Events of the last week have made the Deficit Commission an embarrassment. Co-Chair Alan Simpson is a one-man disaster movie, compulsively offending one key voting bloc after another. Commission member Paul Ryan faced an angry crowd over his anti-Social Security stance, while another Commissioner locked experienced workers out of a nuclear facility rather than provide retirement benefits.
That's right: He's cutting retirement benefits.
But if the political blowback is obvious, here's what isn't: The Commissioners who are determined to cut your Social Security benefits are going to enjoy their own retirements in comfort. Their own pension plans insulate them from the fears that many other Americans face, and they don't have the professional expertise that would help them understand those concerns. In fact, the Commission's only expert on retirement is Rep. Jan Schakowsky, and she apparently opposes benefit cuts. The rest of the Commission is dominated by people who've expressed their desire to cut Social Security, despite their own secure futures. Millions of working Americans who have contributed to Social Security all their lives will lose out if these Commissioners have their way.
Happy Labor Day.
Normally I consider it off-limits to discuss people's personal finances when discussing their political opinions. But these Commissioners' lack of subject matter expertise, along with their lack of empathy, is important. If you don't know much about the topic and are protected from the problem, what makes you credible? Their pre-established prejudices makes the situation even worse, and their own situations underscore the irony of their self-professed willingness to make "brave choices" - choices whose consequences will mean little or nothing to them.
The Commission's Social Security obsession is odd anyway, since the projected Social Security shortfall comes out to only 0.7% of GDP. Nevertheless, these Commissioners have made their benefit-cutting intentions plain, presumably because they want to offer up America's seniors as a sacrifice to the bond markets. So how will these would-be income-slashers for the elderly make out in their own golden years? They'll be golden.
Consider Commissioner Alice Rivlin. Rivlin co-authored a paper that called for raising the retirement age and other benefit cuts, and recently released a specious paper about "Saving Social Security." As a former HEW Undersecretary, CBO Director, White House Budget Director, and Federal Reserve Vice Chair, she will presumably enjoy a comfortable retirement supported by multiple public pensions. Says Rivlin: ""We can't get out of this problem without doing both spending cuts, especially slowing the growth of entitlement, and tax increases."
Experts on Social Security finance (including the long-time Chief Actuary for the program) flatly disagree with Rivlin, pointing out that an adjustment to the payroll tax cap would unquestionably be enough to get the job done. They have the numbers to prove it. So why does Rivlin, who does not have their expertise in this area, disagree? Go ask Alice.
Co-Chair Erskine Bowles brokered a deal with Newt Gingrich to cut Social Security in the 1990s, when he served as Bill Clinton's Chief of Staff. Before that he headed the Small Business Administration, so his government tenure presumably qualifies him for a Federal pension. If not, don't worry: He receives $425,000 per year in his current job running the public universities of North Carolina, and the people of North Carolina are presumably also funding a pension on his behalf. To his credit, Bowles pledged to donate $125,000 of his salary for need-based student funds - but then, he can afford it. As the son of a US Congressman, Bowles had the education and connections needed to make millions as an investment banker. The added income he earns today as a Board member for General Motors and Morgan Stanley will help, too - and his government experience undoubtedly helped him win those positions, too.
Republican Rep. Paul Ryan, an aggressive advocate of Social Security cuts and privatization, will also enjoy his sunset years in comfort, thanks to a publicly-funded pension from his tenure as a Congressman. (He'll presumably earn even more as a result of his employment as an aide to two United States Senators.) Rep. Jeb Hensaerling has served as both a Representative and as an aide to Sen. Phil Gramm, so he should be safe from financial insecurity in his old age too .
The average annual pension payments for former members of Congress ranged from $41,000 to $55,000 in 2002, considerably more than the average $13,836 that Social Security recipients received in 2009. Yet neither Ryan nor Hensaerling have proposed cutting Congressional retirement benefits - nor should they. Sound pension plans like theirs were once available to most working Americans, and more effort should be made to restore them.
