Widgetized Section
Go to Admin » Appearance » Widgets » and move Gabfire Widget: Social into that MastheadOverlay zone
Lawrence O’Donnell Scolds Firebaggers For Their Obama Ignorance
On MSNBC’s The Last Word Tonight, host Lawrence O’Donnell sat the firebaggers down for a brief lesson on Barack Obama and presidential politics 101.
The video:
Visit msnbc.com for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy
Here is the transcript of the relevant segment:
Outrage notes have been struck today in the liberal blogosphere and elsewhere that the president was entertaining modest modifications in Medicare and Social Security that could save trillions, even though liberal democrats in the past have done exactly that. the president’s willingness to discuss raising the retirement age in Medicare or Social Security has met rage from some who don’t know that the eligibility age of social security has already been raised, that a gradual increase of a retirement age was enacted in 1983, increasing the full retirement age from 65 to 67, and that increase had the support of liberals in the House and the Senate.
Now, if raising the retirement age is in principle bad, then it would follow logically that people who even oppose discussing it would be in favor of repealing the increase in the retirement age that has already occurred, yet none of them have ever proposed repealing the current increase in the retirement age. Some of the new-found liberal defenders of Social Security that will reject any discussions in the program were voting Republican back in the ’80s when the retirement age was raised or not voting at all, not even bothering to register to vote. Some, of course, were not yet of voting age. They are all capable of getting up to speed on these issues reasonably quickly, but until they know more history, until they know where we have been, they will not have any comprehension of where we might be going.
The president’s been attacked today for considering the means testing of Medicare, as you heard him describe, the possibility of rich people like him paying a little more on premiums and co-pays on Medicare. As rich people on Medicare already know, that’s nothing new, they already pay more. The president is willing to entertain a discussion in which they might pay even more, and suddenly some liberals have found what is, in effect, a small tax increase on the rich that they can oppose. All such objections from the president’s base of supporters are actually — this is a bit counter intuitive, they are actually helpful to the president.
Adam Green, the head of the progressive change committee and a friend of this show has been among the loudest and most effective progressive objectors to the president’s consideration of cuts in Medicare and Social Security spending. Today his group delivered 200,000 petitions to President Obama’s campaign headquarters warning about entitlement cuts. These are 200,000 people saying they will not contribute money to or volunteer hours to an Obama reelection campaign if he agrees to any cuts in Medicare, and social security spending during these debt negotiations with the republicans, and these are people who have contributed to president Obama before and have volunteered for him before. These protestors are actually helping the president’s negotiating position, strengthening it, as well as his public appearance of being reasonable in the eyes of independence and swing voters by adding credibility to statements like this.
Apparently, Lawrence O’Donnell has also grown tired of the firebagger and far left’s ignorance of both history and politics. The problem is that the far left doesn’t understand political language. If you go back and read exactly what President Obama said at each of his press conferences, he never said that he would cut Medicare or Social Security. He simply said he would listen. He never has said that he would actually cut anything.
I too do not wish to demean the achievement of the PCCC. A couple hundred thousand people is a nice number, but these fine citizens are so misguided that they actually believed they were putting pressure on Obama or making him stand up to the GOP. What they are really doing is providing Obama with political cover. As O’Donnell said, the PCCC has just validated Obama’s claim that he is taking heat from his base.
In reality, Adam Green has just done Obama a gigantic political favor. The president now has evidence for his illusion that he is actually giving something up. Thanks, firebaggers. We owe you one. It is really interesting that when these people say they want nothing changed, they are helping the rich collect Social Security and not pay their fair share for Medicare. Talk about progressive values!!!!
The one thing that the far left and far right both have in common is that they are so attached to their emotion and ideology that they sacrifice facts and history to the altar of their feelings. As we already know the Tea Party and the firebaggers already share a common leader, so it is not surprising that their unity of heart is also a unity of mind.
Who would have guessed that both the baggers tea and fire would have the shared goal of not raising taxes on the rich?
