Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

"Obama welcomes the opportunity to jettison the legacy of FDR as outmoded political baggage"

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » General Discussion Donate to DU
 
Better Believe It Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-03-11 12:53 PM
Original message
"Obama welcomes the opportunity to jettison the legacy of FDR as outmoded political baggage"



The Recovery Is Dead, Long Live the Recovery
by Robert Scheer
August 3, 2011

The die has been cast. Obama’s “nearly complete capitulation to the hostage-taking demands of Republican extremists,” as an editorial in the normally sedate New York Times described the deal to raise the debt ceiling, is a disaster in the making. It rules out a vigorous government response to the persistent economic stagnation in which joblessness, housing foreclosures and an ever-widening gap between the top 2 percent and the rest of Americans have become the norm.

But to use the word “capitulation” is too kind, since this president, as was Bill Clinton before him, is clearly one of those “New Democrats” who welcomes the opportunity to jettison the legacy of Franklin Delano Roosevelt as outmoded political baggage. Otherwise, why would Obama have reached for a “grand bargain” in which he even put Social Security and Medicare cuts on the table before the Republicans rolled him?

That same opportunistic reasoning got us into the Great Recession, thanks to President Clinton joining with congressional Republicans to destroy the sensible controls on Wall Street greed that FDR had put in place in order to prevent a repeat of the Depression. That was also the rationale of the Clinton alums that Obama appointed to clean up the mess they themselves had created. Instead of worrying about jobless workers and swindled homeowners, they bailed out the swindlers, following the example set by George W. Bush.

Neither party has ever dared to use the deficit ceiling to blackmail the entire nation—until now. And for that, the GOP is the party clearly at fault. But it is also true that, in his zeal for centrist consensus, a preoccupation doomed to failure in a time of tough choices, it was Barack Obama who folded.

Read the full article at:

http://www.truthdig.com/report/item/the_recovery_is_dead_long_live_the_recovery_20110803/

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
SugarShack Donating Member (979 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-03-11 01:06 PM
Response to Original message
1. Yes, killing the party softly, forever. Our, most valuable precious values, killed off.
Obama is worse than anything I have ever imagined. I have nitemares about the republicans, so this Obama tragedy is really traumatic.

Not that I did not know what I....needed to know before the vote. This is so sad.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Fuddnik Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Aug-04-11 06:33 AM
Response to Reply #1
83. And to try to take advantage of it, the DLC is operating under "Americans Elect"
Don't get fooled by this "third party".

As useless as our party has become, they've managed to lend the worst elements of the DLC, New Democrats, and the Neo-cons.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
UnrepentantLiberal Donating Member (747 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Aug-04-11 08:11 AM
Response to Reply #83
89. Yup. I was a staunch Clinton supporter when they were trashing him.
But what good has it done us? We "win" and we get "Democrats" who hate liberals as much as Republicans do. Great strategy.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
xxqqqzme Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-03-11 01:08 PM
Response to Original message
2. Good one,
thanks for posting.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
madrchsod Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-03-11 01:13 PM
Response to Original message
3.  another jimmy carter presidency
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ananda Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-03-11 01:16 PM
Response to Reply #3
4. Obama is nothing like Jimmy Carter. Period.
He's completely rightwing corporate.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
BOG PERSON Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-03-11 02:31 PM
Response to Reply #4
22. not to mention, jimmy carter had a personality
(n/t)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
SusanaMontana41 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-03-11 03:44 PM
Response to Reply #22
35. Jimmy Carter supported the poor. Still does. n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Pooka Fey Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-03-11 04:36 PM
Response to Reply #35
37. Yup. Habitat for Humanity.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Divine Discontent Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-03-11 10:18 PM
Response to Reply #22
59. Carter does indeed have a personality! as opposed to the perception of such.
and we know what they call that.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
shanti Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-03-11 03:06 PM
Response to Reply #4
27. thank you
i'm getting so sick of this meme!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
jwirr Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-03-11 03:15 PM
Response to Reply #4
29. Agreed Carter worked for the Democratic values but was merely an
unsuccessful president in many eyes. Not in mine - I think he is given a raw deal.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
dotymed Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-03-11 09:36 PM
Response to Reply #29
52. The right wing
accompanied by Reagan and his handlers, destroyed the Carter presidency. Reagan should have seen prison for the "arms for Hostages" deal he arranged for the inauguration.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Jack Sprat Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-03-11 10:30 PM
Response to Reply #29
60. Definitely given a faw deal.
Volker as Fed chairman was unrelenting on raising interest rates to fight inflation in the aftermath of Vietnam. The savers were joyful, but the young boomers were looking for homes at interest rates of 12% or higher in some cases.

Then he was blamed for being weak over the Iran hostage situation, even though he had directly warned all Americans to leave Iran weeks before the Shah fell and the first hostage taken. It may have been months before. I can't remember exactly. But, he was trying to keep them unharmed and didn't want to jeopardize that. Meanwhile, Reagan's campaign advisors were making a deal behind the nation's back to secure the release of the hostages. Now how can he blamed for that? And that's the whole argument people made that he was weak.

The die was already cast, though, imo. Defense and Business had co-opted by that time to control the destiny of the country. Reagan was their first puppet actor.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
RainFromAbove Donating Member (7 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-03-11 11:01 PM
Response to Reply #60
63. Iran hostage crisis
>> even though he had directly warned all Americans to leave Iran weeks before the Shah fell and the first hostage taken

This is a bit hard to take. They were embassy personnel. Employees of the State Dept, reporting to the Secretary of State, and the President. If the President tells 'em to leave, they leave. Where the heck did you pick up this little gem?

