RAW Exclusive - Sen Sanders: Obama May CUT SOCIAL SECURITY

[Segami]

<>

One-year payroll tax holiday key to toppling seniors' safety net, Sanders warns




" Social Security may be on the White House chopping block, a US Senator recently told Raw Story, expressing deep uneasiness about President Barack Obama's noncommittal attitude toward staving off cuts to the cherished program.


"I have to tell you, I have been on the phone to the very, very, very highest levels of the Obama administration, and the responses that I am getting are not assuring," Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-VT) said in an exclusive interview. "What I’m told is that no definitive decisions have been made on the issue of Social Security – I expect that is probably true."


Progressive activists, fearing that the holy grail of American liberalism could fall prey to a bipartisan deal on Capitol Hill, have launched a campaign to pressure the White House and Congress to oppose cuts. And Sanders has stepped up as their champion in the Senate, confirming their concerns based on knowledge drawn from his relative proximity to the president.


"What I’m hearing does not reassure me – that we have a president who is not prepared to defend the heart and soul of what the Democratic Party has been about since Franklin Delano Roosevelt," said Sanders, a self-described democratic socialist.


The independent from Vermont on Friday wrote to President Obama urging him stick by his campaign promise and oppose cuts in Social Security benefits, as Washington debates ways to cut the national debt.


Sanders cited as one cause for concern the president’s decision to appoint two longtime "foes" of Social Security, Alan Simpson and Erskine Bowles, to co-chair his deficit commission, which proposed trimming the program's payouts by increasing the retirement age.


Obama "could have said that’s not on the table," Sanders said. "He didn’t say that."




cont'



<http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2011/01/obama-weak-social-security-bernie-sanders-tells-raw/>

.

[Kalyke]

1. That reminds me... I need to take my 2 percent and put

it in my savings.

I refuse to spend it - I'd rather it go toward my Social Security.

[BigBearJohn]

54. self delete -- inserted at wrong spot

[somone]

2. Hear, hear

[bobbolink]

3. Show of hands..... Anyone actually surprised?

There's nothing to say....just :puke:

[CrispyQ]

23. But, the prez gave such a great speech last week!

:eyes:

[bobbolink]

44. Yes, we keep getting words.

Some of us on the "lunatic fringe" actually want ACTION on ....~~gasp~~Democratic. Values.

[CrispyQ]

104. "lunatic fringe"

Interesting what 30-40 years can do, huh? I've gotten a little more liberal since I was young, but I was always pretty liberal. Forty years ago my ideas were not considered 'lunatic fringe.' One of the things the repubs were wildly successful at, was demonizing the word liberal. So much so, that even liberals avoided the word & started calling themselves progressives. Why didn't we stand up & proudly proclaim, "Yes, we are liberals & this is why!" & then recite the things that we stand for. No, we backed away from the word & now we back away from the values, as well. Today's democratic party is not the party I joined when I was young.

When I say 'we' I mean the democratic party in general.

[bobbolink]

109. Not standing firm on our beliefs is destructive. It is one thing to honestly question,

periodically, whether we still elieve the same things and why, but that bears no relationship to selling out because it is expedient.

I'm not just ashamed of my party for refusing to hold firm, I am terrified, because I am on the bottom rung of the ladder, which will receive the harshest brunt of this sellout. Many of us will die, and it won't matter. That has been VERY difficult for me to come to terms with. Facing a terminal illness is hard enough... but facing demise because people just plain don't give a shit is tortuous.

While I agree with you about the destructiveness of allowing the word "liberal" to be demonized, it never affected me that much personally because since the days of Vietnam, I have considered myself a "RADICAL".

That word comes from "radix", which means "root". I firmly believe, and as the years pass, I see it ever more clearly, that the only way to really deal with issues and problems is to look honestly at the causes... the ROOT, and form the resolutions from that. Misreading the root causes is going down a very misguided road. Sometimes that road leads to suffering and death for others.

The other part of what you are saying is VERY important. Most people in this country, when they examine what they want from the society, are LIBERAL. We have FAILED to communicate what liberalism is.

We fail further by not coming together to really discuss it, and to hash out ways to correct this grievous error.

Thank you for your thoughts...... I wish we could come together with others to really work on this, but I no longer see that as a possibility. What a loss for us and our nation.

