Dissent in the Ranks

Forums: Politics
Email this Topic • Print this Page

I never dreamed that this year would be going so well for Dems last November. I mean, just look at the Post today (reg required)

Quote:

Personal Accounts Are Not A Certainty
Social Security Plan Is Work in Progress, Republicans Signal

By Dana Milbank
Washington Post Staff Writer
Tuesday, April 26, 2005; Page A06

On the eve of the first congressional hearing on the restructuring of Social Security, Republicans on the Senate Finance Committee signaled that they will not insist that personal accounts be part of the legislation and that they will not seek further details from President Bush about his plans for the government-run retirement program.

Let's see that again

Quote:

and that they will not seek further details from President Bush about his plans for the government-run retirement program.

Wow. Didn't think I'd be reading that any time soon.

Then again, this might have something to do with it:

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

How long until the house of cards collapses? It will be fun to find out!

Cycloptichorn

Topic Stats
Top Replies
Link to this Topic

Type: Discussion • Score: 0 • Views: 1,749 • Replies: 36

No top replies

Dunno, Cyclo.

Do you suppose that the fact that Air America now has 53 radio outlets might have something to do with it?

Seriously, not trying to go off topic. But it is abundantly obvious to me, and now I suspect the Republicans as well, that much of their recent run of electoral victories just happens to coincide with the AM airwaves being monopolized by right wing talkers.

Now, the other side is showing signs of coming back. Suddenly, GOP members are backing off this radical plan which they seemed so hell bent on passing just a few short months ago.

0 Replies

It would be very sad if it turns out that the key to political success in our modern democracy is the number of loud mouthed idiots there are spouting off your lame rhetoric on the public airways.

0 Replies

Direct marketing has been the key to GOP successes in the last 25 years, for sure.

They call it 'removing the filter' of the mainstream news. By which they mean, removing any ability to sort truth from lies.

I don't really want to see the Dems move to the same model, but hey, effective is effective. I think in this case, people of America just know, deep down in their heart, that Bushco. just wants to get rid of SS completely. And they don't want that. So they aren't going to go along with his plan.

Cycloptichorn

0 Replies

ebrown:

It might be sad, but it might be true.

The talk radio phenomenon started inte late eighties. At that time, the Democrats held the House and Senate for decades.

Bit by bit the political advantage shifts toward Republicans and away from Democrats.

It only takes a small percentage of voters switching sides to make a huge numerical difference in the House and Senate. Having the AM radio become essentially an extension of the Republican National Committee can do it.

0 Replies

ebrown_p wrote:

It would be very sad if it turns out that the key to political success in our modern democracy is the number of loud mouthed idiots there are spouting off your lame rhetoric on the public airways.

Be sad, be very sad. Every visit I have had to the States I listened on the road to those loud-mouthed idiots (Limbaugh, Liddy et al) and the endless list of callers eager to agree with every piece of propaganda they spewed out. And because at least some of his listeners could read, Limbaugh published books (which I read). Again, be sad, be very sad.

0 Replies

This was an epic gamble by Bush. No one has the balls to take on what has to be done with Social Security.

What did you think? Bush was going to get a raise if he could convince everyone to change Social Security? It was a ploy to win his next election....?

It was going to be a thankless job, but some people feel it is negligent to leave it as it is. The Dems have fought it, and most of the public is too stupid to admit it needs fixing. My check! My check!!!

The 'checks' that were going to be affected are to people who have never yet received one. Nothing was going to change for currect recipients.

I just hope they got enough footage of Bush begging people to plan for the Soc Sec crisis.

.....so, it likely won't get fixed.

Bush will be marked down as having made a sincere effort, the Dems and the public will be marked down as having put the kybosh on it--

The sun rises the next day.

And?

0 Replies

History will note that Bush made a gallant effort to erase the legacy of FDR and failed. this SS agenda has nothing to do with solving the SS problem, it has everything to do with deleting the liberal heritage. Reminds me of when Nixon was elected an he hated everything to do with LBJ especially the War on Poverty (named as Office of Economic Opportunity) so he had it deleted from his budget. The dems simply renamed it the Community Services Administration and Nixon put it back in the budget. From capitol hill everything is done with smoke and mirrors, nothing different about George W Bush.

0 Replies

dys.

That is the first paranoid thing I've heard you say in three years.

0 Replies

paranoid? full blown twinky perhaps but paranoid? I don't think so.

0 Replies

We laks FDR. Mostly. I promise not to let Bush rough up his corpse.

<twinky...heh>

0 Replies

Agree with you absolutely, Dys. For some obscure reason, many of us seem to believe that what a politician says is what he/she means. Nothing could be further from the truth. Unless one looks for the message behind the verbiage, one will end up believing damn near anything. Social Security reform has nothing whatever to do with the Social Security system (which is not in any serious trouble, if you ask the experts), any more than the Iraq invasion had anything whatever to do with WMDs.

Lash, we paranoids have enemies, too, y'know.

0 Replies

Cycloptichorn wrote:

Direct marketing has been the key to GOP successes in the last 25 years, for sure.

They call it 'removing the filter' of the mainstream news. By which they mean, removing any ability to sort truth from lies.

I don't really want to see the Dems move to the same model, but hey, effective is effective. I think in this case, people of America just know, deep down in their heart, that Bushco. just wants to get rid of SS completely. And they don't want that. So they aren't going to go along with his plan.

Cycloptichorn

Don't know how you do your math, but the late 80's is not 25 years.

