The lack of details (for those wondering about why there was a lack of details we have an answer below) in the Obama Wall Street bailout “plan” announced yesterday aroused guffaws and a stock market tumble.
Obama bamboozles the American public and his adoring fans in Big Media with his continued refusal to lay out the hidden components of his Rube Goldberg-style economic contraption.
We opposed, (in Something For Nothing) the scam bailout of Wall Street and called instead for Hillary-style solutions such as a Home Ownership Loan Corporation.
While tax cheat, now Treasury Secretary, Tim Geithner is busy renaming TARP to TALF our attention turns to the as yet unveiled Obama scams to come.
* * *
As we have written:
We have been a lonely voice warning about the coming Obama Social Security Treachery. We have explained how Obama’s coming Social Security Treachery is tied to the whole of the “stimulus” scam and the other plans to loot the American economy.
Ironically, while Dimocrats and Democrats and PINOs and Big Blogs ignore our warnings about Obama’s Social Security Treachery, a Big Media outlet has joined us in noting the silence.
For those wondering about the lack of details in Obama “plans” we suggest the lack of details are the calculated Obama strategy for a George W. Bush style looting of Social Security and the American economy.
Politico – Left silent on Social Security, Medicare:
The new administration hopes to have a stimulus package passed by Congress, a new plan in place to shore up ailing banks and, by month’s end, to hold a “fiscal responsibility” summit.
If the stimulus and banking bailout weren’t controversial enough, the summit fills some entitlement reform critics with dread, as they fear it could speed calls for cuts to Social Security and Medicare.
Obama is planning an epic treachery – the Democratic Left – to its eternal shame – is silent.
Strikingly, however, Obama appears to be getting unusual room to maneuver on entitlements by most of his liberal allies. On the subject of entitlement reform, in fact, Obama’s honeymoon continues — at least in the unlikely precincts of the Democratic left, a counterintuitive development that has buoyed the spirits of reformers who would like to see drastic changes in the way Social Security works.
Big Media, especially the now departed Tim Russert, loathe paying into Social Security – a program that does not benefit them particularly. Republicans too, hate Social Security and have tried to destroy the crown jewel of Franklin Roosevelt’s New Deal. Politico labels these Social Security haters “reformers” and those who want to save Social Security and keep it whole (us) “opponents” and “critics”.
Opponents of significant changes to Social Security benefits were jarred in January, when the then-president-elect echoed George W. Bush’s claim of an entitlement “crisis,” warning of “red ink as far as the eye can see” in Social Security and Medicare. Obama promised that those programs would be a “central part” of his plan to reduce the federal deficit.
Social Security defenders were surprised again last week, when Obama named a leading voice for reining in entitlement spending, New Hampshire Sen. Judd Gregg, to his Cabinet.
Obama plans to loot Social Security and the Democratic Left is silent. It appears the Democratic Left is really the Dimocratic Left and they plan to join Obama in looting Social Security. Apparently the Dimocratic Left did not want George W. Bush to feast on the spoils of the looted Social Security but now they will themselves feast at the table.
But despite some grumbling in the ranks, the powerful, organized movement that effectively defended the Social Security status quo from Bush’s ambitious reform effort in 2005 has been one of the key dogs that haven’t yet barked at Obama.
The relative silence of liberal activists who smashed Bush’s hopes of slowing entitlement spending is a mark of the deep trust Obama enjoys from the left of his party — and it’s also giving hope to those who would like to see major shifts in the way Social Security and other programs are funded and managed.
Obama is “in a honeymoon phase, and many liberals are afraid to express concerns,” said Rep. Jim Cooper, a Tennessee Democrat and deficit hawk who sees the current economic crisis as an opportunity to reform entitlement spending.
Obama has bamboozled on all sides of the Social Security question. Paul Krugman called Obama out on the bamboozlement when Hillary Clinton defended Social Security.
Paul Krugman has been silent too on the latest Obama treachery. Dimocrats like Barbara Kennelly are busy protecting Obama instead of protecting Social Security.
“The president gets it,” said former Democratic Rep. Barbara Kennelly, the president of the National Committee to Preserve Social Security and Medicare. “This is very different from the people who run around beating the drum for entitlement reform — they’re coming from a different place.”
Opponents of Bush-style changes also believe that sleeping liberals will awaken should Obama make a proposal offering significant changes. “Everyone wants to give Obama the benefit of the doubt, but if he were to get out of the gate and say, ‘We’re going to fix entitlements, and that’s going to mean cuts to Medicare and Social Security,’ he’s going to hit a wall real fast,” said Dean Baker, co-director of the left-leaning Center for Economic and Policy Research.
Obama’s treachery on Social Security will not be as foolish as the open warfare declared by George W. Bush. Obama’s treachery will be coordinated with high level Dimocrats and their PINO Big Blog supporters.
But make no mistake: The old foes of entitlement reform are quiet — and one key group from the last round of Social Security wars has moved on.
In 2005, a labor-backed group called Americans United to Protect Social Security set its sights on killing Bush’s privatization plan and silencing his warnings that Social Security was “headed toward bankruptcy.”
But now Americans United to Protect Social Security, whose top operatives worked for Obama’s campaign, has changed its name to Americans United for Change. And the group has turned its attention to rallying support for the White House’s stimulus package. The labor unions that underwrote much of the organization’s campaign against the Bush White House are Obama’s allies, with a broad agenda they hope he’ll advance.
Even many of the people who were rankled by Obama’s campaign comments about entitlements are disinclined to challenge the new president publicly, to the delight of those pushing to rein in spending on Social Security and Medicare.
Obama cannot be trusted and the Dimocrats know that is true on issue after issue. The reality is that the Dimocratic Left will now profit from Obama’s treacheries and that is the sole source of the supposed “goodwill”.
The defenders of maintaining Social Security and Medicare at their current levels say they’ve been alarmed at times by Obama’s rhetoric, but their relatively relaxed stance is an illustration of the trust and goodwill that Obama commands on the left.
Obama’s pronouncements on the American system of “entitlements” — proponents of the current system dispute the widespread use of the term to refer to government-provided income and health care for senior citizens — have drawn occasional fire from the left. In 2007, New York Times columnist Paul Krugman accused Obama of “Social Security crisis-mongering.”
When Obama said last month that “discussion around entitlements will be a part, a central part” of his economic agenda, liberal columnist David Sirota warned: “That’s coded politicalspeak for an effort to ‘reform’ Social Security and Medicare, which history has shown is often itself politicalspeak for cuts to those programs.”
Embarrasments to rational thought like David Sirota should rarely, as in this case, be taken seriously. But why are usually intelligent sources like Paul Krugman silent? Surely, there are some on the Democratic Left that have some honor left?
The Gregg appointment caused another ripple of concern.
“I’m not pleased to see anything strengthen those voices within the administration,” said Lawrence Michel, president of the left-leaning Economic Policy Institute. Michel added that he’s concerned that the summit planned for later this month also could reinforce calls for cuts to Social Security and Medicare. “Why undercut the strongest pillar of retirement security?” he asked. [snip]
“The question is, whose leg is he pulling?” said Baker. “I’d like to think it’s theirs when he says [to deficit hawks], ‘I share your concerns.’ But I guess it’s conceivable that it’s mine.”
The Democratic Left has much to be ashamed of these past few years. Obama should not have been trusted and cannot be trusted on FISA, Guantanamo, Renditions, Torture or the economy – but the Democratic Left was mostly silent.
The latest shame of the Democratic Left is the silence on Social Security.