Holder: Big banks may face criminal cases soon... says, no such thing as 'too big to jail.'

[woo me with science]

64. Nope, haven't been wrong about that, either. But you knew that.

Last edited Mon May 5, 2014, 08:52 PM - Edit history (1)

You know very well what I have said all along:

that the threats of SS cuts will be used for as long as corporate politicians find them useful as a "greater evil" in order to push through other assaults and, bizarrely, to take credit for "saving" SS...an absurd bit of propaganda twisting, since it was Obama who wielded the threat in the first place.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=2020314

This is not *only* about Social Security and Medicare. In fact, I would not be surprised if SS and Medicare were ostentatiously "saved" at the last minute one more time as propaganda to make the people cheer and be grateful and feel represented when the blow is withheld, rather than demanding to know why predatory policies are still being enacted in every other area of our lives, and why nobody is helping us.

There are other other examples, too. It just takes a google.

Only the propaganda of the Third Way could possibly try to advertise as representation of the people the president's withholding of an assault HE himself chose to threaten them with. But there is no way this country would have as quietly accepted the vicious austerity that *was* imposed had he and other slick corporatists not pre-arranged the situation so that they could terrify seniors to their shoes and then make them breathe that, "At least he didn't cut Social Security." It was a cruel and cynical tactic, but that is how the Third Way rolls.

And true to my prediction, the cuts are *still* on the table...merely moved to the side temporarily because it is an election year. But you knew that, too, because you have been caught before trying to claim it's all over ...and have been shamed by the White House's own statements contradicting you:

The disinformation campaign grows old, Whisp.
http://sync.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=4713737

Your impressive fail on SS aside, it's certainly illustrative that you felt compelled to *try* to change the subject from the administration's protected bankers to SS, because you could not refute the cold, hard truth about the delays, the statutes of limitations, and Holder's own shameful admission.


Now, you go ahead and try another tactic without me. Youve already made me break my rule about responding to Third Way arguments that've been debunked a thousand times, so I will bow out now and let you spin this any way you like. I think the pattern here is already sufficiently clear.