-- Rain
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Jack Sprat Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-03-11 11:07 PM
Response to Reply #63
64. from my memory
of some 32 years ago, timmy. i remember distinctly his warning for citizens to leave iran. if you're right about all the hostages being state dept employees, then i could be wrong.

"where the heck did you get this little gem?" Are you a 6 year old?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
RainFromAbove Donating Member (7 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-03-11 11:22 PM
Response to Reply #64
66. hostages
Iran_hostage_crisis

Read the list. Looks like darn near all of them were fed employees.

Why do you rely on 32-year-old memories before posting? They got these search engines.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Name removed Donating Member (0 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-03-11 11:27 PM
Response to Reply #66
68. Deleted message
Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.
 
Jack Sprat Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-03-11 11:22 PM
Response to Reply #63
67. HEY..HEY...HEY...WHAT HAVE WE HERE.
Looks like a troll slipped in with the roaches. Hey, why are you here with the adults? See those 6 posts. Slip in and slip out quick, huh? Yeah, that's the m.o.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Jack Sprat Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-03-11 11:41 PM
Response to Reply #63
69. Look at this sentence again.
>> even though he had directly warned all Americans to leave Iran weeks before the Shah fell and the first hostage taken>>


Now, Mr or Miss 7 posts. That statement is true regardless of the hostages actually taken. So it is possible to recall events and converse with people without research. Of course, unless you're talking to a jury under oath or Mr or Miss 7 posts.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
RaleighNCDUer Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Aug-04-11 12:28 AM
Response to Reply #63
70. He DID have the State Department issue a warning for Americans to
leave - only a very few, nearly all Embassy personnel, were still in country when it all went down, instead of the thousands who would normally be there.

As for the Embassy personnel, it's their JOB to stay. And they DO stay unless there is clear evidence that they are unsafe within the Embassy compound. If the mob had not stormed the Embassy, but simply surrounded and cut it off, there would have been a helicopter evacuation. The fact that there were as many as 140 still there is evidence that the embassy did not think a total evacuation was going to be needed.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
jwirr Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Aug-04-11 12:11 PM
Response to Reply #70
100. Yes, my uncle who was military talked about it being their duty to
do their job in a crisis. It is what they got paid for.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
sabrina 1 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Aug-04-11 12:35 AM
Response to Reply #63
71. What matters is that President Carter was betrayed by the
treasonous actions of George Bush Sr. and Reagan. All should have been prosecuted for treason for what they did. They undermined the efforts of a sitting president to get the hostages safely home by making a deal to keep them in captivity for political reasons. It is a tragedy that they got away with it and the beginning of the slide to lawlessness at the highest levels in this country which continues to this day.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
marew Donating Member (854 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Aug-04-11 07:20 AM
Response to Reply #29
86. I agree completely.
He was a kind and compassionate man and got a really raw deal!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
lark Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Aug-04-11 12:27 PM
Response to Reply #4
101. TAKE THAT BACK. Obama isn't fit to wash Carters jockstrap
One is a real caring individual who takes real action to help the poor and the other a complete corporate tool who is intent on driving the middle class into poverty. I'm sure you can figure out which is which.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
LiberalLoner Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-03-11 01:17 PM
Response to Reply #3
5. No, it's much more damaging to the Democratic brand and ideals than that. n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bvar22 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-03-11 01:19 PM
Response to Reply #3
8. Bad comparison.
Jimmy Carter actually cared about the Working Class & The Poor.


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Better Believe It Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-03-11 01:54 PM
Response to Reply #8
14. Whatever disagreements I may have had with Carter, I believe he honestly cared about working folks
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
me b zola Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-03-11 03:38 PM
Response to Reply #14
34. Yes
Compare the post-presidency work of Carter and Clinton. I expect Obama will take Clinton's path when he's out of office.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
russspeakeasy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-03-11 10:13 PM
Response to Reply #34
57. Yup, I would guess phone numbers, and contact people and
fees have already been traded.:think:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Ganja Ninja Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-03-11 01:26 PM
Response to Reply #3
10. Whatever you think about Jimmy Carter he never sold out the party.
This guy is a Joe Lieberman.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
senseandsensibility Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-03-11 02:36 PM
Response to Reply #3
23. Carter was and is a liberal
which is why, when all the living Presidents met in the Oval Office for a photoshoot, Obama and Clinton avoided him. It's also why Carter was given the cold shoulder at the Democratic convention where Obama was nominated. IIRC, he was not given a prime time speaking slot. I, however, heard his speech and it was oldstyle Democratic all the way.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
robinlynne Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-03-11 05:56 PM
Response to Reply #3
42. in our dreams. this is NOTHING like Jimmy carter. Jimmy Carter has values.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DJ13 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-03-11 01:17 PM
Response to Original message
6. K&R
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bvar22 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-03-11 01:18 PM
Response to Original message
7. Whoop! ...There it is.
Thank GAWD it Passed. We SAVED the World!

Neville Chamberlain holding aloft his "compromise" and claiming a "WIN" in 1938.






Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
watajob Donating Member (253 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Aug-04-11 02:15 AM
Response to Reply #7
73. Magnificent!!!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
xchrom Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-03-11 01:21 PM
Response to Original message
9. recommend
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
leftstreet Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-03-11 01:27 PM
Response to Original message
11. K&R
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
proud patriot Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-03-11 01:28 PM
Response to Original message
12. Rassberry
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Octafish Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-03-11 01:52 PM
Response to Original message
13. Corrrect me if I'm wrong, but wasn't FDR a Democrat?
Why would he even think about all these socialistic programs like social security and universal health insurance? It's like the guy's a frigging communist. Really. And remember, someone has to pay, even if it's on Uncle Sam's dime...yada yada yada. Blah blah blah.

:sarcasm: I keed. I keed.

