Graham: McCain would consider a tax increase on Social Security as ‘part of a comprehensive approach.’
By on Aug 3rd, 2008 at 11:00 am
Graham: McCain would consider a tax increase on Social Security as ‘part of a comprehensive approach.’
On Fox News Sunday today, host Chris Wallace asked Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-SC), a top McCain surrogate, about Sen. John McCain’s “doozy” of a flip-flop this past week on whether he would consider raising taxes as part of a Social Security fix. Despite the McCain campaign’s backtracking assertion this week that raising taxes is “absolutely out of the question,” Graham said McCain could support it “if it’s part of a comprehensive approach.” Watch it:
Following Graham’s comments, former Senate Majority Leader Tom Daschle remarked that, “we don’t know what we’re going to get with John McCain. The more he talks, the less certain we are about any of the positions he’s taken.”
Update Huffington Post's Sam Stein points out that despite Graham's claim today that raising taxes to save Social Security is "a dumb idea," he advocated a tax increase as a solution in 2005.
View Most Popular
Advertisement
What We're About
What We're Fighting For
What We're Fighting Against
Featured
Subscribe to the Progress Report
Topic CloudView topics sorted by popularity
Afghanistan
Bachmann
Beck
Boehner
Bush
Business
Cheney
Civil Rights
Congress
Corporate Ethics
Dobbs
Education
Election
Energy
Environment
Ethics
Fox News
Gingrich
Glenn Beck
Global Warming
Guantanamo
Health Care
Immigration
International Relations
Justice
LGBT
Lieberman
Limbaugh
Media
Military
O'Reilly
Obama
Palin
Pelosi
Politics
Race
Radical Right
Religion
Steele
Stimulus
Tea Parties
Technology
Terrorism
Veterans
Women's Rights
Visit Our Affiliated Sites
Reports
In-depth studies on select topics
Got a hot tip?
Have a hot news tip? We'd love to hear from you. Use the form below to send us the latest.
ArchivesBlog Roll
Following Graham’s comments, former Senate Majority Leader Tom Daschle remarked that, “we don’t know what we’re going to get with John McCain. The more he talks, the less certain we are about any of the positions he’s taken.”
That’s because this so called straight shooting “maverick” will say anything to get elected.
http://progressiveworldreview.com
August 3rd, 2008 at 11:04 amGraham: McCain would consider a tax increase on Social Security as ‘part of a comprehensive approach.’
A “comprehensive approach” to not having a firm grasp of the issues or having to take a firm stand or position on anything ; like on torture………….
August 3rd, 2008 at 11:04 amLies, mendacity, and, oh, lies!
August 3rd, 2008 at 11:10 amYeah, a comprehensive part of his “Borrow and Spend” Economic policy that borrows from:
The Chinese
August 3rd, 2008 at 11:17 amThe Japanese
Saudi Arabia
Canada
Europe
Brazil
UAE
Generation Y
Generation Millenials
Generation X, Y and Millenials children, grandchildren, great grandchildren, and so on…
Haven’t we had enough of this? A man who will pander to anyone and not stand firm on anything cannot be an effective leader!
August 3rd, 2008 at 11:20 amYeah, and a tax on all bloviating senators who spew this crap. Maybe, ehh what, 85% of their incomes from these bloviosities, I think thats a good figure. Consider it an alternative energy tax on your hot air. Does not this dufuss’ hot air cause increased global warming?
August 3rd, 2008 at 11:21 amlieberman wouldn’t let kerry speak this morning on meet the press. and he wouldn’t answer the question about social security, he just babbled. that guy is really looking pathetic these days.
August 3rd, 2008 at 11:23 amMcCain campaign’s backtracking assertion this week that raising taxes is “absolutely out of the question,”
Didn’t George W. Bush also say the same thing about taxes, and, well, everything? Yet, he blew the huge budget surplus that Clinton left him and has put us so far in debt that we’re technically bankrupt as a nation, and the only thing holding us up is the rest of the world who are all now suffering from the communicable diseases of Recession and inflation too.
