PROGRESSIVE caucus defends Obama on Social Security but most DU post bash him?

[uponit7771]

An extreme disconnect is apparent here no?

Your take?

Thx

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/07/07/progressive-dems-social-security-cuts_n_892210.html

But Grijalva and Rep. Sheila Jackson Lee (D-Texas), a vice chair of the caucus, defended the president for signaling he would be willing to take a look at changes to the programs, arguing there are ways to restructure entitlement spending to save money without hurting beneficiaries.

[madfloridian]

1. Yes, there is an extreme disconnect between us and the party leaders.

And it is not our fault.

[ellenfl]

8. u DO know the party leaders aren't the progressive caucus, right? eom

[emulatorloo]

14. As far as I can tell it was a knee jerk response, rather than a thoughtful one.

[madfloridian]

49. Knee jerk? No.

[EffieBlack]

65. LOL

The Progressive Caucus members' response was an unthoughtful, knee-jerk one, far less thoughtful and informed than that of the experts on DU.

Good Lord . . .

[emulatorloo]

The progressive caucus????????

Are you so sure about that?

[emulatorloo]

9. Self-Delete, phantom double post

[elleng]

2. Don't have a 'take,' upon, but

makes for disturbing days, reading DU stuff. I ignore as much as possible.

Surprises me, as I expect DUers to be somewhat sophisticated and knowledgeable about the ways of the political world.

Thanks for asking.

[uponit7771]

5. I'd put some money on it that this board is being worked by FUDrs, Obama has 80-90% approval with

....liberal dems.

The people who usually bash him do it to call for third parties and use conservative misdirection tactics.

[Bobbie Jo]

62. +1 nt

[tekisui]

3. The label is irrelevant. If anyone is supporting cuts to our social

safety nets, they are wrong and in for consequences come election day.

[uponit7771]

6. I'll tell the IRS that their "lable" is irrelevant, the progressive cause has more crediblity than..

...DU bashers

[DevonRex]

4. My take is that DU isn't representative of progressives at all.

My take is a lot more complicated than that, but that's all I can say. Self-

[uponit7771]

7. Yeap, this board is getting worked....."self censored" too

[Name removed]

12. Deleted message

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

[Name removed]

16. Deleted message

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

[RBInMaine]

33. Gee, somewhere along the line I thought it was actually about networking to defeat Republicans. Does

that notion ever actually enter your purist mind? How about networking to support DEMOCRATS on "DEMOCRATIC" Underground, or is it just a bitching chamber for the purist fringe who think Dennis Kucinich "sold us out" because he supported the less than pure healthcare bill, and other such nonsense? This Obama bashing is FRINGE foolishness, plain and simple. Find your local planet.

[cheapdate]

57. What he said! Thank you, RBInMaine.

[Name removed]

44. Deleted message

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

[uponit7771]

51. THANK YOU!!! My Goodness, I was thinking I was among few who noticed this.

[Enrique]

10. maybe DUers are thinking for themselves

they're not waiting for a caucus of politicians to tell them the correct way to think

[emulatorloo]

20. Or maybe they are waiting for Jane Hamsher to tell them the correct way to think?

I see a lot of FDL type "speculation as fact" talking points being pushed by a handful of DU'ers. There are few DU'ers who appear to start a couple of threads every hour.

[DevonRex]

40. Lately this site is just a big advertisement for FDL. Laughable and sad

considering what DU used to be.

[Bobbie Jo]

64. Isn't THAT the truth. nt

[uponit7771]

36. You left out the word "PROGRESSIVE" you know that right? Thx

[Enrique]

43. they don't own the word

they can call themselves anything they want, if they give cover for centrist positions then they're just as full of it as the centrists. I remember Jan Schackowsky going around reassuring everyone that Obama's going to sneak in a public option which was going to lead to single-payer. Total bullshit.

[uponit7771]

48. no one said they did but it's a part of their label

[Palmer Eldritch]

45. Or more likely they're not thinking at all, only reacting.

And reacting to unsubstantiated rumors, at that.

[Vinnie From Indy]

11. Really? Why no linkies?

I am continually amazed and amused by these types of posts. Where are your links to statements by the progressive caucus members?

I hope all DU'ers discount immediately these types of posts that proclaim this or that with ZERO proof that their claim is true. While it may certainly be true that some in the caucus are supportive, who would know without references, links or quotations?

Cheers & unrec.

