OK, thanks to DUers I think I'm seeing a "Shock Doctrine" pattern here........

[socialist_n_TN]

Let's see if I'm right.

While everybody is distracted by this continuing resolution and soon to be debt ceiling fight (the "disaster&quot , the PTBs of both parties are getting ready to put together that infamous "Grand Bargain" that will begin the process of gutting Medicare and the Social Security system. They'll probably add in fast tracking and trying to pass the TPP and the Keystone pipeline too. All within the next 2 or 3 months. They've already got austerity in the form of the sequester, this will just complete the changeover in making the USA a neo-liberal paradise. Which of course will decimate the working class and the poor.

Call it "Project Activist Overload". They ARE organized and they DO want all of these things and they now have the "disaster" in place. Let's see how right I am about this. EVERYBODY has to admit that this IS the MO of the disaster capitalist crew.

[texanwitch]

1. O yes.

This goes much deeper then the little game they are pretending to play.

Much deeper.

Cause so much pain that the Democrats will gave and give in to any demand.

[Jackpine Radical]

2. You sound as if you're assuming the majority of the Dems are reluctant to play along.

I have no such illusions.

I could well imagine our Tennessee friend being right here.

[texanwitch]

5. We know who really owns the congress.

It isn't us voters.

[sendero]

131. This whole thing....

.... (shock doctrine in the form of shutdown) could not work without substantial Democratic involvement, period.

[Fawke Em]

135. Who's "our Tennessee friend?"

I live in Tennessee, so just wondering what you mean.

[socialist_n_TN]

145. I believe that would be me.......

Nashville area here.

[stuckinodi]

3. I Keep Saying This...

it is already on the table, and will be approved in a landslide.

If you're over 55 and poor, you're fucked.

[corkhead]

20. at least we'll be nutritious

[JimboBillyBubbaBob]

70. Soylent Green

are people!!!!!

[Squinch]

152. Yummm.. In pies!

[KoKo]

4. Could be....

Makes sense from what we've seen in the past.

[Flo Mingo]

6. Just said the same to a friend today

All this BS about CRs and the Debt Limit, Obamacare is just a red herring so no one is talking NSA or TPP. The noose tightens again.

Somebody help me, wasn't it Tricky Dick Cheney that said by the time we know about one thing they're doing, they're on to the next. (paraphrasing what I recall, anyway)

[socialist_n_TN]

24. Thanks for the input and welcome to DU.......

And I wish I could help with your question. I know I heard that phrase said by some big RWer, but I can't remember who.

[bvar22]

26. That is attributed to Carl Rove:

The source of the term is a quotation in an October 17, 2004, The New York Times Magazine article by writer Ron Suskind, quoting an unnamed aide to George W. Bush (later attributed to Karl Rove):

The aide said that guys like me were "in what we call the reality-based community," which he defined as people who "believe that solutions emerge from your judicious study of discernible reality." ... "That's not the way the world really works anymore," he continued. [font size=3]"We're an empire now, and when we act, we create our own reality. And while you're studying that reality—judiciously, as you will—we'll act again, creating other new realities, which you can study too, and that's how things will sort out. We're history's actors…and you, all of you, will be left to just study what we do."[/font]

Frightening.

[Flo Mingo]

40. That's it

Thanks bvar. Even creepier than I remembered.

[ConservativeDemocrat]

48. Proud Member of the Reality Based Community

Is clearly a slam against Karl Rove. Which is why I use it.

Remember however that reality goes both ways. This whole OP is scare-mongering against something that has absolutely ZERO evidence of happening. If anything, Democratic electeds are even more united than ever, since this kind of hostage taking, if successful, would make it a new tactic forevermore deemed a normal part of governance.

Something else a lot of people around here also forget, is that the hard left was strongly in favor of this tactic back in 2006. People like me were saying it was playing with fire, but of course not shutting down the government or hostage taking with the debt ceiling meant that we (and all adult Democratic electeds) were "traitors" to the one and only true Real Democrats®, and we had to be in "favor" of the Iraq war. This is the "evidence" wingnuts use to pretend that Democrats "don't have a spine", and/or are secretly trying to sell everyone out.

I leave you to consider, given the public's current response to the GOP's hostage taking, what kind of electoral drubbing we would have received in 2008 if Democrats had done so. We'd be looking at President McCain right now. And likely the REAL end of Social Security.

Bottom line: if Democrats are to claim "reality" as one of our attributes, Democrats need to make sure it fits.

- C.D. Proud Member of the Reality Based Community

[socialist_n_TN]

56. My OP was postulated as a possibility........

based on historical evidence of how the capitalists manipulate crises in order to advance a neo-liberal agenda. ALL of the issues mentioned have been supported by Obama, with the exception of the Keystone pipeline which he supposedly hasn't made a decision on. And of course, ALL of the Republicans, even the so-called "moderates" support ALL of these issues, INCLUDING the pipeline. There's your bi-partisan "compromise" actors right there. So it's not that there's "...ZERO evidence of happening". Just because it hasn't happened YET, doesn't mean that there no evidence it COULDN'T happen. I fully admit it speculation, but it IS speculation based on historical evidence and stated aims and goals of the actors.

BTW, even in my speculation, I do believe that the capitalists would give up on SOME of these issues AT THIS TIME, in exchange for getting some of them enacted. And that would look like (or could be spun to look like) bi-partisan "compromise" in order to fund the government and solve the current crisis. My problem with this is that ANY of these things being enacted would be further disaster for the working class and poor.

It's worth the speculation IMO and apparently several posters agree with me. We'll see how it shakes out over the next few weeks and months.

[bvar22]

75. Excellent explanation!

Logical, concise,
and explains HOW 25 years of Sensible, Pragmatic, Centrist, "Compromise" has, in reality, moved the National Agenda very FAR to the Conservative RIGHT.



Thank You!

[socialist_n_TN]

78. You're welcome. Coming from you bvar....

that is high praise indeed! It does seem logical doesn't it?

[2naSalit]

85. Indeed.

It's the process we were told is "the way to govern properly" in my PoliSci classes, the ones dealing with heading a government agency and in positions of mediator and directorships. and it all smells pretty much like Ms Klein describes in her informative expose from 2007. I couldn't agree more with your summation!



I thank you too.