[SammyWinstonJack]

48. I am sick of his speeches! Just pure Bullshit!

:puke:

[BrklynLiberal]

90. +1000

[CrispyQ]

106. Have you read posts #13 & 70?

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=439x221273#221339

So true. So tragically true. I'd use the little cry icon, but it doesn't come close to the sadness I feel when I think of this administration & the opportunity that was squandered.

[JDPriestly]

57. Yes, he gave a wonderful speech, and then he went back to the

White House where no one sees what he is doing. Oh, where is Wikileaks when we really need it?

The banks were bailed out. The wealthy were saved.

The poor have to pay for it.

What I do not understand is why these same austerity measures are being adopted in every Western country at the same time. It cannot be the case that every single Western democracy is in severe financial straits.

If so, for the first time in my life, I find myself questioning whether our system is really all that efficient, effective, whether it is really all that superior to other systems, other economic and social systems.

China seems to be doing quite well. And our investment money seems to be flowing in China's direction quite steadily. Yet China is still, in so far as its government is concerned, a Communist system. What is the real story here? I don't understand the conflict between our having to accept severe austerity measures and the propaganda about how superior our economic system is. There is a huge and very irrational leap of faith required to fully swallow that propaganda at this time.

Anyone want to help me on this? If our system is so superior, then why the austerity measures?

[bobbolink]

103. "There is a huge and very irrational leap of faith required to fully swallow that propaganda ..."

Very well put. It is extremely sad.

[Name removed]

94. Deleted message

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

[Enthusiast]

69. He has done the wrong thing

right from the start. This Daily guy was instrumental is promoting NAFTA. That makes him my deadly enemy. Obama never does the correct thing.

[Richard Steele]

80. Not even slightly. nm

[xchrom]

4. there wouldn't have been a catfood commission -- and the people chosen for the commission --

if SS cuts weren't on the table.

[somone]

7. Precisely

[bobbolink]

8. That was kinda obvious, wasn't it? We needed a Dem to do what RW couldn't do.

[Name removed]

10. Deleted message

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

[upi402]

5. Jesus and Sanders - guilty of socialism

Both great souls. Fight the power Bernie, you speak for me.

MLK fought for labor and economic justice.
Obama fights for corporatists against labor, and all Americans -save the richest 2%.

[bullwinkle428]

6. K&R. Thank you, Bernie, for looking out for the American people.

[jtown1123]

39. Bernie is awesome. Check out NCPSSM. They just launched a Million $ Campaign on this issue

http://www.ncpssm.org/entitledtoknow/?p=1518

[snappyturtle]

74. Thank you jtown! I just subscribed to their e-mail notices to help me

stay on top of this issue. K&R

[jtown1123]

102. Great! Here is a letter you can print out and mail to the White House

http://bit.ly/hGGV4V

[Altoid_Cyclist]

79. I second what SNAPPYTURTLE said.

Thank you for the link.

[still_one]

9. If Obama compromises social security, he will lose the progressives completely, and if the Democrats

in Congress do not fight any such compromise, the Democrats are finished

[TheKentuckian]

13. Obama's post-partisanship means we are all Republicans now

and if he can't convince us to be Republicans then he'll just scuttle the Democratic Party as to remove the obstacle to his "one nation" tripe.

[Enthusiast]

70. He will lose everyone.

He will lose votes from across the political spectrum. Seniors will never vote for another Democrat. I now believe this was part of the plan all along. Destroy the Democratic Party brand forever. And one term.

[sendero]

82. Exactly...

...if this happens the DEMOCRATIC PARTY IS DONE! This was the ONE ISSUE that the Reps wouldn't really tackle for fear of the electorate. No problem, our LACKEY ASS "DEMOCRATIC" PRESIDENT will do it for them.

It's unbelievable.

[earth mom]

118. Obama's fake hope & change was pushed on everyone so that he could be THE ONE to do the dirty work

for the DLC, DINOS and Rethugs!

[Hannah Bell]

126. +100. triangulation.

[sarcasmo]

11. I figured they would raise the age you can first collect to 67. How many would die prior to

collecting if they upped the initial age from 62-67?

[Sirveri]

88. The retirement age is already slated to hit 67.

It will get there sometime in the 2030's. I can't remember when that program change happened, I suspect it was during the Reagan era but I might be wrong.

[sarcasmo]

98. Currently you can draw early at a discount starting at age 62. My thinking is that is the age

which will be raised.

