Poll conducted for DFA finds 85% of voters opposed to Social Security cuts.

[madfloridian]

The poll was taken on election day by SurveyUSA. It was commissioned by Democracy for America.

The findings were not surprising.

From Joan McCarter at Daily Kos.

Cutting Social Security highly unpopular

85% of voters polled are opposed to cutting Social Security.

2010 Midterm Voters support changing the Social Security tax cap over cutting benefits by 55% to 4%

Republicans, by a margin of 2 to 1, support changing the Social Security tax cap over raising the retirement age.

Even Republicans oppose cutting Social Security. Yet the proposal by the deficit commission co-chairs has been hanging in the air without an official response from our party. A few have braved speaking out, but most seem to be awaiting a heads up from the president. There has been no definitive statement from Obama.

The two co-chairs have even been laughing about their roles in all this. It's just funny to them.

"We have harpooned every whale in the ocean and some of the minnows," Bloomberg quoted Simpson as saying. He added that the plan is merely a starting point for negotiations.

Bowles, the former chief of staff to U.S. President Bill Clinton, acknowledged the plan would be unpopular, and joked that the pair may have to enter the witness protection program.

Here is more on the poll from the DFA website.

First a comment from Jim Dean

"The Deficit Commission does not speak for the American people. Our poll clearly shows that all voters, even conservatives, don't want to see any cuts to Social Security. If Congress wants to fix the deficit, they should start by letting the Bush tax cuts for the wealthy expire."
-Jim Dean, Chair - Democracy for America

See the rest of the poll at the link.

[Starry Messenger]

1. Who the heck were the 15% who were for?

The hedge fund Democrats?

[madfloridian]

2. I tried to post other parts of the poll, but not able.

It's an interesting read, and it's good to get that support for Social Security out in the open right now.

[Starry Messenger]

3. I'll give it a deeper read in the am.

Good work madfloridian, I'm not surprised the support is so high. It's an excellent program. It's just always shocking to see the number of people who are willing to sell out their fellows.

[madfloridian]

15. And how many elected officials are willing to ignore the public

It's truly upsetting..

[Dr.Phool]

20. They didn't seem to care about the majority who wanted single payer.

They'll do whatever it takes to get campaign contributions from corporations. Public opinion be damned.

[madfloridian]

21. And then...

wonder why the people are enthused.

[Chisox08]

32. The public doesn't have the money

Big money has drowned out our voices. The rich are openly declaring war on us.

[OHdem10]

6. I will bet it is the Very Wealthy and some Libertarians who

do not believe in these programs.

Dick Army,wanted to sue the Goverment to see if he
could opt out of Medicare. Hard Core Libertarian.

Very Wealthy do not need SS. They can buy anything
and any insurance they wish.

[madfloridian]

7. That could well be.

:hi:

[Individualist]

13. DLC/NDC supporters

[madfloridian]

16. Seems that way.

:shrug:

[LiberalFighter]

4. The Witness Protection Program won't protect you Bowles.

It doesn't work for super high profile people.

[madfloridian]

8. Can't believe he's joking about it.

It's way too serious a topic.

[EFerrari]

5. K&R

[dkf]

9. How hard is it to vote that someone else to give you money?

[Hannah Bell]

14. That's a republican meme. Why do you spread it?

[defendandprotect]

23. FICA is paid for by employees and employers -- Social Security runs HUGE surplusses....!!

Which right wing has used mainly as a SLUSH FUND for wars and tax cuts

for the rich!

[Mimosa]

29. Plus the self-employeed who pay an extra percentage. n/t

[defendandprotect]

30. Thank you -- and I think Congress also opts in as individuals?

I seem to recall they aren't automatically in the program?

And I've also heard that there is something like $2 BILLION and more

which illegals pay in -- an never can claim.


ALL of that subject to someone here having more concrete info on what I've said.

[madfloridian]

10. And yet FL with all its seniors voted for Rick Scott who hates SS

I am not sure where to put the blame for that. I know a lot of it falls on our party for not exposing him for who he is.

There was almost no mention of his past Medicare fraud. Sink tried, but not enough money.

Some people around here are feeling scared now that they are reading more about him.

:shrug:

[defendandprotect]

24. Seems obvious that these seniors had no idea who Rick Scott is ...!!!

Heard someone on with Randi Rhodes one day -- a guy from Florida --

he had NO clue --

And, I agree -- the Democratic Party has failed in its responsibilities to

advise the public and to address the problems of computer voting -- of right

wing propaganda which they mostly do not respond to -- and of the huge numbers

of Democratic voters who no longer vote having no confidence in honesty of our

elections -- and no confidence in the candidates which TPB give us to vote for!!