2na

[socialist_n_TN]

95. Thanks for y'all's support........

I knew that thinking like this actually did skirt the edges of CT, but as I said above, thinking about everything logically and putting together the pieces from disparate areas made this possibility more plausible than other possibilities. And it was worth bringing up, if for no other reason, than to be prepared for the possibility of this happening.

I truly do believe that ANY of these things being enacted into law will be massively disruptive for the working class and poor. Even a slim possibility of it happening is TOO much of a possibility IMO.

[2naSalit]

99. I agree

this alleged "clean CR" is a pile of tea party pap already since, as it seems a lot of people don't realize, it is at sequester level and sets a bad precedent being that we are STILL going to have the sequester until this short spell that the CR covers comes to an end. So one has to wonder when does the sequester end or is this the new norm? And if this is the new norm we can only assume that there will be even more of our social safety net cut away as subsequent budget battles ensue.

I don't like the smell of it and don't see anything positive coming down the pike in the very or distant future. And I am concerned that there are too many folks who either drink the kool-aid, have their heads so deeply buried in electronic mesmerizing machines or both that the number of us who are actually seeing this with clear heads (the unconditioned to the ever new norms, not allowing ourselves to be distracted) are few.

[socialist_n_TN]

101. Agreed. It's like I said below to the poster who said it didn't seem "mysterious"......

enough to be Shock Doctrine, it's PLENTY mysterious enough to the folks who don't even think about politics very much. Or the ones who can't hold more than one "cause" at any one time.

That's one reason I went ahead and posted when the thought finally came completely together in my mind. It needs to be laid out there so that at least a few can think about it and discuss it.

[2naSalit]

102. And I must say

you've done a good job of making the point. Thanks for posting the OP! For all the reasons that you did.

[ConservativeDemocrat]

100. You think it's a possibility we'll be "gutting Medicare and the Social Security system"...

...when the reality is that when the the President called the GOP's bluff on Social Security they ran and hid, and Obamacare (which is what we're fighting over right now) has inside of it the largest expansion of Medicare in decades.

Um. No. Not gonna happen.

Now I'll give you that Obama is likely going to be in favor of the TPP, since his team is negotiating that right now. But as I've said previously, free trade is a good thing - twice as good if it has protections for workers build into it. There are massive number of jobs dependent on exports. So if you want to hang your hat on Obama not being Socialist, well okay. He's not. He's a Democrat.

May I also explain that labor, especially the Steam and Pipefitters unions, are in favor of the Keystone pipeline? There are reasonable arguments to make against the project, but that it will "decimate the working class and the poor" is really not one of them.

At least I can give you props for stating upfront where your true political affiliation lies. Much better than many folks around here.

- C.D. Proud Member of the Reality Based Community

[socialist_n_TN]

103. What happens when they use the debt ceiling to "force" Obama.......

to chain SS to CPI? Obama is already said he's in favor of that. Some estimates I've read stated that this would cut an SS pensioner by 30% if he/she lives into his mid 80s and up. Not to mention the fact that it's messing WITH a program that's worked as well as ANYTHING in the world for the last 8 decades. And as another poster stated below, quite a bit of the subsidy money going to the insurance industry FROM the ACA will be cut from the Medicare budget. Because they had to make the ACA revenue neutral.

As to the TPP, the real problem is that no one in the public actually KNOWS what's in it. And NAFTA hasn't really shown "free trade" to be such a good thing. And as far as worker protections, from a few things I've read any worker protections put in by nations could cause said nations to be sued by the multinationals for lost profits. But some of the things that HAVE been leaked are horrendous.

As to the pipeline, a LOT of the AFL-CIO is predicated on short term thinking. I'm a fan of the working class. That's not necessarily the AFL-CIO.

[ConservativeDemocrat]

110. I repeat - the debt ceiling will not be used. Period.

If the Democrats allow the debt ceiling to be used as a negotiating weapon then the GOP will use it all the time, until the Democrats eventually find something to stand on. Better to end the fight right now by giving them nothing.

Nothing.

Second, Obama did not say he was in favor of Chained CPI. He's always been against it. He did indicate that if the GOP absolutely demanded it for something that he could get in return (say a middle-class jobs program - which he wants desperately), he'd be willing to put it on the negotiating table. As soon as he said this though, various members of the GOP (including Oregon's own Rep. Walden) tried to bash him over it. So that's more or less off the table permanently.

As to the TPP, yes it's being negotiated in secret. Many treaties are. This is especially true with trade treaties. However, it must be revealed to the Senate before a vote. So if it's crap, it can be opposed then. I promise you that if you object to it then because you think it's a bad deal, I'm not going to go beating you up for being unreasonable. Hell, maybe I will be objecting to it. But complaining now, while it's still being made, is silly.

It's legitimate to believe that the pipeline is a mistake, but splitting AFL-CIO from the working class? Come on.

- C.D. Proud Member of the Reality Based Community

[socialist_n_TN]

122. As to most of your responses......

my answer is "Well, we'll see". However, I'm not going to be shy about putting a possibility out there when the stakes are so high. I think it's important to note all possibilities so the worst of which can be organized against. As I've said in a couple (or more) of my posts on this thread, I actually hope I'm wrong. But if I'm not, I want folks to be prepared so that we can make SURE I'm wrong by protesting against this. Ergo, "We'll see".

Splitting the AFL-CIO from the working class? The AFL-CIO has done a pretty good job of that themselves with their "business union" model in a zero sum game. Their attitude towards US capitalism has led to 80 years of playing defense and the state that the union movement finds itself in today.

[WCLinolVir]

119. TOP does not protect workers, or humans, or the planet.

[ConservativeDemocrat]

128. That's argument by assertion. State your reasoning/Cite your sources. N/T

[socialist_n_TN]

129. Well see, that's the problem with negotiations in secret.......

Nobody KNOWS what sources to use because nobody who knows is talking. Except for Elizabeth Warren, Grayson, Sanders and a few others who say they can't talk about it, but that if the people knew what was IN this treaty, they would be outraged. When there's nothing concrete to cite, you have to go on second hand info and analysis of what info you have. Like the legislators who DO know what's in the. Are they trustworthy or not? Like the people who are helping to draft the treaty. Are they billionaire international capitalists or not? Are any representatives of the workers helping to actually draft the language of the treaty?

ALL of those questions make me doubt that this will be a good treaty to workers. Or for national sovereignty for that matter.

