So the plan, as I understand it, is to slash support to the poor and elderly and raise the retirement age in order to afford lower income tax rates across the board, including corporate taxes, and this is called “fiscal responsibility”?

For further comment, see Paul Krugman, “Unserious People” and “Income and Life Expectancy“; and Kevin Drum, “Is the Deficit Commission Serious?” (executive summary: no).

But what really pissed me off this morning was the President.

President Obama is in Seoul, South Korea, where today he said lawmakers in the United States should hold off on comments about his fiscal commission’s proposals to slash the federal budget deficit through spending cuts, ending tax breaks, and a revamping of the Social Security system.

“Before anybody starts shooting down proposals, I think we need to listen, we need to gather up all the facts,” Obama told reporters….

…”We’re going to have to make some tough choices,” Obama said.

Tough choices? Making the rich richer is not a “tough choice.” A tough choice is choosing between filling a prescription or paying the heat bill. A tough choice is when your child has a fever, but if you take him to a doctor there won’t be money left for groceries. Those are tough choices.

But to be well fed and well housed and choose to deprive others of necessities to give yourself an income tax break is not a tough choice.

There also are reports that the White House is about to cave on the Bush tax cuts. And I might add, this is what happens when your base doesn’t bother to vote, but the other side’s base does.

Oh, yeah, and It’s Armistice Day.

Update: Greg Sargent says that the White House is denying that the administration will cave on the Bush tax cuts.