I admire the passion of the firebaggers, no matter how misdirected it may be, but in the Democratic family they play the role of the weird cousin who at every holiday dinner manages to embarrass the rest of the family with their ignorance and antics.
Lawrence O’Donnell did his best to enlighten them but if there is one universal truth about firebaggers, it is that they never learn.
Related Posts :
Finding out the identity of the 47% videographer was nice, but Scott Prouty's real contribution is that ...
On his program The Last Word tonight, Lawrence O’Donnell had to sit down and rewrite Glenn Beck after he ...
The Obama White House rebuked the war on terror by confirming that Boston bombing suspect Dzhokhar A. Ts ...
Last night on his MSNBC program Countdown, Keith Olbermann spent almost 12 minutes of his show criticizi ...
President Obama told House Republicans that they need to compromise and he will not be cleaning up their ...
41 Responses to Lawrence O’Donnell Scolds Firebaggers For Their Obama Ignorance
english saddle
Jul. 16th, 2011 at 1:20 am
I just figured they were deliberately bit seeing it. Never realized they were so dumb they bought that line. Why are they screaming tonight? Because he might cut Ss for the rich.
Thanks for the cover baggers.
Neil Sagan
Jul. 16th, 2011 at 12:25 pm
Lawrence O’Donnel may not be the last word on all of the politics at play in this debate. Consider this if you care about job creation.
Oldsun
Jul. 16th, 2011 at 12:53 pm
“Social Security to help relieve the jobless crisis, and when Jane Hamsher this week front paged an article by James K. Galbraith” The most asinine thing I read, lowering the age really and do what then when the money runs out??? Again Obama knew that any deal with taxes would not pass PLEASE let the writer of the article that you linked here that they have no understanding of politics and should not write anything about politics.
DJ
Jul. 16th, 2011 at 6:31 pm
Who is Jane Hamsser and why should I care? What does she have to do with anything?
english saddle
Jul. 16th, 2011 at 1:05 pm
Why would I read fdl when they worked with the tea party to kill healthcare! !! There are only 2 people over there I like to read but I had to give them up because I do not support BP or the tea party.
Neil Sagan
Jul. 16th, 2011 at 4:40 pm
Bush unified Democrats of all stripes.
Obama is dividing the party by virtue of his rhetoric and policy for one reason, he believes there are more votes to be had in the middle than on the left.
english saddle
Jul. 16th, 2011 at 5:33 pm
But why work with the tea party? How could I trust anyone who did that? His can you blame Obama for divisiness when you are working with the teabaggers and Racists against the first black president! I wont have anything to do with anyone who sides with racists. And they are against unions! Unions are the middle class. I am middle class so no thank you.
Mike
Jul. 16th, 2011 at 6:27 pm
Since their PAC money from “Accountability Now” goes all to the leaders, not a penny to the candidates, the source is suspect. Bullsh*t is bullsh*t no matter who is dishing it out.
vander
Jul. 24th, 2011 at 10:56 pm
The problems we face today are
there because the people who work
for a living are outnumbered by those
who vote for a living.
Dan Bimrose
Jul. 16th, 2011 at 1:24 am
I must admit that I have always been a little mystified by Liberals who object to means testing for Medicare or Social Security. I am all for the wealthy getting a little less or paying a little more. Where is the problem with this?
Jason Easley
Jul. 16th, 2011 at 1:28 am
I agree, and I think having rigid inflexible positions like we oppose any and all changes to Social Security and Medicare results in a throwing the baby out with the bath water sort of mentality. Remember, when the left was known for being open minded?
Elaine
Jul. 16th, 2011 at 4:55 am
Hi, Dan,
The problem is that SS and Medicare will then be seen as welfare programs instead of programs from which ALL draw a benefit, not just the poor.
As the poor have no political clout, when these become programs just for the poor, they will go the way of AFDC and Medicaid with less and less respect for the individual and less funding.
