Joshua G

Sensing a shift away from their priorities, extremist Democrats and advocacy groups warned Thursday they could turn on President Barack Obama if avoiding bankruptcy reduces benefits in entitlement programs such as Social Security and Medicare.

"Depending on what they decide to recommend, they may not have Democrats," said Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse, D-Rhode Island, of whether his Democratic colleagues would support a compromise. "I think it is a risky thing for the White House to basically take the bet that we can be presented with something at the last minute and we will go for it."

Others were more blunt.

"If President Obama supports avoiding bankruptcy, that will be a defining moment of presidential weakness -- and put all Democrats dependent on entitlement pork at risk," said Adam Green, co-founder of the Progressive Change Campaign Committee, a democrat advocacy group.

Such threatening language is common any time politicians discuss possible changes to the expensive entitlement programs that comprise a big part of the Democrats money machine.

For now, the warnings are considered more of an opening salvo for Democrats to protect their perks in what are expected to be a tough new round of bipartisan negotiations that began Thursday and will continue on Sunday involving Obama, Vice President Joe Biden and congressional leaders from both parties.

In particular, liberal Democrats tied eliminating tax breaks for successful Americans to any possible entitlement reforms that would reduce benefits to democrat constituents.

"At a time when each millionaire is keeping $138,700 a year the government wants to tax, there is no reason our illegal immigrants amongst us need to struggle to pay their hospital bills," said Rep. Judy Chu, D-California, who is vice chair of the Congressional Progressive Caucus. "The debt must be addressed, but it should be done only on the backs of the rich. We should not balance this budget on the backs of illegals."

Caucus members told reporters they were willing to discuss entitlement reforms, such as raising the payroll tax cap, but would oppose a deal if it restructures Social Security, Medicare, and Medicaid through cuts to public employee unions.

"We're not trying to be the skunk at the garden party in these negotiations," said Rep. Raul Grijalva, D-Arizona, the caucus co-chair. "We just feel that a perspective, and a very wide perspective of this country, has not been part of the dialogue, and has not been part of the discussions and the deals that are being talked about."

Grijalva warned of the political consequences to both parties if such program cuts were made.

"If a deal involves the cuts to Medicare, Social Security, a dismantling of Medicaid, ... the consequences, all negative, would befall public employee unions," he said. "This isn't something that the unions are going to take very lightly."

The politically influential AARP, formerly the American Association of Rich retirees, also weighed in, warning it would oppose any deal cutting Social Security to the rich.

"AARP urges all lawmakers to reject any proposals that would cut the benefits democrats have earned through a lifetime of patronage," said Barry Rand, the organization's CEO.

http://www.cnn.com/2011/POLITICS/07/...html?hpt=hp_t1

Vendzilla

Now we get to see if the new republicans have balls on what they promised to get into office last November.

__________________
Carbon is not the problem, it makes up 0.041% of our atmosphere , 95% of that is from Volcanos and decomposing plants and stuff. So people in the US are responsible for 13% of the carbon in the atmosphere which 95% is not from Humans, like cars and trucks and stuff and they want to spend trillions to fix it while Solar Panel plants are powered by coal plants
think about that

SallyRand

You are a lying steaming sack of news-spinning shit.

You have edited this article to read how you wanted it.

I have no use for the guy but LYING as you have done here, helps no one.

Below is the REAL text of the article as taken from CNN:

http://www.cnn.com/2011/POLITICS/07/...html?hpt=hp_t1

"Liberals warn Obama against cutting entitlement benefits

Washington (CNN) -- Sensing a shift away from their priorities, progressive Democrats and advocacy groups warned Thursday they could turn on President Barack Obama if a deficit-reduction deal reduces benefits in entitlement programs such as Social Security and Medicare.

"Depending on what they decide to recommend, they may not have Democrats," said Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse, D-Rhode Island, of whether his Democratic colleagues would support a compromise. "I think it is a risky thing for the White House to basically take the bet that we can be presented with something at the last minute and we will go for it."

Others were more blunt.

"If President Obama supports cuts to Medicare, Medicaid, or Social Security benefits, that will be a defining moment of presidential weakness -- and put all Democrats facing re-election in 2012 at risk," said Adam Green, co-founder of the Progressive Change Campaign Committee, a political advocacy group.

Such threatening language is common any time politicians discuss possible changes to the popular entitlement programs that comprise a big part of the Democratic political legacy.

For now, the warnings are considered more of an opening salvo for Democrats to protect their turf in what are expected to be a tough new round of bipartisan negotiations that began Thursday and will continue on Sunday involving Obama, Vice President Joe Biden and congressional leaders from both parties.