Former SEIU President Andrew Stern, who once might have been counted on to defend Social Security, recently sneered at Commission critics as "assassins of change" while saying that "all entitlements should be on the table." Mr. Stern's annual pension is $152,000 - and he retired at the age of 59, not 70. Nevertheless, Stern now publicly muses about "whether defined benefit pensions can really exist in the long run in a globalized economy."
Judd Gregg, who wants to raise the retirement age to 70, will receive a Federal pension for his Senate position. Gregg, like Alan Simpson, is the son of a Governor (self-made men, you might say), which means that public pensions also ensured that neither of them had to worry about supporting their aged parents. Tom Coburn, another would-be Social Security cutter, will receive a Congressional and Senatorial pension too.
David Cote, the CEO of Honeywell, provides some "private enterprise" perspective to the Commission's work. But Cote's wealth comes in part from Honeywell's government contracts, which exceed $4 billion annually. What's more, Cote's "free enterprise" ethic didn't stop him from making sure that Honeywell grabbed a few million in stimulus money from the taxpayers, too. A few billion from the Pentagon here, a few million more from Uncle Sam there - that'll plump up the nest egg a little for Mr. Cote's sunset years.
Cote made the headlines this week when Honeywell locked out the union workers at a nuclear power plant over a labor dispute - even though the workers agreed to stay on the job to protect public safety. Instead, Cote hired replacements and put them through a pared-down training process. The image of Homer Simpson comes to mind, pushing the wrong buttons and spilling beer on the reactor console - which would presumably make Cote Mr. Burns.
But it's no joking matter. Apparently there's real danger, which is why the Nuclear Regulatory Commission reportedly stepped in to block Honeywell from distilling uranium with its crew of replacement workers And what are the union and Honeywell arguing about? Honeywell's raising health care costs - and eliminating retiree pension plans for new workers.
That's right. A member of the Commission that's pretending to judge our retirement security with impartiality would rather have hastily-trained amateurs handle nuclear materials than bargain openly with his workers - about their retirement. D'oh!
As for Simpson (Alan, not Bart), to say that he suffers from "political Tourette's syndrome" would be a disservice to Tourette's sufferers. Most of them don't really say socially objectionable things, and those who do (it's called "coprolalia") don't mean what they say. But Simpson does. By attacking senior citizens as "greedy geezers," then offending women with his "milk cow with 100 million tits" comment, and now offending veterans' groups, Simpson has now hit the voting bloc trifecta.
And Cote's outraged labor, a fourth group. But the problem isn't Simpson anymore, or Cote for that matter. It's the Commission itself. The coprolalic curmudgeon Simpson has done a service to the nation. He's drawn attention to the Commission, and to the anti-Social Security biases held by so many of its members - all of whom will retire in comfort, thanks to those whose benefits they would cut. It's the comfortable afflicting the afflicted.
If these Deficit Commission members want their recommendations to have any credibility, they should pledge to live on the same Social Security benefits that they would impose for other Americans. Better yet, they should dedicate themselves to helping provide every American with the kind of retirement security they enjoy. That was part of the social contract this nation embraced during its years of greatest economic growth, the fulfillment of a promise that a lifetime of work should never end with years of deprivation. They should be working to restore that contract, not erode it even further.
One thing is clear: This Commission has no business making recommendations about Social Security.
(Sign a petition asking Congress and the President to protect Social Security from the Deficit Commission. Roger Hickey has more here.)
Additional links:
* Sam Seder and I discussed Social Security this week while co-hosting The Young Turks.
* For further reference on the Commission's members and their biases, see Firedoglake and Talking Points Memo.
* House Democrats are vowing to protect Social Security from any cuts. The polls show why that's a very wise idea.
