Will Pres. Obama take the budget proposed by the Progressive Caucus as seriously as Ryan's?

[polichick]

Wish I could say, "Of course he will!"

[dkf]

1. I would like to see how they intend to pay for entitlements 75 years out.

[grahamhgreen]

4. 81% of Americans want to tax the rich, 63% out of Afghanistan, close loopholes, etc.

It's a no-brainer.

[polichick]

6. It really is a no-brainer if it's about the people - sadly, it's about the mic...

...the wealthy and corporate profits.

[dkf]

14. So they intend to increase taxes just on the rich equal to 20% of GDP?

Is that feasible? Do the rich make enough?

[ProudDad]

28. Why do you hate the poor? (n/t)

[grahamhgreen]

86. Yes. According to Obama a 4% increase is 70 billion a year. A 40% increase to pre-Reagan levels

would be 700 billion every year.

[ProudDad]

27. "entitlements"

Nice use of the republican/tea-bagger description of the Social Safety Net...

If Society wishes to include everyone in the bounty then they will find a way to afford it...

In Europe, most countries decided that Health Care was a human right THEN they found a way to pay for it...

Here in amoral USAmerica, the capitalist paradise, any social good must pass a "cost benefit analysis" litmus test or, sorry Charlie, fuck you...

[villager]

2. Sadly, the Progressives who elected him aren't his "base"

n/t

[polichick]

3. It's such a depressing situation to have a "Democratic" president who jumps...

...for the other side and seems to hold the base in contempt.

It's really time for progressives to get serious about holding him accountable, or challenging him.

[ProudDad]

29. "Progressives" did not elect him

Corporate money (mainly Wall Street) SELECTED him...

And deluded Democrats and independents and some "old fashioned" republicans cast votes for him...

Thanks to his impressive propaganda machine...

And a shit-pot of money...

Just as they will again in 2012...

[vaberella]

5. Do they even have one?! Because if they did, I haven't seen it. n/t

[polichick]

7. Of course you haven't.

[vaberella]

9. That was a question. Where is it? What is the name?! Snark doesn't answer a question. n/t

[grahamhgreen]

11. Here

Progressive Caucus co-chairs Raúl M. Grijalva and Keith Ellison sent a memo to House Budget Committee Ranking Member Chris Van Hollen April 6 outlining the Caucus' top budget priorities. The letter and attached budget information are available at this link. An op-ed by Dr. Jeffrey Sachs of Columbia University endorsing the People's Budget is available at this link (off-site).

The CPC proposal:

• Eliminates the deficits and creates a surplus by 2021
• Puts America back to work with a “Make it in America” jobs program
• Protects the social safety net
• Ends the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq
• Is FAIR (Fixing America’s Inequality Responsibly)

What the proposal accomplishes:

• Primary budget balance by 2014.
• Budget surplus by 2021.
• Reduces public debt as a share of GDP to 64.4% by 2021, down 16.9 percentage points from
a baseline fully adjusted for both the doc fix and the AMT patch.
• Reduces deficits by $5.7 trillion over 2012-21
• Both outlays and revenue equal 22.3% of GDP by 2021



http://cpc.grijalva.house.gov/index.cfm?sectionid=70§iontree=5,70

[vaberella]

12. Thanks a lot. I appreciate it. The WSJ article totally ignored it.n/t

[ClassWarrior]

17. Starting to realize how much you're being played against your fellow Dems?

NGU.

[vaberella]

58. What is that supposed to mean? n/t

[ClassWarrior]

63. You had no clue a Progressive Budget existed. Not because progressives are Obama haters...

...but because the Radical RW media didn't tell you about it. So who's the enemy?

:shrug:

NGU.

[ClassWarrior]

74. .

[vaberella]

13. Thanks I like the plan.

I don't see it too realistic considering the clowns we have in Congress---and the President is already asking for bipartisan---so oy. But hopefully some bargaining will happen and we'll get some of these measures. Luckily the pull back of troops is supposed to happen this summer and there's no word against that so far so the war in Afghanistan might be winding down. Iraq is basically a done deal.

[former9thward]

59. We still have combat troops dying in Iraq.

For them it is not a "done deal".

[Cali_Democrat]

23. Now THAT is a real plan

[vi5]

8. HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAH!!!!

Oh I'm sorry. Were you seriously asking that question?

[polichick]

10. Actually no - just pointing out how ridiculous the situation is. You're right to laugh...

...or to weep uncontrollably.

