There is strong concern that the lame-duck Congress will be used to pass the Catfood Commission’s recommendations to slash America’s social safety net with cuts to Social Security and Medicare benefits. The idea of a Democratic President and a Democratic Congress allowing cuts to our great social programs that will result in millions of seniors falling into poverty is a horrifying thought. Fortunately, progressives in the House have the power to stop this if they are willing to play hardball politics.
The Catfood Commission, conveniently, won’t release its recommendations until early December. That’s too late to let voters incorporate it into their judgment before the November election but not too late for a lame-duck Congress to pass it. Clearly the Catfood Commission members hold extreme contempt for the idea of letting us, the unwashed masses of the country, actually get to shape government policy using this thing called democracy.
If the Catfood Commission suggests a bill slashing Social Security benefits and it comes to a vote in the House, it is likely to pass with the votes of Republicans and conservative Blue Dog Democrats. Even if all the progressive-leaning Democrats oppose it on a straight vote, it will probably pass. Progressives likely won’t have the votes to defeat it on the floor.
But they should have the votes to prevent it from ever reaching the floor if they are willing to play hardball. Here’s how:
The Catfood Commission’s cuts to Social Security can never become law if they don’t get a vote on the floor. As Speaker of the House, Nancy Pelosi is fully capable of preventing any bill she doesn’t want to from coming to the floor during the lame-duck Congress. Liberal Democrats can apply pressure by promising to remove Pelosi (and all other House Democratic leaders) from any leadership position in the House, forever, if she allows a bill cutting Social Security to reach the floor.
Members of the Progressive, Populist, African-American and Hispanic caucuses should easily make up the majority of the Democratic caucus in the 112th Congress, about a quarter of all House members. Their percentage of the overall Democratic Caucus should only increase after November, even as the caucus as a whole loses members. This means if they act together, they will have the power to elect or defeat any individual for a caucus leadership position. The threat should carry even more weight on this issue, because the very next vote after any action in the lame-duck session will be votes on caucus business at the start of the next Congress.
I highly doubt Pelosi is so personally committed to giving the Catfood Commission recommendations a vote on the floor that she would be willing to give up her leadership role. I fully acknowledge this would be very hardball tactics. I’m suggesting the possibility because the goal is to protect America’s most important, most popular and most progressive government program from regressive and needless cuts.
If Democrats in the House truly oppose cutting Social Security, they have the tools at their disposal to stop that from happening during the lame-duck Congress. It would require some brutal politics but they do have real leverage if they are willing to use it. It is important to know this well ahead of time, so the public will know that the excuse of “We couldn’t stop it, we voted against it, but there were too many Republicans and Blue Dogs voting for it,” is not sufficient. Members of Congress have powers have beyond just voting yes or no on the floor.



144 Comments








Support this site!
Subscribe to the newsletter
Advertise on Firedoglake
Send
us your tips
Make us your homepage
About FDL Action
Jon, you have been giving excellent political advice to the Dems ever since I first started reading your work here at the Lake. But as far as I can tell, not once, not once, have they heeded your advice. And look where it has gotten them.
The mere thought of the CPC playing hardball is comical. These guys couldn’t get to base in whiffle ball.
I suspect the only avenue open to us is to not vote for Dems. If enough of them lose seats, it might scare them into better behavior in the future. It will lead to short term setbacks, but no one likes Republicans either, so in the long run maybe killing off (of forcing the reform of) the Dems will be worth it.
In the meantime, you will forgive me for not holding my breath waiting for Woolsey et al. to threaten Pelosi’s grip on power.
Guess who’ll take the Catfood Commission at their word and instate every lie they arrive at??
I suggest we start talking about not paying our taxes next year in protest of Social Security being cut or invested in banks.
Then we dare the Tea Baggers to follow us.
Nothing scares Politicians like threatening the money.
Obama, Harry and Nancy all seem to think being Easy is the best way to be Popular. I expect nobody to have the Stones to play HardBall.
SURELY there are 41 Senate Democrats with enough stones to filibuster any attempt to implement cuts in the Social safety nets as well?
It’ll just end up being another shining example of how the Democrats are spineless pussies and/or just as corrupt as the evil Republicans they constantly blame for their ineptitude.
Snark?
Hope.
An additional strategy is to make the commission and cutting social security a national issue for the midterms. Try to force people to take a stand on it, and if they don’t commit to voting against cuts, expose them before the elections.
In line with the that, I have written twice that progressives should demand that the commission “open up or shut down.” Make all their proceedings public; make all reports, proposals, analyses public; require all meetings of 3 or more members be publically notice, public meetings, with a published agenda and opportunity for public comment — the standard rule of law for virtually every public agency in the US.
Then demand a ban on all secret meetings, communications, etc.
Open it up, or shut it down. And do this now, while they’re developing proposals and getting presentations and analysis from staff.
Make it a campaign issue and demand people take positions. Make them worry about this, so people can ask them before the elections, not be surprised after.
I don’t know why FDL has not picked up on this.
But…Retirement is for losers…
http://www.salon.com/entertainment/comics/this_modern_world/2010/07/20/this_modern_world
seconded
OK
I highly doubt Pelosi is so personally committed to giving the Catfood Commission recommendations a vote on the floor that she would be willing to give up her leadership role
I’d never doubt how much party leadership (from either party) is committed to passing corporatist legislation. Obama and the Democrats showed that they’d slog on for year – during the worse collapse of the economy in 70 years no less – to deliver for the big corps.