When will the Average American understand that Conservativism is BAD for eveyone except the top 10%? When will they getthat politician ssay anything to get elected? When will they understand that Big OIl makes Big Profits because our “representatives” represent them and not us? When?
August 3rd, 2008 at 11:24 amDiebold has their work cut out for them this time…
August 3rd, 2008 at 11:27 amIt’s hilarious.
Chris Wallace asks Graham a question about McCain’s position, and the first words out of Graham’s mouth are, “Senator Obama.”
August 3rd, 2008 at 11:30 amGramm-cracker, the ‘Don’t Ask/Don’t Tell’ Senator, is about as believable as oh ….., say, maybe McCain or maybe LIEberman or “Go Cheney Yourself’ Darth.
August 3rd, 2008 at 11:32 amThe canard in this whole Social Security “fix” discussion is that there ia no problem whatsoever with Social Security and therefore, it is not and will not ever be in need of a “fix!”
Social Security has been in surplus since 1986 and ran a $181,452,000 surplus in FY 2007 and will continue to run surpluses until 2017.
Let’s focus on getting out of Iraq and the recession and leave Social Security ALONE!!!
August 3rd, 2008 at 11:33 amMcLiar is like the weather: if you don’t like what he is saying just wait a few minutes and he will change. Actually, it really doesn’t make any difference. If by some hanging chat or supreme court jester he is installed (he sure as hell won’t be elected) as President his Corporate string pullers will tell him when it is time to go to the bathroom and anything more complicated.
August 3rd, 2008 at 11:35 ambryan hussein Says: Chris Wallace asks Graham a question about McCain’s position, and the first words out of Graham’s mouth are, “Senator Obama.”
I’m convinced that it’s because the Cons are just negative people. They think all people (except their leader, and their spawn) are bad and need to be both micromanaged and punished. As a result, they focus on the negative aspects of the other guy (no mtter how make-believe), rather than telling us what they are going to do to fix the so many things wrong with America.
I’ve recently seen studies that agree with the Liberal point of view that most people are inherently good, and that given the ability to show it, will rise to the occasion. That people who work under liberal conditions out perform those under conservative conditions, by a significant amount. Liberalism is win-win for everyone, while conservatism is lose-lose for everyone except the top 10%.
It’s why Obama, like our Founding Fathers, focuses on the positive and McCain is incapable of anything but whining like a little girl, and slinging his constant doom-and-gloom negativity.
August 3rd, 2008 at 11:39 amBecause of recent fiscal policies and crimes by the bush administration the next president, no matter who it is will raise taxes.
Social security would be fine if they would leave it alone but the rest of our countries economy is in the dumpster.
Who is elected will determine what Americans bear the brunt of the taxes that will be required. Obama will tax the rich who have been getting a free ride and mcbush will tax the working class.
August 3rd, 2008 at 11:42 amgreat post unbelievable, I agree with everything you said.
August 3rd, 2008 at 11:43 amconservatives are not nice people, even the poor dumb ones that want nothing more than to run our lives while they at the same time can’t run thier own lives.
In my life I have observed that the people I don’t want to spend time with are always conservatives. Life is too short.
August 3rd, 2008 at 11:50 amPost #14 Unbelievable,
agreed for the most part. However, I don’t think though that the philosophies of Hobbes and Locke have to be mutually exclusive.
Hobbes correctly observed that when people are in a state of abject poverty and desperation, they tend to behave selfishly and criminally. Locke correctly observed that when people have their basic needs covered, they tend to behave generously and in a communal manner.
The debate ultimately comes down to wether the government should make it a priority to help people cover those basic needs of the people (healthcare, poverty assistance, educational opportunities, etc), or if the government should bother covering those needs and instead focus on enforcing the law and punishing those that do what they must to stay alive. In short: Welfare State versus Police State.