Instead of separating citizens by income, every effort should be made to bring us under the same umbrella so that we all have skin in the game.
Mike Sax
Jul. 16th, 2011 at 10:03 am
Dan, the concern of means testing SS or Medicare is that it would turn it into a welfare program rather than what FDR had intended it to be: social insurance. If it’s just welfare for the poor it would lost it’s political support goes the thinking.
Doesn’t mean their fear is right. I don’t know that it would haev this effect. Obama’s point is that this would raise revenue, like Cliton’s deal(and O’Donnell who was there for this has spoken about it) in 1992 where he cut medicare benefits in exchage for raising taxes on the rich.
nk007
Jul. 17th, 2011 at 12:32 am
I qualified for medicare last year. I am middle class. Yet my medicare part B was means tested. I have to pay a premium for my medicare part B. I really don’t understand what the fuss is all about about means testing. Besides, is it fair for a retired member of congress to receive both Social Security and congressional pension while a retired worker, with no pension, gets only Social Security?
Green Genius
Jul. 16th, 2011 at 3:22 am
Some say you shouldn’t touch social security for the rich because it is egalitarian in we all have the program?
Sally
Jul. 16th, 2011 at 8:16 am
I took O’Donnell’s comments as meaning that what these people (and I admit it, I signed one!) did was a GOOD thing…so that Obama can go in and say, “look, I’m taking a lot of heat here from my folks for even mentioning means testing and cuts.” I also think the real thrust behind this is fear that the President, who has been known to give away everything but the farmhouse in the name of compromise (think single payer, which would have solved a bunch of problems and the GOP knew it) would not sell us out on these programs. I know that I signed it, but have no intention of voting GOP, ever again in my life! I wanted to take a stand for SS and Medicare, to show that they are vital to the health of this nation. Obama gets that.
Henry
Jul. 16th, 2011 at 3:30 pm
The President didn’t “give away” single payer or the public option. Neither of these had a chance in hell of passing at the federal level, and would’ve been used by opponents of HCR to demonize it even further.
George
Jul. 16th, 2011 at 3:54 pm
Is there something about establishing voting records that people don’t understand? I know the Repubulicans understand this very well because of the votes to “support the troops” they had when they ran the show and the Iraq war.
Most Americans, from the polling I’ve seen, support single payer and the best way to get their “representatives” to represent them is to make their “representatives” establish a voting record on the issues (this assumes the American electorate is sophisticated enough to vote on issues). Obama and Reid gave their entrenched buddies political cover by not having a vote on single payer or a public option (and I suspect Reid was only following orders). If the polls are correct and the American people support single payer than while it may not have passed on the first vote over time, with voting records to be challenged for not supporting it, it would pass in the future.
And, one last point, the polls I’ve seen say the American people, by large percentages, do not want to see SS benefits cut. When SS was restructured (the Greenspan Commission) a regressive tax solution was used (in addition to incrementally raising the retirement age). If one believes in progressive taxes, and I do, then one has no logical basis to oppose lifting the SS payroll tax limit – which would solve SS’s 25 years down the road financial problems.
And finally, solving the employment problem is the biggest way to trim the deficit.
Dee
Jul. 16th, 2011 at 6:08 pm
Single payer was never going to pass the federal level as Henry said. The reason why they did not pass it is because of the bluedogs in the Senate. The were doing what their constituents wanted. Obama and Reid provided cover for nobody. The American people also support not raising the debt ceiling and balanced budget amendment. Should they pass that.
Shiva (Moderator)
Jul. 16th, 2011 at 6:18 pm
and the worst part was that the American people supported a single-payer and the blue dog Democrats let them down.
Dan
Jul. 16th, 2011 at 8:21 pm
Read again what George wrote. Single-payer might not have passed, but its being put to a vote could have been the first step to getting it passed in the future (by getting blue dog “democrats” on record against it, and thus increasing the possibility of a future primary opponent unseating them). It also would have moved the debate to the left, allowing for a better compromise (like the public option) rather than RomneyCare, which is what we got.
All this assumes that Tom Daschle “misspoke” when he said the Prez took the P.O. off the table months before he abandoned it publicly; obviously, if he never had any interest in getting it, then there’s no point in discussing tactics that might have brought success on the issue.
And bringing up issues where public support is on the wrong side has very little to do with how you leverage public support when you have it on your side. Yes, the public can be wrong sometimes; should that be an excuse for not fighting for what they want when it’s the right thing?
I also note that you failed to address George’s point that passing a jobs program would be the best solution to the deficit, and that is what Obama should be fighting for, not “reform” of Social Security (which is not an “entitlement”, btw).
Henry
Jul. 16th, 2011 at 8:14 pm
This is the difference between ineffectual activism and actual governing; the difference between being satisfied with making a “statement” and actually making progress. Democrats had been trying to get HCR passed for decades, and the choice came down to getting most what we wanted now and working on establishing the missing elements later, or staring over from scratch; from zero. The choice was obvious. Why do you think Kucinich, with all of his talk of not voting for the bill, voted for the bill? It wasn’t because the Obama administration twisted his arm. It was because he was smart enough to know that passing that bill was enormous progress toward what he truly wanted. The “Kill The Bill” movement (if you can call it a movement) was the most idiotic thing imaginable. Hamsher and others who supported it see passing policy as a spectator sport, with no real regard to how real people’s lives are effected; “people with pre-existing conditions? Screw you! I didn’t get my single payer/public option pony.”
“Recent young adults who need to stay on their parents coverage? Screw you! I didn’t get my single payer/public option pony.”
acrosebud
Jul. 21st, 2011 at 11:22 am
I signed as well – wanting to take a stand on SS & Medicare. Also, fearing IF the president made even a $1.00 cut to these programs – the Republicans TV ads would immediately start up with, “Obama plans to cut your SS and Medicare” and his re-election chances with seniors are gone. At least with “the gang of six” proposal – this might not happen, but I’m not really convinced.
800t
Jul. 21st, 2011 at 11:55 am
He meant it’s a good thing gives PO cover. But don’t be fooled by the PCCC they don’t give a dime to candidates so don’t send them your money. Send $ to a candidate direct.
Watch out for the Firebaggers they’re so full of hate they’re plotting new names to call anyone who supports the President. It’s a sickness over there. F*ck that. I fought for this country. I know a traitor when I see one. They just can’t admit that they’ve been had by g.o.p. jane, firebagging cult leader. They make the Teabaggers look reasonable.
Sandra
Jul. 16th, 2011 at 8:52 am
Lawrence has a good insight because he has worked in that circle. His analysis has been enlightening.
Lee Ann
Jul. 16th, 2011 at 9:42 am
Working for a medical clinic, I see that the wealthier patients have not only Medicare, but a better class of supplemental insurance as well as better medicine coverage. They could quite easily pay a little more for their Medicare, or receive slightly reduced benefits because they have better back up insurance and more income with which to pay what might be leftover after all insurance has paid. I also see the multitudes of elderly who scrape by with only Medicare coverage and then struggle to pay what Medicare doesn’t, choosing between medical bils, medicine or food and utilities each month. And don’t even get me started on the people who have insurance but never meet the $1500-5000 yearly deductible so that in essence they only have catastrophic coverage, and most importantly the ones who have no coverage of any kind. I’d love to hear how Boehner, McConnell or Cantor would explain that without insurance coverage, it will cost them $120 to walk into the office the first time. “Oh, you don’t have that money, but your child has a really painful toothache/congestion/diabetes? Well, tough. Go find an Emergency Room where they have to take care of the kid. What? They don’t supply syringes, test strips or insulin? You can’t afford a dentist? Well, you should have purchased that family insurance coverage at $1400 a month. Oh, you say you only make minimum wage at your job?”. They are all such pompous asses and you know not one of them has ever lacked genuine medical or dental care, and will be guaranteed coverage as part of their government job. Pompous asses all….
Shiva (Moderator)
Jul. 16th, 2011 at 10:02 am
And the whole social networks depend on one thing. As many people working as possible. The one thing the GOP will never mention in reality
Pat Padrnos
Jul. 16th, 2011 at 10:04 am
Jason -
I saw this segment last night on the show. When he started, I realized we were in for a bit of a lesson – but worth sitting through. His experience and insight into how these “deals” are worked out was very interesting.
I was interested in your comment “The one thing that the far left and far right have in common is they are both so attached to their emotion etc.” I have discovered for myself this is all too true. I don’t really understand why, but it has been a gradual process. But – I must say in defense of that – after watching and listening to repubs and tpers and the incredible lies and justifications for their behavior I came by it honestly. See there – I am justifying my emotions!! Sorry.
Good article, as always.
Shiva (Moderator)
Jul. 16th, 2011 at 11:35 am
No one is trying to humilate you. Just point out who you are.
Always remember you are PART of what got Obama elected. But you do point out your incredible inability to look at the bigger picture
Shiva (Moderator)
Jul. 16th, 2011 at 1:36 pm
Well best of luck to you then especially with your tea party notion that no compromise is good compromise.
By being willing to compromise Obama has just crushed the GOP house republicans. I like that. I am not silly wnough to think Obama can do everything and have the GOP agree with him
Shiva (Moderator)
Jul. 16th, 2011 at 2:22 pm
I am not saying you favor them, I am saying you speak like them
I am not trying to be rude, but what is your point? You keep saying too much compromise but you have missed that the president by being for compromise has crushed the GOP. They are now a set of babbling fish with their heads out of water. And what did he give up? Nada, By appearing to move right Obama has single handedly stopped the GOP. But he didnt move to the right. I think youi want to say these things about Obama rahter than support him
I doubt I will lose anyone, as you have given no indication of what you are going to do. You have threatened saying Obama cant get along without you. Well, what are you going to do about it all in 2012?
Oldsun
Jul. 16th, 2011 at 12:29 pm
The whole problem here is that you are as most are in you group so tied to your ideology that you cannot see the big picture. Go back, listen, and hear what O’Donnell is saying. Obama knew that the GOP would not take any deal with tax hikes, Obama could have said I will not run for a second term but there have to be tax hikes and the GOP would have said NO. Get it; it is nothing more than gamesmanship, Obama was playing the political game. “…can he do it again WITHOUT us”; 86 million without you, so yes he can, you need Obama more than he needs you right now. Big tent yes but it is you and your kind that throw the temper tantrum here is a good example “… like his taking Warren out of the running for the new Consumer Protection Agency “. OK we all know that Warren would never be confirmed, so what you wanted next was a recess appointment that can only last for one session of the Senate. What good is that the Senate still will not confirm so she out in less than a year. Think before you go spraying garbage out of your mouth, because all of you are sounding like the Teabggers you hate so much.
Karen
Jul. 16th, 2011 at 12:33 pm
Are you aware that Social Security and Medicare are both means tested already?
karen brooks
Jul. 16th, 2011 at 7:47 pm
the Obama administration has let Fox News drive decisions for them.the media all stood by Fox instead of PO when he tried to cut them out of the press pool. RM has way too much power all around the world. It was going to take more than one man to put him down. I get mad about the dishonest tactics used by the right, so when the left starts saying the same crap, it’s really frustrating. Van Jones being let go was a low point. When people predicate thoughts on another president could have stood up to Fox, they’re full of it. Like Kucinich would have! Ha. The truth is that those a$$holes are EVIL and when the left joins in with them to destroy the only hope we have left, it burns me. We should be together fighting corporations and fox news.
Morna Erwin
Jul. 16th, 2011 at 2:45 pm
Thanks for saying my thoughts.
mel in oregon
Jul. 16th, 2011 at 2:52 pm
i don’t agree with o’donnell. my view is the increase in the retirement age past 65 was wrong to begin with & any further decreases in benefits to poor & middle class people receiving social security benefits they’ve worked their whole life for is wrong. there also shouldn’t be decreases of any sort to medicare for poor or middle class people. means testing for benefits is a good idea. someone making 500k a year should pay their own way for healthcare & retirement. after all almost anyone in this catagory has abused the system through all the entitlements they receive from the government such as yacht tax rebates, learjet tax rebates, rebates on hummers, country club memberships rebates, wine cellar rebates, horse rebates, stealing american indian land & then getting a rebate on mining, timber, oil, uranium or gold profits. o’donnell has accused the left of being uninformed. haha! he’s not very knowledgeable at all on american history, the tax history & favors received from the government of corporate america, the tax loopholes allowed by the law to only the wealthy. he also is very poorly informed on economics, finance, state & constitutional law & all the corruption done by wallstreet & the pentagon. i have accused the majority of readers & writers on this website of being toadies for obama. not all of you are. you are though innocents betraying your own interests by not informing yourselves. have a good weekend, i’m going fishing.
Henry
Jul. 16th, 2011 at 3:49 pm
Adam Green and Jane Hamsher(along with Glen Greenwald) have turned fundraising off anti-Obama outrage into a business. This is part of how they make their living. Don’t believe me, check this out: theobamadiary.com/2011/07...
They’re constantly on the look out for the next outrage that they can use to exploit people through panic-mongering: “Obama’s hatching a secret deal to destroy !!! Send me money so I can stop him!” Jane Hamsher’s “Accountability Now” PAC bills itself as a recruiter and supporter of primary challengers. But all her PAC seems to be doing is cutting check for Greenwald and Hamsher.
Henry
Jul. 16th, 2011 at 4:22 pm
Speaking of the next firebagger outrage, here it is: www.bloomberg.com/news/20...
Fire up the Accoutablility Now fund raising machine. Look to receive a BREAKING OUTRAGE ALERT email for Adam Green and the Progressive Change Committee: “Donate now to stop this travesty!!!”
The article mentions that Raj Date, a top deputy to Warren at the consumer bureau, is on the short list of candidates for director. Raj is a former banker with Deutsche Bank AG and Capital One Financial Corp. Now remember that Warren herself appointed Raj, along with Elizabeth Vale, a managing director at Morgan-Stanley, and Zixta Martinez, from Freddie Mac, to top positions with the CFPB. And it was noted at the time how silent the Professional Left was concerning her bringing in former bankers to serve in the Bureau: www.salon.com/technology/...
But you can bet that if one of these people is nominated for the Director position, the shouts of “SELLOUT” from firegaggers will be heard around the world (which to them is the bloggesphere).
SuperDoctorSerizawa
Jul. 16th, 2011 at 9:36 pm
No where did Lawrence use or even imply the hateful, derogatory term “firebagger”. Being neither a “firebagger” nor an “Obama-bot”, I am disgusted with the latter actively enjoying being played one side against the other. Divide and conquer, the repugs like to think. Good job. I don’t agree with Jane Hamsher on much, but find no need to play “my way or the highway” with her readers.
tim
Jul. 16th, 2011 at 9:44 pm
So Jane is her name. Thanks for that. This Jane is the goddess of unity according to you. Do not say one bad word about DEAR GODESS!
Wasn’t it Jane who called all Obama supporters “dumb motherfuc*ers on the front page of her website.” LOL. And who called obama “worst president ever”. How’s that “don’t divide us” thing working out for you?
CJS
Jul. 26th, 2011 at 8:45 am
Superb. Thank you very much.
I started calling them Left-baggers about a year ago (the full term is Professional Left-bagger Progresso Blameobamabots). And don’t forget, they and the Tea Set have a second commmon leader: the infamous Mrs. Arianna Breitbart, specialist in dishing out non-stop gratuitous borderline racist Obama-bashing to the Left (ironic, isn’t it?).