They shouldn’t cut the government checks to the needy.
completey agree but to be a majority of the majority party don’t you have to be (as they are) MORE than a quarter of the full House?
Wow, there’s a lot of misogyny in these comments genitalia-status-wise. How do you women feel about this?
This is nonsense. There is no way on God’s green earth that the Democrats will preside over cuts in social security. Ain’t—gonna—-happen. As for the folks on this blog who recommend withholding votes from Democrats or otherwise holding their collective breath and stomping their teeny little feet, I think you get this kind of nonsense when you cater to the lowest common denominator by using cutesy terms like “Catfood Commission.” Why don’t we leave the silliness to the Republicans and the Tea Party stalwarts. Call the Commission by its proper name and deal with the substance of calling them out on policy. The rest will take care of itself.
The cuts are a done deal and nothing is going to stop it.
Anyone looking towards Progressive Dems, Pelosi risking her power, or midterm threats is in denial.
Obama’s been on a mission since day one to cut these programs, and by God he’s gonna get it done. Come hell or high water, Obama will make sure the Dems succeed in another GOP wet dream.
So, hold onto all you’ve got and grab your ankles.
Vote out the Dems. They do way more damage to the American people when they’re in power than any Republican could hope for.
That this vote is scheduled during a lame-duck Congress shows the fix is already in and Pelosi will allow the vote to happen despite what she might claim between now and after the elections. At the least Pelosi and the rest of the Democratic leaders should be removed and replaced by true progressive Democrats otherwise a new progressive/liberal party must be formed.
Amen Scarecrow. Make this an issue now.
God, I can’t remember when I’ve laughed so hard. Hardball politics? Riiiiight… That’ll happen when pigs fly.
Yep, whistling past the graveyard has worked wonders for us so far. Have at it.
In the meantime, might as well put my little feet to good use by stamping — it got your attention anyway, I bet it might work for others too ; )
Right. Those Dems who swore they would not vote for HCR really came through, eh? Didn’t quite work out that way, did it?
Worked for them though. They got a nice booster in campaign donations from all the gullible supporters who bought months of their bullshit.
I don’t understand anyone going back for more abuse.
It is time to march and protest and scare these millionaire members of the mental deficit commission.
I may go out and buy bigger shoes. Stimulus effect and they stomp better.
The “proper” name of the commission is not used here because it is a fraud. There is nothing “responsible” about a commission whose stated premises are a myth based on phony economics and whose focus on Social Security, for which there is No Deficit and No Crisis and Nothing Irresponsible Now or in the next 30-40 years is preposterous.
This is an illegitimate group, packed with deficit hysterics, staffed by propagandists and commissioned by cowards and led by two clowns. That’s the only honest description of this commission. Cat food doesn’t get at its perversity.
I too think the “Catfood” nickname is silly and detracts from the seriousness of the concern about what this commission might do under the cover of secrecy. I think we should focus on two things: forcing the Commission’s meetings to be public and reminding and insisting that changes to Social Security and Medicare are not part of this commission’s scope.
I agree completely. Force all meetings and their agenda into the sunlight. This is where FDL and progressive energy should be focused.
Get lost on your way to dkos?
I’d be happy to leave the silliness to “that other party” but it seems most of it comes from the Democratic WH and congress these days. So let me ask you this. How the hell do you negotiate for something if you’re not willing to withold something else from your counterparty as a penalty for not giving it up? You’re clearly a party tribalist with your line of ‘vote for the dems no matter what-”the rest will take care of itself.”‘ Sorry, but that hasn’t gone so well for actual progressives over the last couple years.
I will bet you a $50 donation to your local foodbank that enough Dems will support it to pass it if it comes to a vote.
Nancy will support it behind the scenes and then denounce it and vote no when it comes to the floor. And she will then campaign on her vote to protect Socal Security.
Boxturtle (Unless Nancy’s position is crediably threatened, this will pass)
Scarecrow, I am afraid you still don’t get it. Using loaded terms like “clowns” does not get us anywhere. It just encourages the fringe elements to surface on your site and propose that we all gather in a circle and start shooting by refusing to vote for Democrats. Grassroots education and mobilization work. Disclosing, as you properly do, the myths about social security’s impending bankruptcy also works. But this “catfood” stuff trivializes the debate. Reminds me of the Republicans’ insistence on calling the Democratic Party the “Democrat” party. Does that impress you, scare you, intimidate you? No, it reveals their pettiness and ultimately, their weakness. I still find it impossible to believe social security is threatened by a Democratic-controlled Congress and Presidency. There is a reason why they refer to social security as the third rail of American politics. Tampering with it is foolishness and the Republicans try to do so at their peril.
So why did Obama create his “Deficit Commission” by executive order, staff it with people who want to cut Social Security, schedule it to deliver it’s results in a lame duck session of Congress, and have Nancy Pelosi sneak language into an unrelated bill saying she would bring their recommendations to a vote before the House?
Maybe you should tell Dick Durbin, I’m sure he’s going to be surprised that Social Security cuts aren’t on the table…
Dick Durbin is one of the “liberals” on the President’s Debt Commission, which is currently studying cuts to Social Security and Medicare as a way to reduce the deficit.
[Durbin] admonished “bleeding heart liberals” to be open to program reductions to restore fiscal balance.