I also agree with you in that I think Obama correctly interprets the situation and has policies that (while not perfect) have a real chance to be made into legislation and have a positive impact on people’s lives.
August 3rd, 2008 at 11:51 amFred Says: great post unbelievable, I agree with everything you said.
Thanks Fred!
I’ve been having a debate with a college friend after he revealed himself as one of the 23%ers. Funny how you can know someone for so long without having discussed politics before…
Anyway, I’ve been digging up all kinds of stuff to support my position that Conservatism is bad for America, which is why our Founding Fathers created a liberal country in which the free market was supposed to be actually free to the masses so that they controlled it, and I’ve been amazed at how comparing the U.S. now to other Industrialized Nations shows that the countries with the best health, education, worker’s rights, standard of living, longevity, etc. are all VERY liberal (and NOT religious).
It’s made me frustrated that the Average American doesn’t get it. And, frankly, I’m worried that they won’t if Big Oil just lowers gas prices from now until November.
August 3rd, 2008 at 11:56 amFred Says: In my life I have observed that the people I don’t want to spend time with are always conservatives. Life is too short.
It’s why I stopped being one. I didn’t like being around myself either. I had been raised to be materialistic. It made me utterly miserable.
Ten years ago, I went backpacking across Europe trying to figure out why I was so unhappy. I met amazing people and those experiences changed my life (for the better). Unfortunately, once I got bac home, I had to pitch most of my friends and start over – but it was worth it. :)
August 3rd, 2008 at 12:00 pmToo late even if they do. The wheels are in motion and people are feeling the cost in other goods of pandering to big oil. I don’t think we will ever see gas below 3 dollars a gallon again.
Why is the right beating the drum of offshore drilling as if it were a silver bullet that will solve our high fuel prices? I would be open to those kind of actions….that and open the reserve to ease the immediate problem, but they don’t seem to see that we must do more, now.
Just getting more oil alone will not help us in the long run. The American people should be reminded daily about Jimmy Carters efforts to avoid the catastrophe we now face.
August 3rd, 2008 at 12:04 pmbryan hussein Says: The debate ultimately comes down to wether the government should make it a priority to help people cover those basic needs of the people (healthcare, poverty assistance, educational opportunities, etc), or if the government should bother covering those needs and instead focus on enforcing the law and punishing those that do what they must to stay alive. In short: Welfare State versus Police State.
Personally, I’d rather my taxes (because that is where the government gets the money to finance these things) went to take care of a few people who can’t take care of themselves than to a beat them up. Countries who take care of others have better statistics than those who do not.
WE just works a whole lot better than ME… :)
August 3rd, 2008 at 12:05 pmFred Says: Why is the right beating the drum of offshore drilling as if it were a silver bullet that will solve our high fuel prices? I would be open to those kind of actions….that and open the reserve to ease the immediate problem, but they don’t seem to see that we must do more, now.
I think because the polls show that 72% of Americans want offshore drilling. Why isn’t even Obama saying “Look, I understand your pain, but we cannot be knee-jerk in our reactions. Ther fastest and probably best way to solve this problem isn’t by wasting our time with long-term oil solutions that will keep us addicted, but to spend our time on major alternative energy projects.
“The Oild Companies are not investing tehir profits – that they get from YOU – so we are going to use windfall taxation to start creating alternative fuel sources that will create jobs, protect the environment, stop sending billions of our $ overseas, and get us self-sufficient.”
Why isn’t anyone saying that?
August 3rd, 2008 at 12:10 pmGraham: McCain would consider a tax increase on Social Security as ‘part of a comprehensive approach.’
Ok, and someone needs to point out that this is the same stance as Obama is taking on oil drilling. He’s willing to consider limited off-shore drilling as ‘part of a comprehensive approach.’