First things first, the good folks over at Corrente are having a fundraising drive. Please go over and give 'em some cash to help 'em stay afloat. Now, onto business:
While things look pretty bleak in America, we can take comfort from the fact that we aren't alone in letting our economy get looted by multinational financial institutions. In Ireland, where eyes are doing anything but smiling, things are getting really dire:
The cost of bailing out the Republic of Ireland's stricken banks has risen to 45bn euro (£39bn), opening a huge hole in the Irish government's finances.
Oh. That sounds bad.
The increased cost will see the government run a budget deficit equivalent to 32% of GDP this year.
Yeah, that's pretty bad. But how much will this hurt Seamus Average?
Mr Lenihan defended the cost of the bail-out measures, which will cost the Republic's two million taxpayers the equivalent of 22,500 euros each
Holy crap! And the Irish have already implemented austerity measures to raise taxes and cut public services. Does this mean they'll have to do even more of that to pay for yet another massive bank bailout? Why, yes it does:
Minister for Finance Brian Lenihan today warned that further austerity measures will have to be imposed after the Central Bank revealed the total cost of the bailout for Irish banks will be almost €50 billion.
Speaking separately, Taoiseach Brian Cowen refused to rule out further tax increases in the forthcoming Budget and said "revenue raising" options would be required as well as spending cuts in the Budget, which is due to take place in December.
Speaking on RTE radio at lunchtime, Mr Cowen refused to outline how much would have to be found through austerity measures.
Ireland, then, is becoming a feudal state where people are taxed not to pay for police, fire departments, schools, hospitals or pensions. Instead they're taxed to bail out failed financial institutions. And what's more, they're having their taxes increased to bail out failed financial institutions. The banks are the feudal lords living in castles and the taxpayers are the serfs.
But hey, some people are happy about this charming turn of events! Here's Danny McCoy, the director-general at the Irish Business and Employers Confederation (which I gather is their version of the Chamber of Commerce):
The announcement of the final scale of its bank rescue plan concludes a month in which the troubles of Ireland’s economy have again been centre stage. Rating agencies and analysts have questioned the capacity of our small economy to cope with its emerging debt. Ireland has also become a test bed for state recovery strategies, including the introduction of austerity measures and the resolution of complex banking problems.
Thursday’s figures reveal the undeniably high, but manageable, costs of the domestic bank bail-out. The one-off impact is to push the ratio of deficit to gross domestic product to 32 per cent. However, the Irish government has also committed to framing a budgetary plan to reduce the underlying deficit to 3 per cent by 2014. This plan will help to satisfy market concerns by providing clarity on the scale of the painful, but deliverable, fiscal adjustments needed in coming years. And underneath, Ireland’s economy is much stronger than it at first appears.
Well yeah, you definitely don't want to go by how it "appears," do you? Because it appears that Ireland has unemployment of almost 14%. That's, like, pretty bad and stuff. But Mr. McCoy tells us the Irish are eating their crap sandwich and loving it:
Difficult though the situation is, the state has reacted swiftly. Stern measures to address the public finances – including public sector wage cuts, expenditure cuts and increases in personal taxation – have been introduced with widespread acceptance by the public.
Acceptance. Riiiiiiiight. That's why the ruling Fianna Fáil party is facing a nine-point deficit against the center-left Labour Party. After all, who doesn't love having their taxes jacked up even as their pension gets slashed? It's like having an angel eat whipped cream off your nipples!
Measures to fix the banking crisis through a new National Asset Management Agency have received a more mixed reaction. However, the aim of taking bad property loans off bank balance sheets to enable recapitalisation is sound.
Oh joys! The Irish have their own version of Timmy Geithner's cash-for-trash initiative! I can't imagine why that would get a mixed review! After all, buying worthless housing securities is almost as much fun as having your pension looted!
Of course, I shouldn't mock the Irish too much for their impending enslavement by the financial industry. After all, as Digby notes, we're about to get the same treatment here in the US:
Rep. Paul Ryan (R-Wis.) slammed Democrats Thursday for campaigning against Republicans on Social Security.
