‘Stop picking on Social Security,’ Reid declares

[NorthCarolina]

America's Social Security program is sound and should not have to change in order to pay down the national debt, according to a leading Democratic senator.

"One of the things that always troubles me is when we start talking about the debt, the first thing people do is run to Social Security," Sen. Harry Reid (D-NV) told NBC's David Gregory on "Meet The Press" Sunday.

Reid continued, "Social Security is a program that works. And it's going to be -- it's fully funded for the next forty years. Stop picking on Social Security."

<snip>

Reid added that he would not endorse any "backdoor methods to whack Social Security recipients," such as raising the retirement age for inclusion into the program.

Link: http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2011/01/stop-picking-on-social-security-reid-declares/


Personal conviction, or are the Dems possibly starting to get cold feet with regards to planned cuts to Social Security? Given the anti-entitlement appointments to the Deficit Commission made by a Democratic President, I don't trust the Dem leadership any more than I trust the GOP when it comes to protecting programs like Social Security and Medicare. Anyone here good at reading between-the-lines?

[enough]

1. I can't understand why any Dem would go along with cutting Social Security. It seems like

a losing political stance, let alone being wrong.

Why can't Dems let the Republicans try to cut social security, then go out an campaign as protectors of the program? I don't get it. When did cutting social security become a winning strategy?

[PoliticAverse]

2. Actions will speak louder than words. We'll see what happens in the coming months. n/t

[NorthCarolina]

5. Do you think Reids statements regarding SS have anything to do with

the recent polling data released last week that indicates only 2-3% of Americans support cuts to entitlement programs?

[PoliticAverse]

7. Perhaps,

"Are there things we can do to improve Social Security of course".

I wonder what he has in mind.

I suspect that any proposed changes to Social Security may be done under the guise
of "strengthening" it or "ensuring it will be there for future generations", as was
the case in 1983 when the retirement age was raised.

Changing the COLA seems to be mentioned frequently. This can be claimed to "more
accurately reflect inflation" while in actually it reduces the benefits that are
paid out.

Time will tell what really happens.

Actions speak louder than words.

[awoke_in_2003]

10. raising retirement age. nt

[dwilso40641]

8. No Democrat

should refer to S.S. as an entitlement. An entitlement is something you get for nothing like the Congresspersons retirement plan.

[NorthCarolina]

9. I don't believe that is correct

It is an 'entitlement' because YOU PAID INTO IT, and therefore you are ENTITLED TO IT. That has always been my understanding of entitlements.

[awoke_in_2003]

11. as has been pointed out....

"entitled"" means you paid into it and deserve it. Republicans have screwed the language up- we shouldn't dumb down our vocabulary to suit their lack of education.

[marmar]

3. And what will Harry Reid do to protect it?

I wouldn't hold my breath.

[ProfessionalLeftist]

4. WOW. An actual DEMOCRAT. It's rare to see those these days

Yes the anti-entitlement appointments to the "Deficit Commission" by a Democratic (allegedly) President - not to mention the hateful and incendiary remarks by said appointees which the President never bothered to distance himself from or disagree with which means he is cozy with those sentiments and wholly agrees.

Now, when some schmuck in Washington starts calling my 83-year old mom 'greedy' - especially when she has to go without meds half the year due to her financial situation and that lovely little doughnut hole, I take exception to that. It appears to me that this Catfood Commission does an awful lot of projecting when it comes to the word "greedy".

None of THEM, nor Obama (*) will EVER NEED Medicare or Social Security. I think it's hardly surprising that they don't have any empathy for those who do and for those who, in fact, PAID INTO these systems all their lives so as to have this help when they needed it. Now, if the GREEDY in gov't couldn't keep their paws off of OUR MONEY and emptied the account and now don't want to pay it back, choosing to gut these programs instead, I think the epithet "GREEDY" is misplaced, to put it mildly.

Obama however, alleged Democratic President, likes the GREED moniker applied by his friend Alan Simpson and agrees with this. THIS is where he lost me.

I note his party as Obama (*) for a reason. Perhaps it should be Obama (?) - since his attitudes and policies are inexplicable for a Democrat, while he is simultaneously reticent about calling himself what he truly is. My advice to him is to run on the Republican or Independent ticket in 2012. It might be more honest and less disingenuous, because a Democrat he is certainly not.

[TBF]

6. Thank you Mr. Reid, here's hoping you can have a conference with President Obama and discuss. nt