[WCLinolVir]

149. Go read what is available about it. I should not have to do your research.

Just plain lazy.

[socialist_n_TN]

123. BTW, as to my open political affiliation........

If I'm going to make a Marxian analysis of a situation and it turns out correct, I certainly want the REASON that the analysis was correct to be known. Even if it turns out wrong, I'm OK with it. Because most of the time the Marxist analysis WILL be correct to a greater or lesser extent.

[KamaAina]

146. Actually, Mr. Oxymoron,

the ACA expands Medicaid, not Medicare.

[ConservativeDemocrat]

148. Oh, you're correct. My bad.

I think the general point stands, however. Accusing Democrats of being in favor of gutting government health-care is a pretty silly argument to make when they're defending government health case as you write.

- C.D. Proud member of the Reality based Community

/ p.s. there are more conservative Democrats than there are strong liberal democrats. Don't forget that, Mr. Oxymoron.

[Rozlee]

73. Karl Rove has got reality handed to him in the ass.

He thought he had engineered a scheme by which to have a durable GOP majority in the country using a "base in" instead of a "center out" method. He figured the American center would fall in with their heavy voting conservative base and carry them to victory each time. He didn't foresee the tea party moonbats swinging so far to the right, that the center pulled away and their extremism alienating swaths of voters from just about every demographic.

[KansDem]

126. True. Here he is on Election Night, 2012...

And don't forget him on the phone trying to explain the results to the Koch Brothers!

We're history's actors…and you, all of you, will be left to just study what we do. -- Sure, Karl, whatever...

[Rozlee]

134. Heh.

[sendero]

132. It has never been clearly established..

... who (if anybody) said this. If it was Rove, well he's certainly tripped on his own dingus enough times to have lost his lofty status with anyone that is paying attention to actual results.

[tavalon]

111. It was Turdblossom, I believe

and he said that while some of us were living in a "reality based" world, they were creating a new reality.

[quinnox]

7. I hope not, but I can see the possibility

"We didn't want to do these things, or make these cuts, but those damn republicans made us do it!" "Yea, not our fault"

[texanwitch]

12. Yes.

The only thing good about this and I use that word lightly.

The stupid people who voted Republican will suffer also.

Their government aid stops also, big time.

Of course they are to stupid to understand why but their aid stops also.

[malaise]

8. I hope you're wrong and I'm right

I think the worm is turning against neo-liberals and neo-cons

[socialist_n_TN]

19. So do I malaise, so do I. HOWEVER.......

both of our positions COULD be right. IOW, things could be turning against the neo-libs and neo-cons, but that still wouldn't stop them from TRYING to use the current "disaster" to ram through all of these items they've been attempting for decades. After all, they have no problem going against the will of the people as shown in polling. They've done it whenever they want something bad enough.

One real problem we have is that the resistance, even if it's growing, is pretty atomized. Too few in the resistance see ALL of these items holistically. That's where Marxists DO have something of a head start on many. We're trained to see all of this as part of a systemic problem and not just individual actors.

[nadinbrzezinski]

29. Point of order

There are groups that do, and every group that does, starting with the first red scare, has been infiltrated and faced police repression. It is not coincidence the Palmer Raids happened as well as the Occupy raids. Those two are the bookends.

This is very much by design.

Current youth unemployment though is a recipe for revolution. These fuckwitts forget what Kennedy once said. (And I mean the political class regardless of party) Those who prevent peaceful change ensure revolution. I am paraphrasing.

[socialist_n_TN]

44. As a veteran of the Vietnam anti-war movement.......

(albeit a young one then) I remember well the infiltration and the rest. I still remind my younger comrades about this fact of revolutionary and even radical politics. It was also a factor in the drug sub-culture. The more popular resistance gets, the more this will begin to happen anew.

And that a DEFINITE salient point about revolutions and youth.

[Oilwellian]

9. You just about covered it

and they're very close to realizing their dreams.

[formercia]

10. The 'Boys' have been using the same playbook since Mein Kampf

In fact, it's required reading over at DeMint's little Social Club cum 'Family'

[Auggie]

11. It's too transparent to be shock, IMO ...

Shock Doctrine/Disaster Capitalism requires a bit of mystery, spontaneity and confusion to be effective. It requires a greater number of participants too.

[socialist_n_TN]

17. A mystery for whom?........

For the masses in this country, none of these other things are even on the radar. So to them it WILL be a mystery, a confusion, and (seemingly) spontaneous. And of course, the MSM will NOT inform on this. And as to the greater number of participants, there's a WHOLE bunch of very powerful people who want these laws and treaties passed. And since they ARE wealthy and powerful, they have influence over and above their numbers.

[RandiFan1290]

13. We're supposed to be grateful we got to keep our precious

Bush tax cut for the rich. Remember when we were so ruthlessly over taxed by Clinton?

Thank god it passed!!!!!

[texanwitch]

14. Money rules for both parties.

There are some good Democrats left in congress but not enough.

The is little play will run it course, and all the needed social programs will be gutted.

Game over, the late great United States of America.

Just remember who the republicans are, they are not human.

[socialist_n_TN]

22. Well, I for one, won't give up........

I might lose, but giving up is not an option, nor is it in my makeup.

And it's CAPITALISM that's not human, not just the actors. The actors play their parts in the system's play.

[texanwitch]

25. It will take one hell of a fight.

I will fight, we can still win.

It is just sad that it has come down to this.

People will have to loose what they have to fight.

Good government programs are taken for granted.

[questionseverything]

88. the farm bill has expired

by January if nothing is fixed...milk will be 8 bucks a gallon

http://www.rollcall.com/news/shutdown_or_not_farm_bill_extension_expires_on_oct_1-227866-1.html

[texanwitch]

93. The wave of the future.

The government worked well, that was the problem for the republicans.

Times will get interesting.

Time to buy rice and beans.

Just wait until the stupid teabaggers don't get their government goodies anymore.

Some people have to be beat over the head before they listen.

I hope there will be enough of America left to pick up.

[dgibby]

15. Grand Bargain AND TPP.

What's not to love?

[KoKo]

107. The Grand Betrayal" according to Economics Professor William K. Black:

By William K. Black

Slate’s John Dickerson leads its (and CBS’) political reportage so his specialty is in examining what is actually driving politicians’ policies and their efforts to “spin” those policies. Dickerson authored an article entitled “Why Obama’s Outreach to Republicans is All About Obama” (March 12, 2013).

