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

Politics and Media Headlines 2/24/09

Caro's picture

You say goodbye, I say halo (by Joseph Cannon at Cannonfire)
Remember when AP ran a photo similar to this one [below] featuring Dear Leader George Dubya? Remember how the progblogs (correctly) screamed for weeks about that gross exercise in Messianic imagery? Do you think any progs will complain about this? Naw. It's very, very different, y'see.

Gregg plan at center of summit debate (MSNBC)
Sen. Judd Gregg was one of more than 120 members of Congress and economic experts attending a White House summit on fiscal responsibility yesterday… Most of the debate, Gregg said, centered on the Conrad-Gregg bill, a proposal by Gregg and Sen. Kent Conrad, D-N.D., chairman of the Budget Committee. The proposal would have a bipartisan task force of Democratic and Republican senators and members of the administration hash out policy and then send it to the floor of both Houses for a yes or no vote, with no amendments or debate…

"Fixing Social Security is a shared, bipartisan goal, and it can be accomplished right away," Gregg said. "I believe this is the right place to start." [Emphasis added.]

Poll: Majority Doesn’t Want Obama To Be Bipartisan (by Greg Sargent at The Plum Line)
You routinely hear it asserted that the public wants bipartisan comity in Washington, but some striking numbers buried in the internals of the new New York Times poll find that in the current context, precisely the opposite is true:

“Which do you think should be a higher priority for Barack Obama right now — working in a bipartisan way with Republicans in Congress or sticking to the policies he promised he would during the campaign:
Working bipartisan way: 39%
Sticking to policies: 56%

So a sizable majority wants Obama to pursue his policies with our without Republican support. Meanwhile, a huge majority says that Republicans should emphasize working with Obama in a bipartisan way over pursuing their policy ideas.

Democrats Resisting Obama on Social Security (New York Times)
Mr. Obama considered announcing the formation of a Social Security task force at a White House “fiscal responsibility summit” that he [convened] on Monday. But several Democrats said that idea had been shelved, partly because of objections from House and Senate leaders… Liberal Democrats are already serving notice that they will be equally vehement in opposing any reductions in scheduled benefits for future retirees. But any solution, budget analysts said, must include a mix of both approaches, though current beneficiaries would see no change.

See How That Works? (by Susie at Suburban Guerrilla)
Obama starts talking about reforming Social Security.
The progressive wing pushes back.
Obama backs off. (For now.)
Let’s do this more often.

News, comment, and entertainment (by Avedon Carol at The Sideshow)
Baby-Boomers didn't just pay for their parents' retirement during their working lives, but also for their own, thanks to Ronald Reagan giving us the biggest tax hike in American history - on payroll taxes. I paid for those benefits, Mr. Obama. Why are the people you invited to that conference trying to steal them?

Obama Gets Push-Back on Social Security "Reform" (by campskunk at Alegre's Corner)
The same advisers who keep pushing to bring this up, from OMB chief Orszag on down, will keep pushing. Stay vigilant. There's a crying need for education of some of our elected officials on Social Security. I was flabbergasted by this quote from an alleged Democrat: “…is it a nice-to-have or a have-to-have?...” I would modestly submit that any program which reduces the number of seniors in poverty from 48% to 8% is a have-to-have. Thirteen million seniors owe their access to adequate food, clothing, shelter, AND dignity to Social Security. You don't want that many people voting in the 2010 election right after they've been plunged into poverty, Congresswoman Tauscher, now do you?

Democrats Make Obama Retreat on Social Security (by myiq2xu at The Confluence)
[The] bad news is the fauxgressive NeoRepublican Obama administration hasn’t given up, they’re just moving the SS task force idea to the back burner. Social Security “reform” isn’t dead, it will be back sooner or later, just like Jason Voorhies. So keep those pitchforks and torches handy, you’ll need them again.

Click here for more politics and media news headlines.

Carolyn Kay

No votes yet


Submitted by jawbone on

burner, that admin still has strong desire to "reform" SocSec that it's very much "on the table." They've just put some other papers on to of it right now, or they're hiding the table. No time to give up vigilance.

Jane sums it up this way:

My overall sense after reading the pool reports and hearing what various people had to say is that reforming Social Security is very much on the table now, but how that gets done -- and when -- is something that is being negotiated.

It's going to take constant vigilance, pressure on Congress Critters, LTE's, emails to Obama. And lots and lots of blog posting. Can't le the A-Listers get away with ignoring SocSec.

Josh? You hear that? That means you too.

joel dan walls's picture
Submitted by joel dan walls on

That was supposed to be Hillary with the halo. It was it was it was it was it was!!!!!

pie's picture
Submitted by pie on

Careful there, dude.

There are no saints in politics. Only sinners. The degree to which they burn in hell is the only variable.

Sarah's picture
Submitted by Sarah on

but the jury for me is still out on the situation