August 3rd, 2008 at 12:11 pmONE MONTH AGO — IN LATE JUNE — A MCCAIN AD SUPERIMPOSED OBAMA’S VISAGE ON A ONE HUNDRED DOLLAR BILL AS PART OF AN EFFORT TO MOCK HIS SUPPOSED ‘PRESUMPTUOUSNESS.’
To all you self-deluding gullible Republicans who claim to believe that Obama interjected RACE into the presidential campaign by stating, “You know, he doesn’t look like all those other presidents on those dollar bills, you know. He’s risky.”, it must be humbling or even humiliating to realize how easily manipulated you’ve been. Your guy is a flat out lying SOB whose basic campaign strategy is to smear Obama and then claim to be the victim when Obama calls him out for what he’s done. MCCAIN IS A SHAMELESS LYING RACIST! And those who support him are no more honorable or worthy of trust or respect than he is.
http://www.jedreport.com/2008/08/setting-the-rec.html
Ad was released by McCain’s campaign on June 27th, 2008.
NOTE: The image doesn’t occur until about three-quarters of the way through the video. The way YouTube works, the default image occurs at the midpoint. In other words, McCain’s campaign purposefully choose this image.
August 3rd, 2008 at 12:22 pmHow about McCain making a ’small step” to helping Social Security . . . like returning the $28,000 he CURRENTLY collects from SS as a symbolic gesture?
Seems he could struggle along on his Senate Salary, Senate Retirement Payments (CURRENTLY collected for “over 20 years service”), his VA Disability, his wife’s $6 MILLION a year and the lifetime free Senate/VA Health Care . . . multi-millionaires SHOULD pay taxes on SS Benefits COLLECTED.
Now THAT is a “comprehensive approach” I might consider.
August 3rd, 2008 at 12:29 pmJess Wonderin Says: How about McCain making a ’small step” to helping Social Security . . . like returning the $28,000 he CURRENTLY collects from SS as a symbolic gesture?
My mother, who is 64, was saying that she remembers politicians doing just tha – donating their SS to some worthy cause because they didn’t need it. And few of them had or made as much as McCain.
Greedy pig.
August 3rd, 2008 at 12:33 pmJess,
Can someone explain how you can draw a disability and work at the same time?
I agree with your post, anyone who owns a yacht should be shown the door at the social security office as well as the disability office.
I know people who were genuinly hurt on the job and who actually cannot work because they were so badly injured who have had hell getting thier disablily started if they were ever able to get it started at all.
If the man can work, which he seems capable of doing obviously, why should he be drawing a check from a program that his ilk call socialism?
How can mccain be taken seriously?
August 3rd, 2008 at 12:41 pmFred Says: If the man can work, which he seems capable of doing obviously, why should he be drawing a check from a program that his ilk call socialism?
Funny how many anti-socialists work for socialized government that provides them socialized health care, social security, and socialized benefits. They get to work on socialized roadways and runways, use socialized mail, police, firefighters, education, etc. all while whining about socialism. About 90% of his life is socialized! He’s the poster boy for socialistic democracies!
August 3rd, 2008 at 12:50 pmFred -
I don’t hold ill on the VA Disability – he served and suffered physical and mental harm that effects him since, for the rest of his life.
Although I DO find problems with his lack of support for Health and Education Benefits (voting against increased VA health car funding, opposing the Webb Bill etc) for OTHER VETS not lucky enough to have been able morally or physically able to dump an old wife that stood by and raised his family – to get a rich wealthy sugar momma . . .
This son of a military elite family has never had less than complete socialized lifetime medical care, and his family wealth (actually his sugar mamma’s ) has been protected and nurtured by “socialist” laws allowing a monopoly control of distribution of a controlled substance that has been shown to cause great social harm . . .
Bottom line: Does a multi-millionaire NEED to collect a tax free SS income payment? Seems it MIGHT be better spent donated to a welfare fund to help elderly/poor with heat this winter . . . (contrary to myth, most on “welfare” are white poor people and kids . . . .) – Jist a thought.