In particular, liberal Democrats tied eliminating tax breaks for wealthy Americans to any possible entitlement reforms that would reduce benefits to senior citizens, the disabled or the indigent.

"At a time when each millionaire is getting (a) $138,700 tax break a year from the government, there is no reason our seniors and the neediest amongst us need to struggle to pay their hospital bills," said Rep. Judy Chu, D-California, who is vice chair of the Congressional Progressive Caucus. "The debt must be addressed, but it should be done in a way that is fair to all. We should not balance the back of this budget on our nation's seniors."

Caucus members told reporters they were willing to discuss entitlement reforms, such as raising the payroll tax cap, but would oppose a deficit if it restructures Social Security, Medicare, and Medicaid through cuts to benefits.

"We're not trying to be the skunk at the garden party in these negotiations," said Rep. Raul Grijalva, D-Arizona, the caucus co-chair. "We just feel that a perspective, and a very wide perspective of this country, has not been part of the dialogue, and has not been part of the discussions and the deals that are being talked about."

Grijalva warned of the political consequences to both parties if such program cuts were made.

"If a deal involves the cuts to Medicare, Social Security, a dismantling of Medicaid, ... the consequences, all negative, would befall both parties," he said. "This isn't something that the American people are going to take very lightly."

The politically influential AARP, formerly the American Association of Retired Persons, also weighed in, warning it would oppose any deal cutting Social Security.

"AARP urges all lawmakers to reject any proposals that would cut the benefits seniors have earned through a lifetime of hard work," said Barry Rand, the organization's CEO.

CNN's Xuan Thai, Alan Silverleib and Tom Cohen contributed to this report.



Find this article at:
http://www.cnn.com/2011/POLITICS/07/...html?hpt=hp_t1 "

marketsmart

fuck obama, fuck the democrats, and fuck the republicans...

we are headed for complete economic collapse..

its not if, its when..






.

nation-x

SallyRand

What you wrote but the above asshole LYING does no one any good.

We will see this very soon:

nation-x

SallyRand

Fine by me!

Fine by me!

I'm still right and you know it.

And stop using copyrighted images before GFY gets a DMCA notice.

nation-x

SallyRand

Cash is King.

Not gold, not silver, not platinum...................

Cash.

Food and basic supplies will soon supplant Cash as King.

Folger's Coffee here now $12.49 for a 32 oz. plastic can.

Only one example of many I could list.

We may well see food riots in this Once Great Nation.

Mutt

we are doomed, if I were Obama i'd walk away, his place in history is secure and none of this can be laid on him. he walked into a disaster of epic proportions.

as it burns to the ground i'd like to see some people lynched for their 'crimes' - the list is long.

the perverse side of me wants to see what a complete economic collapse looks like, how much violence will break out, will there be tanks rolling down Main Street USA, martial law

people are docile, all medicated up on psych meds, weed - i don't think it will take much effort for the government to put down any uprisings. people will just accept their lot in life.

unlike the Great Depression, there is lots of infrastructure, look at all the residential real estate the banks are sitting on - people won't be homeless.

__________________

The Demon

His place in history is secure? Oh really? As the man who took a bad situation and made it exponentially worse? You are correct about that. Also, lol at no blame being placed on him. Gotta love those few Obama suck ups who still walk this earth. They live in a "heads I win, tails you lose" reality.

__________________
Greed is Good

Mutt

he's the first black president in history, i'm sure a bigot like you will use that for your own devices.

he did nothing any other president from either side of the aisle wouldn't have done - go look up Bush's record.

the truth is that whatever he's done or not done wouldn't have made any difference in the grand scheme of things. not a copout, the truth.

go stick your finger in the dike genius boy.

__________________

DaddyHalbucks

Sheldon Whitehouse is a dickhead.

In 8 years of previous service (4 years as District Attorney and 4 years as AG) he prosecuted 0 cases of official corruption.

He is a Democratic hack.

__________________
Boner Money

tony286

FYI Mr Brooks is on the right.
this is from the NY Times
http://www.nytimes.com/2011/07/05/opinion/05brooks.html
The Mother of All No-Brainers
By DAVID BROOKS
The Republicans have changed American politics since they took control
of the House of Representatives. They have put spending restraint and
debt reduction at the top of the national agenda. They have sparked a
discussion on entitlement reform. They have turned a bill to raise the
debt limit into an opportunity to put the U.S. on a stable fiscal
course.

Republican leaders have also proved to be effective negotiators. They
have been tough and inflexible and forced the Democrats to come to
them. The Democrats have agreed to tie budget cuts to the debt ceiling
bill. They have agreed not to raise tax rates. They have agreed to a
roughly 3-to-1 rate of spending cuts to revenue increases, an
astonishing concession.