[vi5]

22. I'm beyond actual laughter...

Now I fluctuate between seething anger, and uncontrollable weeping.

[polichick]

15. Wonder if we'll even hear the WH or Dem leaders talk about this plan...

Use of the bully pulpit would sure help.

[ClassWarrior]

16. It's more rooted in reality than Ryan's, but I doubt he will.

NGU.

[polichick]

18. Isn't it amazing that we should even have to ask the question?

[FrenchieCat]

19. Does the progressive Caucus have a majority available to pass such a budget?

if not, then that should answer your question....

Not sure why you didn't know the answer to that....
nor, evidently do those in line responding in this op
shitting on Obama once again....cause any reason to shit on
Obama appears priceless here at DU, no matter if politically one is given the
choice between the impossible and the more than likely.

[polichick]

20. You do know what a bully pulpit is for, right?

[FrenchieCat]

24. The media decides who and when there will be a bully pulpit....

not you, nor I, nor even the President.

Anytime the President gets on television, they allow him two minutes if that.....
and then, they give the opposition an hour....at least. If the President schedules
a "bully pulpit" type of official speech of sorts, the media complaints about the
fact that some regularily scheduled program will be interrupted, and then searches
for the "Gotcha" distraction of their choice to derail the conversation.

The Bully Pulpit is a thing of the past....
because the bully pulpit is intercepted by the media
and translated for us, and interpreted to us based on
whatever bias can be found.

You are underestimating the power of United Citizen,
with along with a fraudulent 4th estate and the millions
who are misinformed on a regular basis to stand against
their own interests.

Understand the realities of what our media does,
and perhaps instead of joining the opposition
in shitting on Obama every day, you'll realize
that the only thing you are working so hard for currently
is not the truth as much as begging for a Republican foot up all of our asses
come November 2012.

[Cali_Democrat]

25. So then how can Obama incorporate many of the CPC proposals into the budget debate?

What should he do? Because, to me, the Congressional Progressive Caucus plan looks like an excellent plan that is fiscally responsible.

[ProudDad]

30. He could open his mouth and support the principles...

Of course, for him, he'd have to do a hell of an acting job because he apparently doesn't fully believe in Progressive Principles...

[Name removed]

31. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[ProudDad]

34. If you can spout nonsense like that

then you obviously DON'T understand my "Agenda"...

My "Agenda" is that every person and creature on this planet has her/his/its needs fulfilled, is nurtured and loved and allowed to live up to his/her/its fullest potential and leaves the Earth even more able to sustain future generations than they found it...

My "Agenda" is a sustainable planet full of happy people...

http://www.daveforarizona.org/html/sustainability.html

---------------------------------------

As for "nations", including this one, "Piss on all Flags" because nationalism is antithetical to my "agenda" as detailed above...

As for capitalism...it's the current dominant tool for maintaining the power of the elites...

As for Obama, he's the spokesmodel for the above two destructive forces and therefore cannot be relied upon to help...

[Blue_In_AK]

70. ProudDad, I just have to tell you

:yourock:

[ProudDad]

66. Aw, Darn...

I hate it when posts get deleted from my threads or subthreads...

Obviously the one above had some relevance or I wouldn't have responded to it...

[ClassWarrior]

37. So give up? Or try even harder to get our message through?

:shrug:

NGU.

[polichick]

40. It's always the media for you - never what the prez is actually doing...

...or not doing.

[FrenchieCat]

41. Cause I'm not stupid......

I saw who took us to war in Iraq. It wasn't Bush as much as the Media's
manner of massaging the public opinion of the masses.


I saw why Bush was allowed to steal the fucking presidential office,
and how the media was a big part of the show...


Just like I understand how Obama saved this fucked up country from an economic meltdown,
yet all we hear are those who didn't do SHIT but talk, talk some more....
all the while they work extra hard at turning this country against Obama,
instead of giving him any support, simply because he didn't decide to
nationalize all of the banks and declare himself dictator.

[polichick]

42. Everyone knows the media sucks - still, many of us are not stupid enough to...

...make endless excuses when the president's actions suck.

[Name removed]

43. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[polichick]

44. What's "gutless" is disregarding everything the prez does and blaming it all...

...on the media. You act as if nobody has any info about the decisions made.

[ClassWarrior]

51. I ask again... So give up? Or try even harder to get our message through?

NGU.

[ClassWarrior]

61. Hellooo? McFlyyy??

NGU.

[ClassWarrior]

62. .

[ClassWarrior]

68. .

