Bush is getting desperate

[Shug2003 1]

I just wonder how many of these young "whipper snapper" republicans would put their $$$ where their mouth is about "King George" if their butts were drafted to go to Iraq!!!!! By the way, Republicans are no better than democrats in the sense that they constantly run on a morality ticket, conduct dirty campaigns, lie to the american people, protect the rich, and claim to make a difference in the morality arena--yet they have done absolutely NOTHING and never will. It's simply a ploy to get re-elected and the American people are catching on.... Damn, that felt good so come on you young republicans give me your best shot because know what, I don't care anymore so holler and raise a ruckus!!!

[Tigermike 3,053]

So I guess Kerry wasn't desperate for jumping on MEMOGATE?

148547[/snapback]

Let's for the minute grant you the point that the memos were forged (a point that has yet to be proven), please let me know of a single fact contained within them that has been refuted by evidence. One. Just one. Please. Just one.

Bush DID relinquish his duty. He DID miss his physical. By any legal definition, he IS a deserter. You might say "who cares", and I will totally agree. A shady past should bear no reflection on ones current duties. But with what Starr did to Clinton, don't you think it's a bit hypocritical to cry wolf now?

148554[/snapback]

So it has not been proved that the memo's were forged, why then were those people fired?

So now we are back to whining and harping about Bush's record. You guys can't win an election, despite the tons of money spent, illegal votes cast, smear campaign and innumerable lies told and printed you are still whining about his service record.

BTW - President Bush did disclose his entire record. We are still waiting on John Kerry to do the same.

[AURaptor 1,126]

SS should have never occured in the 1st place.

148574[/snapback]

That's honest. It is obvious you are not an elected Rep. This is what the Rep. slogan should be:

SS should have never occured in the 1st place.

148577[/snapback]

Thats a difference between you and I . You seem to think it's perfectly fine for the Gov't to take $ from one person at a point of a gun and give it to someone else. I fail to see how SS passes the ' proper function of Gov't' test. It clearly does not, but if we do nothing , it will end up destroying this country. I find a problem w/ that, where as you seem content w/ that prospect.

[AURaptor 1,126]

,I don't care anymore ....

148597[/snapback]

Some still do care. Maybe there's your problem.

It's simply a ploy to get re-elected and the American people are catching on....

Yes, catching on. So much so that more participated in the 2004 election than ever. Yep, the people are really showing them politicians 'what for' .

(btw - there still is no draft. Only Dems are talking about bringing THAT back. )

G'day.

[TexasTiger 13,026]

SS should have never occured in the 1st place.

148574[/snapback]

That's honest. It is obvious you are not an elected Rep. This is what the Rep. slogan should be:

SS should have never occured in the 1st place.

148577[/snapback]

Thats a difference between you and I . You seem to think it's perfectly fine for the Gov't to take $ from one person at a point of a gun and give it to someone else. I fail to see how SS passes the ' proper function of Gov't' test. It clearly does not, but if we do nothing , it will end up destroying this country. I find a problem w/ that, where as you seem content w/ that prospect.

148631[/snapback]

Could you describe your "proper function of government test?"

[CCTAU 3,345]

The only desparation I see from PRESIDENT Bush is that he can't get you liberal morons to see that being a slave to an inept SS system is not good.

Sure SS will pay out for another 30 years. But you morons forgot to mention that it will not pay out enough to wipe your butts with. The return on the money paid in is horrible. I would prefr to invest my retirement money a little more wisely and be able to leave some to my children if I happen to pass early...not to your welfare slaves that only exists to vote liberal moron idiots back into the free money giveaway, demoncratic hell that you want us all to live in.

So you see. Desparation is good. Its just in the way you view it. It means he cares about you even if you don't care about him.

[Tigermike 3,053]

The only desparation I see from PRESIDENT Bush is that he can't get you liberal morons to see that being a slave to an inept SS system is not good.

Sure SS will pay out for another 30 years. But you morons forgot to mention that it will not pay out enough to wipe your butts with. The return on the money paid in is horrible. I would prefr to invest my retirement money a little more wisely and be able to leave some to my children if I happen to pass early...not to your welfare slaves that only exists to vote liberal moron idiots back into the free money giveaway, demoncratic hell that you want us all to live in.