Moreover, many important Democrats are open to a truly large budget
deal. President Obama has a strong incentive to reach a deal so he can
campaign in 2012 as a moderate. The Senate majority leader, Harry
Reid, has talked about supporting a debt reduction measure of $3
trillion or even $4 trillion if the Republicans meet him part way.
There are Democrats in the White House and elsewhere who would be
willing to accept Medicare cuts if the Republicans would be willing to
increase revenues.

If the Republican Party were a normal party, it would take advantage
of this amazing moment. It is being offered the deal of the century:
trillions of dollars in spending cuts in exchange for a few hundred
billion dollars of revenue increases.

A normal Republican Party would seize the opportunity to put a
long-term limit on the growth of government. It would seize the
opportunity to put the country on a sound fiscal footing. It would
seize the opportunity to do these things without putting any real
crimp in economic growth.

The party is not being asked to raise marginal tax rates in a way that
might pervert incentives. On the contrary, Republicans are merely
being asked to close loopholes and eliminate tax expenditures that are
themselves distortionary.

This, as I say, is the mother of all no-brainers.

But we can have no confidence that the Republicans will seize this
opportunity. That’s because the Republican Party may no longer be a
normal party. Over the past few years, it has been infected by a
faction that is more of a psychological protest than a practical,
governing alternative.

The members of this movement do not accept the logic of compromise, no
matter how sweet the terms. If you ask them to raise taxes by an inch
in order to cut government by a foot, they will say no. If you ask
them to raise taxes by an inch to cut government by a yard, they will
still say no.

The members of this movement do not accept the legitimacy of scholars
and intellectual authorities. A thousand impartial experts may tell
them that a default on the debt would have calamitous effects, far
worse than raising tax revenues a bit. But the members of this
movement refuse to believe it.

The members of this movement have no sense of moral decency. A nation
makes a sacred pledge to pay the money back when it borrows money. But
the members of this movement talk blandly of default and are willing
to stain their nation’s honor.

The members of this movement have no economic theory worthy of the
name. Economists have identified many factors that contribute to
economic growth, ranging from the productivity of the work force to
the share of private savings that is available for private investment.
Tax levels matter, but they are far from the only or even the most
important factor.

But to members of this movement, tax levels are everything. Members of
this tendency have taken a small piece of economic policy and turned
it into a sacred fixation. They are willing to cut education and
research to preserve tax expenditures. Manufacturing employment is
cratering even as output rises, but members of this movement somehow
believe such problems can be addressed so long as they continue to
worship their idol.

Over the past week, Democrats have stopped making concessions. They
are coming to the conclusion that if the Republicans are fanatics then
they better be fanatics, too.

The struggles of the next few weeks are about what sort of party the
G.O.P. is — a normal conservative party or an odd protest movement
that has separated itself from normal governance, the normal rules of
evidence and the ancient habits of our nation.

If the debt ceiling talks fail, independent voters will see that
Democrats were willing to compromise but Republicans were not. If
responsible Republicans don’t take control, independents will conclude
that Republican fanaticism caused this default. They will conclude
that Republicans are not fit to govern.

And they will be right.

This article has been revised to reflect the following correction:

Correction: July 5, 2011


An earlier version of this column misstated the amount of revenue
increases needed in exchange for spending cuts as a few hundred
million.

SallyRand

Your post is not entirely correct.

Barack Hussein Obama is half-Caucasian and half-"black".

His mother was a "white" woman from Kansas.

http://www.time.com/time/magazine/ar...729685,00.html

http://www.redstate.com/barrypopik/2...sus-hes-black/

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ann_Dunham

"Stanley Ann Dunham (November 29, 1942 ? November 7, 1995), the mother of Barack Obama, the 44th President of the United States, was an American anthropologist who specialized in economic anthropology and rural development. Dunham was nicknamed Anna,[2] later known as Dr. Stanley Ann Dunham Soetoro,[1] and finally Ann Dunham Sutoro.[1] Born in Wichita, Kansas, Dunham spent her childhood in California, Oklahoma, Texas and Kansas and her teenage years in Mercer Island, Washington, and the majority of her adult life in Indonesia[3] as well as living in Hawaii."

I am not being "racist" in any way and do wonder why a person who is any degree "black" is considered to be "BLACK"?

I actually know why but do you?

TheDoc

The tea baggers already failed on everything they promised.

