Nine "Democrats" who would use your Social Security as a bargaining chip

[Triana]

Remember their names...

[fredamae]

1. And we need to

take a "peek" behind their curtain to see If there are any more "Dems" who "The Wall Street 9" might be shielding from public view...
It's never This simple-It goes in stages--the first ones who are brave enuf to venture out with very objectionable bullshit--they'll "convince" the others that "there is NO Other Choice" and then "the old sick, frail people get it" from the Democrats-again, going after those with the Most to lose and the Least capable of Protecting themselves against it--then these Wall Streeters Move UP the food chain to the Next most vulnerable class...

[truebrit71]

2. Very disappointed in Sen. Durbin...

DiFi, Baucus and Munchkin are par for the course...

Durbin will be hearing from me if this is his strategy...the rethuglicans won't budge on raising taxes for the uber-wealthy, so there should be no wiggle room, absolutely NONE, when it comes to "negotiating" hard-earned benefits for everyone else...

[fredamae]

3. And then there are these 28 dems

Who voted to Cut SNAP--DiFi and others of these 9 are amongst them as well.

We gotta face facts--"being" Dem is No Guarantee they're For the People they serve either...
They're Wall Street Democrats First before they consider we, the people. Period.

Vet their records-challenge their positions and vote.


http://beforeitsnews.com/politics/2013/06/shame-28-senate-democrats-voted-to-cut-food-stamps-2523608.html

[L0oniX]

8. Enemies of the real Dem party.

No core Democrat would ever even think of damaging SS but it may be that we are seeing a morphing of the Dem party into something other than what it has traditionally been. It has happened before.

[fredamae]

12. Yes, it has

I don't reject the Dem Party and what it "says" it stands for--I reject Wall Street/Corp Dems who have/are "Permanently Tea Staining" it and aide the GOP with the worst of the worst of legislation-that goes Against the people they serve. They do this for the Same reasons we charge the GOP with; Greed, Personal and Political gains.

I agree the Dem Party is very different from the Republicans-It's core is much better-however, this vision is simply blurred by these Powerful Wall Street Minded Party Leaders/Members....
Again, If we're going to fix the problems we face--we must also be willing to face the reality about our own.

[tblue]

29. RFK Jr. said 75% of Democrats in Congress

are corrupt. And 100% of Republicans.

This was a few years ago, so the Dems % may be higher now.

There is a world of difference between Democratic Party principles and what our elected officials stand for, I am very sorry to say. We could take a page from the Tea Party playbook and threaten to primary the Dems who go off the reservation. They shouldn't be allowed to crap on the cornerstones of the Party's hard fought achievements.

[fredamae]

35. I've long believed

we are Very Damned Lucky if we can point to 4% of the total body elected to Congress that actually do the peoples work.
As a Dem supporter/voter for 54 Years-I too for 52 of those years was "blinded" by party loyalty and even tho those who were wiser than me Tried to tell me this fact-I did Not believe it because "that's just Not who/what Dems do".
I was in total and complete denial and I was wrong.Why should anyone believe that about anything? The statistical math doesn't add up regardless of issue.
Unless and until we take All Politicians to task, Challenge their voting practices/agendas/disparity between votes and "sweet media talk" - Nothing will change, the division amongst the American People will continue to grow while these people we elected go about their dirty business of screwing Us out of all we and our parents labored and sacrificed for our whole lives to Earn.
We gotta forget about the mythical fantasies that somehow one group of politicians is any better than the other and start relying on non-traditional "news" resources to get to the facts.

Some Dems are so good-but they're in the minority, out-ranked, don't get much "air-time" on MSM and they're out-moneyed. It's OUR Job to know who's who and vote according to our own priorities and conscience, imo.

[Myrina]

17. ^^ this ^^

Ted Kennedy would be mad as hell that these people call themselves Democrats.

[fredamae]

37. I sure miss Ted. n/t

[leveymg]

53. I miss having liberals and progressives in leadership positions

There are damn few genuine populists in top Congressional posts. The Gang of 9 types pretty much run the top committees.

[jsr]

4. Recommend

[Buddha_of_Wisdom]

5. I see my Senator up there.

Bennet (notice his spelling, please) is a scumbag with a D on it. Appointed in by Ritter who quit after one term because he was so unpopular, and was re-elected after a nasty primary which my favored candidate Andrew Romanoff (now currently running for Coffmann's CD-6 seat and has an excellent chance of taking it) lost narrowly.