So you see. Desparation is good. Its just in the way you view it. It means he cares about you even if you don't care about him.

148664[/snapback]

Very well said!

[Jenny AU-92 0]

Thanks, kid.  That puts my Mom at ease.

148452[/snapback]

You obviously haven't been paying attention to the President's plan - the one he outlined in the State of the Union. Unless you are a teenager, your mom is probably older than 55, no? If so, then what has she got to be worried about?

I have a message for every American who is 55 or older: Do not let anyone mislead you. For you, the Social Security system will not change in any way.

Nice scare tactic tho - let's just frighten the geezers to the polls because the big bad Republicans are gonna take their check away the MINUTE they get elected...

[DKW 86 7,441]

And I wonder why we can't have the same reitrement plan as our leaders in Congress?

148558[/snapback]

Many people do. Their plan is not so unusual. They also pay the same SS rate the rest of us pay and none of it goes into private accounts.

148576[/snapback]

This is a complete BS Lie! Tex, if you actually believe this you are dumber than a rock.

Prove it! Define Many! Prove this totally bogus accusation is true Tex. Make sure you use a REAL source not one of your usual BS Dems Spin machines.

148590[/snapback]

You're beyond dumb.

Begun in 1987, the Thrift Savings Plan, which as of December 2004 had assets of $152 billion, is a retirement-savings plan open to all civilian federal employees, including senators, and all members of the uniformed services.

They can invest as much as 14 percent of their salaries in one of five retirement funds.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/6919700/site/newsweek/page/2/

Many participate in this particular optional plan-- in addition to Social Security, many more Americans participate in similar optional plans-- in addition to Social Secuity. If you don't know this, you need to educate yourself before you thow around such strong insults. WWJD?

148593[/snapback]

Many participate in this particular optional plan-- in addition to Social Security,

And right on cue, Tex quotes from an article that SLAMS SS. I asked you to define "many." So what is it 1-2% of the incorrigibly stupid that can opt out of Ss and Dont?

Tex, read the article again. I would give anything to get THAT plan. 14%? why that sounds very close to the SS witholding...

Are you saying that if GWB would give us that plan you would support it?

[Auburn85 432]

By 2018 more money will be going out than coming in.

In 2042 benefits will have to be cut by 27%.

Lets fix it now, rather than use it as a political ploy for votes.

Um, no wait, lets raise the retirement age, let's increase the payroll taxes, let's cut benefits, lets just let people die empty handed. A person that pays into the system from age 18-61 and then dies............. Sorry you get didly sqat. 43 years of feeding the governments endless appitite.

If we privatize SS it would be on a voluntary choice to do so

And only a portion will actually go into a private account. This means that a certain percentage can't be touched by any administration.Unlike this one and previous administrations going all the way back to LBJ.

[Shug2003 1]

Yeah, King George W. would probably just tell everyone to eat cake!

[TexasTiger 13,026]

And I wonder why we can't have the same reitrement plan as our leaders in Congress?

148558[/snapback]

Many people do. Their plan is not so unusual. They also pay the same SS rate the rest of us pay and none of it goes into private accounts.

148576[/snapback]

This is a complete BS Lie! Tex, if you actually believe this you are dumber than a rock.

Prove it! Define Many! Prove this totally bogus accusation is true Tex. Make sure you use a REAL source not one of your usual BS Dems Spin machines.

148590[/snapback]

You're beyond dumb.

Begun in 1987, the Thrift Savings Plan, which as of December 2004 had assets of $152 billion, is a retirement-savings plan open to all civilian federal employees, including senators, and all members of the uniformed services.

They can invest as much as 14 percent of their salaries in one of five retirement funds.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/6919700/site/newsweek/page/2/

Many participate in this particular optional plan-- in addition to Social Security, many more Americans participate in similar optional plans-- in addition to Social Secuity. If you don't know this, you need to educate yourself before you thow around such strong insults. WWJD?