At an event for the Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget Thursday morning, he took on Democrats who have gone after Republican candidates for supporting Ryan’s Roadmap for America’s Future. The plan includes partial privatization of accounts for those under 55.
What! How dare you campaign against policy proposals I made! The opposition party isn't supposed to oppose things!
“We’ve got to get beyond weaponizing these issues for political gain in the short run,” he said, adding that Congress and President Barack Obama aren’t offering any solutions on Social Security. “We’ve got to get through this political moment. The political weaponization of entitlement reform is very unfortunate. It’s hurting our chances of actually getting bipartisan agreement in the near future. It’s unfortunate but we’ve got to get out there."
Gee, Paul, I'd feel so bad for you, except Republicans have successfully and relentlessly weaponized any and all tax increases for the past 30 years.
Anyway, I hope lots of people are prepared to fight this crap in the coming years. Our corrupt business and political elites aren't satisfied with the looting they gave us with the 2008 financial crisis. They're going to start coming after everything else we have too.
Catherine Herridge - Fox <b>News</b> | Gender Discrimination | Age | Mediaite
The US Equal Employment Opportunity Commission filed a complaint yesterday against Fox News for a gender and age discrimination case dating back to 2007. The FNC correspondent, Catherine Herridge, is still an employee with the company, ...
Probably Bad <b>News</b>: Toy FAIL - Epic Fail Funny Videos and Funny <b>...</b>
epic fail photos - Probably Bad News: Toy FAIL. ... Fail, Owned and Pwn moments in pictures and videos. Share fails, pwns, and owns with the world on FAIL Blog. Lolcats � Loldogs � Celebs � Look-Alikes � News ...
Haley Barbour Defends <b>News</b> Corp's Donations To RGA, Chamber Of <b>...</b>
The reports that News Corp., the parent company of Fox News, has given two separate million-dollar donations to conservative entities has sparked another wave of criticism over the cable company's editorial leanings.
Dr. eric seiger eric seiger dermatology
Events of the last week have made the Deficit Commission an embarrassment. Co-Chair Alan Simpson is a one-man disaster movie, compulsively offending one key voting bloc after another. Commission member Paul Ryan faced an angry crowd over his anti-Social Security stance, while another Commissioner locked experienced workers out of a nuclear facility rather than provide retirement benefits.
That's right: He's cutting retirement benefits.
But if the political blowback is obvious, here's what isn't: The Commissioners who are determined to cut your Social Security benefits are going to enjoy their own retirements in comfort. Their own pension plans insulate them from the fears that many other Americans face, and they don't have the professional expertise that would help them understand those concerns. In fact, the Commission's only expert on retirement is Rep. Jan Schakowsky, and she apparently opposes benefit cuts. The rest of the Commission is dominated by people who've expressed their desire to cut Social Security, despite their own secure futures. Millions of working Americans who have contributed to Social Security all their lives will lose out if these Commissioners have their way.
Happy Labor Day.
Normally I consider it off-limits to discuss people's personal finances when discussing their political opinions. But these Commissioners' lack of subject matter expertise, along with their lack of empathy, is important. If you don't know much about the topic and are protected from the problem, what makes you credible? Their pre-established prejudices makes the situation even worse, and their own situations underscore the irony of their self-professed willingness to make "brave choices" - choices whose consequences will mean little or nothing to them.
The Commission's Social Security obsession is odd anyway, since the projected Social Security shortfall comes out to only 0.7% of GDP. Nevertheless, these Commissioners have made their benefit-cutting intentions plain, presumably because they want to offer up America's seniors as a sacrifice to the bond markets. So how will these would-be income-slashers for the elderly make out in their own golden years? They'll be golden.
Consider Commissioner Alice Rivlin. Rivlin co-authored a paper that called for raising the retirement age and other benefit cuts, and recently released a specious paper about "Saving Social Security." As a former HEW Undersecretary, CBO Director, White House Budget Director, and Federal Reserve Vice Chair, she will presumably enjoy a comfortable retirement supported by multiple public pensions. Says Rivlin: ""We can't get out of this problem without doing both spending cuts, especially slowing the growth of entitlement, and tax increases."