In all seriousness: I'm so old that I can remember when Democrats were different than Republicans.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Blue_In_AK Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-03-11 01:55 PM
Response to Reply #13
15. I'm that old, too, Octafish.
I hope to live to see real Democrats again, but I'm not hopeful.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Octafish Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-03-11 01:57 PM
Response to Reply #15
16. The 'New Democrats' go where the real money is -- the rich and their corporations.
Unfortunately, that's where the GOPers have always been.

Perhaps we'll see the day, my Friend, where the Democratic leadership sees the light and decides integrity does matter.

Compared to Wall Street and its owners, union money may not be much, but at least it was earned honestly.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Better Believe It Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-03-11 01:58 PM
Response to Reply #15
17. Will those Democrats at some point leave and form a new party with other forces that is labor based?

It might go down that way.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
jwirr Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-03-11 03:20 PM
Response to Reply #17
32. I don't know - will we?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
jwirr Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-03-11 03:19 PM
Response to Reply #15
31. Me too. This is breaking my heart.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Bluebear Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-03-11 03:05 PM
Response to Reply #13
26. Now they are "third way democrats"
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
QC Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-03-11 04:25 PM
Response to Reply #26
36. I prefer to think of them as Fifth Column Democrats. n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Larkspur Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Aug-04-11 09:16 AM
Response to Reply #13
91. FDR started as a Republican
He was of the clan of Teddy Roosevelt. When he decided to start running for elected offices, he figured that he'd end up in primary battles against Teddy's sons and grandsons, so he switched to the Democratic Party, who welcomed him because FDR could self-finance his own campaigns. This switched allowed FDR to get the automatic endorsement of the local and state Democratic Party because few lifelong Democrats could afford to compete in very Republican strongholds. That political marriage between FDR and the Democratic Party became fruitful for the Democratic Party as history showed.

Another note, remember that the Teddy Roosevelt wing of the Republican Party was also the Progressive wing of that Party.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
JoePhilly Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-03-11 02:00 PM
Response to Original message
18. Obama Bad Obama Bad Obama Bad
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
TransitJohn Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-03-11 07:35 PM
Response to Reply #18
46. "They just hate Bush"--Tucker Carlson
Sounds similar, no?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ihavenobias Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-03-11 09:49 PM
Response to Reply #46
55. It does.
Very sad.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Proles Donating Member (229 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-03-11 02:09 PM
Response to Original message
19. At this point we need some sort of
labor party or social democratic party which puts a true emphasis on social justice and prosperity -- rather than pure rhetoric which turns out to be a cruel lie.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Better Believe It Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-03-11 02:20 PM
Response to Reply #19
20. But the social democratic parties in Europe are in some cases leading the austerity drives!

So we would probably need something more radical and independent of big business.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
blindpig Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-03-11 02:49 PM
Response to Reply #20
24. So true
Edited on Wed Aug-03-11 02:50 PM by blindpig
It is too sad that the party of Marx has folded each and every time they needed to stand tall since 1914. It is the result of playing the game, the privilege and access, which turns the leadership into quislings for capitalism.

Ya want 'something more radical and independent of big business'?

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
amborin Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-03-11 05:10 PM
Response to Reply #24
39. Pzeworski spoke to this in Capitalism and Social Democracy____
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
stockholmer Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Aug-04-11 05:47 AM
Response to Reply #20
76. many of the left-leaning parties here in the EU are simply held hostage by the banksters (some are
indeed corrupt as well, Greece and Ireland being the 2 worst by far). In countries such as my own (Sweden) and others who have resisted bankster invasion, they still fight austerity programmes, BUT the centre-right generally have taken control, so they (the social democratic left) are put on the defensive.

The Swedish Social Democrats have not had great leadership since Olof Palme was assassinated in 1986, and are losing percentages each election. I myself switched parties in 2008 to the Greens, as they are much more dynamic and forward thinking, plus they also hold an overall anti-EU stance, something I share to a high degree. In the 2010 elections, Miljöpartiet de Gröna (Green Party of Sweden) had huge gains, and are now the 3rd biggest party in our Riksdag.

here is the Green Party Platform:




Raise quality within welfare, invest in educationtion


1. No-one should be without insurance

Everyone should be covered by secure and modern health insurance. We want sickness benefit to be available for as long as people are ill and we want to get rid of the health insurance ceiling. Society has a particular responsibility for providing effective rehabilitation. Everyone should be covered by general unemployment insurance.

2. Shorter working hours

We want to reduce normal working hours to 35 hours a week to give people more time and increase their quality of life. As an initial step we want to introduce support for parents of young children to allow them to reduce their hours, and we want to reintroduce the sabbatical year. We want to introduce more flexibility around retirement age and create opportunities to reduce working hours as people approach retirement.

3. Diversity at school

While at school children are entitled to learn the skills that they will need as they enter adult life. Parents and children will have good opportunities to influence teaching and be able to choose a method that suits the child. All children will have the attention and time that they need with adults in school and at nursery. Quality in Swedish nurseries and primary and secondary schools therefore needs to be improved. We need to increase the teacher-pupil ratio, reduce class sizes and increase the amount of scheduled teaching time. We want to protect diversity in schools, teaching and educational focus. We want to strengthen pupil democracy and invest in pupil healthcare.


4. Let children be children

A playful and safe childhood should be a universal right. A society that is good for children is good for everyone. We want to boost children’s rights and incorporate the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child into Swedish law.

5. Preventive care

Healthcare and nursing need to adopt a preventive approach that promotes healthy living. Healthcare will be equal for all and be located close to citizens. It will be characterised by teamwork and broad medical and psychosocial expertise. Special initiatives are required in order to reduce mental ill-health and improve elderly care. Checks and monitoring will be enhanced to reduce cases of incorrect use of medication.