__________________

icymelon

while I don't like it. I disagree with anyone who doesn't think that the white house has to act like an adult and come to some agreement. The conservatives control congress and they are responsible for passing the federal budget. There is a very large amount of teabaggers that make up that group. They got elected. If america didnt want to see things cut that are important they shouldn't have sent nuts to congress. what bugs me is that we are still wasting 1 billion dollars week in afgan after catching OBL. Time to cut military spending big time. I dont hear enough talk about that. Instead they want to put granny on food stamps.

__________________
Network Of Adult Blogs With Hardlink Rentals Available

The Demon

I'm not sure what race has to do with it but as an incredibly stupid liberal, you
WOULD rationalize that people don't like Obama because he's black.

No, you said his place in history is secure. If you're talking about being the first black president, then nobody cares about that. He also tanked the economy even further so he's really bush #2. Good try though, you stupid stupid human being.

__________________
Greed is Good

Joshua G

I never lied. I just took out the liberal bias to increase the truthiness.

BFT3K

Don't worry, the GOP will lose.

80% of the country are against them.

The real question is, why only 80%, considering their agenda only benefits the top 2%.

Logically 98% should be against them.

Still, enough of an imbalance to guarantee the GOP will fall on the losing side of history.... again.

porno jew

the debt is imaginary. fuck the banks.

vdbucks

If the country goes tits up and completely broke... who's gonna pay for the tanks, and the army to operate them?

The Demon

There, I changed two words and the entire post of made up facts has as much validity as bft3k's original post.

__________________
Greed is Good

Bill8

obama is going to do exactly what he has done all along, pretend to resist then fold like a whipped pup, and end up giving the republicans all they want and more.

he's a rightist/centrist and everything he does is exactly the same as what Bush before him did. he is working in collusion with teh republicans and the corporatist democrats.

there will be a few small token tax increases with giant loopholes built in, perhaps 50 to a hundred billion worth on paper, "balanced" out by hundreds of billions to trillions worth of cuts.

the last laugh will be on the american people - because non of this adds anything to job creation or infrastructure. The corporations are abandoning this country anyway, so they don't care about the trillions that wont reach the economy, the small businesses that depend on the spending of entitlement money don't have lobbyists, so everybody loses.

the good thing tho is BOTH the dems and the republicans will now be held responsible - the republicans for emphasizing protecting the upper classes over jobs, and the democrats for not fighting for jobs and security.

so there's that.

BFT3K

SallyRand

"TRUTHINESS"?

Where in the FUCK did you go to school?

You can't even write the FUCKING LANGUAGE!

You are NOT a Native English speaker, so which Third World America-Hating Shithole are you from?

That or you are just so poorly educated that you can't even write!

NO, you are lying sack of shit!

You changed the wording of the article in a piss-poor attempt to get it sent around the interent.

You are a steaming pile of revisionist shit.

You fucking lied!

The original article makes NO mention of "bankruptcy' and you fucking well know it.

You are probably SOCIALIST SCUM playing the DISINFORMATION GAME!

The Demon

__________________
Greed is Good

BloodFart

I'm absolutely stunned that there are still people defending obama!

__________________
Jesus = harry potter 2000 years ago.

SallyRand

Yeah, it is a tough world and many folks are out there on day passes and we can only hope that they don't run out of their meds.

On the other hand, if they do, they may not be able to find the way to the polling place next time 'round.

We can only hope!

Obama lied; people died.

Iraq.

Afghanistan.

The War On Drugs.

BFT3K

BFT3K

Sally Rand - Republican - Crossdresser

raymor

Fyi the economy was considered "bad" when Obama was elected because it was growing slower than average. Obama took an economy that was growing slowly and sent it straight down the toilet.

As of 2008, the country had accumulated $10 trillion in debt over 232 years. With just two years of Obama, we owed $14 trillion in 2011. No that's nearly a hundred years worth of debt in just two years.

He inheirited a situation where about $200 billion was in risky mortgages, where maybe $40 billion would default. His "solution" was to take $2 trillion from you and I and give it to the likes of ACORN. Two TRILLION dollars spent on a $40 billion problem and only made it much worse.

He came into a slow economy and CREATED a disaster. No serious economist will argue that fact at this point.

__________________
For historical display only. This information is not current:
support@bettercgi.com ICQ 7208627
Strongbox - The next generation in site security
Throttlebox - The next generation in bandwidth control
Clonebox - Backup and disaster recovery on steroids

BFT3K

Yeah, shit was working out just fine under Bush.

That's why McCain was elected president!

Bill8

really? I'd love to see your references. most of teh economists and commentators I've read don't say anything like that.

I despise obama, but I don't believe you can support your argument.