Experts on Social Security finance (including the long-time Chief Actuary for the program) flatly disagree with Rivlin, pointing out that an adjustment to the payroll tax cap would unquestionably be enough to get the job done. They have the numbers to prove it. So why does Rivlin, who does not have their expertise in this area, disagree? Go ask Alice.
Co-Chair Erskine Bowles brokered a deal with Newt Gingrich to cut Social Security in the 1990s, when he served as Bill Clinton's Chief of Staff. Before that he headed the Small Business Administration, so his government tenure presumably qualifies him for a Federal pension. If not, don't worry: He receives $425,000 per year in his current job running the public universities of North Carolina, and the people of North Carolina are presumably also funding a pension on his behalf. To his credit, Bowles pledged to donate $125,000 of his salary for need-based student funds - but then, he can afford it. As the son of a US Congressman, Bowles had the education and connections needed to make millions as an investment banker. The added income he earns today as a Board member for General Motors and Morgan Stanley will help, too - and his government experience undoubtedly helped him win those positions, too.
Republican Rep. Paul Ryan, an aggressive advocate of Social Security cuts and privatization, will also enjoy his sunset years in comfort, thanks to a publicly-funded pension from his tenure as a Congressman. (He'll presumably earn even more as a result of his employment as an aide to two United States Senators.) Rep. Jeb Hensaerling has served as both a Representative and as an aide to Sen. Phil Gramm, so he should be safe from financial insecurity in his old age too .
The average annual pension payments for former members of Congress ranged from $41,000 to $55,000 in 2002, considerably more than the average $13,836 that Social Security recipients received in 2009. Yet neither Ryan nor Hensaerling have proposed cutting Congressional retirement benefits - nor should they. Sound pension plans like theirs were once available to most working Americans, and more effort should be made to restore them.
Former SEIU President Andrew Stern, who once might have been counted on to defend Social Security, recently sneered at Commission critics as "assassins of change" while saying that "all entitlements should be on the table." Mr. Stern's annual pension is $152,000 - and he retired at the age of 59, not 70. Nevertheless, Stern now publicly muses about "whether defined benefit pensions can really exist in the long run in a globalized economy."
Judd Gregg, who wants to raise the retirement age to 70, will receive a Federal pension for his Senate position. Gregg, like Alan Simpson, is the son of a Governor (self-made men, you might say), which means that public pensions also ensured that neither of them had to worry about supporting their aged parents. Tom Coburn, another would-be Social Security cutter, will receive a Congressional and Senatorial pension too.
David Cote, the CEO of Honeywell, provides some "private enterprise" perspective to the Commission's work. But Cote's wealth comes in part from Honeywell's government contracts, which exceed $4 billion annually. What's more, Cote's "free enterprise" ethic didn't stop him from making sure that Honeywell grabbed a few million in stimulus money from the taxpayers, too. A few billion from the Pentagon here, a few million more from Uncle Sam there - that'll plump up the nest egg a little for Mr. Cote's sunset years.
Cote made the headlines this week when Honeywell locked out the union workers at a nuclear power plant over a labor dispute - even though the workers agreed to stay on the job to protect public safety. Instead, Cote hired replacements and put them through a pared-down training process. The image of Homer Simpson comes to mind, pushing the wrong buttons and spilling beer on the reactor console - which would presumably make Cote Mr. Burns.
But it's no joking matter. Apparently there's real danger, which is why the Nuclear Regulatory Commission reportedly stepped in to block Honeywell from distilling uranium with its crew of replacement workers And what are the union and Honeywell arguing about? Honeywell's raising health care costs - and eliminating retiree pension plans for new workers.