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/04/28/business/economy/28fiscal.html
Dear Sapphire, where was the pure love in that response. The invented quote about voting for Dems no matter what sure wasn’t pure love. The sneering reference to DKos wasn’t too lovely either. Why oh why do we on the left insist on eating our young, on creating petty differences with those who are fundamentally on our side. Let’s focus on the real menace, a political party which engages in a scorched earth policy of voting against everything proposed by the majority party, in hopes that when the entire ship goes down they will somehow bob to the surface. Reminds me of what happened here in Chicago when Harold Washington came to power and the City Council majority vetoed everything he proposed, no matter how righteous. We need to expose that instead of shooting each other in the feet (foot?).
I thought the commission was meeting today? Yet you have time to comment here?
That’s why the Oligarchy needed a Democratic president and Congress to do it.
Game on.
If House progressives had cojones then health care would have included the public option. I can’t imagine them confronting Speaker Pelosi in a do-or-die effort to save Social Security.
They let me phone in my vote to slash payments to the elderly poor. Double-tasking, don’t you know.
So based on the trolls on this site, looks like Obamarahma is going to try to lie their way through the midterms that “hahahah! we would never cut social security”….before the “new political realities” after the ass kicking in November “force” them to do it.
It will also be a nice F U to the hippies in December, after Rahm’s DINO’s get blasted in the elections. He LOVES to stick it to Progressives. Better than killing baby seals or kicking puppies.
LOL — where does Ronald McDonald buy his shoes I wonder? ; )
Seriously, I could not agree with you more. Thanks for putting it so succinctly. Nothing about this commission is legitimate. Nothing.
This December, Barack Obama will demand that Congress begin the dismantling of Social Security. Congress will oblige, and the media will praise their work as a triumphant achievement of bipartisanship.
This is how it will play out. Period.
How much evidence do you need before you stop finding it “impossible” to believe Obama and the rest of the Democrats care just as much for the middle class as the Republicans do? The only difference between the two is the level of honesty we see in their contempt for us.
And therein lies your problem.
Keep clapping though, Tinkerbell will pull through…
This isn’t a game. Maybe you can afford to think of it as such but I assure you, there are tens of millions that cannot.
This is the thing that has become troubling about the discourse at FDL. When people disagree with the “party” line, they are mocked, marginalized and told “this is how it will play out. Period” This is the kind of thing you see at right wing sites – agree completely or go elsewhere. It’s just really disturbing to me to see authoritarian bully tactics used at a site like this.
I think we can kill this thing on the vine if we can force it into the public and raise awareness of what this commission actually can and cannot do.
Cool! Directions for donations to my local food bank are here. In the event you win, who gets my check?
Boxturtle (Feeling pretty good about this bet)
The Democrats are NOT on my side. Despite their lovely rhetoric, they haven’t lifted a finger to do a thing about anything I care about. If you like the Dems, that is your problem not mine. I want progressive legislation and governance and I am not getting it. When our federal government is controlled by Dems across the board and we STILL aren’t getting what we were promised, there is a problem. I’ll give you a hint. It isn’t with the minority Republicans.
Explain how Obama and the Democrats are “fundamentally on our side”. And please, don’t give a list of “Clear Skies” type misleadingly titled bills passed recently.
Off the top of my head, the White House suggestion that Congress cut food stamps, Obama threat to veto the war supplemental if it included help for teachers, the Obama spending freeze, no job bills in Congress, talk of extending the Bush tax cuts for the rich, creating of the “Deficit Commission”….I could go on and on.
This administration cares NOTHING about the middle and lower classes, despite their rhetoric.
The third rail of American politics gets its current from folks knowing that Social Security is in danger. That is why the secrecy, the lame duck session, and the other maneuvers to keep it from being a political issue in November. And that is the danger that Kent Conrad, and Obama to buy Conrad’s vote on whatever, has put Democrats in.
The best way to defeat this effort is to make it the issue in November and brand it as a Republican dream-wish. What is clear about Blue Dogs is that they are more motivated by fear of a Republican defeating them than by principle; leave aside for the moment why they want to stay in office. Significant defeats of Republicans because of the Social Security issue will motivate Blue Dogs either from fear of seniors or from the freedom to pursue a more Democratic agenda. During the campaign, Blue Dogs will waffle on the issue of Social Security, preferring instead to talk about deficits.
Waiting for the Democratic Party establishment to figure this out is kinda hopeless at this point.
What is required of progressives in addition to a strong defense of Social Security is a plan of a path to budget surpluses that leans heavily on the creation of jobs and prosperity quickly and on key spending cuts in the areas that in purpose are wasteful. And this should emphasize the compound interest effect of surpluses producing more surpluses. And what we know is that prosperity for everyone makes tax issues less salient and makes it possible to deal with the tax code.
Finally, there are some symbolic races in which victory will set the media narrative on end. Defeat John Boehner, Virginia Foxx, Charles Grassley, Richard Burr, Michele Bachmann, Steve King, Pete King, Darrell Issa, and a few others. In most of these cases, there are more progressive Democrats who are the party standard-bearers.
This is a situation in which we must not be complacent and we must not think that we can fix it in December.
There is nothing wrong with calling it the “cat food” commission. We need to learn from the Repubs and Frank Luntz who managed to rename dreadful policies and make them sound sane. Most people get cross-eyed over details, so they need short snappy names.
“Catfood” sounds cutesy and benign. My 88 year old mother wouldn’t understand the reference. She would certainly understand “The Committee to Eliminate Social Security”.
I too am inclined to hope for some maturity and discipline when doing serious polocy advocacy. Has the portion of the left that expresses itself here at FDL become so full of itself that a nervous self-justification is taking over?