August 3rd, 2008 at 1:21 pmTYPO!!!
August 3rd, 2008 at 1:24 pmDang!! make that “VA Health CARE funding” . . . alhough as a Vet “car funding” would be nice too. \snark> . . . .
Lindsay should just stick to grinning and standing in the background in photo ops rather than trying to explain McCains gaffs. I really liked the way he was smiling and holding hands with the Dali Lama. I hope his constituents back in SC didn’t see him being photographed with a non-christian.
August 3rd, 2008 at 1:32 pmGreat stuff, unbelievable. However, I don’t think it’s accurate to refer to the run of the mill, modern, neocon GOOPers as “conservative”. They are dangerous, reckless, radicals who have moved so far right that they can’t even see the middle. There’s nothing conservative about them.
And. Don’t forget “socialized farming”. Between subsidies, price supports, and the growing industrialization of the industry, food production is far removed from the “free market” model.
August 3rd, 2008 at 2:00 pmFred Says:
conservatives are not nice people …
In my life I have observed that the people I don’t want to spend time with are always conservatives. Life is too short.
i know what you mean…
what if it’s your family… most of which are “nice”, for the most part…
August 3rd, 2008 at 3:23 pmLinseed Grahamcracker is one of the dumbest, corrupt, RePugniScums to every travel north of the Mason-Jar line!
August 3rd, 2008 at 4:07 pmdixie blood Says:
“Linseed Grahamcracker is one of the dumbest, corrupt, RePugniScums to every travel north of the Mason-Jar line!”
And even when he did he took his own Mason Jar full of “shine.”
August 3rd, 2008 at 4:14 pmFor those of you who will be finishing your studies of The Criminal Mind at college, I give you the name of Lindsey Graham to consider for your dissertation.
Thank you.
August 3rd, 2008 at 8:32 pmI have no problem with any candidate saying they would consider a tax increase as part of a comprehensive approach to dealing with Social Security. The truth is that people are now living considerably longer than they did in the early 1930’s when the program began, yet we still consider 65 as retirement age (or 62 with reduced benefits). Therefore, people who begin drawing Social Security are drawing it for more years than they did in FDR’s time.
It doesn’t take a math whiz to realize that one either has to raise the age for getting benefits (I’m not counting the disabled here), increase the SS tax, raise the SS tax cap, or lower benefits in order to keep the system going. All of these have pros and cons (mostly cons), and should get fair consideration.
I don’t fault McCain for saying that he would consider everything. What I do fault him for is his failure to articulate a position — SOME position — and stick with it. Right now, it’s so obvious that he will say anything anybody wants to hear that it’s impossible to take him seriously, let alone trust him.
August 3rd, 2008 at 10:48 pmFred Says:
unbelievable Says:
That people who work under liberal conditions out perform those under conservative conditions, by a significant amount. Liberalism is win-win for everyone, while conservatism is lose-lose for everyone except the top 10%.
conservatives are not nice people, even the poor dumb ones that want nothing more than to run our lives while they at the same time can’t run thier own lives.
In my life I have observed that the people I don’t want to spend time with are always conservatives. Life is too short.
People, you are missing the point.
August 3rd, 2008 at 10:50 pmThe ACT of governing, IS a liberal action. To provide for others IS a liberal concern. CONVSERVATIVE CANNOT govern, because they lack the very thought process of GOVERNANCE. They have no care or concern for others, ergo, they CANNOT even fathom governing.
This is a great discussion of the ills of the conservative mindset.
Homo economicus
Chuck the oil fompanies!
“Drill Now, Pay Less” is a fiction after our last quarter of “Drive Less, Pay More.”
http://peureport.blogspot.com/2008/08/drive-less-pay-more.html
August 3rd, 2008 at 11:55 pmMy apologies for #40. I thought I was posting under the 9:00 pm piece on Republicans coming stunt. Chuck them too!
August 3rd, 2008 at 11:59 pm