[Sirveri]

122. You can withdraw at 62 but with a penalty.

For all the bitching about the fiscal commission that is one thing they actually wanted to fix with the hardship exemption.

[MattBaggins]

12. So when they cut SS how much will they cut the SS tax?

Oh wait they fully intend to keep lying to us about how a separate program that has a specific tax for it; is making us go bankrupt, despite the fact that it pulls in a surplus. They want to offset the future deficit in the program so they can steal more money from it today.

They actually are going to take money from us in the name of a retirement program; then steal that money and give it to the already rich people and gasp in exasperation if we suggest we are being fleeced.

Do they really truly believe we are this stupid? Oh yeah Fox News, my bad.

[yourout]

14. Obama needs to be told.....touch SS and you will be primaried.

[elocs]

15. Touch SS and it will be one term. For many Democrats that is the line in the sand

and any Democrat who willing embraces cuts in Social Security can count on losing Democrat votes. I vote for Democrats to be Democrats and not Republican Lite.

[still_one]

16. and it should be the last straw, as you implied if that happens there is little to differentiate

republicans from Democrats

[elocs]

22. Social Security should be the line in the sand for us, the 3rd rail:

touch it and you politically die.

[glinda]

18. Can we start a petition on this one? I think your words are accurate and all that is needed.

[jtown1123]

101. Send this letter to the White House (A printable PDF)

Cutting Social Security Makes NO Cents! (Pun intended)

http://bit.ly/hGGV4V

[Better Believe It]

20. Do you think Obama really cares or is worried about that?

He's now set for life.

If he decides to not run or losses in 2012 he'll cash in his chips on Wall Street.

[SammyWinstonJack]

49. +1000!

[Enthusiast]

71. I figure he will run

if only to prevent a viable real Democrat from running in his place. The PTB probably have Pawlenty or Gingrich penciled in for POTUS.

[grahamhgreen]

37. +1,000,000,000

[FiveGoodMen]

45. He won't care; he'll have plenty of money already.

And in the America that he's help to create, money is the only thing that matters.

[snappyturtle]

76. +1x1000 nt

[no limit]

17. It's not a matter of may. He will. They will raise the retirement age

but they'll be cute about it, making sure it gets pushed back to something far like 2050.

[QC]

19. It will be presented as a way to "shore up" and "preserve" this glorious program,

the grand legacy of America's greatest president, etc.

The speech will be lovely, as always.

[Segami]

21. Don't forget the offset-single spot light on him for ' angelic ' effect.

[QC]

24. "Make no mistake--we will never "cut" Social Security...." n/t

[MattBaggins]

27. Oh he's got that covered.

political speak

Raising the retirement age isn't cutting it. Just like Raygun "cut taxes" by redefining them as "service fees".

[Segami]

28. Yea right, sounds like a familiar tune

For one thing, under an Obama presidency, Americans will be able to leave behind the era of George W. Bush, Dick Cheney and "wiretaps without warrants,"

[Donnachaidh]

26. don't forget to toss in *historic* in the speechifying

Someone on his team will write an editorial on how Obama *improved an antiquated system*...

:puke:

[somone]

29. History will remember him for pretty speeches

and for being the Democratic president who dismantled the New Deal

[earth mom]

120. Maybe he'll trot out his pretty family & cute dogto show what a "caring & compassionate" person

he THINKS he is. :puke:

[Bluenorthwest]

25. The day Obama proposes his intended attack on the least of us

I will change my party affiliation. And I will never look back.

[pam4water]

63. Hasn't that day come and gone?

[Enthusiast]

72. What party are we going to join?

I'm open to suggestions.

[Buns_of_Fire]

30. The country still has a week to work itself into a frenzy over it.

I'm not too encouraged by what I've been hearing so far, but I'll wait until the SOTU to really work myself into a blind rage. And who knows? Maybe we'll all be pleasantly surprised and/or relieved.

[Enthusiast]

73. You will be relieved. That is their intention.

"No future retiree, those approaching retirement age will not have to worry about their social security."

What they will do is partially privatize it just as the George W Bush PTB wanted all along. I can't say what I think of Obama on the DU.

[Deep13]

31. Corpse of FDR to be exhumed and shot. nt

[avaistheone1]

56. Huh?

That doesn't make sense. And what an awful thought.

[Deep13]

99. RW economic supporters hate FDR and the New Deal.

They have spent the last 70 years trying to dismantle it.