[uponit7771]

17. Here yah go

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/07/07/progressive-dems-social-security-cuts_n_892210.html

"But Grijalva and Rep. Sheila Jackson Lee (D-Texas), a vice chair of the caucus, defended the president for signaling he would be willing to take a look at changes to the programs, arguing there are ways to restructure entitlement spending to save money without hurting beneficiaries."

[polichick]

13. My take is you're not telling the whole story - caucus members have also been...

...saying on msnbc that they WILL NOT vote for cuts in benefits - no matter what the prez wants.

[uponit7771]

22. Ummm cuts to cost an cuts to benefits are two different things you know that right?

[polichick]

25. "Ummm" - my point is the caucus isn't supporting whatever the prez comes up with.

[uponit7771]

29. Link and quote in OP says you're wrong, I'm going to believe the PC not bashers

[polichick]

31. I'll go by what caucus members have said, live, in their own words.

[uponit7771]

39. Yeap, no link or quote...come on, you guys are getting more and more obvious

[emulatorloo]

34. Good point. Republican are experts at "pretending" that overhead cost cutting is the same as benef

benefit cuts.

It is similar to how they claim "Obama wants to raise your taxes!" Well that is true if you are one of the richest Americans. But they act as if it were true for every American.

It seems odd to me that some DU'ers seem to be falling for/promoting this sort of hazy disinformation tactics.

[johnaries]

61. The President has been saying the same thing. nt.

[ellenfl]

15. i haven't heard the pc backing obama. where do you get

this info? i saw a couple on the tv last night and they were saying they vote against ss and medicare being on the table.

ellen fl

[uponit7771]

19. here you go, I'll update my post

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/07/07/progressive-dems-social-security-cuts_n_892210.html

But Grijalva and Rep. Sheila Jackson Lee (D-Texas), a vice chair of the caucus, defended the president for signaling he would be willing to take a look at changes to the programs, arguing there are ways to restructure entitlement spending to save money without hurting beneficiaries.

[Bluenorthwest]

35. The bit before that...

"We feel the discussions have been skewed up to this point," said Rep. Raul Grijalva (D-Ariz.), co-chair of the caucus, who also said he would not support a final deal if it involves entitlement cuts and does not include revenue-raisers.
"It's incumbent upon the president to put what I believe are the real priorities on the table for deficit reduction."

[uponit7771]

41. Cutting cost and cutting benefits are two different things, bashers and M$M FUDrs are leaving out...

...the cost part and replacing it with benefits.

But Grijalva and Rep. Sheila Jackson Lee (D-Texas), a vice chair of the caucus, defended the president for signaling he would be willing to take a look at changes to the programs, arguing there are ways to restructure entitlement spending to save money without hurting beneficiaries..."

[Bluenorthwest]

52. I'm quoting them, from their own website.

The entire context of what they said, and all of their press material, is available to anyone at their own website. The way you are editing them is as bad as anyone else who is editing them. I am personally posting great chucks of their actual words, and suggesting that reading their full statements and discussing those statements is a great idea for all to do. They are clear and specific. Easy to understand.

[uponit7771]

54. What you quoted doesn't change the FACT that their defending his approach

[Bluenorthwest]

18. Some quotes from their letter, and a link to it for the record.

"First, any cuts to Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid should be taken off the table. The individuals depending on these three programs deserve well-conceived improvements, not deep, ideologically driven cuts with harmful consequences. These cuts would hurt households and damage the country’s economic recovery as well.

Second, revenue increases must be a meaningful part of any agreement. Tax breaks benefiting the very richest Americans should be eliminated as part of this deal. Republican insistence on protecting these tax breaks will force middle-class families to shoulder the burden of even deeper budget cuts, and this is unacceptable.

These points are essential for any deal on the debt ceiling, but more work to rebuild the economy will remain after these negotiations have concluded. We support The People’s Budget introduced by the Congressional Progressive Caucus in April, which would bring the country into surplus by 2021 and invest more than $1 trillion in job creation through public works, infrastructure upgrades and other popular measures."

"We stand ready to work with the Administration responsibly to increase the debt ceiling. The middle class has experienced enough pain during the last three years. Republicans are willing to inflict even more. We will not join them."
http://cpc.grijalva.house.gov/index.cfm?sectionid=64&parentid=6§iontree=6,64&itemid=353

[emulatorloo]

21. Good letter n/t

[Bluenorthwest]

From the Progressive Caucus website, not from the Huffington

Post. The horse's mouth, not the...oh, never mind, that was going to be a rude joke.