6. Good food

We want to improve the quality of food in schools, hospitals and homes for the elderly. Children, older people and sick people will be served freshly cooked meals from local kitchens in schools, homes and hospitals instead of heated up food that is driven long distances. When procuring services the focus will be on organic ingredients and locally produced food, which is why the law on public procurement needs to be reviewed to allow the promotion of local purchasing. Tasty and nutritional food is a natural aspect of welfare.


7. A strong higher education system and increased student grants

The education system is a key aspect of a modern knowledge-based society. Quality in higher education institutions will be improved by increasing the amount of contact time for the students and a greater focus on good teaching methods. We want to offer people new opportunities and to make it easier to study at all stages in life. That’s why we want to raise the student grant and improve students’ social safety net. Cooperation will be strengthened between universities/higher education institutions and the business sector.

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


A just and sustainable world is possible


1. Active global climate policy

We must reduce global emissions of greenhouse gases. We want to campaign globally to phase out all subsidies on coal, oil and nuclear power. We want to introduce environmental control charges for fossil fuels within international airline and shipping operations to cover the cost of climate initiatives in poor countries. We must increase international support for climate measures in developing countries.

2. Tackle poverty

We want to work for fair trade that takes account of the needs of the poor countries. The level of aid given by Sweden will be at least one percent of GNI. Sweden will campaign to write off illegitimate debts and ensure that poor countries do not fall into debt traps. Tackling poverty will be a key element of foreign, trade and development aid policy.

3. Phase out export of arms

We want to phase out the export of arms. An initial step will be to toughen up regulations for Swedish weapons exports. It is unacceptable for Swedish weapons to be exported to countries that are involved in human rights abuses. We say no to investing additional billions in a new, upgraded version of the JAS fighter plane. Sweden should remain outside NATO. We must step up efforts to establish peace in the world. We also want to prohibit the manufacture of mines and cluster bombs in Sweden.

4. Stop overfishing in our seas

All subsidies must be removed that contribute towards overfishing. Cod and other species of fish in our seas should not be fished if their numbers fall below safe levels. Strong measures are required to tackle illegal fishing. We will also review Sweden’s trade policy to help reduce overfishing in other seas around the world.

5. Respect for human rights in refugee policy

We want to create more legal routes for migration to the EU. A more humane refugee policy is needed. There have long been deficiencies in the Swedish migration process, which is why we want to carry out an amnesty for all those without papers. The best interests of the child will be prioritised in the assessment of all refugee cases. Those without papers should be entitled to healthcare and have the right to attend school.

6. No to EMU

We want Sweden to keep its own currency and not join the EMU. The EU must be more democratic and less centralised. The EU should not have a common defence policy


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


An equal society increases freedom


1. Equality at home and on the board

Both parents are entitled to be at home with their children and the child has the right to be with both parents. We want parental insurance to be divided into three periods, with the parents each being assigned a certain number of days and the third period being divided up as they choose. This will improve opportunities to divide up parental leave in an equal manner. We want to introduce a law on quotas for the number of women on the boards of listed companies and public sector companies.

2. Women’s safety is freedom

We want to increase resources to women’s refuges working with domestic violence. The justice system must handle cases with skill and respect. Rape laws will be strengthened to guarantee sexual integrity. Children who have witnessed violence in the home will be regarded as victims of crime. People who are convicted of assault will be forced to undergo treatment. Violence against men and violence within same sex relationships must also be given attention. More resources are needed to tackle prostitution and human trafficking.


3. Equal rights for all

Discrimination legislation needs to be toughened up. We want to promote equal rights at companies and government agencies. Local anti-discrimination agencies will be strengthened. We want to continue to campaign for the rights of homosexual, bisexual and transsexual people. Efforts to tackle hate crime will be stepped up. Everyone will have the opportunity to participate fully in society. We want lack of access to be classed as discrimination against people with disabilities under the law.

4. Learning using native language

One of the most efficient ways of improving school results for children whose native language is not Swedish is to invest more in native language teaching. We want to extend the right to native language teaching to cover the entire compulsory schooling period. We also want to increase subject teaching in children’s native language.


5. Jobs and training for newcomers

Newcomers to Sweden will be offered opportunities to learn Swedish quickly, validate or supplement their training and get a job. We want Swedish language studies to be combined with practical experience. We want to improve quality in Swedish as a second language. We want universities and higher education institutions to offer courses in Swedish for people coming to Sweden with an academic education.


6. Defend the right to a private life

People’s right to a private life is being restricted across society. We want to strengthen the regulations regarding camera surveillance so that individual integrity is taken into consideration. The state will not be able to register all Internet user traffic in Sweden. We want to abolish the FRA law on changes to defence intelligence activities.

7. A free internet and balanced copyright legislation

We want to protect the rule of law and integrity on the internet by making changes to the IPRED law on file sharing. We want to modernise copyright law and decriminalise file sharing for private use. Net neutrality is an important principle that must be defended.


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

New jobs, entrepreneurship and small companies


1. Reduced VAT for service companies

We want to encourage growth in the service sector by reducing VAT within several industries. It will be cheaper to repair broken items, eat at restaurants, go to the hairdresser and fix a bicycle. Sustainable consumption of services must be encouraged and we want to take an initial step towards achieving this during the mandate period.

2. Reduced tax for small companies

We want to reduce payroll tax for small companies by ten percentage points. We want sole traders to have an additional reduction for the first employee during the first year of operation.

3. Venture capital for SMEs

We want to introduce a state venture capital fund to make it easier for more small and medium-sized companies to have access to venture capital. The fund will be financed from dividends from the state companies.