My guess is that he won't run for re-election and will announce it before his term is up in 2016.

[Hutzpa]

6. Bookmarked

Thanks.

[L0oniX]

7. Dino's.

[SoapBox]

32. +1

[woo me with science]

9. Rotating villains.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=223803

http://www.salon.com/2010/02/23/democrats_34/

Democrats perpetrate the same scam over and over on their own supporters, and this illustrates perfectly how it’s played:
....
The primary tactic in this game is Villain Rotation. They always have a handful of Democratic Senators announce that they will be the ones to deviate this time from the ostensible party position and impede success, but the designated Villain constantly shifts, so the Party itself can claim it supports these measures while an always-changing handful of their members invariably prevent it.

[jsr]

10. ^ This should be an OP.

[woo me with science]

11. It has been.

Feel free to repost if you want. It's certainly still relevant.

[L0oniX]

15. ^^^this^^^

[adirondacker]

22. +1000. Smoke and mirrors. nt

[leftstreet]

26. +1

[Egalitarian Thug]

33. That's how easy it is to fool the American Sucker Class and keep your

"ratings" in the top decile despite voting to screw over your constituents and follow that up by selling corporations exclusive rights to the federal trough over and over and over, again.

[gulliver]

13. These types of threads are hopeless and should be informally banned.

Let's look at some problems.

1. No link. It's a picture. A picture.


2. No specific charge. "Bargaining chip?" What's that? Huh?


3. Says nothing about Republicans. Let's not focus on nine tenuously accused jaywalkers when their are hundreds of Jack the Rippers.


4. Says nothing about seniors who vote Republican. Dems who want to protect Social Security and Medicare should be talking to their Republican-voting friends.

[Egalitarian Thug]

34. Yeah, neither truth nor betraying your constituents is sufficient reason to

post a thread on a political message board.

[bhikkhu]

36. How about asking "why would they do that?"

If someone has a better answer to the fiscal problems of SS and Medicare, what is it? I know that nothing has to be done immediately in either case, but the basic situation is that the sooner a solution is agreed on, the smaller that solution needs to be.

If the Democratic Party were forced by its constituents to stick its head in the sand and claim that nothing can be done and nothing needed to be done, then the only party to turn to for solutions would be the repugs.

[Egalitarian Thug]

50. How about acknowledging the fact that there is no problem, and standing up

with Bernie every time this lie is repeated?

These parasites are worse than the republican parasites because they pretend to be the opposition.

[bhikkhu]

51. How about explaining how there is no problem - if its a lie, explain it

as it has been well explained how there is a problem, which gets worse each year it is ignored or left alone.

Is there a plan to meet the increased funding needs of Social Security in 4 or 5 years? In 20? More importantly, is there a plan to meet the rising costs of Medicare and Medicare, or do we just say that all the numbers and projections are wrong? That's no way to govern, and no way to manage programs that people depend on.

Its easy enough to research, but here is one graphic:

?w=640&h=480

Of course, the Social Security deficit has been long-predicted, and a large fund was built up to service it, so its not such a big deal. Taken together with the rising costs of Medicare and Medicaid, however, its hard to say that a problem doesn't exist. What is the plan then, other than booting out of office any Democrat that tries to govern?

If a situation is created where Democrats are forbidden from addressing reality (as the GOP, for example, is forbidden from talking about climate change), then reasonable people would be required to elect republicans to manage things. Lets not adopt the tactic that made our opposition such a joke.

[Egalitarian Thug]

60. It has been, ad nauseum. If you missed ti it is because you don't want to know.

This is a symptom of the American fantasy pandemic. Feel free to remain ensconced in your fantasy world, but remember that some of us don't live in your bubble and are paying attention to what is, rather than what the parasites would like us to believe as they continue to loot the nation.

The very chart you present demonstrates the Big Lie, but you and so many others seem incapable of seeing what is right before your eyes. No projections beyond five to eight years hold up, that's just a fact. Too many things that effect the projections occur in the time-frame, so these projections are nothing more than wild guesses by professionals that. given the option, would rather not have to make a wild guess about what might happen 5 - 10 years from now.

