Via the Reuters live blog and Reuters correspondent Steve Holland in the White House briefing room, Obama said “everything is on the table” for the Super-Committee.
Wow, that’s such a big Fuck
You to the progressive caucus and liberals generally. ‘Cause I thought Social Security and Medicare were off the table (“no Social Security benefits would be cut”). I mean, it’s like Obama really does want old people to eat cat food and die. And after we all thought he was so progressive, too. Shocker.
UPDATE Here (via) is the press release, amazingly (10:05PM) not available on whitehouse.gov, but from WSB radio in Atlanta:
THE WHITE HOUSE
Office of the Press Secretary
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
July 31, 2011
BIPARTISAN DEBT DEAL: A WIN FOR THE ECONOMY AND BUDGET DISCIPLINE… Deploys an enforcement mechanism that gives all sides an incentive to reach bipartisan compromise on historic deficit reduction, while protecting Social Security, Medicare beneficiaries and low-income programs….
Well, either Obama’s lying, or his press secretary is lying, or (of course) they’re both lying. If Social Security is “on the table,” it’s not “protected.” Which is it, assholes? I mean, I know the answer, but I want to hear it from you.
UPDATE And keep reading for this bowl of mush:
The President did not agree to any entitlement reforms outside of the context of a [sic?] bipartisan committee process [Catfood Commission: The Sequel] where tax reform [not the Bush tax cuts, or the release would say] will be on the table and the President will insist [sure. nods. BWA-HA-HA-HA-HA-HA-HA-HA!!! Obama’s going to insist. Wipes tear. Don’t make me laugh any more! It hurts!] on shared sacrifice [not this time, so why the next?] from the most well-off [like taxing hedgies’ income as income? I doubt it] and those with the most indefensible [but not merely defensible?] tax breaks.
I don’t think I can write any more right now. The mush is making my stomach heave. O-h-h-h….
UPDATE The full transcript that Steve Holland tweeted. My stomach is heaving again.
UPDATE From Big Orange, Boehner’s bullet points to his own caucus include this:
Medicare not exempted from across-the-board cuts. Medicaid, Social Security, veterans, civil & military pay exempted.
So. Three different stories?
- lambert's blog
- Login or register to post comments
- 1+[CSE]+#b94+
Front page
Comments
WTF, this is a disaster!
Obama's own words from the Detroit News piece you linked to:
What a proud moment in American history, the day the president and congress decided soup kitchens and children sleeping under freeways were what our country really needs right now. Fuckwits!
"Look deep into nature, and then you will understand everything better." -- Albert Einstein
Eisenhower?
The one who spent big bucks on the interstate highway system? He who warned against the military-industrial complex? With a tax rate, as I understand it, waaaaay heftier than now? That Eisenhower?
Reporter to Mahatma Gandhi: What do you think of Western Civilization?
Gandhi to reporter: I think it would be a good idea.
Finally we have arrived at Obama's sellout of the New Deal
This has been in the making ever since Obama appointed the Deficit Commission and packed it with folks that hate Social Security. I posted a brief article titled "Social Security, the beginning of the end" back in Dec of 2010 when Obama caved on taxes and started the process of defunding Social Security.
The question now is what to do NOW and what to do that will stick it to Obama where it hurts - I have a few ideas and hope others do to -
Perhaps Correntewire can be a form for such a discussion!
In the making since "the speech" at the 2004 Dem Convention
And during the primaries, Obama sowed the seeds of generational warfare as he bashed the "psychodrama of the sixties" and repeated false meme of SS not being there for younger generations. Actually it wasn't false because he knew he was going to gut Social Security and Medicare so that people his age and younger wouldn't get the benefits of a civil society.
Yes, so now what? My Prius driving retired not rich but comfortable friends still think they must vote for the lesser of two evils.
One thing I won't do is march on Washington. Waste of time. Civil disobedience seems the way to go but I've never actually done that. If we could get the truckers to stop hauling everything, the whole country would shut down in a few days. And as far as electoral politics, we must vote every incumbent, R or D, out no matter how much we like our individual rep. We must vote out the "liberal opiates" like Sanders, Schakowski, Grijalva, and, yes, even Dennis.
