"President Obama is suggesting benefit cuts, exactly the opposite of what the American people want"

[Better Believe It]

Mr. President; You Are Out Of Touch on Debt
By: Jon Walker
July 7, 2011

President Obama is now suggesting that Medicare and Social Security benefit cuts be a part of a deal to address the federal deficit. This is exactly the opposite of what the American people what. From Pew:

"On the broad question of whether it is more important to reduce the budget deficit or to maintain current Medicare and Social Security benefits, the public decisively supports maintaining the status quo. Six-in-ten (60%) say it is more important to keep Social Security and Medicare benefits as they are; only about half as many (32%) say it is more important to take steps to reduce the budget deficit.

Half (50%) of Republicans say that maintaining benefits is more important than deficit reduction; about as many (42%) say it is more important to reduce the budget deficit."

It is no wonder that the American people are so unhappy with the current job performance our “elected representatives.” They are simply not representing us.

http://fdlaction.firedoglake.com/2011/07/07/mr-president-you-are-out-of-touch-on-debt/

[Renew Deal]

1. Is there a quote from Obama saying "Medicare and Social Security benefit cuts be a part of a deal?"

"to address the federal deficit."

Thanks

[Better Believe It]

3. Would a notarized letter from President Obama to you stating that meet your requirements?

[emulatorloo]

9. There is no such quote, stop being so patently dishonest.

There has been talk of reducing payments to the healthcare corporations. Healthcare conglomerates are not the same thing as individuals.

[Better Believe It]

20. Right. Obama actually advocates increases in Social Security benefits.

Thanks for the info!

[Renew Deal]

Yes

[Renew Deal]

14. .

[MineralMan]

4. No, there's no such quote, because the President has said

no such thing. Lots of pundits have claimed it is so, but the President's own words make liars of those pundits. We do not know what President Obama's plans are with regard to SS and Medicare. He has not laid them out. He's keeping it close to his vest. I do not know. The pundits do not know. The Republicans do not know. One thing's certain, though: We will find out. Until then, it's foolish to make claims about his intentions.

[ChairmanAgnostic]

6. yeah, let's all keep quiet until its fait accompli

and then, we will just be angry Professional Leftists who don't understand reality or done deals.

[emulatorloo]

10. 1. Paid bloggers and pundits are Professional Leftists, you and I are not.

2. don't believe Fabricated Quotes.

3. Call your congresspeople like I am.

Best regards.

[frylock]

16. paid bloggers and pundits are professional leftists that espouse the same views..

that many here do. they have a venue to express those views. an attack on those views are an attack on ours. this has been explained over and over and over and.....

[emulatorloo]

19. Paid bloggers/pundits are paid to Bloviate and Sensationalize. That does not lead to

rational discussion. They feed on creating "controversy" - that is how they earn a living. While some may offer rational fact-based commentary, there are quite a few who push half-truths in order to promote their website so they can get more ad dollars.

IMHO firedoglake has become about the worst in presenting half-truths and outright speculation as "fact". It is too bad, it used to be one of my favorite sites, it had the most serious commentary. Now it seems like their "business plan" is more important to them that fact based analysis.

Hyperbole, disinformation, and out right lying are not a good foundation for rational discussion.

[loyalsister]

26. During the health care debate RWers manufactured similar controversy

The claimed that Medicare "cuts" were part of the deal. Turned out cutting COSTS was what they were referring to and it had absolutely nothing to do with cutting benefits.
Assumptions do not make a positive contribution to most discussions.
I wonder if anyone is yet collecting donations to fight this not yet known threat?

[Renew Deal]

15. So you're angry in advance.

:rofl:

[JTFrog]

24. LOL!

:rofl:

[MineralMan]

31. Don't Wait, Folks! Be Angry Today! If You're Wrong, No Matter!

You can just pretend you never said it.

[EFerrari]

23. That's not true. They are discussing means testing

and chained CPI. And as usual, we get that information from the very few Democrats who still own their own souls. Oh, wait, Bernie isn't a Democrat.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=439x1443097

[Fuddnik]

8. Politicians are masters of using deceptive weasel words.

They will never come out and say "Medicare and Social Security benefit cuts be a part of a deal". They use weasel words to disguise their real intentions. Saying what they're really up to would be political suicide.

Instead, they use words like "strengthen" in place of cut. Then they convince the sheep that they actually saved the program.

War is Peace.
Slavery is Freedom.
Mission Accomplished.
I support a public option.

Everything is on the table, means you're for dinner.

