cicerone imposter wrote:Lash, FLASH! There is no emergency in Social Security. Past administrations have "talked" about the need to address social security, but Bush makes it sound as if it needs to be handled during his term. Not true; it needs to be handled 'soon,' but it's not a CRITICAL ISSUE compared to many other needs of our citizens.
I also have been reading with interest and have not yet decided to throw in my "2 cents" worth. If I do, my comments will have as a basis, idealism and pragmatism, instead of conservative or liberal.
OK.....I have just decided to comment and I'm using a post from C.I. as my starting point. His post points out a fundamental difference in at least my understanding of our differences.
Most Democrats deny there is a problem with Social Security.
C.I wrote: Lash, FLASH, there is no emergency in Social Security.
Greenspan, who I would trust with my life, says there is a problem with SS and it must be addressed sooner than than later.
I do agree that personal savings accounts do nothing to fix the estimated insolvency problem but I think this was a tactic (like asking for a million dollars but hoping to compromise on 500,000) to draw attention to and to create enough controversy to force it to the top of priority list.
Bush wants as part of his legacy, to be known as the president who prevented SS from becoming bankrupt.......can you blame him?
I agree with Greenspan that NOW is the time to fix it but I see the Democratic obstructionism as just a selfish move to prevent Bush from getting the credit for fixing it.........thus furthering my impression that Democrats are just playing politics with every issue.
Another fundamental difference is the war in Iraq. I, and many Americans believe going to war in Iraq was the right thing to do. Many, Many Democrats believed the same thing and voted for the funding. After many mistakes have been exposed and the war is becoming unpopular due to mostly unparalleled criticism and cynicism from the MSM, the Democrats have decided that it is in their best interests to make every effort to make certain we fail in Iraq. Again they are just playing politics with a war effort.
The bottom line here is that the reasons for the war are now irrelevant, and the mistakes that were made, and they were many, have largely been corrected and it is now time to put the interests of this country in the forefront and make every effort to win the war instead of the Dean strategy of making every effort to cause failure in the war effort.
Can we at least agree here that it is evident that most Democrats, all liberals and all idealists would be happy to see us pull out of Iraq immediately which would indicate the Bush policy has failed, vindicating their initial opposition to the war. This is the impression I get.....is it wrong?
I think Democrats see the war in Iraq as the big reason they lost the election and ..... IF.....they can cause a failure in the war, they will be vindicated and the public will support their candidates in the next election.
Can anyone refute my thinking?
This is enough for now.......if there is support for my thinking I will be back with more.
rayban