Dickerson’s theme is one I have long emphasized: Obama is driven by concerns for his “legacy.” In more human terms, he is intensely vain about how history will perceive him. That is common, particularly in politicians’ final terms, and it can be a positive influence on policy. Dickerson also agrees with my warnings that Obama sees inflicting the “Grand Bargain” on the Nation as his means of achieving his legacy.

Here is Dickerson’s introduction to his article.

“Is Obama Setting a Trap for Republicans?

Nah, he’s just trying to ensure his place in the history books. Like most days.”

Obama chose Bill Clinton, which is to say Bob Rubin, and Ronald Reagan as his models for the presidency rather than Franklin Delano Roosevelt. The Wall Street wing of the Democratic Party and Reagan shared the same fawning attitude towards finance, and their typically bipartisan anti-regulatory policies proved so criminogenic that they produced the recurrent, intensifying epidemics of accounting control fraud that drive our rapidly escalating modern financial crises. The remarkable fact is that none of this has discredited the policies or the policymakers. Jacob Lew is the latest in a long line of failed protégés of Rubin that Obama has chosen as his principal financial advisors.

One of the repeatedly failed policies that the Wall Street wing of the Democratic Party and the Republican Party agree on is the virtue of austerity. Austerity was the first, and paramount, pillar of the “Washington Consensus” – and both words in that term are revealing. The consensus was inflicted primarily on Latin America. It was a “consensus” – the amount of theoclassical group-think was and is chilling. It was a product of Washington, a bipartisan consensus embracing austerity. The Washington Consensus caused so much harm and rage that nearly a dozen leaders have won election in Latin America by running on a platform of opposing the consensus.

In the U.S. context there was always an important asterisk to the consensus because the Republican Party’s dominant leaders never believed in austerity when they held power. They cheerfully ran large budget deficits, which the Fed typically supported with stimulative monetary policies. The Republicans leaders went far beyond Keynes. Their “supply-sider” claims (which always proved false) were that tax cuts were magic and would promptly cause deficits to disappear.

Unfortunately, the Wall Street wing of the Democratic Party actually believed in austerity, and because the Democrats were in power the Republicans gleefully supported Clinton’s cuts in social programs. The budget surpluses quickly generated deficits in other sectors (see my colleagues Randy Wray’s and Stephanie Kelton’s explanation of sectorial balances in dozens of articles on our New Economic Perspectives blog) and helped drive our economy into recession. Recessions inevitably cause budget deficits to grow rapidly.

It's an interesting read at:

http://neweconomicperspectives.org/2013/03/slate-agrees-that-obamas-vanity-drives-the-grand-betrayal-and-praises-the-betrayal.html

[cui bono]

113. "Obama sees inflicting the “Grand Bargain” on the Nation as his means of achieving his legacy"

I don't get this. What kind of legacy does he want? This Grand Bargain is not going to be looked on positively if it comes to pass. And history will see this presidency as a co-conspirator if it ends up facilitating these things. He can't really think history will look kindly on this, unless the only thing allowed to be written at that time is by TPTB.

[Zorra]

16. ...

http://www.amazon.com/Tine-Pitchfork-Non-Splinter-Fiberglass-Shaft/dp/B001AZLOEA/ref=sr_1_13?ie=UTF8&qid=1380990309&sr=8-13&keywords=pitchfork

http://www.amazon.com/Set-12-Bamboo-Tiki-Style-Torches/dp/B007IL3GZK/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1380990623&sr=8-1&keywords=torches

[socialist_n_TN]

23. Coming closer all the time Fox......

closer all the time. This will require a LOT of organization.

[duffyduff]

18. If this is the case, we will KNOW the current "crisis" is nothing but a setup

created by BOTH political parties in order to force the rest of us to accept "austerity" measures designed to fuck us over and bail out the people these politicians actually work FOR.

I don't trust any of them as far as I can throw them.

[liberal_at_heart]

21. both parties get to throw a temper tantrum to please their base, and the Grand Bargain will make

them appear as though they are compromising. Most independents will like that. Not this independent. Business as usual.

[heaven05]

38. So all this is one big charade

to gut social security and medicare? Man, wouldn't surprise me in the least with the deep pockets of guvmint funding the charade. If this is right, we all will be fighting, each other, over the scraps of food offered.

[leveymg]

27. The last few days jitters about Debt Ceiling aside, Wall St. loves the Sequester and The Deal

The NASDAQ is up 8 or 9 percent in September, the Dow has risen nearly 15% since the Sequester started. See, http://www.democraticunderground.com/10023766548

[socialist_n_TN]

52. Yes they do.....

I wrote an article for the web site back in May that postulated that the sequester was the real goal of the capitalists during the last dust up over the debt limit. The only thing they DIDN'T get with the sequester was the entirety of the TYPE of cuts they wanted. They wanted it all to fall on the workers and their government programs and instead they had to put the Military in there too.

[leveymg]

58. Almost all of the DoD civilian workforce are being called back.

They're getting EXACTLY what they wanted. The GOP has no reason to do anything until 10/17 now.

[bvar22]

28. The Pattern is there for those who choose to see.

So the Sequester is just another SCAM too?
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10023612281

[Benton D Struckcheon]

30. Looks about right

1. The current CR if passed locks in the sequester levels. For six weeks only, but you just need to do a bit of erosion each time.
2. TPP? Who even heard of it, eh?
3. Boehner is trying to lever in something re "entitlements", i.e., chained CPI or something, to get him out of his dead end. We'll see.

1 and 2 are being worked on. 2 has to pass Congress though, so it will need to see the light of day at some point. As for 3, was just reading that Obama hasn't ruled out using the 14th, so you may not actually see anything like that happen.
What you're describing is what they want, but getting there is always the problem. Cruz's defund Obamacare thing may actually have inadvertently sidetracked them rather than helped them. To the extent it gets people riled up, it may raise awareness on the TPP and on the fact we're actually living under the sequester, which I don't think a lot of people realize.

There are some good things happening. Obamacare is here and working. Not perfect by a long stretch, but it's way better than what we had. That's progress. Even if the Republicans got to "defund" Obamacare tomorrow, most of its funding is actually protected (notice that it opened even though the gov't is allegedly shut down???) so even if they get everything they want, it won't matter much for the program.
Also, you're leaving out a huge part of all this: the Voting Rights decision and all the stuff happening at the state level to restrict voting. That's where the real battle is. The DC stuff will get worked out, but if the state level battles on voting rights are lost, nothing will matter and things will get much much worse than what we're seeing now.