If the Dems are voted out, a lot of folks will metaphorically suffer the same fate as Clemenza did in The Godfather. You surely are not serious? Tell me that you’re just spewing (or trolling)?
OT:
over 18,000 posts to:
Obama Blames Media For His Administration’s Firing Of Shirley Sherrod
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/07/22/obama-media-shirley-sherrod_n_656499.html#comments
… last straw
In answer to why the liberal/progressive wing of the Democratic party has little faith in this administration and Congress, what you refer to as us “eating our young”, is that Dem leadership has given us so little to have any faith in. The last straw for me was the Public Option being jettisoned during the HCR debate without any pretense of a fight for it, but this is hardly the only thing liberals and progressives are frustrated about. Guantanamo, the DOJ’s refusal to look into Bushco war-crimes, the bailout of Wall Street, 10% “official” unemployment forever, the list of failed and broken promises by Obama and the Dems in Congress is endless.
“There is no way on God’s green earth that the Democrats will preside over cuts in social security. Ain’t—gonna—-happen.”
Yeah, Democrats would never do stuff like nationalizing Romneycare or presiding over the gutting of Glass-Steagall.
You want to talk hubris, the fact that Obahmarahma thought they could gut Social Security during an election year is simply breathtaking. They, and the Obahmabots, will try to deny deny deny deny all the way through November, but people are on to their bullshit. Obama is going to dip to Bush levels of popularity in the coming years. Sub 30%. I can tell you, the GOP center right policies they favor….the type of people who want that type of government are busy forwarding AOL emails of pictures of Obama with a bone through his nose. Crazy doesn’t change its mind. Those people will never vote for him.
But I guess one term and a lifetime of $500k speaking engagements, and Board of Director seats, is sufficient for Barry.
If the GOP takes over Congress, no need to worry. We still have Obama, the champion of the people and liberal stalwart, to veto all the Republican policy (which he so despises) that they manage to pass. Right?
Uh-oh…Why does this sentence make me nervous? Something about the surreal conjunction of “House progressives” and “hardball politics”?
Excellent, sensible solutions, TarheelDem.
The reason I think it’s too late is that NO ONE in the corporate media is even talking about the cuts to state funding/medicare/medicaid, let alone this deficit commission. Instead it’s all unemployment benefits and the horrible republicans who are blocking the good Democrats from extending them. Meanwhile cutting the state aid is going to throw millions more out of work
It’s all propaganda now ( i just heard some this morning on MSNBC)about how we must ‘sacrifice for future generations” so the guilt trip is on. And since most who call themselves liberals are so amenable to guilt trips, and are still in love with “our president”. I despair of much resistance.
they want to give it to us as a surprise and then blame the republicans again.
Nice work screwing the American people over and over again, if you can get it.
Jane showed how Pelosi got a vote scheduled before the 4th recess for this abomination, so, I don’t think Pelosi is against it. She was when Bush was prez, maybe she just wanted a Democrat to do US in. who knows?
I wonder what kind of letter I’ll get from them this time?
get ready
Jon, you have way more faith in the Democrats than I do. The wars, HCR and FinReg don’t leave a lot of room for hoping they’ll do the “right thing.”
That’s it. this is the reason he was put in there, primarily to gut SS, Medicaid/Medicare and then walk away with it made for him and his for the rest of his life.
Next we’ll have Genghis Palin or someone like her and the takeover will be complete.
we gotta show Europe how to do it, see?
Rahm added their balls to his collection during HIR. When it was hardball time, they decided to play wiffleball instead. These people voted to nationalize Heritage Foundation policies because they weren’t up to playing hardball.
So douglas, you said
….and I gave you quotes from committee member Dick Durbin saying that “bleeding heart liberals” need to understand they need to cut SS and Medicare.
No response? Just lie and move on?
“Jane showed how Pelosi got a vote scheduled before the 4th recess for this abomination, so, I don’t think Pelosi is against it.”
Jane insisted the night the resolution passed that it was a binding statutory resolution. It’s not. The resolution is a non-binding “sense of the House” resolution that says the House “should” vote before the recess. This was explained at congressmatters the following week. In fact CongressMatters wrote they didn’t really know then what the resolution was intended to do.
Margaret, I was trying to put a light touch to your rather snide comments denigrating my identity as a legitimate,long-term contributor to the comments on this site. Now you accuse me of not caring about the poor, when you know nothing about the 35 years of public service that my career represents. Who is playing games?
Hey, I’ve got a bridge here somewhere you might be interested in.
I don’t fear her. She’s just a patsy, like anyone else who is sitting in that seat. Makes no difference.
Jake, I’m also a fan of Jack Nicholson movies, so where is the love, my brother? Failure to respond to every little snippet you dredge up doesn’t make me a “liar” anymore than your taking on an obscure film name makes you a cinema buff. Peace out.
Clever repartee, and original too.
Oh they MAY let the old people die in peace and maybe some of the really disabled…but I think they want to get rid of us the most. Useless eaters and all.
Rewilding Megafauna: Lions and Camels in North America?
http://www.actionbioscience.org/newfrontiers/barlow.html
Hmmmmmmm
HUMAN POPULATION CRISIS
http://www.cosmosmith.com/human_population_crisis.htm
&
http://educate-yourself.org/lte/mythofoverpopulation02oct09.shtml
NeoCon central, folks
Hi SD! I think Rahm, Axelrod, Jarrett and Gibbs have got to go. I don’t think they’re advising him well and I think they’ve wishy-washied him down. I know people think Obama is not the type to be wishy washy if he doesn’t want to be, but I just think the Oval Office is a bubble where the truth of what is going on in the real world gets blurred and damped down.
