Obama would rather cut Social Security and Medicare than Wars and Empire --unlike Ron Paul

[sailingaway]

http://www.opednews.com/articles/Obama-would-rather-cut-Soc-by-Andrew-Steele-110707-790.html

Obama's a socialist? Nope-- just another run-of-the-mill corporatist. Nothing better exemplifies this than the latest news coming out about the the debt talks between the President and the congressional leaders of the fake right.

From the Washington Post:

President Obama is pressing congressional leaders to consider a far-reaching debt-reduction plan that would force Democrats to accept major changes to Social Security and Medicare in exchange for Republican support for fresh tax revenue...As part of his pitch, Obama is proposing significant reductions in Medicare spending and for the first time is offering to tackle the rising cost of Social Security, according to people in both parties with knowledge of the proposal.

Regardless of one's beliefs about the constitutionality of these programs, both sides of the debate should be quick to notice the priorities of the President, and his so called opposition, turning to programs so many Americans have already paid into and are depending on instead of first looking overseas at the world empire that is bankrupting us all.

According to a report released last month by Brown University, the The United States will have spent a total of $3.7 trillion on the wars in Iraq, Afghanistan and Pakistan by the time that they're over (the word "over" being loosely defined in 21st Century Amerika ). This isn't counting the war in Libya (oh, I forgot that's not a war, according to Obama) or the bases the United States maintains in nations like Germany where hostilities ended so long ago that most of the people who participated in them have either died or are living on Social Security.

Even Libertarian minded presidential candidate Ron Paul-- who is often the subject of attacks by pundits trying to imply that Social Security and Medicare would abruptly end the minute he was sworn into office-- has advocated changing foreign policy and dramatically cutting defense spending before touching Social Security and Medicare, allowing people to get what they have already paid for and not be cheated any further by their corrupt government.

more at link

I personally think this would be a great commercial...

 

[Brett85]

I would dramatically cut both, and I would do it at the same time. There's no reason why we can't cut overseas spending and domestic spending at the same time.

 

[amy31416]

I would dramatically cut both, and I would do it at the same time. There's no reason why we can't cut overseas spending and domestic spending at the same time.

Yes there is. I have quite a few elderly neighbors who'd be out on the streets without Social Security/Medicare. If you want them cut off and put into a home or out on the streets, you are one cold bastard.

 

[showpan]

This will prove to be Obama's downfall and Ron Paul support can be raised significantly by pointing out that he has never voted to take one dime away from SS...as long as he sticks to his guns and votes against any such measure placed before him now. The Democrat base is furious and many more will defect.

 

[Sola_Fide]

I would dramatically cut both, and I would do it at the same time. There's no reason why we can't cut overseas spending and domestic spending at the same time.

I agree. Every dollar that is stolen out of the economy and wasted could have been otherwise used to create more wealth.

 

[evilfunnystuff]

bump

 

[HOLLYWOOD]

Don't forget... Obama has broken the record 2 consecutive years in a row of military weapons to the world. How's that shaken for peace Norwegian Nobel Institute?

Nobel Peace Prize Laureate Barack Obama

 

[eworthington]

Younger people like myself shouldn't get Social Security just because we've been paying into it for five to ten years. Maybe we should just get a tax credit for amount we paid into it.

As far as current recipients, it would be the death of our movement to take away Social Security and Medicare because it would cut government spending. These programs should be phased out in a way that would make it hard for them to ever come back; however, Imperial Washington is a greater threat to liberty than transfer payments to old people will ever be.

 

[asurfaholic]

Obama looks like a devil in that picture... After telling so many lies, why would ANYONE vote for him again??

 

[ctiger2]

Yes there is. I have quite a few elderly neighbors who'd be out on the streets without Social Security/Medicare. If you want them cut off and put into a home or out on the streets, you are one cold bastard.

I'm pretty sure when people say "cut" they don't mean cut 100%. Maybe 25% or 50%. That along with means testing for the wealthy. No one here wants to toss poor elderly out on the street.

 

[amy31416]

I'm pretty sure when people say "cut" they don't mean cut 100%. Maybe 25% or 50%. That along with means testing for the wealthy. No one here wants to toss poor elderly out on the street.

No one? I'm not convinced...one of the reasons I like the Ron Paul is because he is truly compassionate, there are quite a few here who are not.

 

[wgadget]

Listening to uber-neocon Hugh Hewitt today...He was telling people to call Congress and tell them NOT TO CUT THE MILITARY. Apparently, someone is wanting to cut another $700 billion? He says CUT ENTITLEMENTS instead. It was funny listening to the callers saying that we should NOT cut entitlements, and that we SHOULD cut the military.