[grasswire]

31. I said it days ago.

Obamacare is being used as a Trojan Horse of sorts -- a battering ram that is really the tip of a juggernaut.

This is anarchy.

This is a coup attempt.

Presented as a fight over Obamacare to distract the media.

The shutdown isn't over Obamacare.

It's the beginning of the end of our democratic processes of governance.

[pangaia]

36. "COUP" is the active word.

I have felt this for months..maybe even years.

[zeemike]

32. I am afraid you are right.

But time will tell, and it won't be long.
But slight of hand works the same way, why you are looking at the shiny thing in front of your face the gimmick is used.

[NorthCarolina]

33. Precisely what I have been thinking. Get ready for Obama's "Chained CPI" and the GOP's increase

in the eligibility age for Medicare. Bipartisanship.

[grahamhgreen]

34. And possibly the gutting of all the positive reforms in the ACA, leaving only the mandate.

[jwirr]

35. Absolutely. If they take the next step we are in BIG trouble.

[sabrina 1]

37. You're not the only one who is considering this possibility. The answser

will come as soon as they reach some agreement and what is contained in it.

We already know that Republicans have made their demands and we know what they are. I sure hope Dems will be as unwilling to give in on these super important programs as they appear to be on the ACA.

[Enthusiast]

39. K&R. Those are just the problems we know about.

They also won't be satisfied until they fake up the reasons for another profitable war.

[texanwitch]

41. They are mad they didn't get their last war they wanted so bad.

They are getting back at us for saying no.

No war for us, we tank the country.

[joanbarnes]

42. You might be right but I hope you are wrong! (I HATE it when I am right about such things.)

[socialist_n_TN]

50. Yep, I hope I'm wrong too. But......

I'm very afraid I'm correct on this. Too many things coming together.

[Jack Rabbit]

43. I have a similar theory, but not quite the same one

Substitute passage of the Trans-Pacific Partnership for Grand Bargain and that's my theory.

Of course, the two theories are not mutually exclusive.

[socialist_n_TN]

47. Well, I still think they're after ALL of the above......

Now that doesn't mean that they won't sacrifice SOME of them for others. Actually, that could be made to look like bi-partisanship and "compromise". The thing is, in this case, NONE of it should be up for "compromise" as far as I'm concerned. Every one of those things are important issues for the working class and the poor.

[busterbrown]

45. I was wondering where you guys were..

Do you guys have a direct link to each other deciding when and where to attack.. Obama has been playing these guys like a “chess master” for years and all under MIC control which has forced him to play to the right at times.

You honestly believe this guy is gonna participate in gutting S.S and Medicare..?

[socialist_n_TN]

49. Well pretty much every one of those items listed.....

are things that Obama is on the record as supporting, except possibly for the Keystone project. And on that one he supposedly hasn't made a decision on. So do we take him at his word or do we think he's playing Nth dimensional chess?

And even if he IS playing Nth dimensional chess, we've got to take him at his word and organize AGAINST ANY compromise on these issues. You know. To hold his feet to the fire and give him an excuse to stand up to the MIC. Right?

[cui bono]

114. If Obama has been such a "chess master" then why is there a sequester?

Why is the budget now less than Ryan's?

Come on... the chess master meme is old and means nothing. If you think he's succeeded in outwitting or outmaneuvering "these guys" then tell us how and on what issues.

[busterbrown]

117. Our govt. was gonna get shut down and a deal was devised that hurt both parties, but it kept the gov

from hitting the cliff... Which has continued to this day..I’d call it a stalemate..Cuts to Programs we support and cuts to the military which pissed them off.. Which leads to today.

Because today Obama has backed these guys into a corner which they can’t get out of. He played the chess game by
giving them bits of bait and then simply stated no more.. “I’m fucking done” These guys played by Obama thought they could hold the countries financial future as hostage by defunding Obamacare.. Which led to a shut down of govt.

By giving them bits and pieces as bait they thought they could obviously keep it rolling until they defunded Obamacare.. They are now done and looking for a way to get out of Obama’s rat trap.

You can also add Syria to this trap... He played Republican congress beautifully...forcing them to play their hand first
which they did not want to do. They passed a resolution committing us to attacking Syria which led to the deal with the Russians.. Republicans wanted Obama to make the decision in order to attack him on either stance he took.
It didn’t work and today the Syrians are giving up their chemical weapons..

[cui bono]

136. I disagree with your assessment.

If Obama was such a chess master, what happened last go around? The reason we're in this situation is that they had gotten what they wanted last time because Obama gave more than he should have, and so they figured they could do it again. Precedent should have been set the last time.

Also, if the CR passes, we still have a budget with the sequester in it. That's not chess master results. The spending is less than the Ryan budget. Is that supposed to be a good thing? We still lose even if Boehner allows the Senate bill to be passe in the house.

[Taverner]

46. You got it, dude

[LaydeeBug]

51. I honestly think it's been going on too long for that...

but Sen McCaskill (sp) on Morning Joe last week might be some foreshadowing...MAYBE...it's plausible

But, then again, maybe you're just waiting for the other foot to fall.

It is strange territory to see ALL OF US walking lockstep to defeat them. (It's awesome, but William Pitt is kinda right...it's terrible too)

[FarCenter]

53. If Obama uses the 14th Amendment, it will go a long way to establishing rule by Presidential Decree

Obama has never had much influence over Congress -- Harry and Nancy ran the show during the first two years, and it's been a stalemate on Capitol Hill since then.

So Obama will ignore Congress and expand the powers of the President over the next three years.

[JoePhilly]

54. Do know how many times this has been predicted around here?

Honestly, I lost count at 7.

I'm pretty sure we're at double digits now.

[socialist_n_TN]

59. The last budget "crisis" brought us the sequester.....

which STILL hasn't kicked in completely yet. You don't believe that this "crisis" might not bring in another sequester-like event?

[JoePhilly]

60. Describe this "sequester-like event" ...

Before the sequester agreement, folks around here said "Social Security and Medicare would definitely get cut" ... then, it didn't happen.

Are you prepared to make a prediction about the terrible cuts that are going to be made, and be specific about it?

