‘Progressives‘ are getting all gooey over Obama’s stern declaration that he will prevent Republicans from privatizing Social Security.
So why am I being so harsh towards Obama? Because this is a sucker play. Given Obama’s track record on most issues so far, it’s pretty obvious what will happen next:
1) Obama issues a stern declaration about ‘protecting Social Security.’ Of course, no one was seriously entertaining that idea on the legislative agenda. Until now. Up to this point, the debate (aka the ‘Catfood Commission’) has centered over future benefits (e.g., what is the age of eligibility for full benefits, and how much will be paid out).
2) Republicans now call for privatization. Obama boldly, fiercely, courageously, heroically, and steadfastly resists this non-starter of a proposal (the Republicans would be slaughtered if this actually passed due to their support).
3) Obama, inflicting post-partisan depression on millions of Democrats, agrees to a Grand Compromise dictated by Co-Presidents Snowe and Nelson. These will probably include: raising the minimum age for eligibility, slashing benefits (not too likely, at least in the short term), or cutting benefits for the upper-middle class (and higher). This lack of universality will undercut popular support for the program and weaken it.
4) Declare victory and bash amateur Democrats for their opposition to a stupid policy.
I realize that, during the campaign, Obama said he would raise the payroll tax on incomes above $250,000 (he might get that anyway) to close the gap. Maybe that’s what he’ll end up doing.
Of course, Obama said he would do a lot of things, and, not only hasn’t he delivered, in some cases, he’s done the opposite.
Once again, this reminds us why the Coalition of the Sane should never follow the political advice of ‘progressives’ (or their ethical advice, either).
Not feeling hopey or changey.