Politics is the art of looking for trouble, finding it everywhere, diagnosing it incorrectly and applying the wrong remedies.
Groucho Marx
National strike? But I don't see that happening until this
shit sandwich is forced down the throats of the American people.
Then, when more are out of work and the safety net programs are gone or shriveled to near nothing, only then will the public revolt.
Hmmm...I foresee the need for another "Empty Plates" demo
Since there will be so many more hungry people now. Might not be a bad idea. (for the initial idea, see here).
Time for Real Change
More Pure Shock Doctrine ahead
Chris Floyd says the following about the set up of the "special committee"
"special committee" or "Super Congress" which the deal intends to establish. This is an unaccountable politburo which will be able to circumvent all normal democratic (and republican) principles and issue budget-slashing, tax-cutting legislation that cannot be debated or amended, but simply approved or rejected by the rest of the now-powerless representatives and senators.
That's not all. If the politburo -- handpicked members split evenly between the two gangs of thieves and poltroons that now hold sway on Capitol Hill -- can't agree on much they want to gut the budget and cut taxes for the rich, why then, this will trip a series of "triggers" which will automatically start gutting, slashing and cutting, without any vote by the democratically elected representatives whatsoever. And surely it would be superfluous in me to point out that these unaccountable "superpowers" will soon stretch to cover other areas of legislation beyond budgeting and taxes.
obama did promise to change
obama did promise to change the way washington worked...
Funny but sad.
I hadn't expected him to do away with Congress. Now that's some kind of spending cuts. Will this new commission get its own building or will they just use the deserted Capitol?
Politics is the art of looking for trouble, finding it everywhere, diagnosing it incorrectly and applying the wrong remedies.
Groucho Marx
Where did I see the query "IF we have elections in 2016"?
followed by a reasonable explication of the probable hijacking of what was left of our representational democracy? I can't remember, but wow, how prescient.
Time for Real Change
I don't think it gets the
I don't think it gets the play it deserves but Obama is relentless in his service to kleptocracy. He made noises around his Inauguration about cutting Social Security, Medicare, and Medicaid. Obamacare locked in big cuts to both Medicare and Medicaid, but even before the debate on Obamacare was finished, Obama was trying to set up Cat Food Commission I at the beginning of 2010. His first effort, announced January 19, 2010, got shot down in the Senate but Pelosi, Reid, and Hoyer were all onboard for it. He reloaded and set up commission by executive order the following month on February 18, 2010. Bowles and Simpson released their recommendations on November 10, 2010. They fell flat. On December 6, 2010, Obama announced his tax cut deal with the Republicans which extended the Bush tax cuts for the rich, and I would argue intentionally did not raise the debt ceiling at that time (when the Democrats still had majorities in both Houses). This set up the current manufactured crisis. Obama did his best to use it to slash Social Security, and to cut Medicare and Medicaid even further.
What people may or may not remember is that the original Cat Food Commission proposal, the one shot down in the Senate, was supposed to get an up or down vote on its recommendations much like the Super Congress being talked about now.
We used to call Cheney the vampire because no matter how many times we thought we had killed/debunked his lies he would keep coming back with them, not new ones but the very same ones. Obama is exactly the same. There is no compromise with him. There is no burying one of his disastrous kleptocratic initiatives once and for all. He just comes back again and again and again.
Anyone who votes for him in 2012 is voting for 4 more years of this. Anyone who votes for him is voting to slash Social Security, Medicare, and Medicaid. They are voting to continue bailouts and subsidies for the banksters. They are voting to screw themselves.
A final thought on this: Jane Hamsher had a post up today where she supposedly lambasted serial caver Bernie Sanders:
http://fdlaction.firedoglake.com/2011/07...
But her real aim seems to have been to pooh pooh the idea of primarying Obama. What I did not see in the post and there are 600+ comments I have not looked at is a statement by her of what she will do. I may have missed it but I have not seen or heard that she has pledged to support no Democrat and to oppose the Democratic party often and openly.