[pam4water]

62. Makes sense to me :P

[DirkGently]

32. Bankers need more bulletproof limos. Teachers and retirees must "tighten their belts."

[Segami]

35. When have you ever read or heard of a Banker tightening up their belts in order to make ends meet

by implementing the ' cat food ' diet for themselves and their family?

[DirkGently]

40. Clearly you don't understand bankers' suffering. They need our money -- all of it -- to save us.

[Enthusiast]

75. No, we must gear up for

the invasion of Iran or North Korea, maybe both.

[FlyByNight]

33. The Bowles/Simpson commission...

...wasn't chosen by accident (BS appropriately enough).

:grr:

[Urban Prairie]

34. Considering the slim pickens that most aging job-seekers in the US already face

being persona-non-grata to many employers, raising the age of qualification for SS benefits ALONE would be enough to send President Obama's approval numbers into the political toilet, IMO, but then, hasn't he cryptically mentioned that he would rather be remembered as a good one-term president? If so, exactly who would THEY be, if he signs off on SS cuts?

It appears that indirectly killing innocent civilians overseas in Iraq and Afghanistan wasn't/isn't enough for many of those bloodthirsty and greedy corporate-puppet politicians in DC, especially most, if not all of the Rethugs, as they apparently also want to indirectly kill off as many unproductive US citizens as quickly as inhumanly possible.

[grahamhgreen]

36. K&R, we need a primary challenger. Why not let us put more into SS, instead of less. Instead of

putting it into 401K's?

[Enthusiast]

77. They want your money.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=acLW1vFO-2Q

[Segami]

38. The ' un-rec ' trolls are still trying for whatever reason.

[jtown1123]

43. I just had some pretty heated arguments with denialists on an Obama SS thread

no evidence is good enough for them. They told me Sanders saying the WH wouldn't rule out SS cuts was shit and not real evidence. Going to nail a spike into my brain now.

[pa28]

46. Well don't worry.

If benefit cuts for SS savers are proposed some people will make the seamless transition from denial to explaining why we need those cuts and how the left must sit down and shut up to avoid President Palin.
:scared:

Now is actually the ideal time to be informed of the possibilities and hit your political contact points. If proposals for cuts are, in fact, introduced by Obama they will be much more difficult to stop at that point.

[PassingFair]

95. I don't, however, notice theusual suspects posting in this thread.

They're afraid of Bernie.

[ProfessionalLeftist]

41. Obama is already on thin ice with me. He TOUCHES SS and he will

lose my vote and the votes of everyone in my family. Guaranteed.

Who will I vote for instead? I will write in the name of Bernie Sanders.

[disillusioned73]

42. Considering Bernies level of frustration..

we may not have to write it in - a primary message may be the only way to get him to listen.

[Raksha]

125. You aren't the only one...I'm strongly tempted to write in Bernie Sanders

on general principles. If Obama touches Social Security it's guaranteed.

[lfairban]

47. Since I don't have a dog in this hunt, let me lay out your options:

Options:

1) Cut benefits.

2) Raise SS taxes, (Payroll taxes)

3) Do some of both.

So what do you favor. From the previous comments, it seems to be option 2. I hope you have your talking points ready to rejoin the Teabaggers.

[Golden Raisin]

59. 4) Stop pissing billions/ trillions

nonstop into the blackholes of Iraq and Afghanistan.

[Enthusiast]

78. That would be reasonable.

We don't do reasonable.

[lfairban]

115. Won't work

Since SS is off budget, there is no relation between saving money by cutting the military and the amount available to SS.

This is not true of Medicare and Medicaid.

[jtuck004]

60. Option 3 - we could start a jobs program, teach people how to live in a

globalized world, and grow ourselves out of the need to address either of the other two options - though raising payroll taxes seems like a fair idea anyway.

[MsPithy]

61. How about PUT OUR FUCKING MONEY BACK!!!

Social Security has a couple trillion dollar surplus. That is our fucking money, taken out of our paychecks. If you are about to say 2 trillion dollars in Treasury Bonds are worthless, tell that to Chinese President Hu. He's having dinner at the White House tomorrow.

[lfairban]

116. Surplus is due to demographic anomalies

If we don't do anything, the reserves will run out in 2037 IIRC. This is mostly due to the baby boomers retiring and the decrease of the birth rates. If that happens, SS will be on a "pay as you go basis". Benefits will be cut by 25% for about 40 years, or until someone revises something.