That's right. A member of the Commission that's pretending to judge our retirement security with impartiality would rather have hastily-trained amateurs handle nuclear materials than bargain openly with his workers - about their retirement. D'oh!
As for Simpson (Alan, not Bart), to say that he suffers from "political Tourette's syndrome" would be a disservice to Tourette's sufferers. Most of them don't really say socially objectionable things, and those who do (it's called "coprolalia") don't mean what they say. But Simpson does. By attacking senior citizens as "greedy geezers," then offending women with his "milk cow with 100 million tits" comment, and now offending veterans' groups, Simpson has now hit the voting bloc trifecta.
And Cote's outraged labor, a fourth group. But the problem isn't Simpson anymore, or Cote for that matter. It's the Commission itself. The coprolalic curmudgeon Simpson has done a service to the nation. He's drawn attention to the Commission, and to the anti-Social Security biases held by so many of its members - all of whom will retire in comfort, thanks to those whose benefits they would cut. It's the comfortable afflicting the afflicted.
If these Deficit Commission members want their recommendations to have any credibility, they should pledge to live on the same Social Security benefits that they would impose for other Americans. Better yet, they should dedicate themselves to helping provide every American with the kind of retirement security they enjoy. That was part of the social contract this nation embraced during its years of greatest economic growth, the fulfillment of a promise that a lifetime of work should never end with years of deprivation. They should be working to restore that contract, not erode it even further.
One thing is clear: This Commission has no business making recommendations about Social Security.
(Sign a petition asking Congress and the President to protect Social Security from the Deficit Commission. Roger Hickey has more here.)
Additional links:
* Sam Seder and I discussed Social Security this week while co-hosting The Young Turks.
* For further reference on the Commission's members and their biases, see Firedoglake and Talking Points Memo.
* House Democrats are vowing to protect Social Security from any cuts. The polls show why that's a very wise idea.
First things first, the good folks over at Corrente are having a fundraising drive. Please go over and give 'em some cash to help 'em stay afloat. Now, onto business:
While things look pretty bleak in America, we can take comfort from the fact that we aren't alone in letting our economy get looted by multinational financial institutions. In Ireland, where eyes are doing anything but smiling, things are getting really dire:
The cost of bailing out the Republic of Ireland's stricken banks has risen to 45bn euro (£39bn), opening a huge hole in the Irish government's finances.
Oh. That sounds bad.
The increased cost will see the government run a budget deficit equivalent to 32% of GDP this year.
Yeah, that's pretty bad. But how much will this hurt Seamus Average?
Mr Lenihan defended the cost of the bail-out measures, which will cost the Republic's two million taxpayers the equivalent of 22,500 euros each
Holy crap! And the Irish have already implemented austerity measures to raise taxes and cut public services. Does this mean they'll have to do even more of that to pay for yet another massive bank bailout? Why, yes it does:
Minister for Finance Brian Lenihan today warned that further austerity measures will have to be imposed after the Central Bank revealed the total cost of the bailout for Irish banks will be almost €50 billion.
Speaking separately, Taoiseach Brian Cowen refused to rule out further tax increases in the forthcoming Budget and said "revenue raising" options would be required as well as spending cuts in the Budget, which is due to take place in December.
Speaking on RTE radio at lunchtime, Mr Cowen refused to outline how much would have to be found through austerity measures.
Ireland, then, is becoming a feudal state where people are taxed not to pay for police, fire departments, schools, hospitals or pensions. Instead they're taxed to bail out failed financial institutions. And what's more, they're having their taxes increased to bail out failed financial institutions. The banks are the feudal lords living in castles and the taxpayers are the serfs.
But hey, some people are happy about this charming turn of events! Here's Danny McCoy, the director-general at the Irish Business and Employers Confederation (which I gather is their version of the Chamber of Commerce):
The announcement of the final scale of its bank rescue plan concludes a month in which the troubles of Ireland’s economy have again been centre stage. Rating agencies and analysts have questioned the capacity of our small economy to cope with its emerging debt. Ireland has also become a test bed for state recovery strategies, including the introduction of austerity measures and the resolution of complex banking problems.
Thursday’s figures reveal the undeniably high, but manageable, costs of the domestic bank bail-out. The one-off impact is to push the ratio of deficit to gross domestic product to 32 per cent. However, the Irish government has also committed to framing a budgetary plan to reduce the underlying deficit to 3 per cent by 2014. This plan will help to satisfy market concerns by providing clarity on the scale of the painful, but deliverable, fiscal adjustments needed in coming years. And underneath, Ireland’s economy is much stronger than it at first appears.
Well yeah, you definitely don't want to go by how it "appears," do you? Because it appears that Ireland has unemployment of almost 14%. That's, like, pretty bad and stuff. But Mr. McCoy tells us the Irish are eating their crap sandwich and loving it:
Difficult though the situation is, the state has reacted swiftly. Stern measures to address the public finances – including public sector wage cuts, expenditure cuts and increases in personal taxation – have been introduced with widespread acceptance by the public.
Acceptance. Riiiiiiiight. That's why the ruling Fianna Fáil party is facing a nine-point deficit against the center-left Labour Party. After all, who doesn't love having their taxes jacked up even as their pension gets slashed? It's like having an angel eat whipped cream off your nipples!
Measures to fix the banking crisis through a new National Asset Management Agency have received a more mixed reaction. However, the aim of taking bad property loans off bank balance sheets to enable recapitalisation is sound.
Oh joys! The Irish have their own version of Timmy Geithner's cash-for-trash initiative! I can't imagine why that would get a mixed review! After all, buying worthless housing securities is almost as much fun as having your pension looted!
Of course, I shouldn't mock the Irish too much for their impending enslavement by the financial industry. After all, as Digby notes, we're about to get the same treatment here in the US:
Rep. Paul Ryan (R-Wis.) slammed Democrats Thursday for campaigning against Republicans on Social Security.
At an event for the Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget Thursday morning, he took on Democrats who have gone after Republican candidates for supporting Ryan’s Roadmap for America’s Future. The plan includes partial privatization of accounts for those under 55.
What! How dare you campaign against policy proposals I made! The opposition party isn't supposed to oppose things!
“We’ve got to get beyond weaponizing these issues for political gain in the short run,” he said, adding that Congress and President Barack Obama aren’t offering any solutions on Social Security. “We’ve got to get through this political moment. The political weaponization of entitlement reform is very unfortunate. It’s hurting our chances of actually getting bipartisan agreement in the near future. It’s unfortunate but we’ve got to get out there."
Gee, Paul, I'd feel so bad for you, except Republicans have successfully and relentlessly weaponized any and all tax increases for the past 30 years.
Anyway, I hope lots of people are prepared to fight this crap in the coming years. Our corrupt business and political elites aren't satisfied with the looting they gave us with the 2008 financial crisis. They're going to start coming after everything else we have too.
Catherine Herridge - Fox <b>News</b> | Gender Discrimination | Age | Mediaite
The US Equal Employment Opportunity Commission filed a complaint yesterday against Fox News for a gender and age discrimination case dating back to 2007. The FNC correspondent, Catherine Herridge, is still an employee with the company, ...
Probably Bad <b>News</b>: Toy FAIL - Epic Fail Funny Videos and Funny <b>...</b>
epic fail photos - Probably Bad News: Toy FAIL. ... Fail, Owned and Pwn moments in pictures and videos. Share fails, pwns, and owns with the world on FAIL Blog. Lolcats � Loldogs � Celebs � Look-Alikes � News ...
Haley Barbour Defends <b>News</b> Corp's Donations To RGA, Chamber Of <b>...</b>
The reports that News Corp., the parent company of Fox News, has given two separate million-dollar donations to conservative entities has sparked another wave of criticism over the cable company's editorial leanings.
eric seiger do eric seiger dermatologist
No comments:
Post a Comment