Hugh
Hopeless bunch
I spent quite a bit of time on that thread. Their brilliant game plan is to primary the most progressive voice they have in either the Senate or the House and .....
a) replace him with anyone- Jane doesn't even care if the person is "progressive" or not(yeah I'm sure that will really help cut down on debate time anyway.)
b) Oh and the reason it's Bernie instead of someone like Feinstein, who doesn't even bother to hide her distain and opine out loud that the poor and middle class are under siege is because ad buys in Vermont are cheaper.
c) and by challenging Bernie, it's going to scare Schumer and Feinstein into line(I guess after they're through laughing because you just basically gave them a free pass because of how much it costs for an ad buy.)
Nevermind that striking out in anger and basing your principles on some type of half cocked strategy is probably the worst thing they could do. Sigh.
I am seriously glad I held off on donating. The last thing I need when things go rough is to have my husband's money being utilized to fund a primary to get rid of the one voice who is making commonsense instead of utilizing it to help some of the people that are going to be affected by the consequences of the progressives last great strategy, Barack Obama.
I've been listening to Bernie Sanders making excuses
for Barack Obama and the Democratic Senate caucus every Friday for years now on Thom Hartmann's radio show. If he's the best we can do the whole thing has to be scrapped.
Here he is finally busting out, sort of.
I stopped listening to Brunch with Bernie on Hartmann
Year after year, same song and dance. Soothes the liberals like a drug.
Politics is the art of looking for trouble, finding it everywhere, diagnosing it incorrectly and applying the wrong remedies.
Groucho Marx
That's why she isn't relevant to the real fight with Obama
Negotiating 101 says - any deal you aren't willing to walk away from is a deal you will loose. It's that simple. That's why blogs like FireDogLake, The Daily Kos, Talking Points Memo, Huff Post and hundreds of others that self-describe as liberal/progressive have no influence over the Obama White House. The big O could whip it out and literally pee on Markos Moulitsas and he would describe the event on the Daily Kos as a visit from the Gods. I really don't think Jane is that bad but she isn't ready to go all the way and walk from Obama and the Dems yet. It may happen but it hasn't happened yet.
The thing they refuse to accept is that until you are willing to walk from Obama and work to elect a Green or some real liberal/progressive to the Presidency you don't matter. Unless you are willing to see Obama or some other so-called Democrat loose you just don't matter - you are a doormat. Sure Obama will fawn all over you but in the end he doesn't have to give a piss what you want or what you think because he knows he has your vote.
That fact more than any other explains why the Dems have moved so far to the right - they frankly they have nothing to loose. They believe and their advisers tell then that the base will be there for them no matter what they do. Now if they thought you might not vote for them because of their decisions then it becomes a cost benefit thing and that's a trickier game for Obama to play. But right now Libs & Progressives simply don't matter because Obama & Company knows they have your vote.
Now if Markos stood up and said we need to look at the Green Party there would be toilets flushing all over the White House and folks would be urgently trying to talk to him but until them he and the Daily Kos just don't matter. He is seen by the Dem establishment as someone who provides a space for lefties to wig out before they come home and be good little boys and girls.
If we walked away from Obama, put our energies in another candidate and Obama looses the Dem Elites will face one nasty reality check. Note they still blame liberals for Gore's loss in Florida because the Libs had the nerve to vote for Nader. The elites will scream, they will rant and then they will realize we aren't doormats anymore. That's the first step to our becoming a powerful force in the Democratic Party.
Maureen Dowd-caliber haughtiness
Hamster:
And what is that extraordinary vision? Oust the most progressive elements in Congress. It may not accomplish anything, but darling, they're boring our Jane. Take them away, they no longer amuse her.
Note: I'd be happy to see the whole Democratic Party bite the dust. Why not a 50-state campaign for 3rd party lefties? Nope, too dull. And it won't be as successful as her campaign to squelch single-payer advocacy, so why bother?
Sellout?
NO. That's a big fuck you to the American people.
"He said that..."