Stealing money from people and justifying it by pretending that someday there might be a problem is nothing but stealing from the least of us to benefit the people that matter.

[bhikkhu]

61. So, the projections are all bogus

are there any better projections to work from, that suggest a different situation? Or is it that no possible projections could possibly be of any use...in which case we stumble ahead inevitably in the dark, blindly hoping for the best. I don't see how that viewpoint would win elections or serve anyone well who was actually responsible for managing things.

Pronouncing disdainfully that the Congressional Budget Office and the U.S. Government Accountability Office live in their own little fantasy world without suggesting any more reliable alternative isn't really helpful. I don't know of a better source of information. Do you?

[Egalitarian Thug]

62. That's not what I wrote. Your determined refusal to read what was written or to

understand that making deleterious policies based on what boils down to conjecture is inappropriate, shows where you are coming from and where you would have the rest of us go.

Enjoy.

[bhikkhu]

63. You wrote that the figures came from a fantasy world, an "American Fantasy Epidemic"

The figures came from the U.S. Government Accountability Office, and agree with numbers published by the Congressional Budget Office. So, by extension, when you say I am living in a fantasy world, you are saying I'm trapped in that little world with the GAO and the CBO.

I'm just asking what numbers you would use as an alternative. I really would be interested if you have a good alternate source.

[Egalitarian Thug]

64. No, I didn't (although I did misspell 'it'). Re-read the post and kick this thread again.

I wrote that your choice to ignore dozens (hundreds?) of posts here directing you to in-depth explanations of how and why these bogus projections are created and used is symptomatic of the American fantasy pandemic.

[bhikkhu]

65. The best response to a request for references or information

is to at least suggest some by name. I'm always happy to provide a link or two, and make it a habit of having reliable information on hand. It makes discussions more useful.

[bluestate10]

38. I agree and don't understand why Admins haven't put an end to stuff like the OP.

It is easy to write a hair on fire title for an OP, but if no valid policy proposals are included the OP should be deleted.

[madfloridian]

43. We can not leave the Dems without criticism on this issue.

It is expected of the present-day GOP to cut entitlements. It is NOT expected of our Democrats to put them on the table.

[djean111]

52. We know and expect the Republicans will do this sort of thing.

We can only vote the GOP out by voting for Dems, but it is useful to know which Dems should be primaried or whatever.
Ranting at the GOP is pretty much pointless - Freeperish, really, to march in lockstep as if we all agree with everything the Dem party does, and just rant at the GOP. People here KNOW the GOP are shits, and they were not going to vote for them anyway. Suggesting we just march in lockstep to the D, no matter what, is not what Democracy is all about, IMO.

"Bargaining chip" - surely you know that Chained CPI is being used as a bargaining chip by this administration, in order to get the GOP to agree to anything. Funny thing though, I won't be surprised if the GOP just grabs this one chip and laughs at the thought of bargaining. And then uses the fact that the chip is offered by dems in 2014 and 2016.

We can only try and change the Dem party.

[Thucydides]

14. not being smarmy here, do you have a link so I can read up on this?

[madfloridian]

18. Here you go.

http://www.salon.com/2013/10/26/sell_out_alert_9_democrats_already_caving_to_gop_on_social_security_cuts_partner/singleton/

[Thucydides]

24. Thanks MF, always the teacher, you have never retired.....

only have become more selective in your curriculum.

[madfloridian]

59. Yep, that's me.

Always jumping in with links.

[bluestate10]

41. The statements made by the 9 Senators could mean almost anything. I will wait

until I see actual policy proposals. There are several ways to reform Social Security and Medicare that won't hurt people that need those programs and would actually make them healthier for the people that do need the programs.

[senseandsensibility]

16. Maybe we could shrink that graphic and use it as an avatar?

It needs more exposure, I think.

[mountain grammy]

20. Yep, there's Michael Bennet with his name misspelled.

I supported and voted for him because the alternative was a tea bagger named Ken Buck.

I knew Bennet would do this and supported Andrew Romanoff in the primary, but Bennet was the choice. I'll keep letting him know how we feel in this family..