[truedelphi]

123. First of all, neither you or I or anyone else knows what the world will be

Like in 2037. Maybe there will be gold reserves, oil reserves, titanium reserves, that we are currently sitting on, but have not yet discovered.

Maybe the world as we know it won't be here.

On the one hand we have epidemiologists saying that any year now, the Great Big Pandemic is going to come along and decimate the human population.

Then we have the Global Climate crisis which threatens to destroy huge populations.

Then there is this Super Reality: people in the know, like Warren Porter, PhD, who teaches at Univ of Wisconsin, has been saying for some time now that the human population will be achieving NOT A SOARING POPULATION, but a total implosion of fertility rates. Such that in just another fifteen years, most people will be barren, and pro creation will be something only those who can afford in vitro fertilization (along with some other enhanced techniques.) Porter began looking into this because his brother had been working at a think tank, and the inner cabal there had realized this. (For the most part, people aren't told about this. Usually the folks who hear about it are the anti-pesticide crowd.) This is not science fiction; this is reality.

Read up on Theo Colburn and get back to me. What is happening right now on the planet to the reptilian creatures (i.e. teenie tiny penises, hermaphroditism and increasing inability to reproduce) will be happening to humans very soon. Especially given that the elite could care less about our right to drink clean water, or breath clean air.

[Hannah Bell]

127. bullshit.

[Bluebear]

133. You said it.

[truedelphi]

64. Are you even aware that Social Security has a 2.1 trillion dollar surplus?

And that the "Greatest Generation" might well be the last generation where longevity was on an upswing.

I am pretty certain in another five years it will be revealed by actuarial accountants that so many in the Baby Boomer, and younger generations, are kicking off quite early because of auto-immune diseases like4e MS and also because of cancer's tenacious grip, so there was never any reason to be concerned about it.


I think we will find that there never really was any reason to be concerned about Social Security.

[lfairban]

117. See reply 116

That not what I am hearing.

[truedelphi]

124. Please see reply 123. Thanks. n/t

[diane in sf]

67. best option: take the income cap off ss taxation and further tax the rich

[lfairban]

119. Good recommendation

I don't know if it will work, I haven't seen anybody crunch the numbers.

[Hannah Bell]

128. "the rich" don't make most of their money from wages. Raise income taxes on "the rich",

including cap gains.

neither of the richest men in the country get wages.

fica is irrelevant to them.

[cascadiance]

92. Option 3) REMOVE THE CAP and CUT payroll taxes...

Which stops making this tax regressive so that the wealthy don't pay virtually "nothing" of their income in payroll tax to pay their share of providing the safety net of those that depend on SS for that (not JUST as a retirement investment as they try to claim it to be).

Problem is, corporate elites don't want us to even see this as an option. Also if more money gets in to the system via payroll tax this way, it would open up more funding for Medicare part E for everyone if Medicare also gets more funding too!

[Hannah Bell]

130. bullshit. rich people don't get most of their income from wages.

The cap already covers about 85% of all wage income.

[cascadiance]

132. Huh? Are you say9ing that those making $106k or less in wages make 85% of the nation's income?

I REALLY don't think so! You need to show a link to back up that statement. I realize that there's a helluva lot of income that the wealthy get from other sources like investments, etc. too, but the income is still way out of balance, and when you realize that those making $106k or less have 12.4% (employee and company contributions) of their budgeted salaries dedicated to payroll tax, and most of the execs have only a fraction of theirs going to this tax, you can also see how the regressive nature of the payroll tax makes those making $106k or less that much more liable for layoffs when cost cutting happens in company. With a flat payroll tax applied to all employees, the company would have to look at how much more they are budgeting to higher paid employees when figuring out who gets laid off.

And I still think that if I'm making $106k or less and what I'm getting taxed 12.4% of my salary in effect to help handle not only my retirement safety net, but to help provide those safety nets for those that are disabled, lose family bread winners, etc. too, where the wealthy only have to pay a FRACTION of that amount to provide the same SERVICE to society as a whole, which in my book is TOTALLY inequitable. I'm NOT arguing that social security tax shouldn't be used in that fashion. It damn well should be, and perhaps provide a better safety net and be up'd by the real cost of living increases, not frozen like it was recently. But I feel that the wealthy should be made to pay more their fair share.