You know much about the fight game? I’m the Heavyweight Champion of the World.
Well said. Let’s disagree and disagree strongly, but disagree politely.
By the way, I just called my Congresswoman, Diane Watson, and encouraged her to adopt the OP’s strategy.
Far out, man! This groovy pad is where the love is, baby.
Actually not very many of you people pay any taxes anyway.
Damn, you got this trolling shite down to a T.
BoxTurtle, the Greater Chicago Food Depository (you can look it up on-line) is a fantastic organisation and they will be grateful for your inevitable bet-losing donation. How do I do that fancy thing where you link to a site without nameing it?
I am dead serious. Dems are much more dangerous. They are and have been owned by Wall St. since Clinton. You remember him. He was the Democratic President that gave us Welfare Reform, NAFTA, and the trashing of Glass- Stegall. A few things Poppy Bush couldn’t get any traction on.
BTW, Love “The Godfather” reference.
And may I remind you that Clemenza spoke the final line in
“The Godfather.” He wasn’t knocked off.
His death was an inference in Godfather 2.
For the record.
Oh, you’re good. You are very very good. BTW, how do you feel about reducing entitlements for the very rich? Haven’t heard much about that on this site.
Yeah, they are. America is full of evil corporatists. The Dems are the more touchy feely corporatist–but they stick the knife in nevertheless.
I don’t know why the disenchanted on the left haven’t started their own third party–or at least work with the Greens. Something. There needs to be a way to hurt the Dems electorally. If that means another Repub in office so be it! The Dems are essentially right wingers anyway.
LOL. At this point, you gotta laugh at the stream of bullshit spewing from all the shameless cowards in DC.
If that’s true I wonder how it is that you don’t know how to link to another site.
It’s truly amazing that anyone could still think that what Obama does doesn’t represent Obama’s policy. And that when the Democrats in Congress adopt Obama’s policy it’s not Obama’s fault.
Liberals are both gullible and/or stupid. Or maybe know the deal, but prefer to live in a dream world. Or they could be lazy. Or maybe they don’t want to do what is necessary to dump the Dems and form a leftist movement against the capitalist oink oinks.
Someone like Digby, who seems smart, should know the deal, and yet she doesn’t.
Why not go to the heart of the problem?
I think it is time to confront Obama’s inadequacies similarly. No more votes for Democravens. I’m not afraid of the beauty queen, she isn’t mouthing progressive phrases as cover and won’t get the support of sycophants in the democraven party.
See, that’s what I am talking about. Why would you take such a gratuitous slap at someone who is just asking for information? Don’t you have better things to do? p.s. if you know how to do the linking, I would appreciate your advice on it as well.
ALL democrats in the house and senate have LOST THEIR SPINES…they don’t even rise up in verbal protest anymore…All they do is schedule their next fund-raiser and go home.. These guys have really turned against doing the right thing and squarely ended up in the how much is it going to put in my re-election accounts – public AND secret…
Spine has collapsed.
The media has enforced a major blockade against the viability of a third party. That’s the problem. The media picks our candidates and trashes the rest. That’s why voting is futile. We don’t have any real choice.
They all represent corporate interests.
US media is corporate controlled.
A consolidated propaganda arm of Wall St.
And, another one we can attribute to the Democrat Clinton. His 1996 “Telecommunications Act” really set this shit in motion.
Working class Americans pay higher taxes than the wealthy when you consider SS, Medicare, fuel and other sales taxes etc:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Cu5B-2LoC4s
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QLD0p1QpcI8
I think the media just did a huge favor for Obama is burying Dana Priest’s articles. Breitbart and Vilsack rid Obama of the meddlesome Priest. Greenwald has been talking about how Priest’s articles have gotten so little traction. I think it was because of an inside job to create a temporary distraction.
Not a gratuitous slap. As a mental health counselor for 20 years I look for patterns and consistency. Long term contributor to comments and not knowing how to link are not consistent.
Go to a site, copy the url. See the 3-link chain icon between the quote and spell-check icons? Highlight whatever word(s) you want to serve as the link, click on the chain-link icon and paste in the url. Like this.
I agree voting is futile, hence the need for leftist movement apart from the 2 party joke. I’d run candidates on the left, just to make the Dems lose. As a strategy, you see…
Music to my ears….
I didn’t know about the chain icon either, all that education gone to waste….
Please stop calling this monstrosity “The Catfood Commission.” It’s “Obama’s Catfood Commission.” It didn’t spring up spontaneously. Per the Wikipedia:
Not voting at all is not in your own best interest. When that onerous change to the city/county charter goes into effect because lots of folks stayed home they have nobody to blame but themselves. Don’t want to vote for a particular office? Leave it blank or write in your or somebody else’s name. Way too many down ballot races/issues to cut your nose off to spite your face.
Two points for you on that one.
Yes, it’s Obama’s Catfood Commission.
Two points for you, SD.
Specificity is important.
Vote local, forget national.
I think it was part of the plan to get people on the left to think that it was just a gesture. I mean combined with everything else that’s known about the commission, particularly the secrecy, it’s obvious that the White House was counting on apologists in the media to shrug it off as a gesture. Joe Biden’s Blue Ribbon panel on the middle class was a gesture. This is serious. It was obviously part of the plan that thoughtless reporters would simply equate this with every other BS commission and blue ribbon panel that really were gestures. And I think it’s hard to ignore the fact that it’s very likely that there are the votes in the House and Senate to do this. No one can underestimate how badly this President and the leaders in Congress want to crucify themselves and more to the point everyone else.
