Bell Curve The Law Talking Guy Raised by Republicans U.S. West
Well, he's kind of had it in for me ever since I accidentally ran over his dog. Actually, replace "accidentally" with "repeatedly," and replace "dog" with "son."

Thursday, February 03, 2005

Reid My Lips

Senate Minority Leader Harry Reid (D-NV) delivered the first part of the Democrats' rebuttal to Bush's State of the Union address. I think he hit excellent themes when it came to Bush's raid on Social Security. Here's what he said:

"The Bush plan would take our already record high $4.3 trillion national debt and put us another $2 trillion in the red. That's an immoral burden to place on the backs of the next generation. But maybe most of all, the Bush plan isn't really Social Security reform. It's more like Social Security roulette. Democrats are all for giving Americans more of a say and more choices when it comes to their retirement savings. But that doesn't mean taking Social Security's guarantee and gambling with it. And that's coming from a Senator who represents Las Vegas."


Raised By Republicans said...

In an earlier post Dr. Strangelove asked how the Bush administration was "starving the beast." This question went unnoticed. Here we have an opportunity to get to the bottom of it.

By racking up huge debts while at the same time reducing revenue (tax cuts), the Bush administration is making it impossible for future governments to function without either massive increases in taxes or massive cuts in programs.

If this is the thinking then the massive increase in debt associated with the Bush social security privatization would not be a side effect. Rather the debt itself is the goal. By increasing the debt at the same time that the guarantees associated with social security are eliminated, Bush is almost ensuring that social security will be completely wiped out the next time there is a down turn in the stock market. Such a down turn by the way is almost inevitable when Baby Boomers start retiring and cashing out their stock portfolios in about 5 to 10 years.

The GOP has been gunning for social security since the 1930s and they are feeling their oats after the last two elections.

If the elimination of social security is the Republicans' goal (which I think is very likely), there is no real possibility for compromise. The Democrats are forced into a situation where they must be intransigent and as obstructionist as possible. The institutional structure of what is left of American democracy favor obstruction so that works in our favor.

The Law Talking Guy said...

Senator Harry Reid is what the Democrats in the Senate need right now. He's not my kind of Democrat for the most part - he's very centrist -- but he's got the personal connections to hold together the Democrats. He recently remarked that Bill Frist was envious of "the kind of family we have here in our caucus." In part this is because Reid, by being on the right of his party, is good at preventing defections. But more to the point, there are 44 democrats and 1 independent, and that's a social group where ordinary social rules apply. Reid is a popular leader amongst them, who is well regarded and trusted. He can keep the Democrats together for the big fights: keeping Social Security and preventing a Chief Justice Rightwing Asshole.

Rick J said...

I have been following a site now for almost 2 years and I have found it to be both reliable and profitable. They post daily and their stock trades have been beating
the indexes easily.

Take a look at