[ClassWarrior]

71. ROFL... The Obama purists are afraid to answer me!! I win!!

:rofl:

[frylock]

48. fucking defeatist bullshit

[ClassWarrior]

21. Yes.

No Center, No Centrists
by George Lakoff

...I am a cognitive scientist and believe that people's brains play a significant role in elections. From the perspective of brain science, the answer is a no-brainer. (Sorry, I couldn't resist!) You speak to biconceptuals the same way you speak to your base: you discuss progressive values, and if you are talking to folks with both progressive and conservative values, you mainly talk about the issues where they share progressive values. What that does is evoke and strengthen the progressive values already there in the minds of biconceptuals.

And of course, you don't negate or argue against the other on their framing turf -- remember Don't Think of an Elephant!

That was the winning strategy of Sherrod Brown in Ohio. Brown is a thoroughgoing progressive who never moved one inch to the right. He talked about the issues where he agreed with his Ohio audiences -- and legitimately spoke for them...

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/george-lakoff/no-center-no-centrists_b_60419.html

NGU.

[ClassWarrior]

33. So you're willing to get in a flame war with someone (above), but you won't...

...answer a post with real content? That says a lot.

NGU.

[frylock]

47. does the teabagger caucus have a majority available to pass their budget?

[ProudDad]

26. No, because Mr. Obama is

the best "republican" pResident money can buy...

[Bobbie Jo]

38. Good grief....

WTF is up with the "pResident" reference?

You think it's clever or something? :eyes:

[BklnDem75]

45. The term is pretty famous...

Among birthers

[ProudDad]

65. It's because he doesn't "Preside" over anything...

He's part of the great corporate-funded Kabuki theater preserving the status-quo for the uber-rich elites...

His job is to reside in the great house and act as SpokeModel for the Corporate Empire...

Nothing clever about that...it's just a job...

[ProudDad]

32. The Progressive Plan is not only the right one

but polling shows that it's the view of the majority of USAmericans ALREADY...

It would be an easy "sell" if there were anyone in the White House who would be willing to sell it...

-----------------------------------------------------

All of it is to say, when the public option was taken off the table last year, despite a strong support of the public—and why did Obama take it off the table? Because the lobbyists told him to take it off the table. When that was taken off the table, we lost the chance to get healthcare costs under control. This is the problem. It’s lobbyists, morning 'til night. Whether it's lobbyists for healthcare, lobbyists for the financial sector, lobbyists for the war industry, and lobbyists for the tax cuts, they’re running Washington, both the White House and the Congress. And what the public wants—actually, the broad majority of the public—doesn’t get heard.

AMY GOODMAN: Talk more about the People’s Budget.

JEFFREY SACHS: The People’s Budget is a proposal of the leadership of 80 members of Congress, which is called the Progressive Caucus. I was so happy—

AMY GOODMAN: The largest caucus in Congress.

JEFFREY SACHS: I was so happy to see it when I saw it for the first time last week as it was being unveiled. I said, "Thank God. Something coming from Washington that makes sense," because they, too, have been crowded out. The White House has played a game, basically. If the far right is holding the agenda, the White House says, "We’ll be one step towards the center of the far right." But that means giving concession after concession after concession. What Obama is trying to do is to look reasonable, to look a little bit more reasonable than the extreme right. But to do so, he’s just compromising, compromising on core principles.

Then, finally comes the Congressional Progressive Caucus and says, "Stop it. Let’s do what the people really want." This is the wonderful thing about America. Sometimes you feel so frustrated: "What’s going on in this country?" as if everybody’s a Tea Partier. It’s not true. The broad majority of the public has very reasonable, very mainstream and compassionate views. They say, "Don’t slash for the poor. No, let’s start making the rich pay their due." That’s what the public says, the large majority. Who’s listening? Or who’s hearing them? The media keeps them out, by and large. And the White House and the Congress are dominated by the lobbies and by the concern about raising campaign funds. After all, President Obama is trying to raise a billion dollars for his 2012 election. Where is he going to get that? On Wall Street. Are they telling him, "Raise the taxes"? Unfortunately not.

-----------------------------------

http://www.democracynow.org/2011/4/11/dont_punish_the_poor_economist_jeffrey

[JoePhilly]

35. I always enjoy the PREGAME bashing of Obama via strawman.

I don't think Obama or anyone in the administration takes the Ryan budget seriously.

Is that what you mean?

[AtomicKitten]

36. x a really big number

:thumbsup:

[polichick]

39. Yeah, they didn't take Republican demands seriously last week...

...or in December either - oh wait, that's why they gave up so much PREGAME.