148593[/snapback]

Many participate in this particular optional plan-- in addition to Social Security,

And right on cue, Tex quotes from an article that SLAMS SS. I asked you to define "many." So what is it 1-2% of the incorrigibly stupid that can opt out of Ss and Dont?

Tex, read the article again. I would give anything to get THAT plan. 14%? why that sounds very close to the SS witholding...

Are you saying that if GWB would give us that plan you would support it?

148681[/snapback]

Read the article again, David. I know it slammed SS. That's why I chose it. Remember, you didn't want any "Dem spin"? But it also mentioned the plan open to all Federal employees, including military. Optional doesn't mean you "opt out" of SS. As I said, it is in additon to SS. That's where George Will's analogy breaks down in the article. Congressmen pay the same SS rate that you and I pay. If they choose, they invest an additional amount tax-deferred in the Thrift Savings Plan. Tens of millions of Americans have similar, or better, 401(k) or 403( plans. Better in that many of them have the contribution of the employee matched by the employer to a point, unlike the congressional plan. These plans are not in lieu of SS and neither is the federal employee plan. In addition to 401(k)s and 403(B)s, individuals have a variety of IRAs to choose from, that have similar pre-tax benefits for people who do not have employer plans, e.g. self-employed folks. And I believe all are tax deferred. GWB doesn't have to "give us" these plans. They already exist.

[TexasTiger 13,026]

The something for nothing generation. The same folks who most support private accounts, don't think they should bear the risks associated with them.

"If people's investments in Social Security individual retirement accounts perform poorly and lose money, do you think the government should be responsible for protecting them in some way from that loss, or not?"

.

                    Should Be /Should Not Be/ Unsure

% % %

              ALL        60              34              6

  18-34 years        73              23              4

  35-44 years        67              29              4

  45-54 years        56              40              4

  55 & older          50            42              8

------------------------------------------------------------------------

http://www.pollingreport.com/social.htm

[Auburn85 432]

That poll doesn't speak for me

I doubt they polled 1 million people

[DKW 86 7,441]

CSRS opt out, FERS have SS and add-ons.

I would prefer the CSRS plan myself. If I could get the Congressional Medical coverage I would take it too. Too bad no Dem will ever let that happen. We are only going to get the mediocre coverage.

I get your point, do you get mine about those that can opt out do?

[TexasTiger 13,026]

CSRS opt out, FERS have SS and add-ons.

It is not my understanding that they opt out, but rather that SS just didn't apply to those in CSRS:

Federal Government Employment

Until 1984, employment by the Federal government was covered under the Civil Service Retirement System (CSRS) and not by Social Security. If you worked for a Federal agency during these years, you did not pay Social Security tax on your earnings and those earnings are not shown on your record.

In 1984, a second retirement system--the Federal Employees Retirement System, or FERS--was introduced. People who began working for the Federal government in 1984 or later are covered by FERS instead of CSRS. Also, some workers who had been covered by the CSRS program chose to switch to the FERS program when it became available. Work under FERS is covered by Social Security.

If you stayed under the CSRS program after 1983, you still are not covered by Social Security but you are covered under the Medicare program and you pay Medicare taxes on your Federal earnings.

http://www.ssa.gov/retire2/fedgovees.htm

I would prefer the CSRS plan myself.

I would prefer to be in a true pension plan like most big companies used to have. They moved to 401(k)s because of the high cost of those plans. My Dad's retired military pension was a better than average deal, too.

If I could get the Congressional Medical coverage I would take it too. Too bad no Dem will ever let that happen. We are only going to get the mediocre coverage.

Well one just did, but you rejected him:

John Kerry's Plan To Make Health Care Affordable For Every American

Allows Americans to Get the Same Plan as Members of Congress

Many Americans are uninsured because they are not offered health insurance through work, either because they are self-employed or because they work in businesses, particularly small businesses, that cannot afford to offer health care coverage. Those who seek coverage in the individual market often face exorbitant premiums and limited coverage. John Kerry believes that every American should have an affordable place to buy health care, with group protections and affordable premiums. His plan would allow Americans to buy into the Federal Employees Health Plan (in a separate pool) and provide reinsurance to assure coverage is affordable. By focusing on cost containment and helping to cover catastrophic costs, the Kerry plan strengthens the employer-based market and ensures the ability of larger businesses to continue offering coverage to their workers.