4. Trade and industry at the forefront

A lot of new entrepreneurs are motivated by the desire to take greater ethical, social and environmental responsibility. This contributes towards sustainable development. We need to encourage this approach. We want to increase grants for innovation, product development and environmental technology development at small and medium-sized companies. The state and municipal companies will contribute towards new environmental technology, renewable energy and act as an example when it comes to reducing climate impact. Social and cooperative enterprise will be part of a green entrepreneur policy. We work to encourage more companies to start up in rural areas. We want to actively work to utilise and improve opportunities to take social, ethical and environmental aspects into consideration during the public procurement process.

5. Jobs and training for young people

We want to introduce a trainee programme in the welfare sector. We also need to invest more in professional training programmes and apprenticeships. More higher education institutions will offer work experience at companies and authorities as part of the training programme.

6. An open and varied cultural life

A vibrant and creative cultural life is a key success factor for health, quality of life and the development of society. We want to invest in culture so that everyone, particularly children and young people, is given the opportunity to participate in various different cultural activities, both actively and as a member of the audience. Schools of culture will be strengthened. Culture is a climate friendly alternative to material consumption.

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


Invest in new jobs and reducing climate impact


1. Sweden will take its share of the responsibility

Sweden has to take its share of global responsibility. Emissions of greenhouse gases will decrease in accordance with researchers’ recommendations. Increases to green taxes will make it more expensive to use fossil fuels.

2. Double capacity in railway network

Climate-friendly transport policies across the country require major investments in the railway network. Capacity for passenger and goods trains will be doubled. We want to build high-speed railways and link the major Swedish cities Stockholm, Gothenburg and Malmö to Copenhagen and Oslo. We also want to link the main line with regional tracks to strengthen regional connections. It will be cheaper to travel by train than drive or fly.

3. Expand public transport

We want to invest in an extensive expansion of the public transport system, trams, regional trains, underground and buses, to create more climate-friendly cities. We want to double public transport’s share of transportation by 2020. There is no need for new motorways. Public transport should be accessible and usable for people with disabilities.

4. New fuels for cars

Many people in Sweden are dependent on a car. Fossil fuels need to be phased out for environmental and cost reasons. So everyone should be given the opportunity to fill up using renewable fuel. It should be cheaper to drive on renewable fuels instead of petrol. Domestic production and distribution of renewable fuels will be encouraged. It will be possible to fill up using biogas and recharge electric cars all over the country.


5. Make your own electricity

We want to make producing your own electricity profitable. An increasing number of people are keen to invest in renewable energy and contribute to reducing their climate impact. This also means that more people should be able to supply renewable electricity to the electricity network. We want to introduce a system of fixed prices for renewable electricity and allow net metering for small-scale electricity producers.

6. Invest in renewable energy and energy efficiency

We want to replace nuclear power and fossil fuels with wind power, biofuel, wave power and solar energy, and make investments to improve energy efficiency. We want to invest in rebuilding work that leads to reduced energy consumption. This will reduce energy costs. Uranium mining will be prohibited.

7. Repair Million Programme housing

We want to introduce a special investment grant for rebuilding and repairing run-down homes and urban centres, mainly in the suburbs. The investments will lead to improved home environments and reduced energy consumption.


8. More goods by train and boat

We want to introduce a tax on HGV transportation in order to improve road safety and reduce emissions. This will mean that it will make more financial sense to transport goods by train and boat instead of lorry.

9. Protect nature and biological diversity

Meadows and pastureland that are rich in species will be protected and the section on protection of coastal areas in the Swedish Environmental Code will be strengthened. Valuable natural forests will be protected. Sweden will provide long-term protection for robust stocks of the four major predators: wolves, lynxes, bears and wolverines. The spread of environmental toxins must be curtailed, for example by banning several brominated flame retardants and hormone disruptors. We want to preserve and recreate wetlands and provide legal protection for groundwater, which are all important to our water supply.

10. Farming and animal protection

The use of pesticides and commercial fertilizer will be minimised. Animal protection will be reinforced and we want to ban fur farming. We will protect the soil. We want to make it financially viable to pursue ecologically sustainable farming. Sweden will be at the helm within green industries such as ecotourism and small-scale food processing. We want to protect the soil from genetically modified crops.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
hifiguy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Aug-04-11 09:26 AM
Response to Reply #76
92. That is the best and sanest political platform
I have read in forty years. If I were 20 years younger I would find some way to get to Sweden (or Norway, Australia, New Zealand - anywhere sensible).
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Lifelong Protester Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Aug-04-11 09:49 AM
Response to Reply #76
93. I want to be in THAT world.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Doctor_J Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-03-11 09:50 PM
Response to Reply #19
56. Without proportional representation, it's useless
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
stockholmer Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Aug-04-11 05:52 AM
Response to Reply #56
78. +1000000, you have hit upon my most fervent wish for the USA government
The Executive branch of the government has usurped so so much power from Congress in the last 40 years it is breathtaking, and needs to be completely reigned in. The 'Super Congress' from the new debt deal is a ferocious attack upon your republican form of government as well.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
aint_no_life_nowhere Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-03-11 02:22 PM
Response to Original message
21. I'd like Obama to sign a pledge of his own before I vote for him again
The Teatalitarians all signed pledges to Grover Norquist. While I've never been big on enforcing lock-step obedience for Democrats, the recent events have now changed my mind. Before I vote for Obama again, give money to him again, and invest my time and effort on his behalf once again, I'm going to have to see him put his promise in writing that he will veto any bill that comes before him extending the Bush tax cuts and also veto any bill that takes significant money away from Medicare and Social Security. Why would I want to vote for a moderate Republican? While I'm not completely done with him as others seem to be, Obama now has to earn my trust.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
TheKentuckian Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-03-11 03:27 PM
Response to Reply #21
33. Worthless, there would be no way to hold him accountable.
What would we do? Refuse to donate to his library?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
in_cog_ni_to Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-03-11 02:55 PM
Response to Original message
25. Well, you know....they are just "tired ideological battles."
:eyes:

