From doublespeak dept White House spokesman Jay Carney says Social Security ALWAYS was on the table!

[Poll_Blind]

Here is the high water mark for bullshit by the Obama administration thus far on this issue. Nancy Pelosi, herself, says she had no idea that Social Security cuts would be "on the table". White House response: "Oh, they've ALWAYS been on the table." Taxonomically, this is species of bullshit is most closely related to maket-uppus as-you-go-alongus.

From The Hill:

House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) was not informed in advance of President Obama’s plans to include Social Security reform in the scope of the debt-ceiling talks, a House Democratic aide said Thursday.

Reports that Obama is looking for a big debt deal that would include Social Security reforms provoked anger among liberals in the House and Senate, who said they were irritated to learn of the news from the press.

It also prompted the White House to push back at reports. White House spokesman Jay Carney argued nothing has changed in the president's approach to the debt talks.

“There is no news here,” Carney said in a statement. “The president has always said that while Social Security is not a major driver of the deficit, we do need to strengthen the program.”

No, you're not misreading. The euphemism that the Administration is using for putting Social Security "on the table" for cuts is "strengthening". More familiar "Ignorance is Strength" doublespeak. That's not something I really associate with the Obama Administration but they sure as hell have been up to a lot of it, today.

Huffington Post also picked up on the word games and vagueness(referencing same e-mail from White House spokesman Jay Carney):

The response, sent via email to The Huffington Post, provides a measure of assurance to Democrats who were taken aback by the abrupt news, broken by the Washington Post, that Social Security reform was now on the debt-ceiling table. Still, the devil is in the details, and the idea of "strengthening" the entitlement program remains the vague standard for reform.

--snip--

Confusing the debate even more are the political implications of putting Social Security or any other entitlement reform at the heart of debt-ceiling negotiations. Democrats believe they can use Republicans' votes for a Medicare voucher program earlier this spring as a potent political weapon. But by signing off on cuts of their own -- the thinking goes -- Democrats would lose any political advantage they've gained by saying they are protecting Medicare while the GOP is trying to fundamentally change or do away with the program.

I'm just waiting to find out what the next thing that always was, is.

PB

[valerief]

1. The only safety nets where you get shelter and food in the US today are prisons. nt

[ClarkUSA]

2. Do you know "The Progressive Caucus DEFENDS President Obama on his Social Security Stance"?

Read all about it: http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=433&topic_id=702936&mesg_id=702936

------------

Did you listen to Pres. Obama SOTU? Nothing has changed since President Obama's SOTU address, wherein he stated his intention to cut costs and fraud but not benefits.

The actual story is that the President will not slash SS benefits. Where are the appropriate headlines to this effect?

"There is no news here," Carney said. "The President has always said that while social security is not a major driver of the deficit, we do need to strengthen the program and the President said in the State of the Union Address that he wanted to work with both parties to do so in a balanced way that preserves the promise of the program and doesn't slash benefits."

Let's not take the bait. Wait for actual information, before assuming the worst, please.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=433&topic_id=702658&mesg_id=702658

FYI: the WH has already pushed back and denied Fred Hyatt's right-wing WaPo Business Section spin.

------------

Do you know "If enacted, the average social security recipient would get 14 cents less of an increase per month, but only in a month in which the social security benefit actually went up by about $34."

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=439x1435830

[fascisthunter]

3. So once again,...

... the Apologists have been wrong. Now I wonder if we should call them liars or complete fools?

[KittyWampus]

4. Any comments on the C.O.L.A. info? You're a busy little bee.

[Poll_Blind]

8. You're avoiding the issue of the OP, which is the White House claims that...

...Social Security has always been on the table.

So, has it or hasn't it?

:shrug:

PB

[ClarkUSA]

5. Pres. Obama in his SOTU said he'd cut costs and fraud but not benefits. Nothing has changed.

Those who are shocked haven't been paying attention.

The actual story is that the President will not slash SS benefits. Where are the appropriate headlines to this effect?

"There is no news here," Carney said. "The President has always said that while social security is not a major driver of the deficit, we do need to strengthen the program and the President said in the State of the Union Address that he wanted to work with both parties to do so in a balanced way that preserves the promise of the program and doesn't slash benefits."

Let's not take the bait. Wait for actual information, before assuming the worst, please.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=433&topic_id=702658&mesg_id=702658

FYI: the WH has already pushed back and denied Fred Hyatt's right-wing WaPo Business Section spin.

[tularetom]

6. I'm not advocating shooting the messenger but

Jay Carney is a particularly shitty White House spokesman.

And granted, he doesn't have an easy time of it working for this administration, but he never sounds convinced of what he is saying and hence, he just isn't very convincing.

[Poll_Blind]

7. Well, I'm not necessarily disagreeing with you, but you'd figure the White House spokesman...

...would be in the loop.

PB

[nashville_brook]

9. holy f'n shit

this is a nightmare

[Poll_Blind]

11. All of this has developed from within this 24 hour news cycle. I'm wondering what...

...the hell is going to have happened by Sunday, when the President says they'll be sitting back down with Republicans.

PB

[FiveGoodMen]

10. Little by little it emerges: Obama has ALWAYS been a neo-con.

[cascadiance]

12. So... Is he then calling Senator Schumer a liar?

Schumer in effect said that they were off the table earlier on Countdown. Or will he fess up that the White House changed the rules/messaging to senators like Schumer who heard otherwise earlier!

[Poll_Blind]

14. From what I gather (and this has been posted in a few OPs today) it looks like....

...the White House is doing exactly what they did last December: Small group deal brokering then whipping the rest into submission. It's an absolutely reprehensible tactic and it's not terribly effective in the long run, either.

Most of the Democratic congresspeople are hearing about these twists and turns in the media, which indicates (to me) how little the administration keeps them in the loop- until they're needed to toe the line.

PB

[LLStarks]

13. Carney is a fidgeting chicken-shit. Worse than Gibbs. nt