Meantime, Andy Romanoff is running for Coffman's seat if anyone wants to chip in for a real liberal:

http://www.andrewromanoff.com/

[madfloridian]

21. Patty Murray only wants "smart entitlement cuts."

"Alan Simpson and Erskine Bowles would say it just that bluntly. They were the bipartisan co-chairs of the National Commission on Fiscal Responsibility and Reform. I’d suggest Northwest Republicans and Democrats dust off the Simpson-Bowles recommendations pronto. They outlined a thoughtful approach that balances the needs and concerns of both parties — discretionary and mandatory spending cuts, tax reform, social security reform and improving the process we all witnessed fall apart over the past two weeks. Former Republican Senate Budget Committee Chairman Pete Domenici and former White House Budget Director and Federal Reserve Vice Chair Alice Rivlin have also published a bipartisan blueprint for deficit reduction that is worth studying.

These ideas are getting some attention from Washington's Sen. Murray. During a phone call Friday, her communications director Matt McAlvanah said Murray will use Simpson-Bowles and Domenici-Rivlin as something of a litmus test for deficit reduction proposals. He acknowledged that Murray “looks for smart entitlement cuts.” It’s an open question (and a tough conversation) whether Democrats will agree with her, he said."

http://crosscut.com/2013/10/19/politics-government/117016/can-sen-murray-direct-deficit-downward/

That could mean anything.

[leftstreet]

25. She is the absolute worst of the cul-de-sac liberals

'smart entitlement cuts'

[tblue]

31. Like "clean coal."

Does not exist.

[bhikkhu]

39. So nothing can be done?

And if the programs run into funding problems, we'll have to elect repugs to solve them, as Democrats aren't allowed to propose solutions?

[FogerRox]

57. deficit reduction?

An infrastructure jobs program would cut the deficit,,, but I have a feeling Murray wont go there.

[madfloridian]

58. Someone should think about a program like that.

It's greatly needed right now. They are all singing along on that deficit reduction song. Looks like one party would get tired of it, doesn't it?

[justhanginon]

23. Durbin is my senator

and if he gets an opponent who is a real democrat in the next primary I will be supporting that opponent. If he (Durbin) is the candidate again, I will probably vote for the republican.Then I will know I am voting for someone without the disappointment of thinking, incorrectly, that I have a senator who has the average constituent's interest at heart.
No more! It is really depressing and I am just sick to death of this shit!
Yes, I am writing his office and expressing these sentiments and more.

[mucifer]

27. Me too! I met him once at a dem fundraiser. He really seemed like a plastic fake

creepy politician. What scare me is how closely he is connected to the President. The social security stuff is really scary.

[Faryn Balyncd]

28. They are threatening BOTH the Middle Class AND the Democratic Party's future viability.

We have a situation where doing the right thing ---- defending Social Security & Medicare WITHOUT COMPROMISE from assault ---- is also absolutely necessary for political viability.


The reality is that cyurrent CPI calculations have ALREADY BEEN RIGGED to UNDERstate inflation.

We can only defend SS and MC by going on the OFFENSIVE and demanding that we FIX the CPI with a CPI-E that INCREASES future COLAs, not by unjustly raping SS by replacing the current rigged CPI with an even more fraudulent chained CPI.

[doc03]

30. I think Obama would also fall in that group n/t

[hollowdweller]

40. Manchin suprises me.

First he spearheads gun control knowing that it's a hugely touchy issue in WV and he registers a massive drop in the polls here.

Then representing a state with a huge number of seniors and the highest or near the highest number of SS disability recipients he comes out for cutting SS?

He must have totally lost his sense of the issues back home.

[Oilwellian]

42. There are far more so-called Dem Senators willing to destroy the party

Senator Bernie Sanders has circulated a dear colleague letter in the Senate declaring that Social Security benefit cuts should NOT be a part of any deficit so-called “Grand Bargain” destined to be the focal-point of this fall’s lame duck Congressional session. Sen. Sanders is the founder of the Senate’s Defending Social Security Caucus, and organized this effort with the help of Senators Begich(D-AK), Franken(D-MN) and Whitehouse (D-RI). The letter, signed by 29 Democratic Senators, says:

“Contrary to some claims, Social Security is not the cause of our nation’s deficit problem. Not only does the program operate independently, but it is prohibited from borrowing. Social Security must pay all benefits from its own trust fund. If there are insufficient funds to pay out full benefits, benefits are automatically reduced to the level supported by the program’s own revenues. Social Security cannot drive up the deficit by tapping general revenues to pay benefits. To be sure, Social Security has its own long-term challenges that will need to be addressed in the decades ahead. But the budget and Social Security are separate, and should be considered separately."