I also agree that we should restore the pre-Reagan top marginal tax rates too for income tax as well. But that's going to be a LOT harder sell for the short term than making the payroll tax a lower "fair" flat tax for all that still keeps social security and medicare solvent. It would be damn hard for the Republicans to argue against that change if Americans are made more aware of the cap and how payroll tax is used for social security and medicare. It would be damn hard for them to fight a "flat tax" rate change where at the top they are also forced to pay this, and keep the rest of our taxes low and social security solvent by doing so. Otherwise, we can call them out the next time they advocate the "flat tax" mantra for income tax changes too, and can argue that they should be against it for income tax, if they were against it for payroll tax.

I'm just saying that marketing wise, doing something like this might be a lot easier to sell in an age when we don't have as much political power, and we need to keep something like social security funded adequately, and not screw the middle and working classes in the process out of benefits, etc.

I'm not trying to argue with doing tax cuts in other areas like income tax, which I take your "bs" comment here to be that you perceive my comments as such. I'm just trying to offer a suggestion on how to put Republicans in the corner if they try to make this payroll tax holiday permanent, which will totally screw the program long term.

[WinkyDink]

50. IOW: Bernie's been talking to Obama himself. ANY cuts would = the death of the Democratic Party. NO

HYPERBOLE.

[truedelphi]

65. Except so many younger voters have been totally mesmerized by the notion

That is is an "entitlement" akin to welfare, going to greedy Baby Boomers who want it all, and haven't paid anything into the system.

And of course, the other meme:

SOCIAL SECURITY IS GOING BROKE AND THE SKY IS FALLING!!

With the on going Global Climate Crisis I have no confidence what so ever about the sky, but Social Security has a 2.1 trillion dollar surplus!

[Enthusiast]

83. But it's a Ponzi scheme.

:sarcasm:

[truedelphi]

112. Wall Street is the real Ponzi scheme.

I do see your sarcasm tag, but just for the record --

But while the Geithner/Bernanke duo have tossed some eleven to thirty trillion dollars out the back door of the Fed to their greedy friends on Wall Street, Social Security's "insolvency" is being played at the front door, as a distraction.

That eleven trillion dollars could have

1) Paid off every single student loan owed by the middle class and poor in this nation

2) Paid off every single mortgage held by the middle incomed and poor

3) Paid for a good seven to eight years of National, Universal Single Payer HC (Even at the inflated prices allowed by the Barack Obama Administration)

Or:

4) Created a West Coast to East Coast Bullet train, so that we no longer have to rely on the poorly maintained Amtrak or the poorly maintained airlines.

[jtown1123]

105. Not true. Although we are told it is broke, polls show we overwhelmingly support

strengthening it and are against privatization. The Roosevelt Institute has a lot of info on millennials and strong attitudes towards strengthening SS.

[Enthusiast]

81. Support for social security

has now become nearly the only thing left that distinguishes Democrats from Republicans. This is why I have become HIGHLY suspicious of President Obama. HIGHLY suspicious.

[senseandsensibility]

51. I am so disillusioned.

I'm almost beyond cynical at this point. It is time for us to face facts.

[Mojeoux]

52. If they cut my SS, I'm DEAD

And I was so proud to vote for Obama.

[WillyT]

53. HUGE K & R !!!

:kick:

[BigBearJohn]

55. I can't shake the image of a prize fighter being paid off to throw the fight.

He gives a great speech before the fight,
then takes a dive.

[democracy1st]

58. He was a corporatist before he became pres! He played a progressive on tv.

[Spike from MN]

113. You're right on that.

I pegged him as a corporatist from the get-go so I voted third party.

I only wish Obama had proven me wrong. Unfortunately, he's even worse than I thought he would be.

[somone]

108. That's exactly what's happening

consistently and repeatedly

[dreamnightwind]

66. Yes they're coming for SS

Just watch, it's been apparent for awhile now. Very few, if any, in the MSM will spin it as anything short of heroic, a post-partisan gutsy attempt at real solutions by an adult. They'll sell the hell out of this idea, and enough of the sheeple will buy into it.

I think it's a new centrist coalition that Obama is building. The corporatists have a script whereby politicians can advocate painful cuts and austerity for the little people, and these politicians will then be presented as adults willing to forsake politics to make necessary but tough decisions about how to fix the situation we're in.