See, some on DU who have repeatedly predicted a deal that would cut those programs was about to happen, have been wrong, over and over. They were SURE it was going to happen. Then, nothing.

That cycle repeats every couple months, with an outrage level more appropriate for if the cuts had actually occurred.

Honestly, I'm surprised its taken this long to see such predictions this time. I expected them prior to the shutdown.

But there they are again ... late, but not unexpected.

[socialist_n_TN]

69. A sequester-like event like a "Grand Bargain".......

Or approval of the Keystone pipeline. Or the fast tracking and enactment of the TPP. Or any combination of the above.

Hey even if Obama is playing Nth dimensional chess and will NEVER allow any of these things that he's come out in support of to become law, I'm willing to make a big stink about it so he can have cover. He can tell the Republicans and the MIC and the big international capitalists, "Well, I went to bat for you on these issues, but those darn people wouldn't LET me!" I mean you don't want any of these things enacted do you? So help us give Obama cover!

[JoePhilly]

71. "Grand bargin" isn't specific.

And Keystone and TPP are not entitlement programs.

And I don't see how claiming that the President is secretly working to a "Shock Doctrine" scenario (which is what everyone of these threads turns into) is giving Obama cover in any manner.

Its just manufactured outrage.

[socialist_n_TN]

74. Grand Bargain isn't specific?.........

I thought Obama had come out in favor of chained CPI for SS and means testing for Medicare. Apparently Boener thinks in terms of a "Grand Bargain" curbing "entitlements" for a debt ceiling raise. I also thought Obama had come out in favor of the TPP.

Apparently Obama only takes these neo-liberal positions in order to "play Nth dimensional chess" with his political opponents because he KNOWS they'll be against anything he proposes. I just want to give him cover just in case they take him up on his stated goals. That's the cover I'm talking about.

[liberal_at_heart]

147. Both parties have been having a hard time selling cuts to SS.

I wouldn't be surprised if the default or the threat of a default will be used to justify cuts to SS.

[Ikonoklast]

61. Obama is winning, and it's killing these guys.

So make some shit up, which no one else is talking about either inside or outside of government, and attribute it to the president.

Teabagger Water Carriers.

[JoePhilly]

64. I'm waiting for them to say Putin (not Obama) is kicking Boehner's but here.

[socialist_n_TN]

72. Hey man! Help us help Obama stand up against these programs!.......

Make a big stink about it, so he can tell the international capitalists, "Hey I TRIED to get the TPP and cut SS and Medicare, but those darn liberals wouldn't let me!" Like I say, raise hell, so President Obama will have cover!

[doc03]

83. Obama is winning? We have the Ryan Budget! We have a Grand Bargin in

the works. Chained CPI? Raising Medicare eligability? Keystone? TPP? Sounds like a Republican wet dream to me.

[socialist_n_TN]

96. Unfortunately, basing things on what he's SAID.........

those items are an Obama wet dream too. I KNOW he's come out in support of at least half of your list.

[Jamaal510]

55. I wonder what is taking them so long to do those things,

since they have Republicans in Congress who are more than willing to help them. People have been saying for several years now that Obama and other Democrats somehow desperately want to gut entitlements, but it still has yet to happen.
Just like the thing with Syria, I'll let it play out first and believe it when I see it.

[socialist_n_TN]

57. No problem. Your last sentence says it all. HOWEVER..........

I think we need to give President Obama cover in his Nth dimensional chess match with the Republicans and the MIC by screaming to high heaven over even the POSSIBLITY of any of this happening. Don't you agree?

[leveymg]

67. Don't fool yourself: Obama got exactly what he wanted in Syria - Syria is now neutralized

as any military threat to Israel, and the Saudis are happy because the Sunnis now control most of the country.

As for here, well the federal government just got shrunk in a bathtub without anyone having to go on record to vote directly for it, and the military is exempted from having its trousers taken in.

Pentagon: Most Furloughed Civilians Ordered Back
Source: AP

The Pentagon is ordering most of its approximately 400,000 furloughed civilian employees back to work.

The decision by Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel is based on a Pentagon legal interpretation of a law called the Pay Our Military Act.

That measure was passed by Congress and signed by President Barack Obama shortly before the partial government shutdown began Tuesday.

The Pentagon did not immediately say on Saturday exactly how many workers will return to work. The Defense Department said "most" were being brought back.

Read more: http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/wireStory/pentagon-furloughed-civilians-ordered-back-20482298

[JoePhilly]

68. See ... Boehner and Obama are in cahoots.

Obama let the market double, so that 5 years into his Presidency, he and Boehner could shutdown the government, likk the economy, and then use that to kill Social Security.

Of course this plan ignores the fact that Obama could have entered office and done NOTHING and let the full collapse occur, and then the American people would have given up their SS and Medicare freely.

But that plan wasn't diabolical enough.

That's why its taking them so long.

[socialist_n_TN]

80. Don't they both support the TPP and chained CPI?.........

Or did I miss something. Of course, granted Boehner would like to do away with SS and Medicare all together, but I'm sure he'll "compromise" and take the stated Obama positions.

[JoePhilly]

104. Show me when Obama went on TV and told the American people that

cuts to Social Security are needed. Show me the video where he says "We need to go to a chained CPI."

And yes, you have missed something. All of the prior predictions about cuts to SS.

So please, go ahead, make another.

Please, proceed.

[Oilwellian]

106. It isn't a prediction

Chained CPI is in his budget.

[JoePhilly]

108. So its not something Obama is selling to the American people as needed.

Its an item in a budget proposal that the GOP will never accept.

Again ... make a prediction.

Will chained CPI be part of a deal to open the government, or increase the debt ceiling now ... yes or no.

I predict no. Its not happening.

What's your prediction?

[socialist_n_TN]

130. I'll predict that UNLESS the American people rise up en masse........

and say an emphatic "NO!" that chained CPI will be part of a Grand Bargain.

[sulphurdunn]

62. The Republicans proved long ago

that extortion works. It will be a victory for them unless their agenda is forcefully rolled back, not just delayed. Unless something has changed in Washington, I wouldn't hold my breath waiting for that to happen. The Republicans rule. Hell, a handful of them can shut down the entire federal government. What else does anyone need to see in order to realize who calls the shots in this oligarchy?

