Obama Allegedly to Cutback Social Security and Medicare in New Budget, Accepts GOP Austerity Cat Food War on the

Certainly Barak Obama is not from the American Black culture.  But his roots do travel back to Africa.  And we "Middle Class" Americans did vote for him in the belief that we were getting our very first "Black" president. 

So he has either deliberately used his color to gain votes, or he has been used by his Masters, being paraded as a Black Man, while doing the Empire's business. 

Maybe I'm overly sensitive because I've worked with so many "professional" blind people who refused to see themselves as part of our blind minority group.  They would reach down to help blind people, but they travelled in sighted circles and used other words to describe their vision loss.  They joined none of the organizations, gave no dollars to support any of the Causes, or attended any blind functions.  They spoke of their work and their clients as Jerry Lewis referred to "My Children". 

 

Carl Jarvis

 

----- Original Message -----

From: Roger Loran Bailey

To: Blind Democracy Discussion List

Sent: Saturday, April 06, 2013 9:00 AM

Subject: Re: Obama Allegedly to Cutback Social Security and Medicare in New Budget, Accepts GOP Austerity Cat Food War on the

Frankly, I doubt very much that Barack Obama regards African Americans as his people. First, he is not a descendent of slaves and he did not grow up among African Americans and did not absorb the African American culture. Second, he did grow up in a white family and grew up surrounded by white people. The exposure he did have to African American culture was as an outsider visiting it. The main effect that his African ancestry has had on him is as something of a barrier in his political career and he has handled that by avoiding racial issues as much as he can. He cannot deny his racial background, because anyone with working eyes can look right at him and see it, but he does his best to avoid even speaking of racial issues and when he cannot avoid it he passes over it as quickly as possible. That has apparently worked for him, but it does point up that it is very unlikely that he regards African Americans as his people.

On 4/6/2013 11:22 AM, Carl Jarvis wrote:

Bob and All,

I wonder if Barak Obama had the same history books I was "taught" from?  Among the many misrepresentations, the wars, and the great industrialists who "built" this great nation, among all that garbage was a lesson about the Black Americans having been deliberately cut off from their roots as part of their Master's efforts to keep them enslaved. 

Has Barak Obama been so bleached of his color that he no longer cares or even thinks about his own roots? 

Has he been duped?  Or has he deliberately chosen to turn his back on his people? 

Does he even know his people?  Or are they some fiction that has no place in his "self-made" life? 

Well Mister Barak Obama, I know my people.  I know the Ludwig's who came to these shores in 1752, The Alexander's who reached Pennsylvania in 1834, The Hickman's, the Davis's and the Jarvis's who may have been here from the very early 1700's, and finally, the Black Foot and the Osage who were driven from this land. 

These people were Working Men and Women.  Farmers, miners, carpenters, dock hands, the very people who built this mighty land. 

Mister Barak Obama, you won't read much about my people, unless you take the time to read Howard Zinn's, A People's History of the United States. 

Go on believing your little myth that the wealthy Masters are the real movers and shakers.  But at least be honest and tell us that you have lied to us in order to gain our temporary support.  Tell us the truth, how you really are envious of your wealthy Masters. 

One other lesson I should remind you of Mister Barak Obama, and I know the the word I am about to write offends even you, but it must be said to make my point.  Remember those Black folk in Massa's mansion who did his bidding and spied and lied on their fellow Blacks?  They were the House Niggers, Mister Barak Obama. 

Is that the statement you want to leave the world when you finally step down from your position as the King Puppet? 

 

Carl Jarvis

----- Original Message -----

From: Bob Hachey

To: Blind Democracy Discussion List

Sent: Friday, April 05, 2013 11:28 PM

Subject: Re: Obama Allegedly to Cutback Social Security and Medicare in New Budget, Accepts GOP Austerity Cat Food War on the

To the whimpy oreo cookie of a president, I say a loud and proud FUCK YOU
for perpetuating economic slavery and suffering. I wonder what he means by
actions to protect the poor from the chains of the chained CPI.
AS for the por watching helplessly? I say get up off your asses and throw
off the chains of Ayn Rand, Ronald Reagan and the University of Chicago
school of economic slavery. Do we really have that much to lose that we're
afraid to stand up and fight for our share of the American Pie?
FUCK NO.
bob Hachey
----- Original Message -----
From: "Miriam Vieni" <miriamvieni@optonline.net>
To: "'Blind Democracy Discussion List'" <blind-democracy@octothorp.org>
Sent: Friday, April 05, 2013 9:15 PM
Subject: Obama Allegedly to Cutback Social Security and Medicare in New
Budget, Accepts GOP Austerity Cat Food War on the


Friday, 05 April 2013 16:52
Obama Allegedly to Cutback Social Security and Medicare in New Budget,
Accepts GOP Austerity Cat Food War on the Unwealthy

