Hey Unsensible Emo Prog Firebaggers: This Time I'm *Sure* I Got It Right!!!

[cui bono]

178. I see now that you really did miss the press briefing so here's the link.

The relevant portions that pertain to our "discussion" are bolded. Now I anticipate that you are going to pick up on Carney's wording that the president didn't put it on the table, but in reality PBO is the one who included it in a proposal, so he did, in fact, put it on the table at the Republicans' request. So let's not get bogged down by that since that's really just Carney trying to take it off PBO's shoulders. Oh wait... that's exactly what you're trying to do. Oh well, try, at least this one time, to see the facts.

And again, one more time, all this "discussion" of ours is about is whether or not PBO retracted his offer. Which, again, he apparently has not. When someone makes an offer and doesn't retract it it is usually still in effect, unless there was an expiration date, but I haven't heard of one attached to this offer, have you? I hope you have. If so, please, do tell.

http://www.enewspf.com/latest-news/latest-national/39244-white-house-press-briefing-by-jay-carney-december-18-2012.html

White House Press Briefing by Jay Carney, December 18, 2012

Q Yes, Jay, a lot of top Democrats on the Hill, and I think President Obama, spent the campaign season saying, let’s not touch Social Security -- it doesn’t add to the deficit; we can resolve this issue without going to that entitlement program. What is the President’s message to those lawmakers who promised constituents that Social Security would not be touched after the President now has put chain CPI on the table for Republicans?

MR. CARNEY: Well, let’s be clear about one thing: The President didn’t put it on the table. This is something that Republicans want. And it is --

Q But the Republicans --

MR. CARNEY: -- part of his -- if I could please answer Sam’s question, I’d appreciate it. And the President did include it in his counterproposal, his counteroffer, as part of this process, as part of the negotiation process. I would note that this is a technical change -- would be if instated -- to the way that economists calculate inflation, and it would affect every program that has -- that uses the CPI in its calculations. And so it’s not directed at one particular program; it would affect every program that uses CPI. There are also -- as part of the President’s proposals, he would make sure that the most vulnerable were exempted out from this change.

But let’s be clear, this is something that the Republicans have asked for, and as part of an effort to find common ground with the Republicans, the President has agreed to put this in his proposal -- agreed to have this as part of a broad deficit reduction package that includes asking the wealthiest to pay more so that we can achieve the kind of revenue targets that are necessary for a balanced approach to deficit reduction.

Q Right, but there’s a lot -- again, my question was there’s a lot of people who voted for these lawmakers on a promise that --

MR. CARNEY: You heard the President say every time he talked about this --

Q Can I finish my question?

MR. CARNEY: Sure, yes.

Q A lot of people -- I’ll let you answer -- a lot of people voted for these lawmakers for reelection not too long ago on a promise that Social Security wouldn’t be touched, and if it was touched, it would be done separately from these fiscal cliff negotiations. What do those people -- what are these people now supposed to believe about the promises that their lawmakers made, including the President?

MR. CARNEY: Let me again make clear two things. One, the President has always said as part of this process when we’re talking about the spending cuts side of this that it would require tough choices by both sides. And that is certainly the case if you want to reach an agreement.

Secondly, this is a technical adjustment that supporters of it and economists -- outside economists say is meant to make the government’s estimates of inflation more accurate. Thirdly, as part of the President’s proposal, there is a clause that would protect vulnerable communities including the very elderly when it comes to Social Security recipients.

So there’s no question that it represents an effort to compromise, but it is also not -- this is a technical adjustment that economists believe is about getting the proper measure of inflation, and it is one sought by Republicans.

So, again, we’re not going to get everything we want. We knew that the President’s proposal that he put forward to the super committee that we put forward in the beginning of these negotiations would not pass unchanged. But I think your question demonstrates the absolute fact that the President has shown enormous good faith in trying to reach a compromise here. And it would be shocking if Republicans passed up this opportunity for what they say they seek, which is significant deficit reduction, significant spending cuts, simply to protect those just shy of being millionaires from having to pay a dime extra in income taxes.