Too bad we can't eliminate "entitlements" from political language and replace it with the more accurate "retirement insurance." Let's not get into that stale argument about who pays for retirement insurance. We all do.
Obama, the fink, wants to reduce the amount of our own investment that we get back. That may seem fair seen from the high altitudes of the White House, but you and I and Nancy Pelosi (on a Hill but without delusions of grandeur) see it quite differently. We think the President is too willing to cave. Pelosi is quite specific.
First, she wants to keep a united front in the high-stakes budget battle with Obama, who has backed a less generous formula for inflationary adjustments to Social Security benefits in exchange for more tax revenue from Republicans.Second, she wants to defend the views of her caucus, who largely oppose any change in the formula for calculating those benefits, particularly since it could hurt poor seniors who rely on Social Security for their everyday needs.
Third, she's hoping to cultivate the image of Democrats as the more reasonable negotiators in the debate, the party willing to sacrifice in the name of deficit reduction and bipartisan compromise. Members of her caucus acknowledge it’s not an easy job to juggle the three. ...The Hill
What will follow is a war -- a quiet war but a battle for rights. Compared to the gunsters' war against all of us, sanctioned by an unrealistic and narrow reading of the 2nd Amendment, the right of elderly Americans seems considerably more important and life-giving.
The Hill goes on to notice that the Congressional Progressive Caucus is keeping an eye on this and lately we are keeping our eyes on the CPC. They seem to be our best bet -- a better bet, perhaps, than Obama -- if we want a just and progressive future.
NB: Obama may not have to bear the burden of cuts in Social Security. The Hill also reports that it looks as though Boehner may make the first move:
With Speaker John Boehner (R-Ohio) and his Republican conference near-unanimous in their opposition to any new tax revenues, many lawmakers are voicing strong doubts about Congress's ability to pass a deficit grand bargain. It's a scenario Obama is well aware of. “One of the things he [Obama] said when he answered Keith Ellison's question, he said, 'You may not have to worry about it, because if they're not going to go along with revenue, then we're not going to have a deal anyway,’” [Rep. Elijah] Cummings said Friday. “So he said, basically, keep your powder dry.”...The Hill
