Here’s what I think of all this crap about “shared sacrifice” and “skin in the game”: We already have so much damned skin in the game, we’re flayed.
And to us, it’s not a game, anyway!
We’re the people who lost our jobs, our savings, our healthcare, our home equity (and in many cases, our homes). Our public and private pensions have been pillaged, and for far too many of us, all we have left is Social Security and Medicare.
What are we willing to put on the table? Frankly, not another damned thing. Why should we? We’re not the millionaires and billionaires. We’re not the bankers who crashed the economy and walked off scot-free and richer than ever.
Hey, here’s a bright idea. Why not cut Social Security?
“It’s not a cut,” they say. Really? What would you call it if a Republican president was trying to impose this on us? This is a solution in search of a problem.
I am so thoroughly disgusted by the charade of what’s going on. Nancy Pelosi is saying the chained Consumer Price Index will contribute to the “strengthening” of Social Security. Sure it will — in the same sense that Bush’s Blue Skies act stopped air pollution, I guess. If it will indeed strengthen Social Security, why is the White House pretending that the Republicans are forcing them into it? What’s the part, then, that Pelosi says she’s “not crazy about”?
Our democracy is now so perverted that our “leaders” no longer bother to pay us the compliment of wooing us to support what they propose. Instead, they hide behind the skirts of deeply dishonest ploys like the chained CPI. This is the coward’s cut — it hurts the most vulnerable, and pretends to be a tweak.
Oh, and it raises taxes on those who make less than $40,000 a year.
Once again: What does Social Security have to do with the deficit? That’s it in a nutshell. You don’t have to argue against people who insist changing the COLA formula to one that doesn’t count heating oil or healthcare costs is an accurate reflection of the elderly’s expenses. All you have to do is get an answer to that question: Why are we cutting Social Security when it has nothing to do with the deficit?
And all this is President Obama’s response to an election in which he claimed that he would “protect” Social Security and Medicare. He used weasel words that fooled people. But what he’s doing now is so cynical, so manipulative, that if he gets away with it, he will cause real harm to the very idea of democracy.
And I don’t say it lightly. This paternalistic politician has consulted with his corporatist friends and from the very beginning, has been determined to find a way to cut Social Security. For our own good, of course!
Why? Who does he really work for — us, or Pete Peterson?
And why is the president is only pushing for a two-year extension on the debt ceiling? Gee, wouldn’t be because he’ll have another lame duck session and can go back for the cuts he couldn’t get the first time, would it?
The thing that kept Social Security safe and sound for so many years is that politicians were afraid to touch it. When a Democratic president not only accepts, but encourages cuts in the crown jewel of Democratic policy, how much easier will it be to hack at it in administrations to come? All they have to do is point to President Obama.
You need to call. If you’ve already called, call again. This is our only chance to scare our elected officials into representing us for a change.
No cuts to Social Security.