He really likes Baby Boomers too! NOT. :grr:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
eridani Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-03-11 06:06 PM
Response to Reply #25
43. "tired ideological battles" = I have no values n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
jwirr Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-03-11 03:13 PM
Response to Original message
28. Oh great, hows that working out for us? Now worth a damn. I will always
be an FDR Democrat in my heart. And just to let BHO and Bill Clinton know, I also love Naomi Klein.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Horse with no Name Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-03-11 03:16 PM
Response to Original message
30. and I will take the first opportunity to jettison him. n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Pooka Fey Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-03-11 04:40 PM
Response to Original message
38. Here's the problem. We (the Left) have been pushed out of our OWN Home.
I don't have a good answer for that. Money & Corruption win again.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mzmolly Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-03-11 05:39 PM
Response to Original message
40. Give me a freaking
break. What absurd, nonsensical blather.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
madamesilverspurs Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-03-11 05:55 PM
Response to Original message
41. Sneaky, underhanded, and dishonest.
Edited on Wed Aug-03-11 05:56 PM by madamesilverspurs
The quotation marks around the title imply that this is something said by Obama, which it isn't.

Guess the Republicans aren't the only ones who won't play unless they can play dirty.


=

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
a simple pattern Donating Member (426 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-03-11 07:29 PM
Response to Reply #41
45. Not unless he likes to refer to himself in the third person.
That'd be silly!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
stockholmer Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Aug-04-11 05:54 AM
Response to Reply #45
79. +1, thanks for posting this simple, effective rebuttal of that asinine comment
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ProSense Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-03-11 06:14 PM
Response to Original message
44. Nutty!
"since this president, as was Bill Clinton before him, is clearly one of those 'New Democrats' who welcomes the opportunity to jettison the legacy of Franklin Delano Roosevelt as outmoded political baggage."


Repealing Glass-Steagall is the exact opposite of enacting Wall Street reform

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
scarletwoman Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-03-11 08:07 PM
Response to Reply #44
49. The exact opposite of repealing Glass-Steagall would be reinstating Glass-Steagall.
Which the Dodd-Frank bill failed to do.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
seeker4ever Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-03-11 08:56 PM
Response to Reply #44
51. You're so entertaining now! It's like charades!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Jakes Progress Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-03-11 09:45 PM
Response to Reply #44
53. Liscious.
All indications are that had it been there to repeal in this administration, this administration would have repealed it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
RaleighNCDUer Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Aug-04-11 12:37 AM
Response to Reply #44
72. And your 'Wall Street reform' doesn't come close to undoing the
damage of repealing Glass Steagall. The reform did NOTHING to return banking to the standards of Glass-Steagall, to stop the mergers, to stop the chicanery that crashed the economy. I'm not too sure just what it DID do, other than say "Please, Sir, can I have another?"
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
stockholmer Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Aug-04-11 06:01 AM
Response to Reply #72
82. don't forget the odious Commodity Futures Modernization Act of 2000
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
stockholmer Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Aug-04-11 05:56 AM
Response to Reply #44
80. Wall Street Reform? lololol, what a JOKE
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ProSense Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Aug-04-11 07:46 AM
Response to Reply #80
88. Hmmm?
"what a JOKE"

No, but your comment was funny.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bhikkhu Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-03-11 07:48 PM
Response to Original message
47. Obama didn't fold
...whatever you think about the debt plan, its not accurate at all to say that Obama "folded" and finally gave in to the repugs. If you look at his original proposal back in April, that's virtually what we got as a final agreement:

http://money.cnn.com/2011/04/13/news/economy/obama_debt_plan/index.htm
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Jakes Progress Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-03-11 09:46 PM
Response to Reply #47
54. Could differ on points, but
does it really give you a good feeling that his POS bill was something you say he started out wanting?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bhikkhu Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-03-11 10:13 PM
Response to Reply #54
58. Yes, to the extent that the "folding" was more of a media invention
which perhaps is a part of the theater that goes on in these negotiations. In the last budget negotiation there was plenty of RW victory dance at first, but in the details they really got nothing they wanted. If you can make an opponent think they have beaten you when they have in fact given you what you asked for, then the cost of appearing to surrender is worth having gained the upper hand long-term.

As far as what's behind the theater - there is 600 billion to 1 trillion in defense cuts. That hasn't happened in over a decade, and who would have guessed that the repugs would agree to it?

Medicare and SS are untouched, in spite of all predictions.

There are no actual cuts until 2013, protecting the current recovery, again in spite of all RW vehemence and determination.

The bush tax cuts are almost guaranteed to expire, and their expiration is tied pretty securely into the terms of the agreement. The repugs went in with the stated intention of making these permanent.

The one thing Obama concede was immediate revenue increases, but the committee is tasked with generating revenue (through finding both fraud and waste in programs, a long-term dem goal) and closing tax loopholes, among other potentially beneficial things.

If you'll recall, the teabaggers in congress most forcefully campaigned to end health care reform before it could take effect. In the current debt deal, universal heathcare is built into the CBO baseline budget; rather than being attacked in any way, it is on track and funded.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Better Believe It Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-03-11 10:42 PM
Response to Reply #58
62. " there is 600 billion to 1 trillion in defense cuts." That's not really the case.

