Say it ain't so!! Safety net cuts still in play?

[stupidicus]

How could that be?

I thought the table had been yanked from underneath such propositions that had never ever existed to begin with.

President Barack Obama urged Congress Tuesday to replace the automatic spending cuts of the budget sequester with a balanced set of deficit reductions that included cuts and revenue. He also indicated that, as far as he's concerned, a "grand bargain" is still possible.

The proposals that I put forward during the fiscal cliff negotiations in discussions with Speaker Boehner and others are still very much on the table. I just want to repeat: The deals that I put forward, the balanced approach of spending cuts and entitlement reform and tax reform that I put forward are still on the table.

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2013/02/06/1185112/-Austerity-showdown-Safety-net-cuts-still-in-nbsp-play

[Ilsa]

1. As the sign said, we don't need to worry about

The govt taking our guns. We need to worry about them taking our Social Security, Medicare, and Medicaid.

[stupidicus]

3. SO true that is

it's been one of the biggest things I'd hoped I was wrong about.

the last thing this country needs right now is any further erosions in the faith and trust in our government, and I can't think of a better abrasive effort that would achieve that. I'm guessing that some will occur on the basis of it being on the table to begin with.

[Ilsa]

6. Why would our creditors

Have faith in our ability to repay if the govt is willing to screw over its own citizens?

[stupidicus]

15. well

perhaps maybe because of the willingness to screw us if necessary to pay them?

[Ilsa]

19. Only if they assume there

Won't be a Greek-styled revolt.

[djean111]

2. That will be my line in the sand.

[stupidicus]

7. indeed

like many I am having trouble coming to grips with the idea that it has even been put on the table, whether it is taken off or not.

The way the politics in DC continues to drift rightward in this increasingly leftward-leaning country is really something...

[WillyT]

4. Did You Catch This ???

Link: http://www.democraticunderground.com/10022320134

[stupidicus]

11. the first I saw of it was here

http://americablog.com/2013/02/barack-obama-social-security-and-medicare-cuts-are-very-much-back-on-the-table.html

it looks like the message is much the same from all sources -- lube up, just in case.

I left this same message on your link by accident.

[Recursion]

5. Does the GOP still exist?

Then entitlement cuts are still in play

[stupidicus]

12. good point

it is hard to imagine the impetus would be there for it if not for them

[Puzzledtraveller]

8. I'm certain they are coming

sooner or later.

[JoePhilly]

10. They've been predicted here on DU about every 4-6 months since

Obama took office.

His first term is over ... did not happen.

But hey ... fortunately, we have 4 more years during which to predict that he's absolutely going to gut those programs.

And each time that it does not happen, that does not prove Obama does not plan to do it.

[stupidicus]

13. I'm not so sure

I think it depends upon how much opposition he gets from the congresspeople. Given the unpopularity of the cuts/age raises and the midterms approaching, he's not doing them any favors either.

[JoePhilly]

9. So is this the time when Obama cuts those programs????

Its been predicted about 10 times since Obama took office.

"Obama is about to CAVE!!!!"

DU explodes in terror. Breathless threads about Obama's evil plan. AGGGGGRRRRHHHH!!!!!!!!

Then, nothing.

But hey, maybe this time its actually coming.

[stupidicus]

14. who said anything about caving?

let's not change the subject to non-alleged caving or to exaggerations like "gutting" the programs, and stick to what he says is "still on the table", no?

What's next, it's not really "on the table" in the useable sense, like wax fruit not intended for eating, having only ornamental value?

Just because the situation/conditions underwhich the actual bartering involving such has yet to occur doesn't mean the time isn't ripe for it now, does it? Perhaps maybe you can enlighten us as to the other ten times in the last four years they were "on the table" in budget negotiations, no?

[forestpath]

16. They were never NOT in play. Apparently hurting seniors and the disabled is

President Obama's definition of "balanced."

[stupidicus]

17. sorry

I should have maybe made my sarcasm more clear.

As I've noted many times here, he raised my suspicions a long time ago, in terms of what his actual position on the matter is. There's a big difference however, between holding the pov stated in 2006 that "Too many of us have been interested in defending programs as written in 1938." and actually putting it "on the table" for revisions of the kind proposed.

[forestpath]

20. I got your sarcasm - I was just being sarcastic, too!

It's either that or scream at the egregious betrayal.

[HiPointDem]

18. they always will be.

[djean111]

21. Most of the "hair on fire" I see here is from those swiftly mocking those of us

who calmly announce that Obama putting Medicare and Social Security on the table is a betrayal and/or our line in the sand.
Jeers, like clockwork.
I'm going to take the Occam's Razor approach - if Obama continuously announces that cutting Social Security and Medicare are on his table, instead of at least STARTING from a position of not cutting those programs, then sooner or later he will cheerfully sign off on said cuts. And say the GOP made him do it. And telling us to eat our peas. Or whatever is next down the price line from peas.
I have heard that his hands are tied so many times that sometimes it seems that the White House "negotiation process" is merely a chapter from Fifty Shades of Gray.

[stupidicus]

22. yep, that's the case alrighty

it's been quite the goalpost movement from start to finish as well.

It started with disputes about whether he actually intended to put them on the table or not, and when that appeared to be settled, onto the stuff like "hands are tied" you mentioned.