It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Social Security Hypocracy -- Republican Lies, Bush's hidden agenda

page: 1
0

log in

join
share:

posted on Feb, 8 2005 @ 06:54 PM
link   
Obviously the democrats and republicans (Grammer expert: are those proper nouns or adjectives?) disagree on the issue of Social Security. The key issue being debated is if SS is in trouble. The democrats say no, republicans say yes. I'm not an economist, and know very little about the national budget. Whenever I try to find more out, I get a very skewed perspective, be it supporting what the republicans want the public to believe or supporting what the democrats want the public to believe. So instead of solving the question of who's right with facts, I'm going to step back in time and see what people had to say about this when a republican wasn't in the highest office in our Solar system (yep, proper noun, others are called star systems because their star isn't named Sol
).


Sen. Harry Reid (D-NV): “[M]ost Of Us Have No Problem With Taking A Small Amount Of The Social Security Proceeds And Putting It Into The Private Sector.” (Fox’s “Fox News Sunday,” 2/14/99)


Wait, what?!


Sen. Dick Durbin (D-IL) Press Release: “Durbin Said Due To The Increasing Number Of ‘Baby Boomers’ Reaching Retirement Age, Social Security Will Be Unable To Pay Out Full Benefits … But The Sooner Congress Acts To Avert This Crisis The Easier And Less Painful It Will Be.” (Sen. Dick Durbin, “Reforming Social Security,” Press Release, 9/15/98)

Oh, so congress did that already? Or are you willing to wait for a democrat to come back into office, darn the extra pain?


Sen. Byron Dorgan (D-ND): “Fixing Social Security Is An Urgent Priority. It Ought To Be At The Top Of Both Parties’ Agendas.” (Sen. Byron Dorgan, “Fixing Social Security Must Top Both Parties’ Agendas,” Roll Call, 12/6/99)

...It could be, Mr. Dorgan...


Sen. Byron Dorgan (D-ND): “The Potential [Social Security] Crisis Should Be Viewed As An Enormous Success, Because It Means That We Are Living Longer And Healthier Lives.” (Betty Mills, Op-Ed, “What Would You Do About Social Security?” Bismarck Tribune, 8/5/98)

Well, I guess there is always a brighter side


Sen. Kent Conrad (D-ND): “I Was At The Social Security Summit At The White House, Along With 40 Of My Colleagues, Republicans And Democrats. And There Was Virtual Unanimity Of Opinion That We Simply Have To Get A Higher Return From The Social Security Investments.” (Fox News’ “Special Report,” 1/20/99)

Wow, republicans and democrats were standing together in this issue in 1999. What changed over the next 2 years?


Rep. Sander Levin (D-MI): “People Can See, I Think, A [Social Security] Crisis Where There Immediate Family Is Affected Even If Not Immediately … This Is Something That Affects Almost Everybody’s Immediate Family.” (Richard A. Ryan, “Social Security Reform Stalls,” The Detroit News, 2/2/02)

What caused blinders to come up over the last 3 years?


Rep. Charles Rangel (D-NY): “I Am One Democrat That Truly Believes That Democrats Will Not Benefit By Doing Nothing On Social Security.” (Rep. Charles Rangel, Press Conference, 1/21/99)

That was when Bill Clinton was in office. How do you feel about it now?


Rep. Edward J. Markey (D-MA): “I Am An Advocate For Investing A Portion Of The Surplus In The Private Sector …” (Rep. Edward J. Markey, Committee On Commerce, U.S. House Of Representatives, Testimony, 2/25/99)

Apparently not a firm advocate, though


Rep. Jerrold Nadler (D-NY): “[I]t’s A Way Of Getting More Money – A Higher Return On The Trust Fund, And Is A Prudent And Good Thing To Do.” (Rep. Jerrold Nadler, Press Conference, 1/21/99)

It sure is, as long as the democrats have that high seat!


Rep. Dick Gephardt (D-MO): “Why Should Social Security Recipients Be Disadvantaged By Not Getting To Be Able To Have Higher Returns Out Of The Stock Market?” (Rep. Dick Gephardt, Press Conference, 1/21/99)

Well, Dick's no longer in congress, so he may still believe what hi said a few years ago.

And now the Big Man, here are some quotes by former President Clinton:


President Clinton: “[Investing] Will Earn A Higher Return And Keep Social Security Sound For 55 Years.” (President Bill Clinton, State Of The Union, 1/19/99)



President Clinton: “[W]hat I Believe We Should Do Is To Invest A Modest Amount Of This In The Private Sector, The Way Every Other Retirement Plan Does. The Arizona State Retirement Plan Does; Every Municipal Retirement Plan Does; Every Private Plan Does.” (President Bill Clinton, Remarks To The Citizens Of Tucson On Medicare And Social Security, Tucson, AZ, 2/25/99)


President Clinton: “[E]ven After You Take Account Of The Stock Market Going Down And Maybe Staying Down For A Few Years, Shouldn’t We Consider Investing Some Of This Money, Because, Otherwise, We’ll Have To Either Cut Benefits Or Raise Taxes To Cover Them, If We Can’t Raise The Rate Of Return.” (President Bill Clinton, Remarks Via Satellite To The Regional Congressional Social Security Forums, Albuquerque, NM, 7/27/98



Well, jeeze, what happened? When did we fix this problem so soundly, as the democrats would lead us to believe today, and how were the republicans so clueless as to the measures taken to fix it these past 6 years?


EDIT: Let's see if this thread name change will bring more people in. I'll bet it does.

[edit on 2-8-2005 by junglejake]




posted on Feb, 8 2005 @ 06:59 PM
link   
Before the placement in this board is questioned, I want to point out that, short of FoxNews and right wing radio, this is not being covered at all. The new quotes are being used, and there is no question about what happened over the past 6 years.

To coin a trite term used by Hillary Clinton, Vast Left Wing Conspiracy.



posted on Feb, 8 2005 @ 07:48 PM
link   
Since when has Democrat hypocrisy been shocking?


Seriously, the numbers do not lie and more favorable changes in assumptions only make SS last another couple years beyond Bush's date, so any Democratic effort to make it sound that SS is just fine and doesn't need an overhaul is just lies. As Jake has documented, they themselves have said the same thing in the past only to change their tune during a Bush administration!



posted on Feb, 8 2005 @ 08:07 PM
link   
Democrat is a noun, democratic is the adjective.

Republican is both a noun and adjective; the classification comes with usage.

Source: Merriam-Webster



new topics

top topics
 
0

log in

join