The vast majority of American’s couldn’t agree more. However, we have to wonder why only 29 signatures on this letter? Where are the others?

http://www.ncpssm.org/EntitledtoKnow/entryid/1936/29-Senators-Say-No-Cuts-to-Social-Security-Benefits-What-About-the-Others

So who didn’t sign? (Those still in office and not in poster are in bold)

Max Baucus, Michael Bennet, Jeff Bingaman, Tom Carper Bob Casey, Kent Conrad, Chris Coons, Dick Durbin, Dianne Feinstein, Kay Hagan, John Kerry, Amy Klobuchar, Herb Kohl, Mary Landrieu, Joe Lieberman, Claire McCaskill, Ben Nelson, Bill Nelson, Mark Pryor, Jeanne Shaheen, Jon Tester, Mark Udall, Mark Warner, Jim Webb

I also know Chuck Schumer has been very outspoken about Chained CPI and totally supports it.

That makes 15 more Dem senators willing to cut our SS benefits. That's very filibuster proof if every Repub senator votes for it as well.

[woo me with science]

49. This should be an OP.

The corporatists are slick. They have Reid out making speeches that there will be no Grand Bargain so people won't scream bloody murder and flood the nation with protest.

What you just posted shows that we'd better damned well be raising the roof. And now.

[Veilex]

44. Sent this to Patty Murry...

I would like to encourage everyone to do the same. Please contact any of these congress critters...particularly if they are representing your district.

I keep hearing from a number of sources, that Ms. Murry intends to use Social Security as a bargaining chip.

This puzzles me greatly. Particularly since Social Security pumps up job-generating and business activity by about $2 for every dollar recipients spend. This is according to a study by the AARP.

Similar studies by well respected economists have pointed out time and again that a spent dollar has a multiplicative effect on our economy.

So I guess what I'm getting at is this: Why is Social Security, a program that is vital not only for those who have retired, but for the stores, utilities and other services that rely on social security dollars from retirees, why is this program being considered for cuts (or the more current buzzword “reform”)? Cutting or reducing social security will cause an additional drag on the economy... and those who are responsible for such an act will most assuredly be remembered for such an act by the aging, and still voting, baby boomer generation.

Perhaps the answer Ms. Murry would provide would be something akin to: Social Security is running out of money. While I can understand this argument, I disagree with the proposed solution. Cutting or reducing funding for a program that helps stimulate the economy is akin to cutting off an arm because it got scraped and is bleeding. Instead, I posit that the proverbial band-aid for this economic scratch, is an infusion of jobs.

I realize that is an easier said-than-done solution, but it is ultimately the solution for a great many of our current ailments. I would suggest that economic stimulus be targeted at small businesses, as I believe that would have a far more profound impact for the overall populace.

Lastly, I recommend pushing to completely repeal the sequester. I'm sure you agree with this... But I want to point to this in the context of how it'll affect social security. As you know, people pay taxes. Taxes help fund a myriad of items, to include social security... it helps to keep people employed.

It just seems a bizarre spectacle to have the political leaders of the world’s wealthiest country buy into the premise that well-off Americans have run out of money and cannot do more to pay their fair share of taxes to help retirees and the poor.

Social Security as a bargaining chip should be taken off the table. If any negotiating over social security happens, it should be to lower the retirement age and increase the allotment to our elderly. It is passed time for Americans to respect their elders, and this would be a great first step.

[Triana]

45. EVERYONE who has one of these so-called "Democrats" as a rep should be writing such letters

to them!

[Enthusiast]

46. Nice..........nt

[Enthusiast]

47. Kicked and Recommended! nt

[RandiFan1290]

48. The Generals!

[WillyT]

54. K & R !!!

[FogerRox]

55. Short & sweet, but with a top flight message. KnR

[SamYeager]

56. Durbin is pissing me off to no end!

Damnit!

[kath]

66. Sadly, this picture of nine " Democrats" should include the President...