Allow Every American Access To The Same Health Plan Members Of Congress Get Today

Today, nine million Federal employees and their dependents get health care through the Federal Employees Health Benefits Program (FEHBP), which offers a wide choice of affordable health plans with group protections and good benefits. John Kerry believes that all Americans should have access to the same affordable coverage policies that Members of Congress get today.

John Kerry's plan would allow all Americans to join FEHBP by adding a new pool for small and large businesses, as well as individuals and families who need affordable health insurance. A new 'premium rebate' program will provide subsidies to help stabilize insurance rates and keep coverage affordable by removing the burden of high cost cases from the insurance pool. These premium rebates have the potential of saving Americans up to 10 percent (or $1000 for a family) on their current health care costs. John Kerry will also sign an Executive Order to ensure participants will be guaranteed the right to family health benefits for their domestic partners.

http://www.johnkerry.com/issues/health_care/health_care.html

I get your point, do you get mine about those that can opt out do?

148744[/snapback]

I think alot of younger folks would find opting out appealing because of the greater immediacy of "seeing" an account, as you have referred to before. I also think many younger folks don't expect SS to be there-- I used to think that, especially at 20. But, as the poll I cited above shows, it seems that many "younger" folks don't fully appreciate that they should be stuck with the risks of investing. Everyone wants higher rates. But do they want to accept the risks?

We also know that a high percentage of people cash out 401(k)s when they change jobs to deal with immediate needs/wants. Few people are financially disciplined or far-sighted.

If there was a way to fund it, perhaps increasing the cap on the salary as Bush as hinted at, setting up an IRA-type account, in low/moderate risk investments, at birth for each person would allow for the benefits of life-long compounding while maintaining the safety net, modest as it is, of SS.

I see SS as my last ditch safety net, if all else fails. I don't expect it be much. I think that is the best way for people to look at it-- don't count on it exclusively. Invest in tax-deffered annuities and IRAs on your own to try and build your wealth for a higher quality of life. But some folks end up with little else.

[DKW 86 7,441]

If there was a way to fund it, perhaps increasing the cap on the salary as Bush as hinted at, setting up an IRA-type account, in low/moderate risk investments, at birth for each person would allow for the benefits of life-long compounding while maintaining the safety net, modest as it is, of SS.

Bush's Plan, smiliar to FERS, does all these things. So why do you reject it?

IRA-type account, in low/moderate risk investments

That describes FERS and Bush's plan. People want the ownership, they just want "some" govt oversight over the options so a Global Crossing-WorldComm type instance wont happen. They do not wont only govt run -2% APR Returns.

while maintaining the safety net, modest as it is, of SS

This is where we fall apart. SS will be cut, no matter what. There is no way around it. You cannot tell me that the invertebrates in Congress are suddeny going to get the nads to run it right after mis-spending SS money out of it for the last 30-40 years. They wont ever do it. Gore talked about a lockbox, but then made sure it had a back door to raid it again and again.

perhaps increasing the cap on the salary as Bush as hinted at

Bush has flexed enough to pull this off. Bet the house on this though, the Dems will hold out for a tax increase in on everyone before it is over to insure they kill the plan.

They dont call the Dems the "Do-Nothing Party" for nothing.

I see now that you really like Bush's plan, but hate Bush so bad that the Dems will act to stop anything from happening.

Kerry's "PLAN" would have never been implemented because it wasnt Kerry's Plan all along. It was Kennedy's Plan. Only Kennedy's Plan was better and had more options and the Dems kill it year after year.

[TexasTiger 13,026]

If there was a way to fund it, perhaps increasing the cap on the salary as Bush as hinted at, setting up an IRA-type account, in low/moderate risk investments, at birth for each person would allow for the benefits of life-long compounding while maintaining the safety net, modest as it is, of SS.

Bush's Plan, smiliar to FERS, does all these things. So why do you reject it?