"He said that, if enacted, the agreement would mean "the lowest level of domestic spending since Dwight Eisenhower was president" more than a half century ago" (from Det News story)
He said that, as if it were something to brag about, and I don't think this is the first time Obama has made such a statement, comparing today's spending cuts to spending 60 years ago.
Why the hell is this something to brag about? Is the U.S. population, and its needs, the same as it was 60 years ago? Is the impact on infrastructure the same it was 60 years ago? Are medical costs not rising? Is a large part of the population not aging -- and need to be dependent on SS and Medicare and Medicaid? Is the division between the haves and have nots not growing? WTF
?
We have so many more people with increasing needs, but this asshat is bragging that domestic spending is reduced to its 60-years-ago level? Proud to be going backwards? Proud not to be keeping up with the times? Proud to be cheating and killing us citizens, while protecting Wall Street and the MIC?
Disgusted, totally fucking disgusted.
Homework: Compare/contrast 1950's economic situation with
that of the first decade or so of the 21st Century.
Extra credit: Describe political sitution and demographics of both decades.
Paul Lukasiak was right
I've said it before, but it's time to say it again: Paul was right when he predicted (I hope I'm not misrepresenting him) that a Republican president would be better than this. Then the Democrats in Congress would have had some incentive to fight the worst of these ridiculous decisions.
I didn't believe it then. It's nice to know you can still learn something at my age. Huh.
We will push and push and push until some larger force makes us stop.
Lying liars and the lies they tell: Claire McCasskill on NPR
this morning said Medicare was protected, along with Medicaid, food stamps, and all programs for the poor. What she didn't say is they are protected only from the mandatory cuts which go into effect if the recommendations of the Twelve Caesars of the Super Congress don't get passed. And, who knows, she may be lying about those programs for the poor being protected.
Who can trust lying liars?
Anything is on the table for cuts by Obama's Politburo. May he rot...somewhere...not sure where since I don't believe in an afterlife hell. Obama's doing well enough in bringing us a hell on earth.
Nice that our president who coordinates so closely with Big Bidness also brings us a Politburo. What? The worst of all worlds?
It really is a great accomplishment to destroy a political party in just 30 months! Kudos to Obama!
I am so sick of being lied to.
Don't forget
They are going to get rid of the home mortgage deduction and the deduction for medical expenses.
As for the former, no one will be able to afford a home.
As for the latter, they really do not want us receiving any medical treatment whatsoever. First, we have to buy lousy health insurance we can't afford and doesn't cover anything, with outrageous deductibles and copays. But, then, those of us who choose to pay our own way (with fingers crossed) soon won't be able to deduct those expenses. One way to kill the medical profession, along with the rest of us.
I have not felt this bad
since December 12, 2000. I feel that democracy and the constitution have suffered a deep and serious blow.
To me, the Supreme Five's decision was worse, but that's bcz
I really did not see it coming*. I literally could not believe they had come to that decision.
I did see this coming, since late 2007 actually. Not as bad as Obama has turned out to be in reality, but I knew he would be conservative, big bidness friendly, and was not going to give us real health CARE.
If Hillary were in office and had done one tenth of Obama has, she would be drummed out of the Democratic Party! Well, there would be strong pushback and loudly voiced criticism of actions that were more Republican than Democratic. Congressional Dems would have resistend strongly the kind of things Obama does routinely.
And I had hoped she would defeat Obama in the primary bcz I knew he would not be held to account. Alas, I was right.
*Thinking back on the Supreme Five's decision, it was one of the first based on using Shock Doctrine. The drumbeat in the MCM at the time was loud and constant that something had to settled NOW NOW NOW NOW or catatastrophe would result. The stage was set for the Supremes jumping in and preempting the state supreme court. The rest is history.
Hhhmmm, it worked so well, we've been seeing this tactic ever since.
"We are all Bolivians now" - The coup of 2000
I wrote a piece on Firedoglake in 2009 about how the 2000 election was a coup like Bolivia's. http://my.firedoglake.com/montanamaven/2...