If with SS you mean being able to put aside a small amount of MY money into an account as getting rid of SS then you need to relearn how to read. 3 to 4% isn't getting rid of SS by any means.

kelticwizard wrote:

ebrown:

It might be sad, but it might be true.

The talk radio phenomenon started inte late eighties. At that time, the Democrats held the House and Senate for decades.

Bit by bit the political advantage shifts toward Republicans and away from Democrats.

It only takes a small percentage of voters switching sides to make a huge numerical difference in the House and Senate. Having the AM radio become essentially an extension of the Republican National Committee can do it.

Interesting how liberals controlled the media up to the 80's and when people got another choice they made that decision. You can't blame the talk show hosts for their info when libs had control of the airwaves for 30 or 40 years. When the tide turns you guys sure turn ugly. Maybe if the alphabet networks and CNN had been more centered talk radio wouldn't have become do popular!

0 Replies

Real Reason for Social Security Reform----#2

0 Replies

Those increases might not be a threat had not there been all those tax breaks to begin with.

0 Replies

Baldimo wrote:

Interesting how liberals controlled the media up to the 80's and when people got another choice they made that decision.

Since WHEN did "the liberals" control the media?

This is a conservative shibboleth.

I just LOVE how the "liberal media" let Bush lie through his teeth to the American people about WMD's in Iraq, with virtually no scrutiny or hard questioning at all. and on top of this, Baldimo actually talks about "the liberal media" as if it the concept wasn't laughable.

Baldimo wrote:

You can't blame the talk show hosts for their info when libs had control of the airwaves for 30 or 40 years.

What control?

They let Johnson and Nixon talk the American people into vietNam.

They virtually canonized Henry Kissinger, whose forign policy was a disaster.

Nixon damn near got away with Watergate until just TWO young reporters stood up and actually pursued the story. Read the accounts of the time-the Nixon people all agreed the Watergate story was all over a few months after it happened, that they had ridden out the storm. Only two reporters turned it around.

Baldimo wrote:

When the tide turns you guys sure turn ugly.

Nobody's turning ugly. Does this face look ugly to you? Very Happy

Baldimo wrote:

Maybe if the alphabet networks and CNN had been more centered talk radio wouldn't have become do popular!

And the conservative ideology just flows forth, uninhibited by any connection to reality whatsoever. We just had a president impress a war upon us under false pretenses, with the full cooperation of the mainstream press, and yet Baldimo still feels that the press is "liberal". Unbelievable.

Oh, by the way. As I pointed out in another thread, Al Gore NEVER said he invented the internet. In point of fact, he had a great deal to do with it's present position. But the press never bothered to go into THAT in any detail, did they?

"Liberal mainstream media". Humbug!!!

0 Replies

Dyslexia

dyslexia wrote:

History will note that Bush made a gallant effort to erase the legacy of FDR and failed. this SS agenda has nothing to do with solving the SS problem, it has everything to do with deleting the liberal heritage. Reminds me of when Nixon was elected an he hated everything to do with LBJ especially the War on Poverty (named as Office of Economic Opportunity) so he had it deleted from his budget. The dems simply renamed it the Community Services Administration and Nixon put it back in the budget. From capitol hill everything is done with smoke and mirrors, nothing different about George W Bush.

Bush's disastrous mistake is that we need a new "New Deal" more than ever in the evolving age of globalization and outsourcing. A priority plan for re-education of our young and workers is of critical importance. We need a huge push for young people to go into the sciences and engineering, medicine, and developing energy independence strategies.

Bush is concentrating on solving the problems of the last century instead of the future. Maybe he's been listening to God too much to realize the world has moved beyond his pay grade.

BBB

0 Replies

Re: Dyslexia

BumbleBeeBoogie wrote:

dyslexia wrote:
History will note that Bush made a gallant effort to erase the legacy of FDR and failed. this SS agenda has nothing to do with solving the SS problem, it has everything to do with deleting the liberal heritage. Reminds me of when Nixon was elected an he hated everything to do with LBJ especially the War on Poverty (named as Office of Economic Opportunity) so he had it deleted from his budget. The dems simply renamed it the Community Services Administration and Nixon put it back in the budget. From capitol hill everything is done with smoke and mirrors, nothing different about George W Bush.

Bush's disastrous mistake is that we need a new "New Deal" more than ever in the evolving age of globalization and outsourcing. A priority plan for re-education of our young and workers is of critical importance. We need a huge push for young people to go into the sciences and engineering, medicine, and developing energy independence strategies.

Bush is concentrating on solving the problems of the last century instead of the future. Maybe he's been listening to God too much to realize the world has moved beyond his pay grade.

BBB

He is working on the future in bills for SS and alternative fuels. If your buddies in the Dem party would work on something other then being blockers, then something might get done.

0 Replies

Quote:

He is working on the future in bills for SS and alternative fuels. If your buddies in the Dem party would work on something other then being blockers, then something might get done.

Hey Baldimo... Can you explain to me how refineries on Military bases and drilling in ANWAR have anything at all to do with "alternate fuels."

This looks like more of the same big oil to me.

0 Replies

parados wrote:

Quote:
He is working on the future in bills for SS and alternative fuels. If your buddies in the Dem party would work on something other then being blockers, then something might get done.

Hey Baldimo... Can you explain to me how refineries on Military bases and drilling in ANWAR have anything at all to do with "alternate fuels."

This looks like more of the same big oil to me.

Well we still do have to use oil right now, am I right or wrong?

Bush did sign a deal a month or so ago with a car company to start doing do heavy duty research on hydrogen fuel for cars. I would say that is a start in the right direction.

0 Replies

Dissent in the Ranks

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know