Net Roots Movement

Lets Make Change.

Operation Mislead America: Social Security

Can we just talk for a second about Social Security? The Bush administration is now claiming a mandate of the American People to completely privatize America’s Social Security System, and young people are buying it! In a recent poll, a majority of young people (25 and younger) believe that privatizing social security is a good idea. That’s because they’re scared. Why are they scared? Because Bush is lying AGAIN!
In a press conference regarding the Social Security system, Bush said:

A lot of young people, who are young, that understand the [Social Security] system is worried that they will never see a dime

This is because President Bush’s message is that:

By the time 20 year olds today retire we will have a Social Security system that is bankrupt.

This would be reason for alarm, if it were true. In reality, in the year 2052, according to a congressional study on the topic, enough money will be coming into the system for people to be funded at 80%. What we see here is a system that needs some minor tweaking, not a complete privatization!

In addition, what many people fail to understand is that if the system is privatized there will be LESS money in it because instead of paying the system before retirement any reasonable plan* would call for a some of it to be kept in a private account, therefore pulling potential cash out of the system.

*I say reasonable plan because no specific plan has ever been outlined by the Bush administration despite claims that it was discussed in “great detain” during the election debates.

The same lying, misleading tactics are being employed to trick us about the Social Security system as were used to get us into Iraq without putting up a fight. They are telling us they system will be bankrupt if we don’t privatize and when we do and the government is in trillions of dollars of debt for borrowing money to provide the promised benefits, THEN and only then will we here that in reality, had we maintained the current system there would be almost no problem.


January 13, 2005 - Posted by | The Progressive Movement


  1. Great post. It’s sad how he lies and gets away with it.

    Comment by Steven L. | January 13, 2005 | Reply

  2. oh and PS, almost every other civilized country in the world has not only public Social Security but public Healthcare as well!

    But we’re right and they’re all wrong!

    Comment by chris | January 13, 2005 | Reply

  3. To bad public health care around the world works about as well as a cheap HMO.

    I say a big NO THANK YOU to public health care.

    Comment by ÐÇRøçk§ | January 13, 2005 | Reply

  4. I am a firm believer in the fact that everyone should have access to QUALITY health care. DC, you make a pretty valid point (well you didn’t actually make this point but you implied it)…sometimes bad health care is worse than no health care at all. That doesn’t mean that we should leave the less-fortunate who have no access to QUALITY health care to sink. We have to help them, and the only way to do that is by providing everyone with QUALITY health care. To me, making sure everyone has access to QUALITY health care is extremely important, and that’s what socialized health care should be about (in my mind).

    Comment by Steven L. | January 13, 2005 | Reply

  5. Not everyone can have access to quality health care. It would be nice. But it is impossible.

    First of all, I’ve heard 2042..which would mean every 29 year old.

    Second, it’s partial privitization…not complete.

    And thirdly, there is no lying go on here. Social Security will eventually go bankrupt. Whether it’s in 38 years or 48 years it must be changed soon.

    Too much money goes to the elderly who don’t need it (they have money..and they have had the chance to become somewhat successful)…and not enough goes to the children (50% of chronically poor are under 18)…tweaking? I think a little more.

    Comment by rwa2 | January 13, 2005 | Reply

  6. So what’s the motivation for privatizing Social security? Although you may think so, I don’t George Bush is just evil… How does the public/GWB benefit from privatizing social security?

    Also, I think it might be a good idea to start posting your sources below your posts so that we can at least have some reassurance you’re recounting documented facts and quotes.

    Comment by AVoiceofReason | January 13, 2005 | Reply

  7. Yeah, I joted down those numbers from the radio. You can probubly get a transcript of today’s “Al Frankin Show” at

    The qote I got from the live radio broadcast on 6.60am WFAN in New York.

    sorry about that.

    Comment by chris | January 13, 2005 | Reply

  8. Al Franken is a really bad radio personality.

    The Liberals need to get someone better. I’m trying to stay fair here..but I think this is the truth..none of them are like Rush or Hannity…

    Maybe Liberals should stick with T.V. Newspapers, and Magazines..Radio and Internet are conservative turf…you got the news..which is by far the best!

    Comment by rwa2 | January 13, 2005 | Reply

  9. Im not going to get into the controll of the media discussion, thats a thread on its self. But I happen to think that Al Frankin is a great radio personality because he’s NOT like Rush and Hanity. His show is funny and fun to listen to. It doen’t just make you mad. Its light hearted.

    If you want the Rush of the left listen to the Randi Rhodes Show on right after the O’Frankin Factor. She is out of controll. She rants and raves for three and a half hours. By the end of it I feel violant.

    WARNING: Rani Rhodes should be taken in small doses and is not for the faint of heart.

