Bernie/Biden Social Security feud

[geomancer]

Politifact: Did Biden laud a Paul Ryan proposal to cut Social Security as Bernie Sanders’ campaign said?

"Our ruling
A Sanders campaign newsletter said, "In 2018, Biden lauded Paul Ryan for proposing cuts to Social Security and Medicare."

That stems from a speech Biden gave in 2018 in which he spoke about Ryan. Biden appeared to be mocking Ryan, not praising him.

The Sanders campaign omitted what Biden said next: the importance of protecting Social Security and Medicare and to change the tax code, which he said benefitted the mega rich. Overall, the point of Biden’s speech was to criticize tax cuts for the rich and call for more help to the middle class.

The Sanders campaign plucked out part of what Biden said but omitted the full context of his comments.

We rate this statement False. "

[phredo]

Check these out:

Joe Biden's history of supporting Social Security and Medicaid cuts

The Week: Joe Biden's history of austerity

The Intercept: Joe Biden Has Advocated Cutting Social Security for 40 Years

[M/M]

Maybe not false:

Common Dreams: 'The Facts Are Very Clear': Sanders Team Hits Back After Biden Claims Social Security Video Was 'Doctored'

Politifact: Did Biden laud a Paul Ryan proposal to cut Social Security as Bernie Sanders’ campaign said?

"Our ruling
...
The Sanders campaign plucked out part of what Biden said but omitted the full context of his comments.

We rate this statement False. "

[M/M]

More - including a media report card of sorts:

Common Dreams: 23 Corporate Media Headlines Obscure Biden's Social Security Lies
Headlines like "Joe Biden Falsely Claims that Bernie Sanders Is Spreading a 'Doctored Video'" were nowhere to be found

This article points to lack of even a 2-party system:
Common Dreams: 'Hobnobbing With Billionaires in Davos,' Trump Admits—If Reelected—He Will Seek to Cut Social Security, Medicaid, and Medicare

Maybe not false:

Common Dreams: 'The Facts Are Very Clear': Sanders Team Hits Back After Biden Claims Social Security Video Was 'Doctored'

[Barton Stone]

Shall we rename this thread "Bullshit from Biden?" I think Bernie Sanders has proven his reputation for integrity enough to be more respected than this. Better still, something neutral like "Sanders-Biden Exchange?"

[Shepherd]

I agree with Barton and would request that Barry change the incorrect title of this message from "Bullshit from Bernie" to something else. I plan to vote for Bernie Sanders.

Shall we rename this thread "Bullshit from Biden?" I think Bernie Sanders has proven his reputation for integrity enough to be more respected than this. Better still, something neutral like "Sanders-Biden Exchange?"

[american dream]

I agree with Barton and Shepard... Bernie is the LEAST bullshit of 'em all!

[wisewomn]

I am beginning to see a pattern in all this recent news about squabbling among the Dem candidates. It looks to me like the powers-that-be are marshaling their forces to undermine anyone who poses a threat to Biden's candidacy, Biden being a true Establishment Dem., much as Clinton was in the last election.

Additionally, Mark Zuckerberg was getting grilled regularly by the Feds for several months about FB's role in the dissemination of fake news and overarching influence. There was a lot of press about limiting FB's scope, etc. Then. last week Zuckerberg announced that he was going to allow fake news to be published on FB after all and the Feds apparently have stopped harassing him. We all know it's in Putin's/Trump's interests to allow that kind of crap to be disseminated as widely as possible. It worked so well in 2016, after all. FB is the perfect medium to do that.

I think there's a real risk of the lefties and the Dems getting fractured in the coming months by maneuvers such as these, all of which will guarantee another victory by Trump/Putin. And I think we all need to be wary and keep cool heads.

[phredo]

I agree completely with your first paragraph but not the remainder (I think). It seems to me that politicians should be able to speak their views, and I don't see that doing that benefits one side or another. Since we know big media interests can censor or nearly censor views they don't like (look at how the media treats Sanders), why should we give them the power to decide which views to allow? I don't even have a FB account so I'm not too up on FB, but when I was trying to find some examples of what you are talking about, I came across an article in the Guardian about a Republican 30 second ad. The Guardian said, "The 30-second video falsely claims that Joe Biden “promised Ukraine a billion dollars if they fired the prosecutor investigating his son’s company”.

I watched the ad, and while it had the usual slimy quality of many political ads, I would not say it was "false", maybe a bit misleading in the framing. See what you think. As far as I can see, "the devil is in the details"--Biden did bribe the government to fire a prosecutor: the questionable part was to what extent the prosecutor was involved in investigating Burisma. There is disagreement about that. Should the ad be censored? Should the DNC be censored from running derogatory ads about Bernie? Maybe there shouldn't be any political advertising at all allowed on FB, but then what about TV? Maybe not there either? Maybe we should just learn about elections from other individuals and not allow any paid ads anywhere?

Disallowing paid ads on FB is a slippery slope, I think, and there's a lot to consider. One thing I'm pretty clear about is that I don't want one party to get to decide what's true or false, and it sounds like you might be tending in that direction with your comment about Trump/Putin deciding the election.

I am beginning to see a pattern in all this recent news about squabbling among the Dem candidates. It looks to me like the powers-that-be are marshaling their forces to undermine anyone who poses a threat to Biden's candidacy, ...

[wisewomn]

I see your points, Phredo, and they are good ones. I am thinking more of the flagrant lies and distortions that Russia promulgated on FB in the last election and how they were linked to phony sites that seemed to validate them and how many people were swayed by those lies. Pizzagate comes to mind but there were many others. Unfortunately, my cluttered brain has not retained them specifically, just the general fact that the Russians put a lot of crap on FB on fake platforms and elsewhere about Clinton, and many gullible people fell for it. I'm pretty sure it will happen again this time, given how unconcerned Trump appears to be about the election (never mind the trial). Mind you, I spend very little time on FB, but the entire thing received a lot of press after the fact, and investigations definitively showed that the disinformation was provided by brilliant Russian hackers. And of course FB made a boatload of money off of all those fake platforms.

And, yes, the Democratic Establishment did their best to pull the rug out from under Sanders in the last election and they were successful.

I agree completely with your first paragraph but not the remainder (I think)....

[phredo]

I'm conflicted about to what extent "money to advertise equals freedom of speech." I don't like the idea that those with the most money get to have more influence, but it seems hard to know where to draw the line.

I also get a bit "triggered" when Russia/Putin influence comes up. I think part of it comes from my distaste for the old Cold War blaming of the Soviet Union for everything. But there is more, and that's that I believe that Russia, through the agency of Putin, is generally a fairly benign influence in the world, especially when compared to the US. I don't like that they make a lot of their foreign exchange from selling oil, and I have some misgivings about their (and Putin's) tendency to back what could be loosely called, without going into it, Christian Identity, which carries with it some social consequences I view as negative (and a few I think are positive). I say "misgivings" rather than "opposition" because I also think other countries have the right to their own points of view on those sorts of issues whether they are Christian, Moslem, animist, or anything else, tempered of course by what objective good or harm I see. But I generally like Putin and think he is a force for world peace and cooperation, again, especially compared to US actions. For example, to get to the issue you raised, if Russia somehow did some skulduggery in the 2012 election, if certainly pales in comparison to the part played by big money American meddling. And, if Russia did have something to do with exposing the DNC-Hillary emails about keeping Bernie from the nomination, how bad was that? If it resulted in Trump winning, that sounds pretty much like Clinton's position today, e.g., that she likely wouldn't support Sanders if he turned out to be the Democrat candidate.

I see your points, Phredo, and they are good ones. I am thinking more of the flagrant lies and distortions that Russia promulgated on FB in the last election and how they were linked to phony sites that seemed to validate them and how many people were swayed by those lies. Pizzagate comes to mind but there were many others. Unfortunately, my cluttered brain has not retained them specifically, just the general fact that the Russians put a lot of crap on FB on fake platforms and elsewhere about Clinton, and many gullible people fell for it. I'm pretty sure it will happen again this time, given how unconcerned Trump appears to be about the election (never mind the trial). Mind you, I spend very little time on FB, but the entire thing received a lot of press after the fact, and investigations definitively showed that the disinformation was provided by brilliant Russian hackers. And of course FB made a boatload of money off of all those fake platforms.

And, yes, the Democratic Establishment did their best to pull the rug out from under Sanders in the last election and they were successful.

[SonomaPatientsCoop]

Well, I'll be contrary here and say I liked the original thread title better. And this thread gives a pretty good example of how partisan our politics have become- BS can be ignored, spun, and explained away. This is exactly why we are in the situation we are in...and why things are not going to get better no matter who "wins" this election...

Bernies campaign piece was, quite simply, bullshit. It took something Biden said out of context. Now... to be fair- it IS entirely possible his staffers were working from a transcript- which looks different from the actual event. Regardless- a "mea culpa" was due...

To be clear- I'm not a Biden fan. Nor a "Bernie Bro". In fact I don't really like any of the candidates. And I will likely vote 3rd party as usual...

But that said.... I'm not sure if the social programs would exist as well today if it was not for the cuts made years ago.

There seems to be this belief here that we can just to whatever we deem "right" costs be damned. As we stand right now- with, ahem, the party of fiscal responsibility in power- the budget deficit is expected to hit $1 TRILLION dollars this year. The US debt is currently ~ $23.16 TRILLION . That's well over $65K for every man, woman and child in this country.

And when, a couple months ago...I started adding up the costs of all of Warrens plans (because she has a plan for everything.... and while her #'s are generous to her to say the least, it's similar to Bernies plans) I almost had a heart attack.

We are a failing nation. Saddling our childrens, childrens, children's, grandkids with a debt because we want to not just keep living our lifestyle- but improve it. And we have a no credit limit card to live out our fantasies.

And part of this fantasy is that an outsider- whether True, Sanders, or Warren is somehow going to tear down the status quo, "drain the swamp", and rebuild America. Well...we've already seen how well one iteration of this has worked. And Sanders? A career politician who, as one of our longest serving congress critters..has accomplished...zilch. Who, I can count on both hands the number of supporters he has in congress...with fingers left over. When you remove the congress critters who have saved only 2 years... one hand with fingers left over. While I largely agree with Sanders and Warren... I'm sure most people here are old enough to remember Jimmy Carter (who had a D congress btw)... a well intentioned man who could not get anything dome- and led us into 12 years of Reagan/Bush....

I'll be honest... all signs (the inverted yield curve on debt instruments this summer foremost among them)...we are headed to a recession. If the idea is to tear down the system and start over... I may damn well vote for Trump. Let him ride the country into the ground. I don't think Sanders or Warren can actually get anything through congress. And if the economy is going to tank...whichever party is in power will not see office for over a decade. Maybe 2.

And of course I find it ironic that CA... a state that is falling apart. A state that is the has a housing crisis. A homeless crisis. Is THE most unfriendly state to trying to do business in the nation. That has the worst roads. The worst infrastructure. That is seeing an exodus of people fleeing... should decide to move up their primaries to have more say in the national election...because of course we've done so well at running our own state?

[M/M]

Another clarifying article that reveals issues during several presidencies :

Truthout: Biden’s Failure to Confront His History on Social Security Isn’t Reassuring

[phredo]

I think you make some good points. To discuss them all would take a good while, so I just want to throw in a few rejoinders.

Expensive social programs are hard to figure out unless one is an economist, and even they don't agree on much. But don't you think that a Medicare for all system would be cheaper than what we have now? It would cost much more to us as taxpayers, of course, but it would (or could) eliminate so many overall costs: the bookkeeping, the advertising, the inflated drug costs. And how much better it would be in terms of bankruptcies and the anxieties associated with paying. How could it not be better and cheaper?

The other one is about California. There's a lot wrong with it, but try as I do (and I do!) I can't come up with a better place to live. Of course some of it is the natural beauty, the ocean, and all that, but the other thing is that diversity and sophistication here makes it more interesting to than other places. People are treated better here than other places: even with all the many defects I see in identity politics and wokeness, they create a sort of inclusiveness that I like overall.

... I'm not sure if the social programs would exist as well today if it was not for the cuts made years ago. ...

...And of course I find it ironic that CA... a state that is falling apart. ...

[podfish]

Expensive social programs are hard to figure out unless one is an economist, and even they don't agree on much. But don't you think that a Medicare for all system would be cheaper than what we have now? ....

The other one is about California. There's a lot wrong with it, but try as I do (and I do!) I can't come up with a better place to live.....t diversity and sophistication here makes it more interesting to than other places. People are treated better here than other places: even with all the many defects I see in identity politics and wokeness, they create a sort of inclusiveness that I like overall.

unfortunately we don't get to start from a blank slate. If we could, starting with no health care system at all, and were pitched two solutions: MFA or the current setup, I don't think anyone would pick this monstrosity. It's only inertia and FOTU that makes the status quo at all acceptable. And it's easy to complain about identity politics and wokeness, but there's a reason they exist. When people tell you they're not being treated fairly, it's pretty cruel to reply that you don't think it's a problem worth solving.