"I'm thinkin' that President Obama put Social Security on the table because he knew Boehner would

[No Elephants]

not take it."

With that statement, Ed Shultz should lose all crediblity forevermore.

First, I very much doubt that Ed Shultz believed what he was saying.

Second, though, if what Shultz said as an attempted excuse were true, it makes the President look even worse, something that seems to escape Shultz entirely: How dare anyone gamble with the lives of poor seniors, disabled, and widows, widowers and orphans?

Because Ed Shultz does not seem to get that his transparent attempt to bs his viewers would, if believed, only make the President look worse on this issue than he already does, Ed Shultz is nowhere near the populist he portrays on his show.

[Enthusiast]

1. Especially in light of the FACT that

tax cuts for millionaires and billionaires, two unnecessary unpaid for wars of choice using crazy reckless military war profiteer contractors, a medicare drug benefit that didn't allow negotiating pharmaceutical prices and bailing out fraudster banks that even included massive bonus checks to CEOs with no conditions all contributed to the deficit. We had 8 years of record stupid throwing money around that culminated with Dick Fucking Cheney telling us that, "Reagan proved that deficits don't matter."

Social security did not cause the deficit!

This deficit cliff was an "operation". It is the end result of an intentional "starve the beast" strategy started by the GOP in the 1980s.

Putting social security on the table was the goal of this GOP strategy all along. If the President goes along with this he is rewarding treasonous behavior of the GOP radicals.

No excuses this time Mr. Obama. No chained CPI, no way. You were elected mainly to protect "entitlements".

[No Elephants]

3. Do Democratic Presidents Bill Clinton and Barack Obama belong to the GOP?

Putting Social Security on the table is a DLC policy and Obama's goal all along.Madfloridian posted about chained CPI's having been a DLC/Third Way brain child since at least 2011, when Third Way introduced its "new" plan to "reform" Social Security.

http://sync.democraticunderground.com/10022021626

I don't know what the "old" Third Way plan provided for, but I know that DLC was after Obama to get rid of "old" entitlement programs just about as soon as he got elected.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=102x5021667



In January 2009, Obama pledged, after his first election, but before his first inauguration, to "reform" what he called "entitlements." http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/01/15/AR2009011504114.html

In March or April 2010, just about as soon as he got his bail out of health insurers passed, maybe before, Obama appointed the cat food commission, appointing to head it two foes of Social Security. However, the commission did not recommend cuts to Social Security. On that commission were DLC-type Democrats and Republicans, very notably, Paul Ryan.

In May 2011, Bill Clinton, not realizing that he could be heard, offered to help Paul Ryan convince Democrats re: Paul Ryan's Medicare "reforms."

http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/politics/2011/05/bill-clinton-to-paul-ryan-on-medicare-election-give-me-a-call/

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5Nnz-Z7azXg (note the denial in the comments, Democrats literally refusing to believe their own lyin' eyes and ears).


In July 2011, Congressman Conyers revealed:

“We’ve got to educate the American people at the same time we educate the President of the United States. The Republicans, Speaker Boehner or Majority Leader Cantor did not call for Social Security cuts in the budget deal. The President of the United States called for that,” Conyers, who has served in the House since 1965, said. “My response to him is to mass thousands of people in front of the White House to protest this,” Conyers said strongly.

http://www.crewof42.com/cbc/conyers-on-jobs-weve-had-it-lays-out-obama-calls-for-protest-at-white-house/ (more story and a video of Conyers at the link)

And Democrats attacked Conyers for telling the truth about Obama, not Obama for being the first to put Social Security and Medicare on the table.

Since about 1980, the Democratic Party and the Republican Party have had similar fiscal policies and similar behaviors. 1980 was over 30 years ago. I don't know if it is already too late for the 98%, but the 98% is going nowhere until it gets out of denial about both major political parties.

Bush wanted to alter Social Security, too, but failed miserably because Democratic politicians and Democratic voters opposed him. Obama will succeed because Democratic politicians will support him and Democratic voters will make excuses for him.

[Enthusiast]

2. I have the Ed show taped. I'll be watching it this morning.

We shall see.

[No Elephants]

4. See what? Whether Ed said during Wednesday's show what I posted he said?

If you don't hear it, replay the show because he definitely said it.

[Enthusiast]

5. I didn't doubt he said it, only the context.

No, I'm here to read what you say and your opinion. I'm one of the good guys. I try to be, anyway.

[No Elephants]

6. I never doubted you are one of the good guys. Still don't.

The context was Ed Shultz trying to make an excuse for Obama because he said he was getting a lot of calls from viewers asking what the heck Obama was doing and saying, "This is not what we voted for."

I did not think the context added anything or that posting without the context was unfair to Ed in any way.