izzybeans
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Apr-17-08 07:52 AM
Original message |
The only surprise from the debate last night: Clinton endorsing Reagan's Social Security Commission |
|
Edited on Thu Apr-17-08 07:53 AM by izzybeans
Everything else was predictable. We all could have predicted the irrelevance of the first 3/4 of the debate and we know their positions on issues.
I literally spit my water out laughing when she endorsed the Reagan solution. I mean after all the boohooing about Obama lumping Reagan in with two other Democratic presidents' penchant for diplomacy, where's all the faux outrage from the Clinton camp. Oh wait...never-mind. Don't question the Goddess of Peace, she's infallible. Nice choice of words there by the way. The Goddess of Peace. :rofl: Does that make her the Prince of Peace's mother? I suppose Chelsea's birth resulted from an immaculate conception. :rofl:
|
NJmaverick
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Apr-17-08 07:57 AM
Response to Original message |
1. I think Hillary would endorse Satan if she thought it would get her votes |
izzybeans
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Apr-17-08 08:03 AM
Response to Original message |
2. Did anyone actually watch the debate? |
|
Or are you just arguing over soundbites? :rofl:
|
crispini
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Apr-17-08 08:16 AM
Response to Reply #2 |
5. I think most people are annoyed over the moderation |
|
and the Clinton people are telling them, "Neener neener" and so most of the board is falling into that trap.
I wish I had some threads left, I'd go post some substantive stuff, as it is I guess I'll just have to kick it. :D
|
izzybeans
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Apr-17-08 08:20 AM
Response to Reply #5 |
8. I wouldn't even bother with substance here. We should start each substantive thread with |
|
Edited on Thu Apr-17-08 08:23 AM by izzybeans
"Let it sink" in the title just to get people to open it.
And to be ironic about our intentions.
|
crispini
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Apr-17-08 08:33 AM
Response to Reply #8 |
13. Hee! You're right about that! nt |
crispini
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Apr-17-08 08:15 AM
Response to Original message |
|
"CLINTON: Well, in fact, I am totally committed to making sure Social Security is solvent. If we had stayed on the path we were on at the end of my husband's administration, we sure would be in a lot better position, because we had a plan to extend the life of the Social Security Trust Fund and, again, President Bush decided that that wasn't a priority, that the war in Iraq and tax cuts for the wealthiest of Americans were his priorities, neither of which he's ever paid for.
I think it's the first time we've ever been taken to war and had a president who wouldn't pay for it.
But when it comes to Social Security, fiscal responsibility is the first and most important step. You've got to begin to rein in the budget, pay as you go, to try to replenish our Social Security Trust Fund.
And, with all due respect, the last time we had a crisis in Social Security was 1983. President Reagan and Speaker Tip O'Neill came up with a commission. That was the best and smartest way, because you've got to get Republicans and Democrats together. That's what I will do."
|
izzybeans
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Apr-17-08 08:16 AM
Response to Reply #3 |
|
Edited on Thu Apr-17-08 08:17 AM by izzybeans
Shhh...I agree with the "you've got to get together part"...
The only thing she danced around was whether she agreed with raising the payroll tax like that commission did. All she did say was that raising the tax on higher wage earners was not progressive, whatever that means.
|
crispini
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Apr-17-08 08:17 AM
Response to Reply #4 |
6. I ... um... don't remember Reagan's social security commission. |
izzybeans
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Apr-17-08 08:19 AM
Response to Reply #6 |
|
Edited on Thu Apr-17-08 08:21 AM by izzybeans
Just wondered were all the outrage over Reagan was.
I suppose it was what it was, then...so I suppose we are supposed to say it worked. But By today's standards it would be political suicide. Raising the payroll tax. And we don't have sensible republicans to deal with. The commission would be forced to consider giving our money away to wall street.
|
crispini
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Apr-17-08 08:36 AM
Response to Reply #7 |
14. Oh, I get it. Obama praises Reagan and gets dinged.... |
|
Clinton praises Reagan, nobody cares.
You're totally right about "we don't have sensible republicans to deal with" but I do think they know SS is the third rail. Back when I had a republican representative I went to a SS town hall out in rural east Texas. Remember Shrub's "privatize Social Security" initiative?" Even the Republican County Commissioner ripped our Republican House Representative a new one! Boy, that went down like a lead balloon.
|
bunkerbuster1
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Apr-17-08 08:20 AM
Response to Reply #6 |
9. The results were A-ok. |
|
And Social Security IS FUCKING SOLVENT as a result.
Lying assholes continue to claim that the trust fund is "bankrupt." It's "bankrupt" because we've been deficit-spending year after year and claiming the trust fund against the deficit.
Basically, SS has been paying its own way all along. Don't believe otherwise.
|
izzybeans
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Apr-17-08 08:21 AM
Response to Reply #9 |
|
Edited on Thu Apr-17-08 08:22 AM by izzybeans
Kick this post.
|
bunkerbuster1
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Apr-17-08 08:31 AM
Response to Reply #10 |
11. And to be totally fair, Clinton indulged in this practice too |
|
Claimed we were in balance when we weren't, not quite, yet.
I know on a certain level revenues are revenues, and FICA taxes get shoved in the same pot, but it IS accounted for, there are T-bills that are supposed to be as good as the full faith and credit of the government, and anyone who doesn't believe in that full faith and credit shouldn't be allowed to hold office.
|
izzybeans
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Apr-17-08 08:33 AM
Response to Reply #11 |
12. I'm worried that when it comes up people are going to be scared into giving their money away. |
|
Both of our candidates understand these things. It remains to be seen whether they will have the political will to standup to the interests trying to pry open the collective pocketbook.
|
bunkerbuster1
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Apr-17-08 09:23 AM
Response to Reply #12 |
16. Hey, a few months back, Obama uttered the magic word: |
|
"Single Payer." As in, that'd be the most efficient healthcare delivery system.
These people get it. I have every confidence that either candidate will opt to treat us like adults about this fiscal stuff.
|
izzybeans
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Apr-17-08 10:10 AM
Response to Reply #16 |
17. I am confident as well. |
|
First time in a long while I can say so. We have good candidates. I hope we don't destroy them.
|
crispini
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Apr-17-08 08:36 AM
Response to Reply #9 |
DU
AdBot (1000+ posts) |
Thu Apr 25th 2024, 06:10 AM
Response to Original message |