[HockeyMom]

63. Baby Boomers

Who are now becoming Seniors eligible for Medicare and Social Security. Grand Bargain? Yeah, we all have big fat 401K's, which didn't even exist when we came of age, which will cover our medical and retirement costs, IF we can ever even retire.

[treestar]

65. Why would politicians who want to keep the ACA

at the same time intend to cut Medicare?

CT BS.

[Ikonoklast]

76. There is no Logic in the reasoning being used, just a bunch whose political party gets little

support, so they pass the time by shitting on Democrats.

[treestar]

90. And I'm glad those two scary cats are in waiting

for them.

[socialist_n_TN]

77. We'll see what happens........

We should know in a couple of months.

[bvar22]

84. Where do you think the money for the "subsidies" comes from?

By LAW, the ACA most remain "Budget Neutral".
The funds for the subsidies to the private Health Insurance Corporations must come from somewhere. The much vaunted Subsidies for The Poor don't really go to "The Poor". It goes directly to the Private Insurance Corporations.

The majority of the funding for the "Subsidies" that will now flow to Private Health Insurance Corporations comes from cuts to Medicare.

Romney’s right: Obamacare cuts Medicare by $716 billion. Here’s how.

<snip>
The Medicare Advantage cut gets the most attention, but it only accounts for about a third of the Affordable Care Act's spending reduction. Another big chunk comes from the hospitals. The health law changed how Medicare calculates what they get reimbursed for various services, slightly lowering their rates over time. Hospitals agreed to these cuts because they knew, at the same time, they would likely see an influx of paying patients with the Affordable Care Act's insurance expansion.

The rest of the Affordable Care Act's Medicare cuts are a lot smaller. Reductions to Medicare's Disproportionate Share Payments — extra funds doled out the hospitals that see more uninsured patients — account for 5 percent in savings. Lower payments to home health providers make up another 8.8 percent. About a dozen cuts of this magnitude make up the green section above.

It's worth noting that there's one area these cuts don't touch: Medicare benefits. The Affordable Care Act rolls back payment rates for hospitals and insurers. It does not, however, change the basket of benefits that patients have access to. And, as Ezra pointed out earlier today, the Ryan budget would keep these cuts in place.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/wonkblog/wp/2012/08/14/romneys-right-obamacare-cuts-medicare-by-716-billion-heres-how/

While I applaud the defunding of the wasteful Medicare Advantage,
and the measures to eliminate inefficiency, it is yet to be determined HOW the cuts to
Home Care Providers and Hospitals are going to affect those on Medicare,
but it can't be good.

[font size=3]Medicare certainly has a lot of waste, but it is hard to believe that these Hundreds of BILLIONS transferred from Medicare to the Health Insurance Industry are NOT going to have a negative effect on Medicare.[/font]


At any rate, the precedent of diverting funding from Medicare (FICA Deductions) to finance the subsidies going to the private Health Insurance Industry is not something I am comfortable with. The "Private" Corporations & Wall Street have been trying for DECADES to divert the money from the SS Trust Fund (FICA Deductions) to their private pockets.

We will see.



You will know them by their [font size=3]WORKS.[/font]

[treestar]

89. That's the point, to buy insurance

Insurance pays for things we can't budget for. So of course the insurance companies get the money. But then we get the money when the insurance company pays for the medical care. Cue you claiming they deny all claims. Which is in no one's experience.

[bvar22]

91. "That's the point, to BUY insurance"... from Private, For Profit Corporations,

...and open the door to the Public Treasury to Pay for It ALL,
with a guaranteed 15% - 20% Profit margin for the most useless Industry in American History!

The Republican Wet Dream...
Mission Accomplished!

We agree on something!!!

[treestar]

92. The insurance is not worthless

Your analysis stops there, as if there is nothing to insurance.

It helps keep the economy going. If we lived in a right wing dream, the poor sick would just die, there would be fewer doctors being paid, hiring fewer nurses etc.

[cui bono]

115. bvar didn't say the insurance is worthless, he said that the industry is useless.

I assume because it is unnecessary and all it does is add to the medical costs. Without it we could have single payer and pay a lot less for health care. Plus they like to deny care in order to make more profit. Why should we have companies profiting off us getting medical care when it could be handled more efficiently without them, as a government run entity?

[markpkessinger]

138. Of course the insurance isn't 'worthless' . . .

. . . in the context in which such insurance is the only means of accessing health care for most people. But the much larger question, which the ACA doesn't begin to address but only improves somewhat, is whether the entire model of private, for-profit insurance company acting as a middleman between health care providers and patients adds anything of value to the medical care received. I submit that it does not. The only thing insurance companies ultimately do is to provide unnecessary cost to the delivery of medical care.

[raouldukelives]

66. Distractions or not, they are trying to do this everyday.

They are fueled by corporations & lobbyists which are fueled by "investors" who pump as much money into the market as they can.
Oddly, some of those investors continue to question why things are getting worse and claim they want things to be better while continuing to do the same things making it worse.
There is only one way left to make things better. Make your little world better. If we make enough, we can make enough. Maybe even leave a little something of the world for the next group lucky enough to follow in our footsteps.

[fredamae]

79. In my most humble

opinion, I'd venture to go so far as to say "they've" been working on this behind the curtain for a Long time. It's not something you magically "think" of days into the shutdown --

Considering who wants the grand bargain-the wealthy pols-and how long they've kept That alive without commitment(s) from either side to Protect the Big Three? Do I go too far to assume we could be watching the "good cop/bad cop" play?

[socialist_n_TN]

81. Oh, I agree. The end game has been coming for decades........

nm

[stuffmatters]

82. It's also keeping the Tea Party frothy and away from TPP

Because the Tea Party's intransigence before screwed up Boehner & Obama's Grand Bargain Deal at the last minute, I was kind of hoping they would keep thwarting O's GB and its national retirement swindle known as chained CPI. Also because the TP are so vehemently "State's Rights", I was hoping they could be a line of defense (albeit for the wrong reasons) against passage of the TranPacific Partnership Surrender of our democratic sovereignty to global corporate rule.

Their fight/shutdown of the govt over Obamacare and their agenda on the debt ceiling deplete the TP's energy,resources and power.
The unholy alliance of the New Deal Dems and the TP Loons in the House had a convenient utility in protecting America from Obama's corporate agenda contained in the TPP and the Grand Bargain.