[JoePhilly]

46. Last week, the DU prediction was Obama would give up PP, EPA and NPR.

That did not happen. But who cares. Just move on.

He was also supposed to announce major cuts to SS during the SOTU ... did not happen ... just move on.

He was helping Mubarak stay in power behind the scenes ... except he wasn't ... just move on.

He was never going to sign a repeal of DADT, until he did ... just move on.

And in December ... he kept his promise to not raise taxes on the 95% of Americans who make under 250k.

And if he broke that one, I am very sure that many on DU would have crucified him for throwing the middle class under the bus.

[polichick]

52. And then there's this...

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=439x870600

[JoePhilly]

54. Yes a diatribe that picks only those things that support the Obama bad meme.

All else is excluded.

Look, if your goal is to get moderate Dems to stay home in 2012, your plan is on track.

stick with it.

[polichick]

55. Just as you pick and choose things you agree with in your diatribe...

My goal is for the Democratic Party to act on its principles, not adopt right-wing policies.

[JoePhilly]

56. Ah, but I don't pick and choose.

I like some things Obama has done, and I don't like some things he's done.

In some cases I think he might have been able to get more, and in some cases he got more than I thought he could.

But when I come to DU, there are PLENTY of folks ready to scream about how evil Obama is. I tend to find that I need not amplify their voices. But I also find that many of those who are screaming loudest, and most frequently, ignore the points that dis-confirm their "Obama bad" meme.

See ... I don't think that Obama is perfect. And I don't see him as evil. He's a relatively moderate President. Which is why the right can call him a socialist, and the left can call him a Corpratist, and each think they are RIGHT ... when in reality, both are wrong.

He is not the caricature that the far right and far left have created.

[polichick]

57. Well, I don't think of the prez as bad or good - I just agree when I agree...

...and don't when I don't.

[Bobbie Jo]

60. LOL

Oh impartial one. :rofl:

You forget the rest of us read here too....

[polichick]

76. I'm partial when it comes to POLICY, not people - do your homework...

...for once.

[Bobbie Jo]

87. I'm not much impressed with your "work" either.

Carry on....

[ClassWarrior]

50. That's probably very true. So do you think they take the CPC budget more or less seriously...

...than the Ryan budget, which we both agree they don't take very seriously?

NGU.

[ClassWarrior]

64. Ahhh... you won't answer a serious question, but it's OTHER people putting up "strawmen."

:rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl:

NGU.

[ClassWarrior]

67. It's okay if you're afraid to answer.

:rofl:

NGU.

[krawhitham]

49. What makes you think he took Ryan's seriously?

[bornskeptic]

53. I would hope not. The President has more important things to spend his time on than

:rofl: :rofl: :rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl:

I very much doubt that the Progressive Caucus could come up with anything as funny as Ryan's "budget" if they wanted to.

[Blue_In_AK]

69. It remains to be seen.

I'll withhold judgment, but I have to say I'm not hopeful.

[LWolf]

72. Of COURSE he will.

:eyes:

[Overseas]

73. I certainly hope so !

It's a great budget !

[NorthCarolina]

75. Yeah sure, because he's SOOOOO Progressive!

:rofl:

[polichick]

77. Did he mention the progressive caucus plan?

[Bobbie Jo]

78. Desperately grasping at straws....

However weak they may be.

Carry on....

[polichick]

79. The answer is: No, he did not. (Just checked transcript.)

[Bobbie Jo]

80. Okay, now look up the phrase "grasping at straws." nt

[Name removed]

81. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Bobbie Jo]

82. LOL

Touchy, touchy. :rofl:

[polichick]

83. Just calling it like it is - anyone who thinks it's "grasping at straws" to want...

...a Democratic president to support the policies put forth by the progressive caucus has got to be a lame apologist.

[Bobbie Jo]

84. You are just a wealth of distorted assumptions...

Why do you hate America?!!!11?

[polichick]

85. LOL - nice projection!

[Hippo_Tron]

88. You do realize that Congress is controlled by the Republicans, right?

If the Progressive Caucus were the majority I'm sure he'd take it very seriously. Unfortunately America decided to elect a bunch of lunatics instead. Like it or not the budget that passes is the one that the majority of the House approves, not the one that they should approve.

[polichick]

89. You do realize that the Senate is controlled by Dems and is also part of Congress, right?

What we need is a progressive caucus in the Senate, in addition to the one in the House - and both need to play hardball.