[woo me with science]

25. +1

I have no doubt that they would brazenly deny that adopting a chained CPI would equal "cuts" to Social Security.

[gratuitous]

2. No, no, it's a brilliant 12th level Vulcan chess game maneuver

First, we hand over what's left in our pockets after 30 years of steady plunder by the overclass. Then, there's a secret next step. Then, it's unicorns farting rainbows for everybody! Yay! To recap:

Step 1: Divest yourself of all that filthy money you've kept from our wise and benevolent overlords.
Step 2:
Step 3: Prosperity!

[Fuddnik]

13. I think #2 is.....

Then a miracle happens!

[zbdent]

5. "exactly the opposite of what the American people want"

so where is the "liberally-biased" mainstream media's hammering of the fact that THIS IS EXACTLY WHAT THE REPUBLICANS ARE PUSHING FOR????

[Faryn Balyncd]

7. K and R

[SidDithers]

11. ...

Sid

[dionysus]

18. !!!!!

:rofl:

[emulatorloo]

12. Obama is not "suggesting benefit cuts". Unrec for disinformation.

No "suggestion" of benefit cuts.

[Bluerthanblue]

17. this is disinformation- Pres. Obama has not suggested cutting benefits-

but that doesn't seem to stop people from using this meme.

sorry- :thumbsdown:

[EFerrari]

22. So, are Sheldon Whitehouse and Bernie Sanders lying?

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=439x1443097

The "meme" is that the White House only wants to "cut costs" when that's clearly not what they're discussing. They wouldn't go through all of this to snip a few dollars out of SS costs.

[Bluerthanblue]

33. you link to NOTHING by

Sanders, Whitehouse, or the President himself stating that he intends to cut benefits.

I would hardly call either senator a liar, because you are making a claim that they said something which they haven't.

They stated their stand on the prospect of any cuts to the programs- which is fine. You link to them to back up a statement that has NOT been made-

and ask me to call the Senators liars ?

we need to dial it back, don't you think?
:shrug:

[EFerrari]

34. Both Bernie and Sheldon have petittions on their sites

that people can sign to object to NOTHING and they gave a press conference today. Bernie talked aobut this NOTHING on Thom's show as well.

There are multiple threads around hear discussing this NOTHING, too. Here's one with an OP by Dean Baker:

On Using the Chained CPI for Social Security Cost of Living Adjustments
by Dean Baker - MonthlyReview
7/8/11

<snip>

There has been considerable discussion of basing the Social Security cost of living adjustment (COLA) on the Chained Consumer Price Index for All Urban Consumers (C-CPI-U) as a "painless" way of generating large budget savings. This view reflects serious confusion about what the switch to the C-CPI-U involves. (The switch would also lead to higher tax revenue by slowing the rise in the bracket cutoffs.)

While it is often claimed that this switch will make the COLA more accurate, this is not clear. What is certain is that the switch would lower benefits. The research on the C-CPI-U shows that the switch would reduce benefits by roughly 0.3 percentage points a year compared with the baseline. This means that after someone has been retired for 10 years, their benefits would be 3 percent lower. After 20 years of retirement, their benefits would be 6 percent lower and people living into their 90s and collecting benefits for more than 30 years would see a drop in benefits of more than 9 percent. This might be especially difficult since the oldest of the elderly also tend to be the poorest.

This is a benefit cut that would hit current retirees, most of whom are not especially affluent. More than 90 percent of beneficiaries have non-Social Security incomes of less than $40,000. In addition, the Joint Committee on Taxation recently estimated that by 2021, 69 percent of the higher tax revenue gained from switching to the C-CPI-U would come from taxpayers making less than $100,000. By contrast, President Obama has set a $250,000 floor on the households whom he would subject to tax increases.


http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=439x1441934

[WillyT]

21. K & R !!!

:kick:

[woo me with science]

27. K&R Contact your "representatives" now.

Tell them to represent you.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=439x1441744

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

28. After the compromise, Obama will say the cuts aren't as bad as the Repugs wanted and claim victory.

And, the woodchucks will say it was the best deal we could get.

[Ignis]

30. You're anticipating the "We didn't have 60 votes!" too, eh?

Seems like the only shows on these days are reruns.

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

32. Obama needs new script writers. The story is getting stale and everybody knows how it ends.

[muffin1]

29. K&R

Funny...the same people who are telling us he won't make cuts are the very same ones who insisted we would get the public option (but defended Obama when we didn't), and said he wouldn't extend the Bush tax-cuts (but defended him when he did).