MARK KARLIN, EDITOR OF BUZZFLASH AT TRUTHOUT
 It's back to the Simpson-Bowles cat food for the elderly and poor budget as
far as the White House is concerned, according to The New York Times (NYT)
on Friday:
President Obama next week will take the political risk of formally proposing
cuts to Social Security and Medicare in his annual budget in an effort to
demonstrate his willingness to compromise with Republicans and revive
prospects for a long-term deficit-reduction deal, administration officials
say.
Once again, a Democratic president is conceding to the GOP "frame" of
austerity being vital to the future of America, when it was the Republicans
who ran up the deficit - after Clinton left Bush a balanced budget - with a
profligate tax cut for the super rich, two wars, and things like a
multi-billion gift to the pharmaceutical industry by prohibiting government
negotiations on drug prices in Medicare Part D.
This amidst a historical moment when income redistribution and asset
ownership disparities have reached record levels in the US. But Obama
appears to have an aversion to discussing or rectifying a morally
unacceptable imbalance in wealth in America.
In return, Obama will get some crumbs of revenue enhancement, but take at a
look at some of his leaked proposed reductions:
Deficits would be reduced another $930 billion through 2023 as a result of
spending cuts and other cost-saving changes to domestic programs, and $200
billion more due to reduced interest payments on the federal debt.
Mr. Obama's proposed spending reductions include about $400 billion from
health programs and $200 billion from other areas, including farm subsidies,
federal employee retirement programs, the Postal Service and the
unemployment compensation system.
Cutting domestic programs such as pensions and unemployment?
In its defense, the White House claims that it is proposing increased
infrastructure investment (too little) and more taxes on the wealthy (not a
whole lot more).
Meanwhile the elderly on a pittance of Social Security will have imposed on
them the dreaded chained CPI, says the NYT:
Besides the tax increases that most Republicans continue to oppose, Mr.
Obama's budget will propose a new inflation formula that would have the
effect of reducing cost-of-living payments for Social Security benefits,
though with financial protections for low-income and very old beneficiaries,
administration officials said. The idea, known as chained C.P.I., has
infuriated some Democrats and advocacy groups to Mr. Obama's left, and they
have already mobilized in opposition.
Obama either continues to believe in the now inexcusably naïve notion of
"bi-partisanship" or he is, as some will argue, at heart a fiscal corporate
neo-liberal Wall Street true believer:
Together with the $2.5 trillion in deficit reductions that Mr. Obama and
Congressional Republicans have agreed to since 2010, that would bring the
total deficit reduction to more than $4.3 trillion over 10 years by the
administration's computations - just over the goal that both parties have
set for stabilizing the growth of the national debt.
The NYT, which clearly received the leak about the Obama budget from White
House sources, is reflecting an Oval Office viewpoint that the president is
compromising in order to win over "moderate" Republican votes. Say what?
Earth to planet Obama: have you learned nothing from continually starting
negotiations with the Republicans letting them advance to 10 yards of their
goal - and them allowing them to walk over into the end zone for a victory
twist and shake?
If you want to know the low threshold of weakness Obama is negotiating from,
read the viewpoint of his aides, as reported in the NYT:
Neither the president nor senior aides privately hold much hope that
Republican leaders - Mr. Boehner and Senator Mitch McConnell of Kentucky,
the Senate Republican leader - will compromise. So Mr. Obama's strategy of
reaching out to other Senate Republicans reflects a calculation that enough
of them might cut a budget deal with the Democratic Senate majority. If that
happens, the reasoning goes, a Senate-passed compromise would put pressure
on the House to go along.
Uh, so the White House can't get even a basically Republican budget passed -
with some crumbs of federal spending. They have to, as they see it, concede
grovel and pray.
Bill Clinton said a long time back: "We [Democrats] have got to be strong.
When we look weak in a time where people feel insecure, we lose. When people
feel uncertain, they'd rather have somebody who's strong and wrong than
somebody's who's weak and right."
Doesn't Obama run the danger, in his budget and many of his legislative
proposals of appearing both weak and wrong?
Or is it that he actually believes in what he is proposing?
BuzzFlash at Truthout is not clairvoyant, so we can't say.
But history will judge him - and the seniors, unemployed, and poor who watch
helplessly -- as President Obama thrusts a stake through the heart of the
New Deal, while perpetuating a system of systemic oligarchy.
(Photo: DonkeyHotey)

