your very first post on this thread was a pic of a screaming brat, presumably because you are defending Simpson.
One can draw no other conclusion. In your mind, Simpson is vital to the commission.
Now this pic. Who's 'trying too hard'?

Don't get all nervous for defending Simpson as you see him a legitimate voice of opposition to be worked with and respected. Its who you are, and why you're here.

[Radical Activist]

73. "presumably"

Your presumption was false.

You're awfully cryptic. Why not tell me more about who I am and why I'm here? Anything honest and truthful can be brought out into the open.

[daleanime]

76. "Anything honest and truthful can be brought out into the open"?

What about you? :shrug:

[Forkboy]

62. So just being as asshole then?

[TheKentuckian]

25. For what? It is past time to steamroll these enemies of the people.

They have enough seats at the table for far too many years and their failed ideology has lead us to this moment.

Stop looking for excuses to negotiate and concede to economic royalists, there is no advantage in whatsoever.

[Radical Activist]

27. When we have 60 Senators who are progressive

or at least center-left, then I'll agree with you.

[scarletwoman]

30. So we should just shut up and take it in the meantime?

Yeah, some "radical activist" you are.

[bobbolink]

33. !

My definition of "radical" differs substantially, too.

[Name removed]

31. Deleted message

Sub-thread removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Mimosa]

43. Obama chose the worst of the worst

This issue has nothing to do with '60 senators who are progressive.'

[laughingliberal]

60. It's like he said, "Find me the most obnoxious, vile hater of the American people ever."

Back in the 80's there were some reasonable, moderate Republicans. Are they all dead now? Alan Simpson is the number 1 worst choice he could have made (I mean, after creating this commission to begin with).

[DeSwiss]

55. You keep right on moving those goalposts. I'm sure the DLC is proud of ya!!!

It ain't robbery, it's a business cycle

Capitalism is about one thing: aggregating the surplus productive value of the public for private interests. As we have said, it is about creating state sanctioned "investments" for the workers who produce the real wealth. Things like home "ownership" and mortgages, or stock investments and funds to absorb their retirement savings. That crushing 30-year mortgage with two refis is an investment. So is that 401K melting like a snow cone at the beach.

As the people's wealth accumulates, it is steadily siphoned off by government and elite private forces. From time to time, it is openly plundered for their benefit by way of various bubbles, depressions or recessions and other forms of theft passed off as unavoidable acts of nature/god. These periodic raids and draw downs of the people's wealth are attributed to "business cycles." Past periodic raids and thefts are heralded as being proof of the rationale. "See folks, it comes and goes, so it's a cycle!" Economic raids and busts become "market adjustments."

Public blackmail and plundering through bailouts become "necessary rescue packages." Giveaways to corporations under the guise of public works and creating employment become "stimulus." The chief responsibility of economists is to name things in accordance with government and corporate interests. The function of the public is to acquire debt and maintain "consumer confidence." When the public staggers to its feet again and manages to carry more debt, buy more poker chips on credit to play again, it's called a recovery. They are back in the game.

~ http://www.joebageant.com/joe/2010/07/waltzing.html">Joe Bageant, "Waltzing at the Doomsday Ball"

[Radical Activist]

65. So you DON'T want 60 progressive Senators?

Would you mind explaining why the DLC would be proud that I frequently argue for moving the Senate left, including the defeat of conservative Democrats like Licnoln?
It seems like you're having an argument with someone else who argued something I did not.

[DeSwiss]

69. As I recall....

...the discussion went this way:

========================================================================================================

Radical Activist
Wed Aug-25-10 02:28 PM
Response to Original message

9. I won't talk to anyone who disagrees with me!
========================================================================================================

TheKentuckian
Wed Aug-25-10 04:35 PM
Response to Reply #9

25. For what? It is past time to steamroll these enemies of the people.

They have enough seats at the table for far too many years and their failed ideology has lead us to this moment.

Stop looking for excuses to negotiate and concede to economic royalists, there is no advantage in whatsoever.
========================================================================================================

Radical Activist
Wed Aug-25-10 04:41 PM
Response to Reply #25

27. When we have 60 Senators who are progressive

or at least center-left, then I'll agree with you.
========================================================================================================

DeSwiss
Thu Aug-26-10 12:46 PM
Response to Reply #27

62. You keep right on moving those goalposts. I'm sure the DLC is proud of ya!!!
========================================================================================================
========================================================================================================

So sure I'd love 60 liberal Senators. Hell I'd prefer 100 liberal Senators!!! But the fact that we've got 60 that we can't depend upon voting "Democratically" means that they aren't worth shit! They're fucking DINO's and I can think of few things that are worse than a fucking traitor living amongst us a selling us out at the first opportunity.

- In fact, I'm not even sure that there is a Democratic party anymore. At least not like the one which stands for individual rights and social justice. Like the one I joined back in 1972......

[Radical Activist]

70. So you're arguing that you agree with me.

I wrote that we can steamroll over the other side when we have 60 Democratic Senators who are progressive or at least center-left, as you just copied.

The obvious implication is that I believe we DON'T have that now. We have too many conservative Senate DINOs and that needs to change. So we agree. Cool.

[DeSwiss]

75. Don't you just love it when DUers agree???

[G_j]

59. well that pretty much locks it in

because that ain't happenin' any time soon..