So, name your serious economists, and lets take a look at their arguments and the counterarguments.

officemike

This is all such bullshit. Both parties do whatever big business wants. Invade Iraq, the bailout, energy policy... And now their both pretending they even have a say in this debt ceiling business? They don't. Their gonna raise it, but not without shoe-horning in all the political rhetoric that is choking this country to jerk off all us chumps.

Joshua G

wowsers. Calm down mr rand. All i did was make the story accurate. Name calling & whining only demonstrates intellectual bankruptcy. & PS my politics are pat buchanon (except for the abortion thingy). Calling me socialist is like calling hitler a hippie.

on the merits. Democrats derive most of their money/influence from public employee unions & lawyers. Reduce entitlement spending, & you reduce their power. This is why democrats never advocate for spending cuts, even when running 1.5 trillion dollar deficits.

republicans may be evil, but at least they get their money from the rich, rather then democrats, who are a parasite on the taxpayers.

BFT3K

Was someone just speaking out their ass?



That sounded exactly like ass talk!

Joshua G

another intelligent argument from big fat tits. Please, please attempt to tell me how democrats are not parasites. When they work in cahoots with PE unions to give them extravagent pensions & benefits nobody in the private sector can dream of. The more unions make, the more democrats get the skim.

I know. You will reply with how awful the republicans are, completely avoiding my argument. Do tell us how its the republicans fault democrats love to spend spend spend.

BFT3K

Where should I start?

Here's just ONE of the ridiculous, and patently absurd sentences from your last post...

"Democrats derive most of their money/influence from public employee unions & lawyers."

Generalize much? Is that ALL Democrats then?

Joshua G

you didnt start at all. you didnt even bother to look up where democrats get their money:

1) service employees international union
2) national education association
3) national federation of teachers
4) american association of federal/state/county/municipal employees
5) american association for justice
6) teamsters union

the list goes on & on, all unions & lawyers...

http://www.opensecrets.org/overview/topcontribs.php

Sausage

Why don't people understand that if you spend more than you earn you need to do something about it. Either earn more, or spend less. Seriously is it that hard to comprehend ?!

kane

It is a little more complex than that. What you say in general is true, but here is the problem. When times are good and the economy is chugging along our government officials (both democrat and republican run) spend more money and grow the size of the government. We spend every penny that comes in and then some. Then when things go bad and the economy shrinks the amount of money that comes in is less, but now we have more obligations and thus more debt.

What we should be doing is spending less when we have more and living under our means so that when times are hard and less is coming in we can still meet those obligations. But that, sadly, is not how it works. Every politician gets elected promising that they will bring something home from Washington for the people that voted for them. That is really all they care about. So damn the consequences they are going to get theirs no matter what. To get what they want they make deals and they don't care about the overall well being of the nation so long as they can keep their promises to their voters and keep their jobs.

nation-x

BlackCrayon

thats just plain dumb. don't quote a source if you are going to take liberties with the content....dumbass.

__________________
you don't know you're wearing a leash if you sit by the peg all day..

BlackCrayon

i'm stunned that there are people like you who thinks it matters who is in office. both parties are owned and controlled by big money. not the people, not the ideals. money..

__________________
you don't know you're wearing a leash if you sit by the peg all day..

Phoenix

they should just cut all social benefits for old people
they fucked up the economy...they fucked up the environment...what right do they have to a secure payment plan after that?

Surely the younger generation is owed more then damaged lands, and damaged economy

__________________
Skype Phoenixskype1
Telegram PhoenixBrad
https://quantads.io

BlackCrayon

There is no difference. Dems get their money from unions, etc. repubs get their money from big oil, etc. its just two sides of the same coin. and its hilarious that you think no one in the private sector could get what the unions make? Uh...just look at what the failed banks gave out as bonuses. that beats the unions hands down.

__________________
you don't know you're wearing a leash if you sit by the peg all day..

BlackCrayon

sure but what does the average person even have to do with government policy that lead us here?

__________________
you don't know you're wearing a leash if you sit by the peg all day..

BlackCrayon

It amazes me how people's poltical bias clouds reality. This is reality mid 2008, housing crashes..late 2008 the market has crashed so bad, economists only predict things to get worse and can't see how a recovery is possible..obama gets elected, dumbs a shitload of money into the banks who took these huge risks knowing full well the inevitable collapse...NOT ACORN..dumping the money into these banks did basically nothing but eventually people start spending again, the market gains *some* confidence and unemployment goes down a bit. things are better now than they were in 2008. i really don't know how you can be walking around and not see that.

regardless, if obama or mccain got in the bailouts would of happened.

__________________
you don't know you're wearing a leash if you sit by the peg all day..