 

[Paul Or Nothing II]

I would dramatically cut both, and I would do it at the same time. There's no reason why we can't cut overseas spending and domestic spending at the same time.

I agree. Every dollar that is stolen out of the economy and wasted could have been otherwise used to create more wealth.

While I don't disagree with the sentiment itself but that is NOT how we're going to win this election & I think Ron is taking the right path on this when he says that he'd rather use that money here at home as opposed wasting it overseas, & Ron has said that he'd reform the entitlements system; remember, the country isn't going to go all libertarian all of a sudden, it'll've to be a transition.

Yes there is. I have quite a few elderly neighbors who'd be out on the streets without Social Security/Medicare. If you want them cut off and put into a home or out on the streets, you are one cold bastard.

Here's more proof why women tend to be liberal

Younger people like myself shouldn't get Social Security just because we've been paying into it for five to ten years. Maybe we should just get a tax credit for amount we paid into it.

As far as current recipients, it would be the death of our movement to take away Social Security and Medicare because it would cut government spending. These programs should be phased out in a way that would make it hard for them to ever come back; however, Imperial Washington is a greater threat to liberty than transfer payments to old people will ever be.

I agree.

 

[amy31416]

Here's more proof why women tend to be liberal

Funny. In this case, I'm siding with Ron Paul's notion that social programs should be phased out, in order to lessen the pain/harm that would be done to the elderly/dependent. If it makes me "liberal" to give a shit about other people, then so be it.

(And yeah, I knew you were only being semi-serious, but still...have a fucking heart people.)

 

[daveprice]

social security is NOT an entitlement, we paid into it, i personally paid a very large chunk of my income for over 30 years into this.. it is still solvent for over 25 years and does NOT add one freaking cent to the budget deficit. I have seen the age i will be able to get these payments back go farther and farther into the future as everyone loves to beat up on old people and blame them... there are parts of medicare that are given out to lots that have not paid in. Cut there, not the part that we paid into on a promise it would be there, at just under 55 years old i would be top of the list to be screwed and anyone pushing that button is going to be on millions of very voting older Americans enemy list.

 

[daveprice]

Listening to uber-neocon Hugh Hewitt today...He was telling people to call Congress and tell them NOT TO CUT THE MILITARY. Apparently, someone is wanting to cut another $700 billion? He says CUT ENTITLEMENTS instead. It was funny listening to the callers saying that we should NOT cut entitlements, and that we SHOULD cut the military.

Amen to that!

 

[sailingaway]

social security is NOT an entitlement, we paid into it, i personally paid a very large chunk of my income for over 30 years into this.. it is still solvent for over 25 years and does NOT add one freaking cent to the budget deficit. I have seen the age i will be able to get these payments back go farther and farther into the future as everyone loves to beat up on old people and blame them... there are parts of medicare that are given out to lots that have not paid in. Cut there, not the part that we paid into on a promise it would be there, at just under 55 years old i would be top of the list to be screwed and anyone pushing that button is going to be on millions of very voting older Americans enemy list.

Yeah, and when you add the interest to what people paid in, or the correction for government created inflation, since if people had kept that money it would have grown by now, people who were forced to pay in have coming what can be paid (to the extent it can be done). And that obligation should come before new unnecessary spending such as policing the world and corporate welfare, but only Ron Paul seems to see it that way, at least of those running for President. He just wants to let kids opt out so we don't perpetuate this with people who HAVEN'T yet been forced to pay in to the point where they can't really make that up with private investment at this late date. He wants to fund it differently.

Even those who don't see it that way should see the opportunity right now since Obama is saying he's willing to put social security on the table for spending reduction but is not willing to put the cost of policing the world on the table for spending reduction (to the point of an actual cut, not cut in his increases since he took office). NO ONE is arguing for treating medicare and social security as an obligation, as best we can, except Ron. Ron's position should get votes. And it doesn't matter if those people are 'right' that somehow social security and medicare people have involuntarily paid for is not an obligation, because that approach is never going to get voted in, whereas Ron's let the young opt out plan might get support. (Happens, I think this position is wrong, in any event, and that the obligation IS owed. My caveat is that it is unsustainable now, and it failing isn't helpful to anyone).

 

[Tinnuhana]

@eworthington: the tax credit idea is interesting. In fact, if income taxes were eliminated, maybe people could get a debit card for the amt they've paid in that could be used for other taxes (consumption, etc.)