[Radical Activist]

66. It locks in that we need 60 votes to pass something in the Senate.

That's nothing new. "Steamroll and ignore the enemies of the people" sounds fun but how do you suggest we do that in the Senate? Would you prefer nothing pass at all? Personally, I'm working to increase the Democratic majority in the Senate after the 2010 election. If you have better ideas that are more than the empty platitudes about Obama just pushing something through then I'd be glad to hear it.

[Poboy]

35. NOW to President Obama: Alan Simpson Must Go

NOW to President Obama: Alan Simpson Must Go

Statement of National Organization for Women President Terry O'Neill

August 25, 2010

Alan Simpson is not fit to lead the National Commission on Fiscal Responsibility and Reform. The ugliness of his disrespect for women is matched only by his dogged determination to dismantle Social Security by cutting benefits or increasing the retirement age. The National Organization for Women urges President Obama to take a stand on this issue and replace Simpson immediately.

Alan Simpson, the current co-chair of the president's Commission on Fiscal Responsibility and Reform, wrote an embarrassing and inappropriate e-mail Tuesday to Ashley Carson, executive director of the Older Women's League (OWL), berating her and the organization's work to stop the Fiscal Commission's assault on Social Security.


http://now.org/press/08-10/08-25b.html

[dgibby]

11. He should have never been "hired" in the first place.

In light of recent events, he should have already been "fired".

[Hannah Bell]

12. KR

obama wants to send a message, that would be a good one.

[pa28]

15. This should really be called the "Simpson Commission".

Simpson is the de facto leader at this point with Erskine Bowles failing to correct the distortions and even outright lies being sold to the public as fact.

A bipartisan commission is supposed to be providing a clear-headed unbiased analysis. Since the loose cannon on deck that is Alan Simpson has already destroyed all shreds of credibility the recommendations they produce should be disregarded.

Unfortunately the rules won't allow for him to be fired but if Congress acts on the conclusions and the President signs off we'll essentially be letting this nut write the law.

[TheKentuckian]

24. Bowles isn't far off from Simpson. He just has a softer touch and is more professional

[laughingliberal]

61. True dat. nt

[Faryn Balyncd]

17. When the chairman of the "Deficit Comm" advocates theft from SS accounts for war deficits, FIRE HIM!

Simpson was hired to address deficits created by endless wars/occupation combined with tax cuts for the wealthy.

Now Simpson says the Social Security fund, consisting of decades of payroll & self-employment payments invested in US Treasury bonds, should not be honored because he & his dissipated cronies have already spent the funds they borrowed from our SS.

Now he has the gall to call the 310 million Americans who have financed his profligate activities with loans from our retirement "titty babies"..... He conveniently ignores the reality that it has been our payroll taxes which have created the milk from which the corporate welfare recipients have suckled for decades.

Alan Simpson and his entire band of thieves should be immediately relieved of their duties.




:kick:

[G_j]

21. +1000

[bluethruandthru]

34. +1000

[Caretha]

37. You Said It!

Perfect, and you didn't miss a beat.:applause:

[Radical Activist]

41. Actually, he has spoken about the need to cut defense spending too.

I know that doesn't fit in with the narrative but it's true.

[Carolina]

22. Yeah, like he fired GIbbs

It ain't gonna happen.

[Luciferous]

23. Signed

[Poboy]

32. ttt

[democracy1st]

39. K & R this is a test for progressives in this country,the game is over for these corp clowns

[upi402]

44. With more Thurgoods on the SCOTUS

it may not be game over. But it likely is too late. Even folks on DU just can't bring themselves to acknowledge the true situation in both parties. And I know many chickens still lovin' their Colonel Sanders who would never come to DU.

[placton]

45. nooooo - 'Bama only gets rid of liberals! n/t

[Bluenorthwest]

46. Simpson has a Senate Pension which I am sure he takes

as well as the rest of it. Hypocrisy, of course, always, a basic liar about himself and others.

[theaocp]

47. Judging by the "hiring" of Elizabeth Warren

I'd say Obama is well on his way to "firing" Simpson. Petition signed.

[davidwparker]

48. K&R

Agreed. I looked at the TV to see who this was. I had heard of Alan Simpson, but he was some idiot (R) and this couldn't be the same one.

Turns out I was wrong. It was the same idiot.

Why does Obama have this jerk doing ANYTHING? I was so mad last night after confirming who this was. Obama's need to "get his bi-partisan on" will cost him a second term.

Watch!

[Ignis]

50. Here's hoping Mr. Simpson finds "honest work."

But of course, nothing will be done. Daddy knows what's best for us peons.

[totodeinhere]

52. I doubt if he will be fired. Obama knew exactly what he was getting when he appointed him to the

commission. Simpson has been around for a long time and everyone knows what he stands for. Look for some kind of clarification or apology for those remarks, but I'll bet you that it will end with that.

[jtown1123]

53. If anything, Simpson's disgusting blather is good for us

it only further brings attention to the deficit commission, which very few people know about, and undermines the whole process. Here here, Simpson, keep your rants coming.

[DeSwiss]

54. And what do we do if the President doesn't fire him?

- K&R

[Faryn Balyncd]

56. If the WH won't fire him, it's time for House to REPEAL RULE requiring a NO-AMENDMENT VOTE by :

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=389x9020882

[laughingliberal]

63. Big K&R for that! nt

[daleanime]

57. Failure to do so...

can be taken as a confirmation of our worst fears.:banghead:

[G_j]

64. very sadly

yes

[laughingliberal]

58. K & R nt

[Jax]

67. Fire the entire right wing "Commission" Simpson, Reed assholes

need to BOTH go.

[BrklynLiberal]

72. K&R!!