[Phlem]

86. "The condition upon which God hath given liberty to man is eternal vigilance"

-p

[Faryn Balyncd]

87. Classic Shock Doctrine/Disaster Capitalism for which ACA obstructionism was a SMOKECREEN to obscure

....their much more broadbased attack on the safety net and government in general.

They could not admit that the ACA was a moderate plan that in its essentials was the Heritage Foundation designed 1993 Republican plan. To do so would destroy their propaganda. So they portray a centrist health care plan (which Republicans formerly endorsed) as "socialism", and mount a late hour obstructionist drama (which was doomed to fail) in order to placate their base, and in order to set up a crisis in which:
1. They hope to get a deal gutting SS and MC, and
2. They want it done in the context of a fight "about "Obamacare", so they can continue to peddle the ridiculous (but widely believed) lie that "Obamacare" is an attack on Medicare..... In this fashion they hope to accomplish their goal of gutting SS and MC, but escape paying the political price, since their propaganda machine will peddle the meme that "Obamacare" created the crisis and bears the blame for cuts to SS and MC.

Amazingly, a Tea Party favorite House Republican (with one of the "most conservative" ratings by the Club for Growth and the American Conservative Union) is now pushing for exactly such a "compromise". Moreover, he now frankly ADMITS that the original opposition to "Obamacare" was done to "maintain credibility" with the Republican extremist base (since Republicans "ran on repealing Obamacare&quot , but that their real goals are "rolling back entitlements" and "tax reform" (for the 1%).



The battle is only beginning.

[socialist_n_TN]

97. Yeah, see that the thing. Your links show some of the trails of my thinking......

on this. There's so much smoke from the Republican side about wanting (or at least "compromising" for) some of the same things that Obama has come out for that it's seems to be a logical step to propose a "Shock Doctrine" scenario with this. I mean we KNOW that BOTH parties will look for crises in order to enact an agenda.

I just want everybody to be prepared for the possibility of this coming up. And forewarned is forearmed.

[KoKo]

141. Recommend..

[1000words]

94. Sure looking that way to me

Rec

[socialist_n_TN]

98. And in keeping with the theme of this thread........

http://www.democraticunderground.com/10023791489

[Doctor_J]

105. Pretty close. TSD I think usually refers to the aftermath of some complete disaster

which this isn't yet. But this is certainly some misdirection to enact some very unpopular legislation while we're looking the other way.

[woo me with science]

109. K&R

[tavalon]

112. Okay, she's been on my list for a long time

time to read the book.

[BelgianMadCow]

139. I read it. Then came the Eurozone crisis

manufactured & managed by Goldman Sachs & alumni. It has been rather eye-opening.

You will like the book. For me, especially the historical perspective was extremely helpful.

[cui bono]

116. I fear you are correct. And I got sucked into this game they're playing as well.

But having read some more today and been reminded of some things by you and leveymg I am thinking you are correct. It just adds up. Obama has always given them what they want, it is too hard to imagine he doesn't want them as well. I would love to be proven wrong about that, but it hasn't happened yet.

I'm glad he's holding strong on this shutdown to an extent, but all we're fighting for is the sequester levels, which aren't good and were what the Republicans wanted. So... when do we get to fight for what we actually want? And since the military is out of the equation and are getting paid and continuing as before, we have now lost the sequester negotiation after the fact. And congress and Obama did that. They gave that away. I don't know if I had even heard that it happened or if I had forgotten in all the shutdown drama, but the thread by leveymg reminded/informed me of it and it is not a good thing.

It will be interesting, to say the least, to see how it all ends up playing out.

[WCLinolVir]

118. You betcha, can't waste a good disaster.

[L0oniX]

120. They are ready for the people to rise up. This will only end after they kill a lot of people. \/

Who ever wrote V has it right except that our government WILL kill us. They will keep pushing us down until we... (station break) Get No No ...look at how wonderful your crotch area will look after using No No ...show it to your friends and neighbours ...get ready for that summer bathing suit by using No No ...and guys ...looking too much like that hairy teddy bear? ...tired of getting that wax ripped off your baby skin? ...try No No for that young boy look on the beach (end break) Breaking news: The Revolution Will Not Be Televised...


O say can you see by the dawns early light what we...

BEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEP ....CHHSSSSHHSHSHSHHHSHSHSHSHSHSHSHHSSHSHSHH

Honey ...get up and turn off the TV please

snore snore snore fart snore

[bigbrother05]

121. Capitalists only see the opportunity, never the disaster

Pain and suffering are traded on the open market like pork bellies.

[Octafish]

124. It's all good.

For the one-percent.

[socialist_n_TN]

125. Yep. And in general I just call Disaster Capitalism............

capitalism. It's ALL a disaster.

[ewagner]

127. Shock Doctrine

has shaped forever my way of looking at events precipitated by the GOP....there's profit in chaos...and they know it

[liberal_at_heart]

133. good to see you posting socialist_n_TN. With all the centrist democrats on this site, we need some

socialist perspective.

[socialist_n_TN]

143. Why thank you lib.......

I've been a pest on this site for a while now. I'm going to try to be a positive, but most of the time, I WILL have a perspective that is NOT that of the centrist Dems.

[Nay]

150. Let me chime in here and thank you, too, because we're on the same page.

I honestly don't know how a few people on this site can even call themselves Democrats, but maybe that's just me. I still believe in the FDR way of handling things, and the 'democrats' we have in office now are pale imitations of the democrats that used to exist.

And yes, Marxist explanations will turn out to be right, but no one will listen because....commies.

[WillyT]

137. K & R !!!

[kentuck]

140. I certainly hope not.

It is too obvious. Even low-info voters can see what they are up to. Party loyalty keeps them quiet. They put their Party over their country.

[BelgianMadCow]

142. Link to full docu

inspired by this thread, is here.

Thanks for posting. Who knows what happens, but being aware of the doctrine makes us... shock resistant.

[socialist_n_TN]

144. IN A NUTSHELL!!!!!!!!! That's exactly WHY I posted this...

For awareness of what HAS happened in the past. It's a playbook that needs to be widely known so they CAN'T get away with it. At least not without people knowing what's going on.

[BelgianMadCow]

153. Post-shutdown-shock

= relevant for

[silvershadow]

151. If they are thinking about trying it, they will get run out of town with pitchforks. The people are

awake, and they've had it up to here. But, you are probably very correct as to what they think they're gonna do.