Basically -- they recognize a scam when they see one!

[indepat]

11. They (the administration) don't care what 85% of Americans want:

neither do pubs, so we're screwed, blued, and tattooed (and royally fucked and pissed on for good measure and as lagniappe). ;)

[madfloridian]

12. The word liberal has been damaged for so long, they are afraid of it.

Now the words "the left" strike fear.

[indepat]

17. The use of liberal in their lexicon imo has a worse connotation than nazism

;)

[madfloridian]

18. We have let GOP framing of words go on too long without responding.

So now our party fears liberals as well.

[defendandprotect]

26. Democratic Party has been taken over by corporate interests ....

Unfortunately, Obama took the DLC into the White House with him!!

[defendandprotect]

27. But my constant question is .... who is listening to or watching this rw propaganda?

is their audience largely liberals?

[defendandprotect]

25. Rather, I think "right wing" is the dirty word ... always has been .. always will be....

[madfloridian]

19. From McJoan at DKos.

"There's a reason it's always been called the third rail of politics. It should be, because it is so integral to our society and so critical to the well-being of older and disabled Americans. It's really telling that despite the years and years of Pete Peterson sponsored assaults on the program, happily parroted by deficit peacocks like Kent Conrad, the program remains so popular.

The catfood commission was a ridiculous idea from the outset, and now a major marketing failure. But members of Congress from both parties know precisely what this poll tells us: cutting Social Security is political suicide."

http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2010/11/11/919738/-DFA-poll:-Cutting-Social-Security-highly-unpopular

So why is our party allowing the idea of cutting SS to keep floating in the air without being loudly against it.

[defendandprotect]

22. Of course, youth has already seen their 401K's ripped off ....fewer of them

are invested in pension funds because of the constant lay offs that these

generations have faced -- and doubt they would be up for supporting their parents!

Hard to do on unemployment insurance!!


:eyes:

[defendandprotect]

28. That's fantastic considering the intense and extreme rw lies about it over decades--!!

And there are those who want to say Americans aren't liberal????

The base isn't liberal -- ????

Imagine all the liberals who don't come out to vote and what we could do

if the Democratic Party ever got interested in bringing them out to vote!!!

GIVE THEM MEDICARE FOR ALL AND LET'S SEE WHAT HAPPENS!!

The right wing would be totally trampled and it would be the end of GOP!

[LiberalLovinLug]

31. That's whats so bloody frustrating about the neoDems

70% of the public wanted a public option GOVERNMENT RUN medical insurance plan.

Yet the neoDems insisted, with a bafflingly contrite silence from Obama, to "negotiate" that away.


What I would have liked to see was a firey Obama order a press conference where he used all his oratory skills to insist that congress shape a bill with what the "American people demand!" It was a no brainer. If the Democrats would have passed a public option, they would probably still have a majority in Congress. That was the one issue, among a few, that hit the hardest and took the wind out of the base.

And the same with this issue... the public would be behind a heroic fight for it, other than the perpetual 20% morans. If they don't even have the balls to fight for progressive values when the public is behind them, how do you feel about them handling trickier issues like pro-choice, or gay rights?

I still back Democrats, but its about time they looked beyond the Washington bubble and the incestuous relationships with the corporate press who have somehow convinced them along with their moran base, that the USA is a hard right wing country, and that they better not even hint at any solution that doesn't weight heavily in corporate interests.

[defendandprotect]

33. 76%+ wanted single payer, but Obama made back room deals with private HC industry....

to keep single payer off the table --

and to keep Medicare from "negotiation" over drug prices.

Sadly, Obama and Baucus were two of the most heavily sponsored Democrats by

the private HEALTH CARE INDUSTRY!!

Rahm Emmanuel/DLC has "crowed" about Obama's preserving the PRIVATE HC system!!

and more --

Guess a lot of people here still don't know this -- and doubt that Obama will

stand up look the public in the eye and tell them what he did?




Btw, among Catholics -- they wanted single-payer/government run health care by 73%+

and when you include Latinos and Latinas by 83% !!

They also wanted all reproductive care included by large majorities -- including abortion.

and when it got down to just simple CHOICE -- any reason -- they supported it by 51%!



PS: Had I known that Obama was DLC -- or called himself a "New Dem" -- I would NOT have

voted for him.

Hillary was also out -- she is part of DLC leadership!