IRA-type account, in low/moderate risk investments

That describes FERS and Bush's plan. People want the ownership, they just want "some" govt oversight over the options so a Global Crossing-WorldComm type instance wont happen. They do not wont only govt run -2% APR Returns.

while maintaining the safety net, modest as it is, of SS

This is where we fall apart. SS will be cut, no matter what. There is no way around it. You cannot tell me that the invertebrates in Congress are suddeny going to get the nads to run it right after mis-spending SS money out of it for the last 30-40 years. They wont ever do it. Gore talked about a lockbox, but then made sure it had a back door to raid it again and again.

perhaps increasing the cap on the salary as Bush as hinted at

Bush has flexed enough to pull this off. Bet the house on this though, the Dems will hold out for a tax increase in on everyone before it is over to insure they kill the plan.

They dont call the Dems the "Do-Nothing Party" for nothing.

I see now that you really like Bush's plan, but hate Bush so bad that the Dems will act to stop anything from happening.

Kerry's "PLAN" would have never been implemented because it wasnt Kerry's Plan all along. It was Kennedy's Plan. Only Kennedy's Plan was better and had more options and the Dems kill it year after year.

148758[/snapback]

You don't "see" what you think you "see." Bush's plan does not maintain a safety net or address the shortfall. It increases the shortfall.

[Auburn85 432]

How was Kerry going to pay for the Health Care Plan?

Supposedly Bush is trying to ruin SS. Would Kerry have ruined Health Care?

[TexasTiger 13,026]

How was Kerry going to pay for the Health Care Plan?

Supposedly Bush is trying to ruin SS. Would Kerry have ruined Health Care?

148778[/snapback]

Kerry would not have funded his Health Care Plan b/c it was to be paid by rolling back the tax cuts on the top 1%, which congress would not have done. But the difference in motivation is that Republican leaders want to phase out SS. Some people here and elsewhere think that is a good idea, but it very different than expanding healthcare.

[Auburn85 432]

How was Kerry going to pay for the Health Care Plan?

Supposedly Bush is trying to ruin SS. Would Kerry have ruined Health Care?

148778[/snapback]

Kerry would not have funded his Health Care Plan b/c it was to be paid by rolling back the tax cuts on the top 1%, which congress would not have done. But the difference in motivation is that Republican leaders want to phase out SS. Some people here and elsewhere think that is a good idea, but it very different than expanding healthcare.

148780[/snapback]

Kerry would have raised taxes

[Tigermike 3,053]

How was Kerry going to pay for the Health Care Plan?

Supposedly Bush is trying to ruin SS. Would Kerry have ruined Health Care?

148778[/snapback]

Kerry would not have funded his Health Care Plan b/c it was to be paid by rolling back the tax cuts on the top 1%, which congress would not have done. But the difference in motivation is that Republican leaders want to phase out SS. Some people here and elsewhere think that is a good idea, but it very different than expanding healthcare.

148780[/snapback]

Kerry would have raised taxes

148794[/snapback]

On all people. We would all have been considered rich.

[Auburn85 432]

So John McCain, Bill Frist, Tom Delay, George Bush, Dick Cheney, Jeff Sessions, Richard Shelby, want to phase SS out?

At the rate they are going it would take what 50-100 years from now.

[DKW 86 7,441]

Bush's plan does not maintain a safety net or address the shortfall. It increases the shortfall.

In Bush's plan, there are no cuts for the elderly. They get what is due them. We actually have time now to invest in Ind Retirement Accounts-like SS was supposed to be like in the first place...Will we increase the shortfall? Yes, Temporarily anyway. We will then build more and more income into real annuities. As folks die, these annuities can be used to pay off the debt incurred during the shift. The outcome is what was promised to US Citizens years ago. A safety net supplemented by ind. retirement plans. Not a rat hole we throw money down for rest of creation, that buries our kids in debt with benefits they cannot afford and eventually sees SS cut to nothing for us.

Tex, as I said before, Dem Plan....Do Nothing.

Remember, SS will get cut for us. That is a certainty. It will not even be a safety net unless we act soon. The price of benefits to the Boomers will crush our kids unless we act now.

[AURaptor 1,126]

If the Dems and folks like TexasTiger would just stop lying about Bush's plan, things might get done around here. But, alas.....I ask too much.