Looking for a QUOTE from President Obama where HE said that he is NOT CUTTING SS BENEFITS?

[Dawgs]

Does one exist?

Because if he's not, and he really is a Democrat, we should see many quotes stating that he will only strengthen it and never cut it - for any reason.

And don't give me any shit that he doesn't need to do it. He knows that many Democrats are aware of a reported deal. He knows that many seniors and democrats are furious with the reports. If he's really not considering a deal, then he would be stupid not to let us know.

I can think of no other reason not to tell us. Not showing his hand on Social Secuirty shows weakness, not strength, if that's why he's not saying anything.

[MannyGoldstein]

1. He won't cut it for current retirees, won't "slash" it for others

He ALWAYS makes that distinction, e.g. from the State of the Union address:

"To put us on solid ground, we should also find a bipartisan solution to strengthen Social Security for future generations. We must do it without putting at risk current retirees, the most vulnerable, or people with disabilities; without slashing benefits for future generations; and without subjecting Americans' guaranteed retirement income to the whims of the stock market."

Or see here:

http://www.csmonitor.com/USA/Politics/The-Vote/2011/0707/Briefing-room-word-games-What-s-a-slash-versus-a-cut-in-Social-Security

[vaberella]

4. WTF are you even talking about?! I forget you read his "code" speak.

I don't know what you're channeling from his statement, but it makes no sense.

[MannyGoldstein]

5. Do you have a specific issue that you can point out

about what I (and the Christian Science Monitor) have to say?

[emulatorloo]

10. Your bizarre word parsing. You seem to have assigned "Great Significance"

To the word slashing, as if it has a " secret meaning" that is the opposite of what it says.

[ProSense]

2. Do you have one

where he said he is?

"Because if he's not, and he really is a Democrat, we should see many quotes stating that he will only strengthen it and never cut it - for any reason."

Obviously, stating repeatedly that he has no plans to slash benefits means to some people that he plans to cut benefits.

Do you have a direct quote from the President saying he plans to cut benefits? Is this an attempt to have people prove something that's false?

[Dawgs]

3. Where has HE (not Carney) REPEATEDLY stated the he has no plans to slash benefits?

And not 6 months ago, but since the debt ceiling talks started.

And, I'm not making the claim that he said he would cut them. I'm saying that, if he really would not 'CUT' them, he would say it. Do you disagree that it would be easy for him to say that if he really had no plans to cut them?

[MannyGoldstein]

6. Even the Christian Science Monitor is on to Obama's cute word games

http://www.csmonitor.com/USA/Politics/The-Vote/2011/0707/Briefing-room-word-games-What-s-a-slash-versus-a-cut-in-Social-Security">Briefing room word games: What's a 'slash' versus a 'cut' in Social Security?

The denials continued on Thursday. And that’s where the verbal dancing got particularly entertaining. Back in January, in his State of the Union address, the president “talked about his openness to doing things to strengthen Social Security, things that would not slash benefits,” Carney said.

Carney’s statement appeared, however, to leave open the possibility that the White House could accept some kind of benefit cut.

So, a reporter asked, what does “slash” mean?

“Haven’t you got, like, a dictionary app on your iPhone?” Carney replied.

Q: Well, it’s a word that you use instead of “cut.”

Carney: “Slash” is, I think, quite clear. It’s slash. It’s like that. (Carney makes a slashing motion with his hand.) It’s a significant whack.

Q: So it means a significant …

Carney: I’m not going to put a numerical figure on it.

Q: So it means a significant cut.

Carney: I think slashing is a pretty sharp, direct …

Q: It’s not the same thing as cutting – the point is, it’s not the same thing as “cut.”

Carney: It’s slash. (Laughter.) And I don’t mean the guitarist. (Laughter.)

Q: A pledge to not slash benefits is not the same thing as a pledge to not cut benefits.

Carney: I’m not – again, we’re talking about a policy enunciated by the president back in January, and that is …

Q: This is a diction you guys have chosen.

Carney: No, no, I get that, and we did choose it, and the president used it. But I’m not here to negotiate the semantics …

Q: Just so everybody understands – just so everybody understands, when you say “slash,” you don’t mean “cut.”

Carney: We have said that to address the long-term solvency of the problem – of the program, because this is not an issue that drives short- or medium-term deficits, that we would look – the president is interested in looking at ways to strengthen the program and enhance its long-term solvency that protects the integrity of the program and doesn’t slash benefits.

Q: Which is not the same thing as not cutting benefits.

[ProSense]

8. Hmmm?

"Even the Christian Science Monitor is on to Obama's cute word games"

The Q&A is with Carney. Still, go ahead and hype the CSM as if that means anything.

Here's an actual interview with the President.

[tekisui]

9. It is a cute game. He danced all around refusing to define slash.

It is clear they are very willing to cut, and then will be willing to define whatever they do as cut to distinguish it from slash.

[emulatorloo]

11. Sorry, your " reasoning" sounds insane. Bizarre and twisted word Parsing.

[tekisui]

12. You have to be kidding!

He refused to say there would be no cuts. They are leaving everything between cut and slash open and on the table. Yet, they leave slash undefined.

[chill_wind]

13. Thank you Manny. That is very revealing and not unlike the strawman

the admin initially tried to build up more than a year ago that they weren't going allow SS to be "privatized". I remember Dean Baker did a piece about their tactic with that at the time. They dropped that one pretty quick.

[TacticalPeek]

7. Telling.

Fuck these bastards.

[chill_wind]

14. Digby- Classic Shock Doctrine Tactic

"Strengthening" is in the eye of the beholder, of course. If it's the "chained-CPI" change we've been hearing about for a while now, it certainly will result in a benefit cut. The oldest people will bear the brunt of it --- mostly older women, and who cares about them? However, by injecting Social Security into the phony debt ceiling "crisis" despite the fact that it has no bearing on the deficit, they are ensuring that there will be no time for deliberation or discussion of what these "strengthening" policies really are. It's a classic Shock Doctrine tactic.

http://digbysblog.blogspot.com/

(bold edit mine)