[tekisui]

23. "First, any cuts to Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid should be taken off the table."

Their position is clear. The are, in no uncertain terms, against ANY cuts to SS, Medicare and Medicaid.

That is not in support of the WH position, which put them on the table.

[uponit7771]

26. The context was BENFITS not cost, PC quote of DEFENDING Obama in my OP

[uponit7771]

24. Some more quotes from the people in the link, its always best to let people know everything

But Grijalva and Rep. Sheila Jackson Lee (D-Texas), a vice chair of the caucus, defended the president for signaling he would be willing to take a look at changes to the programs, arguing there are ways to restructure entitlement spending to save money without hurting beneficiaries.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/07/07/progressive-dems-social-security-cuts_n_892210.html

[tekisui]

28. LOL! You say after starting an OP with no quotes whatsoever.

[uponit7771]

30. I believed it was a common fact, I was wrong....bashers could care less about the facts

[vaberella]

37. Basically. n/t

[vaberella]

32. S/He's added the quotes now...does it make it his/her post more or less irrelevant? n/t

[tekisui]

55. The PC doesn't want any of the social safety nets on the table.

The OP overstates their support of Obama's position.

[elleng]

38. Thanks so much for your follow-up and explanation on the issue.

[vaberella]

27. This thread has been unrec'd to oblivion. You get my K*R. n/t

[Bluenorthwest]

46. It was disingenous framing of their position

The Progressive Caucus is giving Obama the benefit of presuming he is with them, not with the Republicans, but they are also being extremely clear about their own positions on specific areas of discussion. They are clear that the Bush Tax Cuts for the Ultra Rich must go. They are clear that no benefits should be cut, and no word games played with that. They call upon the President to put the actual issues on the table in this so far rightward skewed debate, they say it is incumbent upon him to do so. To call that a defense of Obama is sort of silly, it is a statement of their own personal positions and intentions in regard to any unacceptable compromises.
DUers can read. The Progressive Caucus can write. It is not even ethical, this characterize instead of quote crap, and it is being done to good Democrats, who are speaking well for themselves and for the American people.

[uponit7771]

47. No, I think thier quoted statement is clear...they DEFEND him cutting COST not benefits and that's

...apparent. What most M$M assholes and bashers have done is juxtapose the words

[Bluenorthwest]

53. Well, again, their entire statement is available for all to see.

No need for Huffington Puffington editorializing, just go to the website of these good Democrats and read what they say, completely. They are very clear, it is there for all to read. They will not support any cuts to benefits, although like any sane people they know there are ways to improve, enhance and update the services. As they say, they need to be improved. ""First, any cuts to Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid should be taken off the table. The individuals depending on these three programs deserve well-conceived improvements, not deep, ideologically driven cuts with harmful consequences."
Their language assumes Obama will stand with them. It also clearly urges him to stand with them. People should all visit their website, linked above, and read up. Send support!

[uponit7771]

56. ...and doesn't change the fact that they're defending his approach

[Bluenorthwest]

58. Reading what they say allows for understanding what they mean

I'm sure you could not take offense at the idea of reading the actual full statements, which I happen to think are very fair to the President while being very clear about their own positions.
It is just a fact that an excerpt is not the whole, and that context is a major part of understanding written language. The need to excerpt and characterize when entire pages of exact quote are there to read is always to be noted. The 'disconnect' you are sure you see is not apparent when you read both what they said and what DUers are saying, as opposed to characterizations and excepts of and from those Democrats and DUers.
I'm sure you agree that the whole story from the actual Democrats is more valid that some piece about them from Huffington or anywhere else. So let the people read the statements. Make up their own minds. The horror! Reading, thinking! Bad, bad stuff!

http://cpc.grijalva.house.gov/

[Big Blue Marble]

42. It is our pension they are coming after.

Is anyone cutting Congressional pensions and medical care? I sure have
not heard that being purposed, have you?

[madfloridian]

50. Exactly. Just our pensions.

[Fire1]

59. Nothing strange about it if you were a member in 2008. Those

bashers are the hiliary, kucinich and dean supporters who never got over it and never will.

[Big Blue Marble]

60. Wrong.

I was a strident Obama supporter in 08. Check out my journal, if you have doubts.
I suspect the angriest among us were at one time the strongest supporters of this man.
I, now, feel guilty that I did so strongly and unknowingly advocate such a betrayer of our deeply held principles
to protect the weakest among us.

[ClarkUSA]

63. BINGO! You got that right.

:thumbsup: