DOWNLOADS: (81)

PLAYS: (145)

Embed

I assume Rep. Paul Ryan was talking about Bill Clinton during this interview on Meet the Press, and not endorsing Hillary for 2016, since Erskine Bowles was Bill Clinton's Chief of Staff, but this is pretty rich coming from someone who helped to derail the Simpson-Bowles plan when he was a member of that commission.

You also gotta love Republicans praising Bill Clinton (the man their party impeached while he was in office and that they treated with about as much disdain as the current resident of the White House) as some great bipartisan savior with whom they're all enamored now.

I'm sure they do love some of the actual bipartisanship we got from Clinton, like bad trade deals and banking deregulation, but to pretend that this modern-day Republican party would be acting any better if we had a Clinton in office is laughable.

GREGORY: It was interesting, on the day of the inauguration Brian Williams and I and others were talking and we noticed some video during the luncheon after the inauguration. And one of the things that caught our eye was a great moment here, you have your back to us, but there are you and you're speaking. You're with Secretary Clinton but also President Clinton. And that's just one of those moments where you say, "Gosh, what were they talking about?" Any advice there coming from --

(crosstalk)

RYAN: We were talking about personal health. Both of us lost our dads when we were young and we were just talking. I got concussions when I was young and Hillary was talking about hers. And we were just kind of chumming it up. Look, if we had a Clinton presidency, if we had Erskine Bowles, Chief Staff of the White House or president of the United States, I think we would have fixed this fiscal mess by now. That's not the kind of presidency we're dealing with right now.

GREGORY: And you don't blame conservatives, particularly in the House--

RYAN: Everybody. Look both--

GREGORY: --for thwarting the effort?

RYAN: Both parties. Forget about just the recent past. Both parties got us to the mess we are in, this fiscal crisis. Republicans and Democrats. And you know what? It's going to take both parties to solve this problem. That's the kind of leadership we need today.

GREGORY: So how do you think about 2016 and a presidential run?

PAUL RYAN: I don't.

GREGORY: You don't. You're not thinking about it now?

RYAN: I think it's just premature. I've got an important job to do. I represent Wisconsin. I'm chairman of the budget committee at the time we have a fiscal crisis. I think I can do my job representing the people I work for by focusing on that right now than focusing on these distant things.

GREGORY: But you'll take serious look at it?

RYAN: I'll decide later about that. Right now I'm just focused on this.

DOWNLOADS: (87)

PLAYS: (436)

Embed

It seems this ongoing feud between former Sen. Alan Simpson and anti-tax lobbyist Grover Norquist isn't going to end any time soon. Simpson went after Norquist again on Hardball this Tuesday while doing his usual fearmongering over the "fiscal cliff."

Alan Simpson on fiscal cliff: ‘Go big or go home’:

Piecemeal measures won’t save us from the fiscal cliff, former Sen. Alan Simpson (R-WY), told Hardball’s Chris Matthews on Tuesday. His advice for his former colleagues: “Go big or go home.”

“On Dec. 31st there’s a mess floating around right now, about $7.2 trillion bucks worth of stuff…[we’ve] got to do something,” Simpson said. [...]

Simpson said some lawmakers “love their party more than they love their country,” and that they would wait until the last minute to strike a deal. “They’re going to react right down to the last point when there’s going to be blood and hair and eyeballs all over the floor and they’re going to come up with something, but let me tell you, if it’s just kicking the can down the road, the can is now a 55 gallon drum filled with explosives. You can’t play that game anymore,” said Simpson.

If there’s no real deal, he said, “the markets are going to chop us up and it will be an unknown day.”

The former lawmaker also took a hit at conservative activist Grover Norquist’s crusade to get members of Congress to vow never to raise taxes.

“So how do you deal with guys who came to stop government, or Grover wandering the Earth in his white robe saying you want to drown government in the bathtub. I hope he slips in there with it,” Simpson said.

Of course Matthews let him get away with the typical false equivalency game they've been playing, where they pretend that the likes of Norquist is the equivalent of those on the left who don't want to see our social safety nets destroyed and calls everyone "loons." There's nothing "looney" about wanting to protect the poor, the elderly and the middle class and allowing people to retire with dignity, instead of having to work until they drop dead.

DOWNLOADS: (363)

PLAYS: (1331)

Embed

Rep. Xavier Becerra (D-CA) did a nice job this morning on Fox News Sunday of explaining why Social Security should have never been offered up as part of the negotiations over raising the debt ceiling even though he supported making sure it stays solvent for the long term as a member of the Simpson-Bowles commission. He also shot down nicely Bret Baier's attempt to paint the Social Security trust fund as full of worthless IOU's that have already been spent because the government borrowed against the program to pay for other things.

BAIER: Congressman, you were on the president's debt and deficit commission, the Bowles-Simpson commission, and you voted against the recommendations at the end. But during the meeting, one of the meetings, you said this, quote, "As you just said here, I don't want to leave the table because I started off the first day saying everything must be on the table" -- what you just said.

But as the negotiations in the debt ceiling increase have continued, you said this week, quote, "I don't see why I would support any plan that would cut benefits to seniors to pay for the reckless fiscal policies that led to us these massive deficits." That seems like a big change.

So, now, there are some things that are off the table for you.

BECERRA: As when I was on the fiscal commission and when any proposal comes before me for a vote, I would take a look. As much as I believe that Social Security should not be on the table because Social Security hasn't contributed 1 cent to the deficit that we face today, nor 1 cent to any of the national debt, the $14.3 trillion.

So, why should Social Security, why should seniors have to pay to balance the budget through Social Security cuts? But it should be on the table. I would fight to take it off the table, but it should start off on the table and then what should remain on the table are the things that really drove us into this deficit. And most folks know what drove us into these deficits. When you don't pay for two wars in Iraq and Afghanistan and you borrow all the money from China, you're going to have to pay for it at some point.

Continue reading »

DOWNLOADS: (888)

PLAYS: (3245)

Embed

The head of President Obama's now defunct deficit commission apparently decided to see if he could outdo himself after his offensive "milk cows" statement on Fox's Your World with Neil Cavuto.

Alan Simpson Invokes 'Snoopy Snoopy Poop Dogg' In Scolding Fears Of Cuts To Social Security:

Alan Simpson, co-chairman of President Barack Obama's debt commission, furthered his penchant for colorful commentary Monday when he unleashed a rambling diatribe targeting what he characterized as a generation of disrespectful youth and their confused grandparents.

"This is a fakery," the former Wyoming senator said on Fox News, referring to retirement-age Americans expressing fears about having Social Security funds slashed. "If they care at all about their children or grandchildren, and sometimes I doubt that -- I think, you know, grandchildren now don't write a thank-you for the Christmas presents, they're walking on their pants with the cap on backwards listening to the enema man and Snoopy Snoopy Poop Dogg, and they don't like them!" [...]

In February, Simpson exhibited his flair for the dramatic when he called the White House's spending cut effort a "sparrow belch in the midst of the typhoon." The deficit, he later said, was "a stink bomb in the garden party and it’s never going to go away.”

Amazingly a little later in the segment as the topic turned to raising the debt limit, even Simpson admitted here that if there is a government shutdown, it will be the Republicans who end up taking the blame for it.

DOWNLOADS: (499)

PLAYS: (1084)

Embed

Former New Hampshire Senator Judd Gregg joined the crew of Morning Joe and jumped all over the Huffington Post's Sam Stein when he pointed out that Social Security is solvent for the next twenty-some years. Gregg's reasoning -- it's not solvent because the taxpayers will either be asked to pay the money back they borrowed against it, or we borrow money from places like China.

So basically he thinks it's insolvent because he doesn't think the money should have to be paid back. This is coming from someone who never had a problem with deficits when George W. Bush and the Republicans were busy invading countries that weren't a threat to us and giving tax cuts to the rich which broke the bank, but now the world's going to come to an end because we're supposedly broke. Social Security is funded by our payroll taxes and does nothing to add to the deficit, but these guys can't stop lying and pretending it does.

And of course Joe Scarborough and Pat Buchanan -- who it appears still has a cot in the MSNBC studios since he's on there every time you turn around -- were happy to help him out ratcheting up the fear. If they want to make Social Security solvent for decades to come, all they need to do is raise the income cap. And shame on Gregg and the rest of them for wanting to balance the budget on the backs of seniors and acting like it's acceptable not to repay that trust fund.

DOWNLOADS: (218)

PLAYS: (342)

Embed

Even though she admits that the now defunct deficit commission acknowledged that "reforming" Social Security didn't have anything to do with taking care of our country's debt, CNN's Candy Crowley does her best job of carrying water for its former commissioners Simpson and Bowles. How pitiful is it when even a deficit hawk like Kent Conrad is sounding like the rational one here?

That commission went nowhere but the media continually pretends it reached the required consensus for their recommendations to be voted on. It didn't. And of course when talking about "reforming" Social Security, you know that's code for either raising the retirement age or means testing it, which turns it into a welfare program. Americans shouldn't be expected to work until they're dead before they can go on and retire.

They need to raise the income cap or for that matter get rid of it. How early could they afford to allow Americans to retire if they lowered the percentage for everyone, and took the cap off completely? I'm tired of hearing them pretend that we can't afford to take care of our senior citizens and that they think all of us should be working until we're on the job in walkers because our politicians refuse to ask those that can afford it to pay more in taxes. People who do physical labor for a living cannot be expected work until they're 70 years old and should not be expected to just because some of those that don't are living longer.

CROWLEY: But now we find that even though the debt commission which you signed onto said, OK, and we are going to deal with Social Security and everyone says, oh, that's not part of the debt, that's not what's causing all of this. OK, that having been said, the debt commission said, deal with Social Security at the same time. Do you still believe that? Because the White House doesn't seem to believe it and you have got some fairly powerful Democrats that don't. Do you?

CONRAD: Look, I signed on to the fiscal commission report that reduced the debt $4 trillion over the next 10 years. Four trillion, trillion with a T. Not talking $100 billion, $4 trillion. That's what's needed.

But we did separate Social Security. We didn't use any of the savings from Social Security for deficit reduction.

CROWLEY: Should you reform Social Security as a part of this overall negotiation that you want to do for a 10-year plan?

CONRAD: Certainly Social Security needs to be reformed. I personally think it's best to separate the two, as we did in the commission. In the commission, we used the savings on Social Security to extend the solvency of Social Security, not for deficit reduction.

DOWNLOADS: (632)

PLAYS: (1634)

Embed

This had to be one of the more irritating segments I've had the unfortunate circumstance of watching on Morning Joe in a while. First they went about trashing the students protesting tuition fee hikes in London and those silly Socialists in Europe who are all just used to sucking off of the government teet. Then they proceeded to trashing anyone who's dared to speak out against the early report released by the president's Catfood Commission co-chairs Bowles and Simpson.

How dare those reactionaries Nancy Pelosi, Paul Krugman and Richard Trumka speak out against those good reasonable adults who want to raise the retirement age and balance the budget off of the backs of the elderly, the middle class and the poor. The nerve of them!

Update: And just one last word on this panel discussion as an afterthought. Did anyone else feel like they were watching a bunch of high school kids debate policy when it came to their reaction on the protests in London? Yeah Mika, destroying the social safety net and the government's former position that education matters beyond high school if you want to retain a middle class and those students being angry that the government has decided that doesn't matter any more and protesting is just like your brother pulling a stunt where he imitated a cop and got in trouble for it. That's exactly the same thing and just kids being kids who need to be disciplined for their bad behavior. Jebus these people make my head hurt.

DOWNLOADS: (298)

PLAYS: (838)

Embed

As Susie already noted, this release by the co-chairs of President Obama's Catfood Commission that don't look like they have any chance of being approved by the entire panel is nothing but a political ploy designed to warm us up for the "reasonable compromises" we're likely to see proposed next. And the Villagers haven't wasted any time getting started. Here's Gloria Borger and Wolf Blitzer telling us how important it is that this got "the conversation going."

Too bad that "conversation" is a completely dishonest one about what really should be done to take care of our deficit instead of lying about Social Security.

BLITZER: Let's talk about the political realities of this proposal.

We'll bring in our senior political analyst, Gloria Borger -- Gloria, how likely are these proposals going to be to move forward?

It's by no means a done deal.

BORGER: No. And as you pointed out, Wolf, this is a chairman's mark. They wanted to get this out there, to put this on the table. And I think we should give the two chairmen, Alan Simpson and Erskine Bowles, some credit here for putting some really bold, serious ideas on the table.

But it -- but you do need 14 out of 18 members to approve of this in order to get this proposal before the Congress. Given the fact that this has both large spending cuts in it and a change in the tax system, I'm not sure, Wolf, that they can get there. But it's in everyone's interests right now to try and get something before the Congress. So I won't say no. You know, we just don't know at this point.

BLITZER: We're -- we're already, though, hearing loud complaints...

BORGER: Yes.

BLITZER: -- from liberals and from conservatives. I don't think this should be surprising.

BORGER: No, it's not surprising. You know, Wolf, we've been debating these issues for years. They're the same issues. Nancy Pelosi just put out a statement -- I just got it on my BlackBerry -- that called it "simply unacceptable." A lot of the spending caps are going to be unacceptable to Democrats. And the changes in the tax system, particularly eliminating sort of the deductions on mortgage, for example, are going to be unacceptable to Republicans.

Continue reading »

DOWNLOADS: (361)

PLAYS: (2219)

Embed

Cenk Uygur filling in for Ed Schultz asks the question I'm sure so many of us have as well on President Obama's deficit commission.

Why did we elect a Democrat if we`re going to get a conservative deficit commission that`s going to cut our Social Security?

As Bob Shrum rightly responds, if the Democrats join with Republicans to destroy Social Security, it's going to spell big trouble for the party, and rightfully so. Alan Simpson and the whole commission need to go.

UYGUR: The White House is circling the wagons around former Wyoming Senator Alan Simpson, the co-chairman of the president`s deficit commission after he went berserk about Social Security.

Simpson likes to talk about the budget in terms of farm animals. In an e-mail to an older voter advocate he wrote that Social Security was like a cow with 310 million -- I think you get the picture.

The White House has responded, quote, "Alan Simpson has apologized and while we regret and do not condone his comments, we accept his apology and he will continue to serve." Catering to loathsome Republicans, the Obama White House at its best.

For Simpson, this week it was a cow. Last month it was a pig. Speaking to a gathering of the nation`s governors in July, Simpson compared the Recovery Act to a pig saying "the pig is dead. There`s no more bacon to bring home."

Get a load of this guy. He thinks you`re milking the system as if it`s his money. You paid into social security. It`s your money. You`re not milking a damn thing and when we try to stimulate our economy or keep teachers on the job, he says the pig is dead. Who killed the pig?

Simpson and his friends in Congress who spent all of your money including the Social Security surplus on tax cuts for the rich and endless wars. Old Simpson had a farm on it he had a bunch of rich Republicans who milked the system dry then told us they killed our pig.

Joining me now is Democratic strategist Bob Shrum. He`s a professor at New York University. Bob, look, this whole talk about how Social Security is going bankrupt, you don`t understand, you guys are milking it dry, doesn`t it have a $2.5 trillion surplus? Isn`t all this one big fat lie?

BOB SHRUM: Yes, it is actually. The truth of the matter is that before Simpson loves to say Social Security goes bust in 2037. That`s not true.

Continue reading »

DOWNLOADS: (867)

PLAYS: (2293)

Embed

Wow, what do you know... for the second time in a row David Gregory decided to hammer one of the Congressional Minority Leaders about the cost of extending the Bush tax cuts. Two weeks ago it was John Boehner. Now Mitch McConnell got his turn to respond to Alan Greenspan's remarks that the Republicans should not be extending them without a way to pay for them. McConnell's response after Gregory hammered on him after he refused to answer the question initially:

SEN. McCONNELL: You're talking about current tax policy. Why did all it of a sudden become something that we, quote "paid for." Look, the problem is the spending problem. If we grind down the spending, we will begin to get a handle on this mounting debt, and if you push this economy further backward, we'll get less revenue for the government, not more. Raising taxes in the middle of a recession on the major job generator in America, small business, is a very, very bad idea.

So much for that deficit they claim they're so concerned about. Not when it comes to tax cuts for the rich. David Gregory should have called him out for his lie about how many small businesses are going to be affected by the tax cuts expiring as well, but hey... it's David Gregory. It's unusual for him to even this aggressive with a Republican when they come his show so my expectations are pretty low when it comes to him getting one of these guys off of their talking points for the day.

He did ask him another good question during this segment as well though. When McConnell said the Republicans would be willing to consider going along with the recommendations from President Obama's deficit commission, Gregory asked him why they needed a Democratic president's commission to figure out what the Republican's think should be cut. McConnell punted on that one and Gregory let it go of course. McConnell claimed he didn't want the matter to become a "political football". Yeah right. Everything is a "political football" with the Republicans.

They do absolutely nothing if that they don't think they can use to gain a political advantage, no matter how bad it is for the country. You could say the same for a lot of them on both sides of the aisle, but the level of just sheer callousness for anything other than remaining in power and protecting their rich campaign donors from the GOP when the country is in this bad of shape is just reprehensible. They're hoping the Democrats do their dirty work for them on Medicare and Social Security so they don't take the political hit for doing what we all know they'd like to do, destroy and privatize both programs.

Transcript below the fold.

Continue reading »