Definitely The Shock Doctrine got a huge boost in 2000, but after reading Doug Henwood's "Wall Street", they started the experiment with the New York default in 1975. He says,
" “these fortunate uses of crisis first appeared in their modern form during New York City’s bankruptcy workout of 1975. This is no place to review the whole crisis; let it just be said that suddenly the city found its bankers no longer willing to roll over old debt and extend fresh credits. The city, broke, could not pay. In the name of fiscal rectitude, public services were cut and real fiscal power was turned over to two state agencies, the Municipal Assistance Corp. (MAC, chaired by [Felix] Rohatyn), and the Emergency Financial Control Board, since made permanent with the Emergency dropped out of its name. Aside from the most routine municipal functions, the city no longer governed itself; a committee of bankers and their delegates did, Rohatyn first among them. Rohatyn, who would later criticize Reaganism for being too harsh, was the director of its dress rehearsal in New York City. Public services were cut, workers laid off, and the physical and social infrastructure was left to rot. But the bonds, thank god, were paid…”
Jac Friedgut of Citibank:
“We [banks] had two advantages [over the unions]…. One is that since we were dealing on our home turf in terms of finances, we knew basically what we were talking about, and we knew and had a better idea what it takes to reopen the market or sell this bond or that bond… The second advantage is that we do have a certain noblesse oblige or tight and firm discipline. So that we could marshal our forces, and when we spoke to the city or the unions we could speak as one voice… Once a certain basic process has been established that’s an environment in which our intellectual leadership…can be tolerated or recognized… we’re able to get things effected. (Henwood, p 296)
Doug Henwood quotes an op-ed by L.D. Solomon "Whether or not the promises...of the 1960's can be rolled back...without violent social upheaval is being tested in New York City...If New York is able to offer reduced social services without civil disorder, it will prove that it can be done in the most difficult environment in the nation" He then concluded "the poor have a great capacity for hardship."
Politics is the art of looking for trouble, finding it everywhere, diagnosing it incorrectly and applying the wrong remedies.
Groucho Marx
MM, fascinating background on the NYC financial crisis of 1975-
That was the time of the famous Pres. Ford to NYC: Drop Dead headline in the NY Post (?).
But that line, "the poor have a great capacity for hardship"? Right out of the unreformed Scrooge!
I have to read that book by Henwood, Wall Street.
Enjoyed your post of Bolivia and Shock Doctrine.
I remember feeling so terrible about what the Russian people went through after their move to democracy -- and we sent them Shock Doctrine Austerians.
I hated Jeffrey Sachs back then! Now, he says the austerity and sudden break up was not the right way to have done things. The oligarchs would beg to disagree with him; those not dead or in jail are quite happy with their prosperity.
Very dark day in a growing list of dark days
Even though I, a Cassandra, have been talking about this since the 2008 primaries, it hurts when it actually happens. I told my husband this morning that this day will go down in the telling of our demise. Only an alien ship can save us now. Bleak.
Politics is the art of looking for trouble, finding it everywhere, diagnosing it incorrectly and applying the wrong remedies.
Groucho Marx
Maybe we can be our own alien ship
I should have kept on blogging about Europe, instead of blogging about the kabuki.
Remember also that making you feel sad and disempowered is not merely an accidental byproduct of the process but an essential feature (which promotes retail therapy, among other forms of self-medication).
First they ignore you, then they ridicule you, then they fight you, then you win. -- Mahatma Gandhi
You are right, fearless leader. I will buck up!
We should be our own alien ship. I like that. And yes we should keep blogging about debt. Why is there such a thing as U.S. debt? Why do we pay interest to bankers? Stupid.
Politics is the art of looking for trouble, finding it everywhere, diagnosing it incorrectly and applying the wrong remedies.
Groucho Marx
There's always this:
Rent's too damn high
I like this take on it, even though I have mixed feelings overall. But it's one of those, not even "why can't WE do that?". but "why AREN'T we doing that?" things.
We can't afford not to have single-payer!
Its always darkest before the lights go out
Paul Lukasiak wasn't the only one saying Obama might be worse than McCain. Many of us had to take a lot of grief from some Sr. Fellows here for pointing out that the danger with Obama--what gave him the potential to be *worse* than McCain/Palin--was that he would normalize right-wing talking points. That's exactly what he did.