I think their strategy will work for them. With the MSM to carry their water, so-called centrist policies that are just cover stories for fleecing the public will get enough support from Republicans who basically believe in these policies anyway, and Democrats who are gullible enough to think no other path is feasible.

We should be out in the streets right now, waving signs and shouting all we can. As someone else in this thread said, if SS cuts are suggested in the SOTU it will be much more difficult to stop it. And who would stop it? The House will support it, the Senate probably will too, and the POTUS seems fully on-board, perhaps he's even driving this train. It's up to us, and that's not very encouraging.

[Enthusiast]

68. Will the Obama Administration

fuck us over? When have they stopped?

Two wars of choice that do not further the nations best interests but we are going to cut social security? We fucked up in 2008. Net Neutrality, anyone? Tax cuts for the filthy rich?

There was one good Democrat running for president in 2008 and it was not Obama.

[snappyturtle]

85. I agree with most of what you say, however, I believe that 'something'

happens to those elected to the Presidency once they take office. Whoever the Powers that Be are intervene and the agenda and campaign promises morph or are reversed. I cannot wrap my head around that what the President campaigned for and what is ensuing were out and out lies just to get elected. I, of course, may be wrong and unfortunately, the outcome remains the same. I also think that President Obama will be a one termer. imho

edit: Just read this post....it explains my position better than I did:
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=439x222089

[Enthusiast]

86. Thank you, snappy. It's a good letter.

I hope it gets results but I won't hold my breath.

[fasttense]

84. If Obama cuts Social Security he will lose.

His base will abandon him. The elderly will vote against him. The young will ignore him. And I'll never vote for him. All the centrists and independents in America will not be enough to give him a democratic House or Senate.

He may need Wall Street's money to win the election but he also needs votes. Wall Street doesn't have enough money to con Americans into believing cutting their grandmothers' throats will balance the federal budget. The bushes tried it and they had Wall Street and corporate money in their pockets. They did not succeed despite the efforts of billionaire Pete Peterson. Obama wont either.

[Enthusiast]

87. Pete Peterson

What an evil fuck.

[katnapped]

89. But...but...but...SARAH PALIN!

You'll be sorry if you refuse to have Obama throw Granny into the street!!!!!! :sarcasm:

[FiveGoodMen]

110. The people he really works for (NOT US!) will reward him

What does he care whether he's in the White House for 4 or 8 years?

[cascadiance]

91. Cut a deal with the Republicans! Let'm impeach Obama if we can impeach Roberts on the SCOTUS!

At this point, though I'm not necessarily thrilled about Biden as president either, perhaps a message would be sent to him that if he doesn't start listening to his base, that we might let them impeach him too.

Part of the deal of course would be to be able to get someone like Howard Dean put in place as the VP to Biden then.

but DAMMIT Obama, if you cut Social Security then your nothing but a closet Republican, which is worse than an in your face Republican!

Sorry about the invectives, but the nerve of this guy after he also, like a f'd up corporate servant, approved the Comcast/NBC merger, needs to be told to STOP!

[TBF]

93. "may"? Looks like a done deal to me. nt

[peacetalksforall]

96. Please don't continue to think that this is a Dem/Repub thing with him going Repub -this is

the One World Order. Wording their way into our downfall. Looks like the agenda is ratcheting up for mere citizens who aren't wealthy.

It's going to become a waste of time to cling to the D R divide. That is not where it's at.

Trickle down takes on a new meaning. An agenda - their agenda - is trickling down.

Two years with no adjustments for cost of living and now this.

[lonestarnot]

100. Ugh yeah, we're fucked.

[Javaman]

97. While he "may" cut it, if Obama so much as breaths on SS...

He has lost my vote.

[Edweird]

107. "May"? It's clear that has been his plan for a while.

[FiveGoodMen]

111. ...Or all along.

[earth mom]

114. "We have a president who is not prepared to defend the heart and soul of what the Democratic Party

has been about since Franklin Delano Roosevelt."

That says it ALL folks-in case you haven't been paying attention to the diabolical actions of Obama's cat food commission. :grr:

[FiveGoodMen]

121. And we have "Democrats" still defending him.

[kentuck]

129. If Obama goes after Social Security...

then he should definitely have a challenger. He would not get re-elected and he would not deserve to be re-elected, if that were the case.

[Bluebear]

131. Bernie never really loved Him!

:cry: