DU doesn't.
The rants are getting easier with each passing day. Rant at the end of the thread.
Better Believe It (17,807 posts) Profile Journal Send DU Mail Ignore
Senator Tom Harkin (D-Iowa) charges Obama with "beginning the unraveling of Social Security"
Last edited Tue Feb 21, 2012, 03:53 PM USA/ET - Edit history (2)
Sen. Harkin rips Obama for 'unraveling Social Security' with tax cut
By Josiah Ryan
February 16, 2012
The liberal senator was unusually tough in criticizing Obama, who Harkin said would deprive the Social Security fund of roughly $100 billion by extending the two-percentage-point payroll tax cut through the end of 2012. That tax funds the Social Security trust fund.
“I never thought I would have to see the day when a Democratic president of the United States and a Democratic vice president would agree to put Social Security in this kind of jeopardy," exclaimed a visibly agitated Harkin from the Senate floor. "Never did I ever imagine a Democratic president would be the beginning of the unraveling of Social Security.â€
He also noted that under the deal worked out by House Republicans and Senate Democrats, the tax cut will not be offset with other spending cuts or tax increases and will add to the deficit.
"I warn my colleagues to consider the long terms ramifications of these actions," said Harkin. "This continues to open the door to further extending the tax cut because we don't have to pay for it."
http://thehill.com/blogs/floor-action/senate/211323-harkin-blasts-obama-for-agreeing-to-unfunded-pay-roll-tax-cut-
<snip>
rurallib (27,492 posts) Profile Journal Send DU Mail Ignore
1. Thank you Senator Harkin.
Yupster (12,562 posts) Profile Journal Send DU Mail Ignore
24. So how are we ever going to start fully funding social security again?
Anyone who suggests ending the temporary 2 % cut will be declared raising taxes on the middle class.
Is the 2 % temporary cut now permanent? It sure looks that way to me, and that's very bad news for social security.
Better Believe It (17,807 posts) Profile Journal Send DU Mail Ignore
28. It's now being funded out of general government revenues, nearly 100 billion under the latest deal
That's a big chunk of social security funding.
MannyGoldstein (17,208 posts) Profile Journal Send DU Mail Ignore
2. It's not like the President has a history of
calling for cuts to Social Security and being deceptive about its solvency...
Better Believe It (17,807 posts) Profile Journal Send DU Mail Ignore
4. Everything is on the table.
Luminous Animal (13,168 posts) Profile Journal Send DU Mail Ignore
3. I agree with Senator Harkin.
RC (17,290 posts) Profile Journal Send DU Mail Ignore
6. The payroll tax cut was a very bad idea from the git-go
The idea should never have made it out of the room it was uttered in. There was a reason it was a separate line item on the pay stub. To keep Congress from using the condition of the General fund from being a factor effecting Social Security. That is no longer the case.
And on it goes, post after post.
This is why I despise liberals.
Every reason they list is every reason the GOP gave for opposing the useless tax cut but the GOP was excoriated in the M$M for wanting to raise taxes on the middle class.
This time around they conceded without a fight, not wanting to relive the experience.
But these ****ers are a mile wide and an inch deep.
They were part of the anti-GOP pile-on for no reason other than it was an anti-GOP pile-on.
Their leaders told them to and they obeyed.
Now another leader tells them the exact opposite and the unprincipled ****s once again fall over, ankles in the air moaning about how good they are.
Yet, we're the amoral authoritarians that need to be told what to do.
Worse, you know these ****ers know they're hypocrites and liars. They know how shallow and obedient and uncritical they are. They don't care. They just want to abuse you so they can have their goodies.
They should all die in a bag full of wet cats.
here's your ****ing link:
http://www.democraticunderground.com/1002335912#post28
