Here Comes The First Pre-Inaugural Cry To "Marginalize The Liberals"
Received this tweet from Bloomberg View the other day. I have long ascribed to the notion that the real news is the news that is reported by the business press, so I "follow" a number of these news outlets.
Hey, aren't you slipping a bit, Jonathan. Heck, took you almost two months after Obama's reelection to go into full attack mode against the liberal activist faction of the Democratic Party. But, enough snark.
Here's an excerpt from faux-liberal, and stalwart Democratic Party shill, Jonathan Alter's piece entitled, "Liberals Nip Obama As He Battles Republicans." And here's the link to the piece.
Liberals Nip Obama As He Battle Republicans
Dateline: Jan 3, 2013 5:30 PM CT, Bloomberg Opinion, By Jonathan Alter.
You can already hear the rumbling in the distance -- a train of noisy liberal Democrats barreling straight for the White House. They should arrive just in time for President Barack Obama’s second inauguration. . . .
The president already has his hands full dealing with angry and unrealistic Republicans. Now he’s getting reacquainted with their counterparts on the left -- a less ideologically inflexible bunch but not necessarily any more susceptible to reason. . . .
Now we’re about to see such imperfection under assault again. While Obama won strong Democratic backing for the so- called fiscal-cliff deal in both the Senate and the House, a chorus of liberal critics rose up to condemn his compromises.
They were particularly incensed that he agreed to raise the threshold on income subject to a higher tax rate from his oft- stated preference of $250,000 per family to $450,000 per family. Some news stories reported that Obama broke a campaign promise by abandoning the $250,000 level.
A few liberals even complained that Obama violated his principles by compromising. They must not have listened to him all year. One of his most important -- and most frequently stated -- principles is that compromise is essential to governing. . . .
Entitlement Adjustment [Here's the real point of Alter's piece.]
Just as Republicans must learn to live with tax increases, Democrats must learn to live with -- and vote for -- changes in entitlements. They should keep in mind that reforms such as a chained consumer price index, which alters the inflation calculation applied to Social Security, and means testing the benefits of wealthy retirees, do not threaten the social safety net.
Neither Franklin Roosevelt on Social Security nor Lyndon Johnson on Medicare was wedded to any of the particulars of those programs -- only the principle of guaranteed support from the government.
The road ahead is paved with compromises that many Democrats won’t like. The president will stick to his refusal to negotiate with Republicans who want to hold an increase in the debt ceiling hostage to spending cuts. But he will have to negotiate over the sequester -- the $1.2 trillion in cuts to defense and domestic programs scheduled to take effect in two months.
Decoupling the debt ceiling from the sequester will be daunting, if not impossible. Even if Obama succeeds, he will have to agree to cuts to entitlements or discretionary programs, a course many liberals oppose. They haven’t forgotten how Obama almost betrayed their interests in the failed “Grand Bargain” talks in July of last year.
If liberals are disappointed in Obama’s fiscal-cliff deal, imagine how they will feel in late February when he starts making tough choices on spending cuts. Liberals need to think harder about what their own long-term deficit reduction plan would be. Raising more revenue is necessary. It’s not sufficient
Yeah, what took you so long, Jonathan? Entitlement Adjustments, indeed!