I'm not sure if we're still sore about "reliving the primaries" but I think its time to do that. Not really for the nah-nah-I-told-you-sos, but because, going forward we need to be cautious to avoid such traps again. Even here, the herd mentality is quite strong. We are going to have disagreements and we need to learn not to be offensive asses.
As much as we hate Hillary (then, and increasingly now), there is little evidence that we would be at this perilous state had she been allowed to have the primary votes actually count. Would we be going rightward even with her? Perhaps, but no where near this level. Hillary is relevant now--not because I would support her as a nominee--but we might have a similar choice in the near future: a corporate friendly, but middle and lower class friendly candidate. That's much preferable to someone who disdains the working class people.
Only tyrants rig elections.
Just ugh...
I couldn't imagine voting for McCain, though at the time I posted that the only difference I could discern between the two parties was that the R aristocracy tortured animals and the D aristocracy didn't. I voted for Hillary Clinton as a write-in, in a state where my vote wouldn't swing the outcome.
I'm still sure that was the right vote for my situation, but in retrospect, if my vote could have swung the outcome, I'm not so sure. (1) It never occurred to me that Obama would be worse than Bush; and I gave the liberal/progressive policy apparatus in DC way too much credit for good intentions; HCR
dealt with that illusion finally and forever. (2) I missed that Obama was the candidate of Big Money; I thought of the rentiers as just another interest group, as opposed to the ruling class. From that failure flowed my failure to understand how virulent Obama's conservatism really was. From discourse analysis, and from the nature of his campaign, it was clear that Obama was corrupt through and through, but I missed the depth of the corruption; less like cholera, say, which is treatable, than ebola which is horrific and not treatable. (3) It never occurred to me that the Ds, as a party, would abandon the New Deal, especially after defending it under Bush; I felt they would restrain Obama. (4) I never accepted the idea that worse is better, better to vote for a real R and get it over with, but maybe there's merit it to the idea: I found the infiltration of R operatives, and their discourse, in some of the PUMA blogs so repellent that I wanted nothing to do with any of it. In retrospect, D operatives, and their discourse, are just as repellent but in a different way. It could be that if President Palin were trying to cut Social Security, the Ds would be up in arms about it, in full "360-degree shitstorm" mode, but on this day in 2011 I doubt very much that the outcome would be any different, though the rhetorical forms might be more congenial; the rentiers are in the saddle, no matter which horse, D or R, they ride in any given administration.
First they ignore you, then they ridicule you, then they fight you, then you win. -- Mahatma Gandhi
Not enough people could have imagined how bad Obama would
be to have affected the outcome of the '08 election. Bush was regarded as so bad that no Dem who spoke English could lose!
That's why the Wall Street Gang Banksters had to bring forward an alternative to Hillary. They did not trust her to act in their best interests -- and the economic situation had made it possible for actual reform, perhaps even breaking up the too big to fail banksters, to be enacted.
They had to defeat her at the party primary level. And, brilliantly, they chose a black man who would make it nearly impossible for the Congressional Dems to act against. Even when necessary, even when this stealth Republican acted clearly against the interests of the Democratic Party and the American people.
I knew Obama leaned toward doing corporations' bidding, that he would not do a good health CARE program -- but I had not the remotest idea he would be as bad as he is. I figured the vote for telecomm immunity was really just out of concern for a big orporation. Not a basic lack of concern about civil liberties and the rule of law.
Obama is a new political creature: A truly Republicanized Democrat.
I didn't vote McCain...
(I did write-in as well). But I remember people getting on my and other's cases for advocating write-ins in swing states. Truth be told, I didn't expect Obama to be *this* bad either. And to be even more honest, I didn't expect McCain/Palin to govern this bad either. Obama telegraphed an attack on the safety net from day one, that was clear to me. I didn't think he'd ever help cut spending in the middle of a potential recession (Q1 GDP was revised down about 1.5 points and early Q2 numbers are at 1.3, so we might be at the start of one already!). That's just fucking stupid and irresponsible.