Enormous Cuts in Military Spending? Read the Fine Print
by Medea Benjamin and Charles Davis
August 3, 2011

Read the article at:

http://www.commondreams.org/view/2011/08/03-2
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bhikkhu Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-03-11 11:11 PM
Response to Reply #62
65. That's a good article...
and I expect that much of the cuts will come from the draw-downs, which have been going on for some time in Iraq and are beginning in Afghanistan.

Still, its real money anyway, and the thought counts for a lot as well. Defense cuts are tied to any cut in domestic spending in a fixed 50/50 ratio - I don't recall that anyone on either side saw that coming; its the sort of thing I'd expect in a Kucinich amendment where the rest would smile and say "well, hell hasn't frozen over yet" and predictably ax it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Historic NY Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Aug-04-11 05:57 AM
Response to Reply #65
81. Running the government on 8 cents.......followup article
In just nine years, unless we make big changes, 92% of the United States’ tax revenue could go to just 4 things – leaving just a sliver to pay for everything else.

http://money.cnn.com/news/economy/storysupplement/spending_pie/?iid=EL
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Jakes Progress Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Aug-04-11 07:40 AM
Response to Reply #58
87. You miss my point.
I think the deal sucks. I think it harms middle class and poor families. I think it rewards the bloodless rich for their greed.

You think it was the best he could hope for.

My point was that you seemed happy that the president wanted it this way. Now you could argue that he was a cunning, but powerless, pretender that managed to get the deal he wanted against overwhelming odds. (I think that is wrong) But the be happy that a Democratic president "wanted" to cut education, infrastructure, to eliminate thousands of jobs for the middle class workers so that he could say he won is really a terrible thing to say about a man. You argue that he bravely put in place - because he "wanted" it mind you - a bill to harm people.

Then you try to say that the bill is a win because it cuts defense. Does it cut it by bringing troops home? Does it cut it by stopping the bloodshed and nation-building? Does it stop it by cutting the obscene profit margin of the MLI? Those cuts will come in commissaries, housing entitlements, staff at hospitals, etc. I have many friends in the military. They are stoic about the coming "cuts in defense", but they have seen it before. When the cuts aren't enumerated, they do not fall on the generals or the contractors. They come in bits and bites at the lives of service men. Check with those in the military that you know.

Show me the language in the bill that says SS and Medicare will not be affected. I know that has been a big part of the press releases, but to find the language, the words that say they won't be touched. They admit, even boast, that they will be cutting the providers. How old are you? Ask most people over 65. They can barely find a doctor now that will take a new Medicare patient. What will happen when their payments are lowered? How is that not affecting Medicare? What about nursing homes. When payment rates are cut, services and staff are cut. People must pay more and more. Do you have any elderly in need of those services? Do you at least have people you know who will be facing the "new and glorious" method of sapping their dignity and making despair a part of the end of their lives? This so the rich can continue to add gold fixtures to the guest bath in the lake house?

The recovery is dead. Maybe you have a safe job. Millions don't. And they don't have one to look forward to.

The bush tax cuts will not expire. That language could have been put in the bill. It wasn't. They are no more "guaranteed" to expire in December 2012 than they were in December 2010. Just another loop hole the president forgot to close. Or as you suggest, didn't want to close since this is the bill he "wanted" in the first place.

Then you pin your hopes on the revenues from a congressional "committee". Really. Just what about the bill seems to buoy you up so much that you know have faith in the honest deliberations of congress after what we have just seen? Why didn't the president, since you argue that this was the bill he really wanted all along, tell us what some of these "potentially beneficial things" might be in the bill?

And yippee. the Insurance Corporate Profit Windfall, I mean health reform bill, seems protected. Of course that language isn't in the bill either. Nothing in the bill in any way guarantees any such thing. It isn't even mentioned. The tea party attacks are already in fund raising mode. This bill did nothing for that at all. But you and the president seem happy that at least the biggest taxpayer-guaranteed profit scam for the insurance corporations was left okay in the bill.

Facing reality may be hard, but it is the only way to successfully move forward. If you sit in the banquet hall and celebrate being beaten badly, you are not likely to do better next time. Sadly, we seem to be prone to celebrate our losses over an over. Thus setting up our next loss. Cheering that practice is not a productive thing to do.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bhikkhu Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Aug-04-11 10:21 AM
Response to Reply #87
94. ...which boils down to a prediction of doom at some future point,
rather than doom itself. There are no specifics in the bill locking out medicare and SS from changes, but then there can't be - these are programs that have always been managed by the government. They don't do well on autopilot. In any case, as has been pointed out elsewhere, DU is 0-4 on predicting cuts to medicare and SS so far under Obama. Perhaps we'll go 0-5 when the first set of committee recs come in, but we're almost guaranteed to see the same old prediction here...

I don't so much think its the best we could hope for, but I think its a good bill. It turns the corner finally on the wealth inequality problem we have, it sets the stage for the health care reform package to go into effect, for the tax cuts to expire, for effective reforms, and a more sound national financial basis in government.

You can say its a bad bill because those could be done poorly or not at all at some future time, but we're still in the same place on that now - congress has to do its job, we have to hold them to it, the president has to make his requirements clear and sign the legislation.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Jakes Progress Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Aug-05-11 01:10 PM
Response to Reply #94
104. Sounds like you're full of "Hope".
Edited on Fri Aug-05-11 01:10 PM by Jakes Progress
Which to most of us means that you haven't been paying attention.

Our point of disagreement is that you believe the president and congress are going to do the right things, that they have the best interest of the people at heart. I don't.

You believe the press releases and the words of people who haven't read the bill but say it is great. I've worked in press relations offices and don't believe anything that group puts out. I tend to follow people who are more pessimistic than you and your sources. However, I hold them to a little higher standard. They must show me the words where they get their interpretations. If you are following people who say that the bill in question won't allow SS and Medicare and Medicaid to be affected, you are following people who are stupid or lying. They haven't read the bill but want to say what is in it. That makes them unreliable at best and mendacious at heart.