Might I suggest calling it the “Let the eat cat food commission.” Does that make the point crystal clear?
I was once an instructor in the political science department at UCF and VCC so I have a bit of a different take than most here I think, but I disagree with you on not voting vs. voting third party. I remember during Reagan how the lack of turnout was interpreted as people being basically satisfied with the way things were and thus not turning out to vote. In other words, all votes are protest votes. A bit simplistic, but I definitely believe that not voting lacks the power of voting for someone closer to your perspective. Another example: Clinton made the deficit the centerpiece of his administration only after Perot’s success highlighted the issue. Or the Greens in Germany forced the ruling SDP to adopt an anti-nuclear power plant and weapons strategy to co-opt voters who cared about those issues. Just not voting makes the issues you care about invisible, but voting third party shines a spotlight on them.
Since you’re in FL, voting for the Socialist Party of FL candidate is no different than leaving that race blank or writing in your own name. The only real difference is that the number of votes the SP candidate got will be shown in the official tally, whereas blanks or your name won’t. There is no 3rd party on a national level.
One point about calling it the ‘cat food commission.’ I think liberals have often made the mistake of thinking that if the facts were known we’d win the argument and therefore dry technocratic language should be used. But honestly that’s a losing strategy, there’s a good reason words like Death tax, death panel and so on have been pretty effective. They get the point across quickly and effectively. It’s harder when you’re trying to argue with the facts on your side than it is to just lie, but facts don’t in and of themselves guarantee you’ll win the argument. That’s why advertisers don’t just send a man in a suit up on a stage to carefully explain why their product is superior. It doesn’t work, it’s boring, people won’t pay attention. Political messaging is not a collegial debate, it’s much more like an advertising war. We can argue about how things should be, but that’s how they are. That’s why I like the term cat food commission, but I think it would be even better to call it the “let them eat cat food commission.”
But WHY didn’t you vote? The candidates aren’t far enough right, not religious enough, not strongly against women’s rights, worker’s rights, not strongly enough against minorities? Do you think the elites should make the decisions and you are too dumb? No one knows. But someone who voted SP makes it clear that they want to move the country to the left.
Well, that’s their job now.
Keep muddying the waters with bullshit ditractions.
They spend a month on the death of Michael Jackson, but one of the last true journalists in America does a critical story on our shadow government and it’s barely a blip on the radar screen before they move on.
Who says I didn’t vote?
How many votes did the SP candidate get in the any of the last 5 or 6 elections? Added together, even. Those numbers wouldn’t get the attention of the meekest of political strategists.
But no one knows it is you who did or didn’t vote, or why, you are just one among millions, mixed in with all the hillbillies who also didn’t vote. So the message you are sending is ambiguous at best.
We’ll just have to agree to disagree. Having helped run 2 congressional campaigns as treasurer I apparently have a different perspective.
It’s never a good idea not to vote, even in our constricted political culture there are alternatives. Vote for the Green Party or whoever is to the left of the Democrats. Not voting simply gives the media the excuse it’s looking for, not that they need an excuse, to say that the Democrats failed because this is a center-right country and they went to far to the left. Which is ridiculous to say the least. The whole left-right debate is most a distraction, though not totally. The real issue is competence and results.
Even fifteen years ago, voting might have an effect of some kind.
Not anymore. The old rules don’t apply.
Wall St. has full control of Washington and the media.
We are simply their ATM.
If the media covers a candidate that’s a red flag.
Since they ignore, minimize, make crazy, or trash anyone who bucks the corporate status quo, I refuse to reward the failed candidates they shove down our throats.
The top 1% get their “entitlements”, that they don’t need, cut along with the rest of us? And that is supposed to make us happy? But they get to keep their Bush Tax Cuts? Yeah, that is really putting the screws to them.
FYI, don’t like to hear MY fica payments that I’ve made since I started working referred to as “entitlements”.
Exactly. George Lakoff and Frank Luntz make similar arguments, the problem is that the progressive Lakoff is ignored by the dems while the repugs have used Luntz’s ideas extensively. I think it is the nature of liberalism vs. conservatism, in that liberals believe in rationality (the ability to understand the world and to make changes based on that understanding) whereas conservatives do not. The upshot is that since rationalism is not possible conservatives do not believe in hypocrisy, in saying something while believing something completely opposite, and they have never hesitated to do so. Ideas serve an end for conservatives, and if they serve the end of maintaining the status quo it doesn’t matter if the ideas are “true”: you have your “truth”, I have mine, with no way of distinguishing other than the character of either of us. Liberal’s also on the other hand believe that not only is rationality possible, but that most people utilize it in making decisions, whereas as Lakoff and Luntz note we mostly rely on past knowledge and emotional reactions in judging ideas. Fascinating stuff.
Reichwingers will never admit that people actually pay into SS and Medicare for future benefits, like a company pension/healthcare plan. “Entitlement” is a way to demonize those who aren’t fortunate enough to make enough money to put in a 401(k) or whatever. Those that do have decent retirement packages seem to have no trouble apply for SS when they’re eligible.
To the shills squawking here that we must vote for Democrats no matter what they do to us… have you thought through that concept? Thought it through to its logical conclusion.
A representative democracy is control of the government by the people governed via their ability to vote for or against the candidates who want to represent them in that government.
The voters therefore have control of the government via the ability to remove representatives who have failed their constituents and replace them with candidates who might perform better.
When you say that we have no choice but to vote for a certain political party then you are saying that there is no choice in or control of our government by the people…
One more thing.
The media will distort anything and everything to say we’re a center right country. They gotta continue making that claim so Congress has an excuse for their corporate ass kissing. Reality isn’t important anymore.
Their mission is greed and power, not the American people.
Frankly, the media has zero credibility and a lot of people already know it.
Back to work.
Namaste
Right on.
It’s your money. You were forced to entrust it to them your entire working life and now they’re getting ready to breach a seventy year old contract with the American people. Think they’d break a contract with an oil or drug company? Never happen.
Entitlements my ass!
I agree completely, quite well said too. This is one of those issues that people across the political spectrum will react to quite viscerally. It’s quite powerful if you can convince someone that someone is trying to take something from them, especially something that they’ve earned. The problem is that people are so cynical and many have grown accustomed to having things taken from them and the false premise that Social Security is bankrupt is more wide spread than many of us would like to think. But still people, in general, are probably more concerned with what they’re getting out of the deal. The optics of this could still be on the side of those that are for reason and rationality but no one should make the mistake of thinking that we can appeal simply to peoples reasonable side, that may help, but it can only be an secondary strategy, the main message has to be: “Wall St is coming for you’re retirement money, the money you earned through a lifetime of taxes.” That sort of message will appeal to peoples heads and hearts. It’s simply a matter of getting enough people to realize what’s happening, we know that Social Security is so very popular that the only way the “let them eat cat food commission” will work is if it’s work is done in the dark and if people on the left are convinced it’s just a gesture. This is no gesture. They’re playing for keeps.
Not sure what mental health has to do with anything, but let’s leave that one alone. Thank you for the directions on linking.
Well said.
Pointing the finger at the monsters on Wall St. coming for a lifetime of our savings that we sacrificed for by living on less all these years, should piss people off big time.
I absolutely agree. I always thought a good frame for the dems would be “The Republicans are stealing from you.” It doesn’t matter that the issue is more complicated, it is a good way of pointing out the unfairness of say the Bush tax cuts and how regressive our revenue generation has become. You are absolutely correct about the need for a visceral reaction, from the gut, to get through to working class people. I think another part of the problem is that many liberals are upper-middle class types who have been to college and like the tools in thinking that it provides us with, whereas most working class people don’t go to college (I was there for 16 years and the only other working class people I met were from Europe).
The policy approach did not work on public option – we had the facts on our side, public opinion on our side per polls (as opposed to Murdoch’s fake townhall protesters), and promise of support from Obama promises of vote from Congress Critters – until the process became a 51 vote need to pass in the budget recon bill – and then the 51 votes disappeared.
More than 51 committals that disappeared.
talking policy does not seem to “take care of itself”.
So walking away from the election – 800000 in Mass so a GOPer Brown could win by 100000 – and then doing the same in Nov – seems the only way to get past Rahm/Obama’s “where the hell can the progressives go?” Indeed given Obama’s corporate agenda, I do not see how having a few GOP elected could hurt the chance of movement on progressive issues. There will be no movement on progressive ideas under Obama – just corporate welfare checks to companies that have a word in their description that matches a word in a progressive cause – as in the cause “health” means giving money to “health ins co’s” and “health drug companies”.
“There will be no movement on progressive ideas under Obama – just corporate welfare checks…”
Bravo.
The most important thing in political messaging is probably to “keep it simple.” Fill in the details later if needed. People will viscerally understand the idea of a midnight conspiracy between government and Wall St to take their money. It’s certainly not unprecedented.
Chicago ?
Ward politics did not begin with Washington, nor did voting your group. Hard to see how that ties to Kos banning long, long time contributors because some young moderators were so in love with Obama that anyone questioning his sincerity or leftness was deemed a PUMA (which in and of itself was nuts as the PUMA folks had the facts on their side in my opinion – and half the party – 18 million – more than voted for Obama in the primary – moved back to vote for him in large part because Hillary requested they do so). “Stop Shooting ourselves in the foot” is a cute way for Obama to try to get the progressive vote – but it will not work that well, IMO.
…if the question gets asked in the campaign. NOBODY is even pretending that the commission will come out with any recommendation other than SS cuts, so how a member will vote is a fair question even today.
She will do a whip count that says it won’t pass, bring it to the floor, and oopsie, it will pass.
Yet again you save me the work of posting.
I admire and support Firedoglake, but sometimes I am dismayed. Jon Walker appears to think that cuts to Social Security and Medicare by Obama and his Catfood Commission will only cause Seniors to fall into poverty. Does Walker not understand that Social Security is the only income or the primary income of millions of Seniors? These programs also serve the disabled. These Obama cuts are coldblooded and ruthless. They will financially ruin these people and devastate their lives. Comfortable, apparently clueless, middle-class progressives appear to feel no urgency. Who else can Americans turn to?
January 2011…News Flash
A reporter asked Mr.Obama and his economic advisors, how they felt about the multitude of stories about how the elderly were showing up dead in so many circumstances that seemed to involve SS cuts. Mr. Obama was heard to retort:
“Ya know, shit happens, but we are looking forward to modifying our research on the deficit and HOPE to make some type of significant CHANGE in the near future!”