Part of the dynamic that has changed the landscape is the Tea Partiers. They seem to be becoming fringe these days, we should do more to hasten the destruction of the Tea Party caucus. I'll give them 5-10% of the population, but certainly not the numbers they have in the House. We ought to go after them--on policy, not their intelligence!
Only tyrants rig elections.
Policy? We don't need no stinkin' policy!
We're the good/smart/culturally-superior crowd.
We vote for the official lesser-of-two-evils party.
Do you expect us to stand up for any particular policy? Nope, everything's negotiable, as long as that "D" is next to the name, each and every even-number-yeared November.
"the good/smart/culturally-superior crowd"
You are right -- there is a pernicious meme within the "left" that just by being self-proclaimed "progressives" or "liberals" they are automatically good. In a way it is almost a counterpart to the fundies who believe that they will be selected come the rapture.
So, people can disagree about the Tea Party's precepts, but personally I find it refreshing that they don't seem to do this. Their attitude towards their pols is if "you call yourself a Tea Party member then prove it." They don't seem to think that they are better than others because of how they identify, instead they think they are as good as anyone else.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
alas is crocheting daily at http://memorycrochet.blogspot.com/
On average, they're probably similarly tribal
They're "the real Americans," salt-of-the-earth, God-fearin', All-American regular-folks types, etc. I'll be writing about this tribal similarity soon.
It's all been too predictable.
I apologize for being completely right.
Jane Hamsher, in head count post, reports vote being moved up
She writes:
Looks like several canvassed prog/lib Dems will fold like cheap lawn chairs.
Update: 3:34pm
Hamsher says vote count for Senate is 70 voting yes.
Hoyer said he has 68 yes votes.
this O vs C
meme frustrates me every time. What O and the Third Way are doing is exactly what Clinton DLC did in the 90's... and what she she would do as pres. The only thing different is the starting point, further to the right post Bill then Bush Cheney.
Far to many of the same players are involved... and the same paymasters.
The Dem party and it's players past and present is a corrupt bribed ongoing criminal enterprise... not worthy of salvaging for compost.
Nancy Pelosi told Diane Sawyer she is a Yes vote on
Obama's Grand Sell Out of the American People.
LINK
Anyone surprised? I mean, really surprised?
Hillary is not Bill.
The reason the same players are in O's admin. is because he figured to copy the last successful Dem. President's playbook and because O does not have a resume.
He has no prior experience where he would know brilliant and accomplished people. He is recycling the last batches. Incidentally, notice how he is recycling Bush2 war people?
O is as inexperienced and in over his head as it looks. He has no real Democratic core principles that he will fight for. It's all so he comes out smelling like a rose.
This is all a show...and not a very good one.
Oh, and I'd bet Hillary's Cabinet would look NOTHING like O's.
Gabrielle Giffords returned to DC to cast YES vote for Obama's
abomination.
To huge applause. Well.
Obama's Dream Team will be taking on SocSec/Medicare sooner
than we can imagine.
I somehow doubt the Senate will let a filibuster stop their vote.
House Dems appear to have split 95/95, for what that's worth.
Heard on the news that Obama is strongly recommending deficit hawks be named to the Super Congress of the Twelve Caesars.
Or Politburo for short.
Re; exemptions for SocSec, poverty programs-stop, beginning
in 2014. For two years there are two groups, one exempted (Medicare gets only haircut for providers) from the automatic spending cuts. The others get the full hit. SocSec, Medicare, Medicaid, veterans programs, and other programs for low income people are exempted but only for two years, per what I read at FDL and in this CBO letter.
I'm not positive this interpretation is correct, but...time will tell. I'm sure there interesting consequences we're not aware of...yet.
Well, President Obama doesn't
Well, President Obama doesn’t get that social security and medicare does not belong to the government, it belongs to the American people. The sooner Washington realizes that they work for us the better.
I giocatori più abili dei casinò online sanno che pianificare le proprie puntate è il modo migliore per massimizzare i guadagni e divertirsi di più.