Let's put it this way. If one year from now, the president has okayed a bill that will raise the age limit on SS or cut the service provider's reimbursement for Medicare or Medicaid, or in other ways cut back on the scope and coverage of those programs, will you come on DU and proclaim your disgust and anger? Or would that be okay with you because the president did it?

If one year from now SS has not been affected and Medicare has been extended to cover more people and Medicaid is expanded, I will definitely be on DU doing a mea culpa for my pessimism in a post that is filled with praise for our president.

How's that? Deal?

(Page bookmarked for future reference)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bhikkhu Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Aug-05-11 07:05 PM
Response to Reply #104
105. No problem.
...one year today is fairly unpredictable, and I'd have to add the caveat that I think the provider's level of payment may be too high in a seriously overinflated healthcare system, but the scope and coverage of care should definitely be preserved, the universal healthcare program should be still on track, and social security shouldn't need to be messed with, other than what is need to strengthen it (without cutting benefits or adopting a punitive COLA formula).
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Jakes Progress Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Aug-06-11 09:05 AM
Response to Reply #105
106. Some problems. Lots of wiggle room there. Sure you're not a politician?
You seem to think cutting provider's payments is a good idea. Do you know how that is done now? Do you know the rate and percentage of standard payment that is in place now? Do you know the amount allowed for nursing homes? If you lower provider reimbursement, you have limited scope and coverage in the real world.

And I have to ask what universal healthcare program you mean? Are you referring to the Affordable Healthcare Act? Are you aware that the affordable part of the act refers to limiting government expenses, not making healthcare more affordable to patients?

Just what kinds of messing with do you think is okay for SS. You trot out the politician's old game of saying we will change it to strengthen it. But those measures never make it better for recipients. If you raise the age, you are messing with SS. Is raising the age on your radar as the good kind of messing with?

A truly progressive Democratic agenda would be to expand healthcare coverage and make sure that SS does not pay less than it does now.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Historic NY Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Aug-04-11 05:50 AM
Response to Reply #47
77. He said what he wanted.......of course people let opinions get in the way of facts..
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ctsnowman Donating Member (58 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-03-11 08:06 PM
Response to Original message
48. K & R
NT
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
blkmusclmachine Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-03-11 08:12 PM
Response to Original message
50. We're gonna have to rebuild the DEM Party brand after Obama, if there's anything left of it:
The damage this WH has inflicted upon the Party name will take a Generation to correct, if we're lucky. But it won't come thru the Party apparatus that we have right now. THAT is hopelessly compromised. Obama is a symptom of the deep rot in the Party, now fully exposed.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
tex-wyo-dem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-03-11 10:34 PM
Response to Original message
61. Just for that, I'm changing my long-time bike avatar to the FDR one...
(Once I get off my phone and onto a computer)...

F--- the "new democrats" and their capitulation to the swindlers and social darwinism!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Pholus Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Aug-04-11 05:02 AM
Response to Reply #61
75. I just did the same. A reminder about the origin of the values I hold.

DFL!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
pam4water Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Aug-04-11 04:57 AM
Response to Original message
74. K&R
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
lunatica Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Aug-04-11 06:39 AM
Response to Original message
84. I got a mortgage loan modification instead of foreclosure
Edited on Thu Aug-04-11 06:41 AM by lunatica
and it was entirely due to President Obama's stimulus package designed to help homeowners. I'm one of the lucky ones if I can continue to pay the lowered mortgage because so far I still have a job. I was laid off late in 2009, but thankfully I was hired right away by the organization that laid me off in the first place. It was a matter of consolidating the work into fewer workers. It's a shitty reality but I lucked out where millions of others haven't. Although I'm still aware that I may still end up homeless down the line because corporations and the Republican party and billionaires like the Koch brothers and the teabaggers are dead set against Obama's efforts.

It's not enough, but it is because President Obama gave mortgage companies the incentive to give loan modifications. I will not throw the President under the bus yet.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Bluebear Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Aug-04-11 06:47 AM
Response to Reply #84
85. You were one of the very very few
I am happy for you but that Program was a colossal bust
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
lunatica Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Aug-04-11 02:03 PM
Response to Reply #85
102. My mortgage company isn't a bank
It's GMAC. Maybe that makes the difference, since GMAC wasn't breaking the law, at least not in California.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Bluebear Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Aug-04-11 02:21 PM
Response to Reply #102
103. Excellent
We had countrywide/bank of America..:.horrible. They took all that money meant to help people and kept it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Fire1 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Aug-04-11 11:10 AM
Response to Reply #84
97. I did too!! n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
a2liberal Donating Member (381 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Aug-04-11 09:01 AM
Response to Original message
90. K&R (n/t)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
divvy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Aug-04-11 10:29 AM
Response to Original message
95. Butt WAIT ! ......... How do we rationalize this into 8-Dimensional Chess?
Remember, Obama IS smarter than you.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Kolesar Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Aug-04-11 11:39 AM
Response to Reply #95
99. You should run for Senate, then
See how you match up
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
midnight Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Aug-04-11 11:06 AM
Response to Original message
96. Obama needs fresh eyes to see what is really outmoded. The cavemen he has surrounding him,
they have blinded him with their Hedge funds... Was Ronald Reagan the first ALEC alumni to become president?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Kolesar Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Aug-04-11 11:38 AM
Response to Original message
98. "Obama welcomes the opportunity to jettison the legacy of FDR ..." What mendacious rubbish
The lead sentence in the third paragraph is embarrassingly stupid.
Scheer needs an editor.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Tue Apr 30th 2024, 01:57 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » General Discussion Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC