Wealth inequity is not a by-product — it’s the goal.
If you read here regularly, you know that Pete Peterson, the crazed billionaire who lives, breathes, eats and … well … to take down Social Security — a man who has spent a half billion dollars on that soulless psychopathic project — just held a Washington DC “summit” aimed at killing what he loves to hate.
Your safety net. Granny needs some catfood in her diet, because U.S. income inequity hasn’t topped out yet. There’s still room on the upside.
The news — at that “summit” spoke the Big Dog himself, “Catfood Bill” Clinton (h/t digby for the quote and for leaning on this hard):
“Our party’s problem is, we are always reluctant to give up the gains of the past to create the future,” Bill Clinton told the audience at the Pete Peterson’s fiscal summit. “Democrats are reluctant to commit to longer-term health-care savings; they don’t want to touch Social Security.”
That’s all you need to know. What digby said: “I think it’s going to happen this time.”
Who’s helping make it happen? How about Nancy Pelosi? How about “your” Progressive Congressional Caucus? Yes, these loveable madcaps are rumoring it about (I have grapevine ears) that they’re really playing some super-smart chess of their own — acing the Republicans at their own game.
I agree — this is what they want us to think they’re doing. This may even be what they do think they’re doing. But that doesn’t make it what they really are doing. What they really are doing is adding their voices to the roar for “entitlement reform.” And doing it rather well, thank you.
How’s this for entitlement reform:
You’re not entitled to the name “progressive” unless you act like one.
Is that wrong? Prove it wrong. With deeds.
Action opportunity — I still like freeway blogging in Pelosi’s district. It’s cheap, and a determined, persistent bunch of self-enabling progressives can maybe make some noise. Besides, the “ex-liberal” slogans just write themselves. Here’s a few:
“Ex-liberal Nancy Pelosi supports Catfood for Granny. Thanks, Nancy.”
“Nancy stands with Steny — Let’s reduce Social Security benefits just as soon as we’re safely re-elected.”
Or more playfully:
“Nancy & Steny, sitting in a tree
Killing Social Secur-i-ty”
I’d add a little picture to that last one. Might make the news.
How bad does gavel-ready Nancy need to keep her fundraising “brand” — the thing she wants you to think she is? You could find out. There are lots of ways to de-brand progressives who act badly.
Remember — you don’t need permission to act. Just think it through first — find the leverage points (like branding), don’t be violent, and press. (Joe Sudbay did just that at the 2010 Blogger Roundtable. All it takes is courage and action.)
And finally, a little video for your midnight freakout fun. Here’s Catfood Clinton and BFF Paul Ryan, another “summit” featured speaker, fixing to fix you good. Hands across the aisle:
More from Clinton here.
And here’s our “fierce defender” — winner of the 2008 presidential ad campaign — perhaps making plans for the looming lame duck session:
They don’t want what you want, folks. They want what they want. “Catfood Bill” has his, and you can’t have yours. What digby said: “I think it’s going to happen this time.” Ready to fight a tad more effectively? Me too. Hey, we might even win.
(To follow on Twitter or to send links: @Gaius_Publius)