If you have "no place to go," come here!

Obama to establish commission for looting Social Security by Executive Order?

Missed this one from December 15. More good news:

President Obama is seriously considering an executive order to create a bipartisan commission that could weigh sweeping tax increases and spending cuts to try to slash the soaring federal deficit, CNN has learned.

Documents obtained by CNN show that top advisers to the president have been privately weighing various versions of a commission, and opinions differ about how to structure it. Officials say that some inside the administration are pushing for a narrow mandate because it's too complicated to tackle reform of the tax system and possible spending cuts to various popular programs such as Social Security and Medicare all at once.

"Each major category of fiscal policy -- Social Security, Medicare, discretionary spending, revenues -- raises a complex and idiosyncratic array of policy problems and prescriptions," according to the documents detailing some of the administration's deliberations. "Achieving consensus on any one of these issues -- much less all of them simultaneously -- may be more than the political system can reasonably accommodate."

"The country is ungovernable!" Translation: The Dems can't arrange to loot the citizens as fast as their owners would like.

But officials told CNN that other advisers to the president are pushing for the commission to have a broad mandate to put all of these big issues "on the table" at the same time.

"The nation's unsustainable fiscal course is the result of imbalance across the budget as a whole, not any component in isolation," according to the documents, which are marked "Preliminary and Pre-Decisional -- Not For Distribution."

Translation: Trial balloon.

Good thing the banksters and the health insurance companies got theirs first, then. I'm so HAPPY!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

NOTE I'm sure the riposte to "unsustainable fiscal course" is Modern Monetary Theory... But I don't have the arguments mastered. And anybody who's saying that Obama's playing 11-dimensional chess with Kent Conrad, instead of doing what his owners want, should ask themselves why he's entertaining this idea at all.

No votes yet


Submitted by jawbone on

Party by Team Obama during the primaries, which was probably a leveraged buyout financed by Wall Street, did you ever think it would be as bad as this?

Obama is a Corporatist. I don't know if he is one based on principles or opportunism or...what? But he is one.

And he and his team are effectively destroying the Democratic Party brand image. Dems are now the party of Corporate interests, not the people's interests. It may have been walking a fine line prior to this presidency, trying to represent the people and also woo business donations and support--someone on one of the talk shows said the last three Dem presidents were basically Corporatists (that would be Carter, Clinton, and now Obama). But...did they so nakedly pursue such goals? So blatantly sell out the public?

Bush's Third Term? or just the natural progression of what happens when corporate interests rule politics?

Parties do change directions; we are seeing that clearly now for the Democratic Party.

Anyway, I woke up this morning thinking about your so prescient analysis.

(Where ya gonna go, sweeties?)

Submitted by lambert on

... I don't think it was all that hostile. Different at the state and local level, I truly believe. As everywhere. For some reason.

cal1942's picture
Submitted by cal1942 on

someone on one of the talk shows said the last three Dem presidents were basically Corporatists (that would be Carter, Clinton, and now Obama)

Moyer's guests were Taibbi and Kuttner. Kuttner made the Corporatist statement.

Submitted by jawbone on

for quite awhile now. It's the New Big Thing among the MCM (Mainstream Corporate Media) punditocracy.

And, yes, it's laying the groundwork for explaining to the hoi polloi why they're being systematically screwed. It's NOT poor Obama's fault! It's the system! What's a poor powerless president to do??

Edit: Fixed typo

cal1942's picture
Submitted by cal1942 on

who ignored his remarks about the fiscal state of Social Security during the primaries are the fools who got us into this predicament.

Apparently Pentagon spending, the continuance of pointless wars and our unsustainable role as world cop would not be a subject discussed by the proposed panel.

I can just imagine who the "Democrats" on that panel would be. Bayh, Konrad; geez. Along with Obama's people the panel may as well be all Republicans.

And cutting spending during a depression. The stupid is ongoing and relentless.

Submitted by lambert on

Get the idea out of your mind that these guys (the "Democrats" on that panel) care one iota about public policy, except insofar as it enables them to take their cut for enabling their owners to loot more, or even more.

cal1942's picture
Submitted by cal1942 on

They'll get their reward. They can't see past that and any opinion to the contrary they'll regard as stupid. Suggest otherwise and they'll look at you as though you have three heads.

But, it's still stupid policy.

Submitted by gmanedit on

by hating on the baby boomers. I remember blog comments to the effect of "Go away and die, old people, you're standing in the way of our new politics."

The generational rift was the first, calculated division of the Democratic base in the niche-marketing primary campaign.

On Social Security, they were all "Why should we support you greedy geezers? There'll be nothing left for us." So "we must fix Social Security" was a promise, not a warning.

Submitted by lambert on

See, for example, this for my favorite quote from a Kos front-pager.

However, I'm guessing, from some straws in the wind, that sentiment in Obama's favor has reversed itself. I suggest that over the holidays, you don't feel, as I did for so long, that there was no point discussing Obama with anybody under the age of thirty. I think the disillusion and buyer's remorse are setting in hard -- and I think that the hate is taught.

Submitted by gmanedit on

I was buttonholed in the street by a young solicitor for the ACLU, who turned out to be an Obama supporter. I agreed to give her a donation and took my time finding my checkbook and writing the check so I could run down what was wrong with him. I concluded by saying, "A year from now, you're going to hate him."

I know some well-meaning people in their thirties and forties who were for him; one came perilously close to calling me a racist over Geraldine Ferraro (I had to send her an email documenting how Kerry and Obama himself had said the same thing). Now I'm fighting the urge to start wearing the button I first saw on her bag and just had to buy: Obama's logo and the word "BELIEVE." That would be rubbing it in.

TreeHugger's picture
Submitted by TreeHugger on

to "reform" so called entitlement programs was crystal clear during the primaries to any voter who chose to listen. I warned my older friends that Obama would be the domestic equivalent of Republican Richard Nixon opening US relations with China. That it would take a Democratic (alright, DINO) president to cut social security and medicare. He even used right wing talking points in making his case.
Instead of losing more friends, I just quit talking about it.

But now you can be damn sure I will forward the except from CNN above to them.
There is precious little joy, though, in being right about this poseur. He is much worse than even I thought he would be. My vote for McKinney feels better every day that this administration is in office.