In addition to my comment above. Why is it that most Americans are unaware of the Obama Catfood Commission? Why are progressives, liberals, Democrats and others talking so little about this danger to Social Security? I hope Jon Walker writes more on this subject. Just, please, remember that this is life and death to many Americans. Thanks.
see below
Cate… The reason that a large portion of Americans are unaware of the Deficit Commission is the same reason they are unaware of many important and significant issues that impact all citizens regardless of age, class, race, or whatever…they are purposely fed lies and deception and have their emotional buttons pushed by those immoral and provocateurs of bullshit, who know what will incite the lowest common denominator.
On the other hand, many simply do not give a shit! If they have professed the belief ‘I got mine’, or are not affected by the current dilemmas, then they assume all is well. But the snowball goes down hill rather fast, and picks up weight and momentum as it goes until all are buried beneath it!
There are ‘life and death’ issues that surround us all, each and every day…but the bigger question is always: ‘whose life and death’? For the elite and the MOTU, they do not live with these fears, because they feel they are the ‘untouchables’, but sooner or later all these issues which remain as potential and current disasters will touch all!
I guess when you can’t muster facts or reasoning for your side, you just Make Stuff Up?
The Chicago analogy was related to the Republicans automatically voting down anything Obama proposes out of sheer hatred and obstinacy and political calculation. It had nothing to do with Kos and any internecine feuds you may be concerned with. Incidentally, I was a Hillary partisan in the primaries until she was defeated.
We keep telling you the facts… and you keep telling us that we have to vote for anyone calling themselves a democrat no matter what they do to us on behalf of their corporate paymasters.
An explicit reminder as to how the phrase “cat food” came to be associated with our senior citizens is not at all out of line, I think.
In fact it would seem that the shills are actually worried about the use of the phrase “cat-food commission”… probably because a lot of senior citizens won’t have any trouble at all understanding exactly what that phrase signifies.
Rahm? Is that you?
Some comments are meant to be snarky or anticipatory, but contain factual information.
Perhaps you have no one in your family that is elderly and will be dramatically and dangerously affected by the potential gutting of the Social Security. I DO, and I am potentially one of them as well. Open your eyes and clear out all that ‘elitist’ gunk, and perhaps you will see the suffering that has taken place and may escalate with the SS fiasco.
It amazes me how the lights look seemingly on, but no one is home!
Obama made the house eat the senate version of serf care. He can make them eat anything.
The budget deficit “problem” is an establishment myth.
We do not need budget surpluses, we don’t even need balanced budgets. What we need is full employment. And we aren’t going to get full employment without significant deficit spending. If we bring employment back up to full, the rest will largely sort itself out. Plenty of room to raise taxes in the future if the economy ever started to over heat.
And this is the core establishment myth that Obama’s entire catfood commission rests upon… the need to control deficit spending.
How will a balanced budget help the jobless and homeless? How will it help those that depend on Social Security and Medicare?
At this point in time, the only thing that balanced budgets or budget surpluses would do is increase unemployment and temporarily prop up the exchange rate value of the dollar.
We need a president that commits to a fast return to full employment rather than a president that commits to a fast return to balanced budgets. The former helps the struggling public, the latter helps rich investors.
It’s the difference between siding with humanity and siding with Robert Rubin. The two are mutually exclusive at this point in time.
If House progressives had cojones then health care would have included the public option. I can’t imagine them confronting Speaker Pelosi in a do-or-die effort to save Social Security.
Exactly, they put their word on their line and then they proved their word is worthless. So they’re not going to do jack about anything… except re-introduce a public option bill a day late and dollar short. Yeah, that will rally the troops. No one is going to respect them until the they take a stand against something, and in Richard Armitage’s wonderful phrase, dismount, kill the horses, fight on foot and not let it happen, but I wouldn’t hold my breath.
IF they want to do something productive in meantime, they should drop the “public option bill” and start working on a “Medicare bill”. As I mentioned at Jim White’s thread, the current Medicare system is in the middle between the public option bill and the HR 676 Medicare for All bill, so make universal Medicare coverage the goal. The benefits package can be improved afterward. So take Max Baucus’s Medicare expansion provision for certain Montana residents and expand it to offer Medicare to everyone in Montana and, this is crazy, the other 49 states too.
IF they don’t want to go back to well on healthcare (then why’d they revive the public option bill?), then the House progressives need to find an issue, any issue, where they can prove their words and their deeds are one.
“One point about calling it the ‘cat food commission.’ I think liberals have often made the mistake of thinking that if the facts were known we’d win the argument and therefore dry technocratic language should be used. But honestly that’s a losing strategy, there’s a good reason words like Death tax, death panel and so on have been pretty effective. They get the point across quickly and effectively.”
Thank you very much for this. I agree 100% but you’ve said it much more articulately than I could.
Obama’s Catfood Commission is exactly what it is.
Obama stacked his commission with benefit cutters. These people have known opinions on this issue.
Obama himself told a room full of Wallstreet types(The Hamilton Project): “too many of us have been interested in defending programs the way they were written in 1938″.( youtube ) What do you think he’s getting at with statements like that?
Or listen to the commission co-chair for a full NPR TOTN episode.
Maybe Congress will shoot down the commissions recommendations but the President has already played his hand.
In my opinion Republicans will never implement tweaks to gut social security long-term even-though they will grumble about it. Reason is they will lose next elections in a land-slide, social security will be brought back with veto proof majority and the party will forever be stained by it. It is Democrats one should be worried about. It is the primary reason in my opinion Deficit commission sponsors hang out with Democrats.
Anyway Social Security is the primary reason we do not have another Depression right now, is one of the primary mechanisms where America is one of the most savings oriented nations in the world where every American saves 12.5% for a rainy day every paycheck unlike the popular opinion.