    Comment by chris | January 13, 2005 | Reply

  10. PS: Randi Rhodes and Air America let you stream for free. Unlike Mr. Limbaugh.

    Comment by chris | January 13, 2005 | Reply

  11. There is a reply to your comment at The Days of our lives blog at regarding social security.

    Comment by Frank | January 14, 2005 | Reply

  12. The lie is that the system isn’t going bankrupt, the lie is that he is trying to fix it… If your bank account is spending more than it is taking in, the solution is not to give away what little you have left before the checks clear! WHat Bush is doing is talking as if his so called “PLAN” will fix it. If he were honest, which he isn’t, he would say we are going to abolish the Soc. Sec. system and deal the death blow to it. Just like there was no WMD, here Bush is creating the crisis he claims he wants to fix. He is not a very good liar, for only misled and naive republicans, that will believe ANYTHING this president tells them, buy into this BS. It is like this… If you are planning to travel 100 miles on 5 gallans of gas and your car only gets 10 mpg, after driving 50 miles the answer is not to DRAIN the tank and tell your passengers, we are fixing the deficit in the tank… only a fool would believe you will NOT run out of gas… do the math. If your car gets decreasing MPG, don’t ditch the car and walk… thats what the repubicans think is the answer… no the answer to them is to steal cars from the people who put the gas in the tank to complete the trip!

    Comment by Frank | January 14, 2005 | Reply

  13. TYPO insert NOT after “The lie is…”[not] in post above… the system is in danger of going bankrupt in the future…

    Comment by Frank | January 14, 2005 | Reply

  14. Oh and about public health care, you talked to DC about that… a republican and conservative… i had to laugh. Most republicans don’t care about the poor and “compassionate” conservativism translates into hope the church can help you… in other words screw everyone else who has not been as “blessed” as they have been. Funny when the health fails for one of these repubs. without health care, they get converted real quick when they have to pay out of pocket 1000’s of dollars for a life threatening surgery. But for those who can’t afford it, and for children who didn’t ask to be poor, it is let them die… that is the compassionate conservatism that is as big a lie as Bush.

    Comment by Frank | January 14, 2005 | Reply

  15. This post has been removed by the author.

    Comment by Smythely | January 14, 2005 | Reply

  16. Sure, the Bush Machine is lying. Try inventing an imminent crisis without telling a lie. It’s a modus operandi for these criminals.

    Rather than incurring a MINIMUM of an additional $2 trillion for Bush’s scheme, how about eliminating Bush’s tax cuts for the top 1%? Raise FICA by one-half of 1%? Eliminate the ceiling for FICA deductions? The majority of people in America pay FICA for every cent they earn. Why shouldn’t everyone?

    Pension privatization has been a losing strategy the world over; just ask the UK, Argentina, Chile, Sweden.

    Bush’s scheme, as always, is about corporate welfare, this time for Wall Street at GREAT expense to the national economy. Has anyone explained what a deficit is to Bush or the halfwits who blindly rally behind his every destructive proposal? Granted, DEFICIT is a three-syllable word, but something’s got to give.

    I rememember The Good Old Days when conservatives purported to care a great deal about deficit reduction, so much so that it came to define the Republican Party of yesteryear. Today’s neocon pack animals are too stupid to understand the concept and, thus, deserve to starve to death in their old age. Too bad they’re so intent on dragging the rest of the country down with them.

    Comment by Smythely | January 14, 2005 | Reply

  17. The FOX news channel AKA The Voice of the Right, sees the problem of the lack of plan Bush is proposing and I quote:

    Bush said earlier this week he wants Congress to approve major changes before the end of May, but he has not offered any details of his plan for private investment accounts.

    Democrats say the model most often described would cost more than $2 trillion over the first decade alone and hasten the program’s fiscal problems. The White House is considering letting workers divert up to two-thirds of the 6.2 percent paid in payroll taxes into investment accounts, up to perhaps $1,000 to $1,300 a year, administration officials have said.

    Bush said a child born now could expect less than a 2 percent return after inflation on the money they pay into Social Security. “A conservative mix of bonds and stocks would over time produce a larger return,” he said.

    Democrats disagreed.

    “Rather than averting the so-called ‘crisis’ it decries, the administration’s plan will create a crisis where currently only a challenge exists,” said Rep. John Spratt of South Carolina, top Democrat on the House Budget Committee.

    Sen. Jack Reed, D-R.I., added: “The kind of plan the president supports only achieves solvency for Social Security through massive cuts in guaranteed benefits. Private accounts actually weaken the solvency of the program.”

    Typical Bush…find a problem and turn it into a crisis then damage alot of people… I can’t believe 51% of the people actually would have elected him if they knew his goal was the destruction of Soc. Sec.!

    Comment by Frank | January 15, 2005 | Reply

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: