RW caller on Stephanie Miller: "Why don't you guys just take the

[gateley]

victory and shut up?"

His view is that the cuts are spread over 10 years, Congress has plenty of time to wipe them out, that we can now keep "spending and spending and spending".

This is so interesting that so many on each side think their side failed, the other side won, and either way, we're dooooooomed.

I wonder how it WILL play out.

[warrior1]

1. that's what I thought they would say.

Let's get more democrats into office to make better changes for America.

[blueclown]

2. This deal isn't about declaring a political party a winner or loser.

If we are judging it in that respect, then neither party is a winner or a loser. However, if we judge the deal on the basis of its merits, the true loser of this deal is the American people. I see very little chance that what the Super Catfood Commission proposes will ever pass Congress. Thus, we will be forced to "eat our peas" by being subjected to a $700 billion dollar Medicare cut.

[snappyturtle]

3. I understand that whatever the SCC proposes supercedes Congressional

approval, in the endgame. The SCC will just pass around the opened smelly catfood can (filled with SS cuts, etc.) in Congress and no matter what Congress thinks or votes, it will get it's way. ???????????

[sharp_stick]

6. SCC... Spokane Community College?

I had no idea they were so influential.

[snappyturtle]

19. SCC as in Super Catfood Commission....as used in #2...which I was replying to...sorry

for confusing you.

[Life Long Dem]

8. The enforcement mechanism protects Social Security and Medicare from any cuts.

[blueclown]

10. I don't think you are right.

I believe the trigger prevents cuts to Social Security and Medicaid. As for the Super Catfood Commission's findings, "everything is on the table", as President Obama has said. "Entitlement" reform, tax reform... you name it. That would include Medicare, Medicaid, Social Security.

[electropop]

13. "Everything is on the table?" - how about our foreign conquests?

are we willing to shut down the empire? That's where the real money is going to waste.

[Life Long Dem]

21. Any cuts to Medicare would be capped and limited to the provider.

[gateley]

14. I'm in agreement with you about winner/loser, but with Fox just

saying that "Boehner saved SS", it's apparent they understand that their base is up in arms about this, too. If it weren't for those pesky teabaggers, I don't think there would be much need for concern.

[TheWraith]

20. Where the hell did you get a ridiculous idea like that?

"Thus, we will be forced to "eat our peas" by being subjected to a $700 billion dollar Medicare cut."

There are no cuts to Medicare benefits in the automatic "trigger" provisions.

[blueclown]

22. Medicare provider cuts are Medicare cuts!

Cuts to Medicare providers affect beneficiaries.

[sharp_stick]

4. You know when a deal

is right down the middle of the road? The left and right are equally vociferous in their hatred of it while the centrists will just take it and move on.

[gateley]

15. That's what I'm thinking, too. But it's not good enough for some people

(on either side!)

[lumberjack_jeff]

5. Let's make this simple.

We are right, and they are wrong. Every compromise with them makes the situation more wrong. Every unnecessary compromise is unconscionable.

They want every bad thing their fevered little brains can contemplate *right now*. It's true that it's easier to destroy than to build, but the fact that it's taking more than one day to complete the destruction is very frustrating to them.

[pacalo]

7. And, you know, it's really remarkable that the rightwingers had no qualms about the colossal

cost of the two wars Bush started. The "spending and spending and spending" all have to do with helping the most vulnerable -- the sick, the poor, & the elderly -- people survive day to day.

Bombing/killing to make a "John Wayne" point: Hell, yeah!
Giving help to our vulnerable citizens: I've got mine; don't dare touch it.

[smirkymonkey]

11. It amazes me how there is ALWAYS plenty of money for war.

But when it comes to providing a decent standard of living for those of us who pay the taxes that make those wars possible, the government never wants to give us anything that would make our lives a little easier.

[gateley]

16. It's amazing, I agree. But we hold some responsibility in not making

that more clear, in one or two soundbites. We shouldn't even have to explain it, but sadly it's needed.

[kctim]

9. It will play out like this

President Obama will win with no problem in 2012.
The House will even out more than it is now.
No huge change in the Senate.

[ProudToBeBlueInRhody]

12. It's no longer about what will save our economy, but who "wins"

I'm so disgusted right now.

[krabigirl]

17. Yep, the whole thing is like a crappy reality show. Nt

[gateley]

18. Agreed. Hello? Remember us out here? The ones who are

affected by your games? The ones who are paying your fucking salaries?? :grr:

[mmonk]

23. Because McConnel said this negotiating tactic was going to be a blueprint.

It will take representatives not on the take from lobbyists to resist and fight.