[defendandprotect]

34. Late K&R .... 85% of voters? Which basically proves VOTING threatens no one ...!!!

[sam sarrha]

35. they dont need SSI ,.. they dont care. richest 1% has 6X the financial wealth as bottom 80% >LINK>>

http://sociology.ucsc.edu/whorulesamerica/power/wealth.html

top 1% has 42% of americas Financial Wealth.. bottom 80% has ...7%... and 73% of personal debt!!

so the top 20% has 93% of americas Financial Wealth... do you wonder why there's a recession.. no money to spend.. so print some dont tell anyone why.!!

think of this next time you hear a ReThuglicker cry baby'n about "wealth Redistribution" ..or "Socialism"

Warren buffet pays 14% in taxes... Gates pays the taxes of a family that makes $80,000 a year.. we live on 34

Bu$h43 tax cut costs 4 Trillion $$$ every 10 years.. only really benefits the richest 2.5% who by the way are the only people who would pay the dreaded "Death Tax"

the GOP platform is based on... wealth is proof of gods favor of a man, so it is a sin to tax a rich man/corporation and the poor are proof of gods disfavor of a man.. so it is a sin to help them..

http://blog.buzzflash.com/hartmann/10016
Arguably, the last two political philosophers who both influenced world events and shared many of the worldviews of today's neocons were the Nicolo Machiavelli (who published "The Prince" in Italy in 1515) and Jörg Lanz von Liebenfels (who inspired a young Adolf Hitler with his magazine "Ostara"). Following in their tradition - relatively obscure men who peddled cynicism and faux patriotism while deeply influencing some of the world's most powerful people - came Leo Strauss, a professor at the University of Chicago through the 1950s and 1960s. A Jewish émigré from Germany, Strauss was obsessed with the noble goal of figuring out how to prevent America from falling into the same trap of a decline into fascism that Germany had. Ironically, he himself fell into the trap of fascistic ends-justifies-the-means thinking, and has taken a large segment of the American conservative movement with him.

this will explain a lot..
http://doggo.tripod.com/doggchrisdomin.html


http://www.alternet.org/story/15935?page=2
Like Thomas Hobbes, Strauss believed that the inherently aggressive nature of human beings could only be restrained by a powerful nationalistic state. "Because mankind is intrinsically wicked, he has to be governed," he once wrote. "Such governance can only be established, however, when men are united – and they can only be united against other people."

Not surprisingly, Strauss' attitude toward foreign policy was distinctly Machiavellian. "Strauss thinks that a political order can be stable only if it is united by an external threat," Drury wrote in her book. "Following Machiavelli, he maintained that if no external threat exists then one has to be manufactured (emphases added)."

"Perpetual war, not perpetual peace, is what Straussians believe in," says Drury. The idea easily translates into, in her words, an "aggressive, belligerent foreign policy," of the kind that has been advocated by neocon groups like PNAC and AEI scholars – not to mention Wolfowitz and other administration hawks who have called for a world order dominated by U.S. military power. Strauss' neoconservative students see foreign policy as a means to fulfill a "national destiny" – as Irving Kristol defined it already in 1983 – that goes far beyond the narrow confines of a " myopic national security."


http://www.commondreams.org/views04/1207-26.htm
According to this carefully researched and well-vetted BBC documentary, Richard Nixon, following in the steps of his mentor and former boss Dwight D. Eisenhower, believed it was possible to end the Cold War and eliminate fear from the national psyche. The nation need no longer be afraid of communism or the Soviet Union. Nixon worked out a truce with the Soviets, meeting their demands for safety as well as the US needs for security, and then announced to Americans that they need no longer be afraid.

In 1972, President Richard Nixon returned from the Soviet Union with a treaty worked out by Secretary of State Henry Kissinger, the beginning of a process Kissinger called "d�tente." On June 1, 1972, Nixon gave a speech in which he said, "Last Friday, in Moscow, we witnessed the beginning of the end of that era which began in 1945. With this step, we have enhanced the security of both nations. We have begun to reduce the level of fear, by reducing the causes of fear�for our two peoples, and for all peoples in the world."

But Nixon left amid scandal and Ford came in, and Ford's Secretary of Defense (Donald Rumsfeld) and Chief of Staff (Dick Cheney) believed it was intolerable that Americans might no longer be bound by fear. Without fear, how could Americans be manipulated?

Rumsfeld and Cheney began a concerted effort - first secretly and then openly - to undermine Nixon's treaty for peace and to rebuild the state of fear and, thus, reinstate the Cold War.

And these two men - 1974 Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld and Ford Chief of Staff Dick Cheney - did this by claiming that the Soviets had secret weapons of mass destruction that the president didn't know about, that the CIA didn't know about, that nobody but them knew about. And, they said, because of those weapons, the US must redirect billions of dollars away from domestic programs and instead give the money to defense contractors for whom these two men would one day work.