Error! Hyperlink reference not valid.
Friday, 05 April 2013 16:52
Obama Allegedly to Cutback Social Security and Medicare in New Budget,
Accepts GOP Austerity Cat Food War on the Unwealthy
http://www.reddit.com/submithttp://www.reddit.com/submit
. font sizeError! Hyperlink reference not valid.Error! Hyperlink
reference not valid.
MARK KARLIN, EDITOR OF BUZZFLASH AT TRUTHOUT
 It's back to the Simpson-Bowles cat food for the elderly and poor budget as
far as the White House is concerned, according to The New York Times (NYT)
on Friday:
President Obama next week will take the political risk of formally proposing
cuts to Social Security and Medicare in his annual budget in an effort to
demonstrate his willingness to compromise with Republicans and revive
prospects for a long-term deficit-reduction deal, administration officials
say.
Once again, a Democratic president is conceding to the GOP "frame" of
austerity being vital to the future of America, when it was the Republicans
who ran up the deficit - after Clinton left Bush a balanced budget - with a
profligate tax cut for the super rich, two wars, and things like a
multi-billion gift to the pharmaceutical industry by prohibiting government
negotiations on drug prices in Medicare Part D.
This amidst a historical moment when income redistribution and asset
ownership disparities have reached record levels in the US. But Obama
appears to have an aversion to discussing or rectifying a morally
unacceptable imbalance in wealth in America.
In return, Obama will get some crumbs of revenue enhancement, but take at a
look at some of his leaked proposed reductions:
Deficits would be reduced another $930 billion through 2023 as a result of
spending cuts and other cost-saving changes to domestic programs, and $200
billion more due to reduced interest payments on the federal debt.
Mr. Obama's proposed spending reductions include about $400 billion from
health programs and $200 billion from other areas, including farm subsidies,
federal employee retirement programs, the Postal Service and the
unemployment compensation system.
Cutting domestic programs such as pensions and unemployment?
In its defense, the White House claims that it is proposing increased
infrastructure investment (too little) and more taxes on the wealthy (not a
whole lot more).
Meanwhile the elderly on a pittance of Social Security will have imposed on
them the dreaded chained CPI, says the NYT:
Besides the tax increases that most Republicans continue to oppose, Mr.
Obama's budget will propose a new inflation formula that would have the
effect of reducing cost-of-living payments for Social Security benefits,
though with financial protections for low-income and very old beneficiaries,
administration officials said. The idea, known as chained C.P.I., has
infuriated some Democrats and advocacy groups to Mr. Obama's left, and they
have already mobilized in opposition.
Obama either continues to believe in the now inexcusably naïve notion of
"bi-partisanship" or he is, as some will argue, at heart a fiscal corporate
neo-liberal Wall Street true believer:
Together with the $2.5 trillion in deficit reductions that Mr. Obama and
Congressional Republicans have agreed to since 2010, that would bring the
total deficit reduction to more than $4.3 trillion over 10 years by the
administration's computations - just over the goal that both parties have
set for stabilizing the growth of the national debt.
The NYT, which clearly received the leak about the Obama budget from White
House sources, is reflecting an Oval Office viewpoint that the president is
compromising in order to win over "moderate" Republican votes. Say what?
Earth to planet Obama: have you learned nothing from continually starting
negotiations with the Republicans letting them advance to 10 yards of their
goal - and them allowing them to walk over into the end zone for a victory
twist and shake?
If you want to know the low threshold of weakness Obama is negotiating from,
read the viewpoint of his aides, as reported in the NYT:
Neither the president nor senior aides privately hold much hope that
Republican leaders - Mr. Boehner and Senator Mitch McConnell of Kentucky,
the Senate Republican leader - will compromise. So Mr. Obama's strategy of
reaching out to other Senate Republicans reflects a calculation that enough
of them might cut a budget deal with the Democratic Senate majority. If that
happens, the reasoning goes, a Senate-passed compromise would put pressure
on the House to go along.
Uh, so the White House can't get even a basically Republican budget passed -
with some crumbs of federal spending. They have to, as they see it, concede
grovel and pray.
Bill Clinton said a long time back: "We [Democrats] have got to be strong.
When we look weak in a time where people feel insecure, we lose. When people
feel uncertain, they'd rather have somebody who's strong and wrong than
somebody's who's weak and right."
Doesn't Obama run the danger, in his budget and many of his legislative
proposals of appearing both weak and wrong?
Or is it that he actually believes in what he is proposing?
BuzzFlash at Truthout is not clairvoyant, so we can't say.
But history will judge him - and the seniors, unemployed, and poor who watch
helplessly -- as President Obama thrusts a stake through the heart of the
New Deal, while perpetuating a system of systemic oligarchy.
(Photo: DonkeyHotey)

Error! Hyperlink reference not valid.


_______________________________________________
Blind-Democracy mailing list
Blind-Democracy@octothorp.org
http://www.octothorp.org/mailman/listinfo/blind-democracy

_______________________________________________
Blind-Democracy mailing list
Blind-Democracy@octothorp.org
http://www.octothorp.org/mailman/listinfo/blind-democracy

_______________________________________________  Blind-Democracy mailing list  Blind-Democracy@octothorp.org  http://www.octothorp.org/mailman/listinfo/blind-democracy

---

_______________________________________________
Blind-Democracy mailing list
Blind-Democracy@octothorp.org
http://www.octothorp.org/mailman/listinfo/blind-democracy