Colorado Retirees: McCain Should Reject Social Security Benefits After Calling It ‘An Absolute Disgrace’
Colorado Retirees: McCain Should Reject Social Security Benefits After Calling It ‘An Absolute Disgrace’
In July, Sen. John McCain (R-AZ), who has claimed that Social Security is “broken,” went a step further and disparaged the retirement program at a Denver, CO townhall, calling it an “absolute disgrace”:
Americans have got to understand that we are paying present day retirees with the taxes paid by young workers…and that’s a disgrace. It’s an absolute disgrace.
Watch it:
McCain’s statement reflected a lack of knowledge about Social Security. “[P]resent-day retirees have always been paid their benefits from the taxes paid by current workers. That has been true from Social Security’s inception,” noted Dean Baker of the Center for Economic and Policy Research.
Now, Colorado seniors are pushing back. McCain is scheduled to speak in Aspen, CO on Thursday, which is coincidentally the 73rd anniversary of the Social Security Act. The Aspen Times reports that a group of seniors plans to protest McCain’s event:
The Colorado Alliance for Retired Americans is organizing a gathering of mostly Front Range retirees to protest during McCain’s engagement at The Aspen Institute’s Greenwald Pavilion. … The Colorado group and the national alliance have been expressing alarm since McCain’s remarks at a July 7 town hall meeting in Denver.
McCain has long supported gutting Social Security. In 2005, he campaigned for President Bush’s radical Social Security privatization plan, though he denies it today. In 2008, McCain said his plan would create “private savings accounts…along the lines that President Bush proposed.”
In 2007, McCain received $23,157 in benefits from Social Security, despite his claim that the system is “broken.” “We’re just absolutely flabbergasted that a man who has been collecting close to $24,000 a year in Social Security has called it a disgrace,” Bernadette Horchner, a member of the Colorado group, said. “He doesn’t give back the money.”
Sort Comments By: Top Rated | Date
146 Responses to “Colorado Retirees: McCain Should Reject Social Security Benefits After Calling It ‘An Absolute Disgrace’”
Topic Cloud
ArchivesBlog Roll
McCain is working, despite his disability, so why is he even getting a check in the first place?
I thought you either had to be unable to work or retired to collect benefits.
August 12th, 2008 at 11:22 amAfter 26 years in the Senate, JM does not ahve a grasp of the most basic workings of our government.
August 12th, 2008 at 11:24 amNo wonder the GOP base do not have any enthusiam for his campaign.
This shows how out of touch he is with Washington and the rest of America......It`s socialism to Mcwars and the rest of the Reich and that competes with their ideology and dogma.How can he be a senator and not understand how social security works.Senator Mc wars is the disgrace here not social security.
August 12th, 2008 at 11:26 am"Americans have got to understand that we are paying present day retirees with the taxes paid by young workers…and that’s a disgrace. It’s an absolute disgrace."
Republicans have been in charge for the last 20 of the past 28 years. Blame your own policies for robbing SS's coffers to fund wars rather than allow it to go what it was actually intended to go for - people who are too old or too disabled to work.
For someone so opposed to Social programs, he sure is setting a bad example in using so many himself.
August 12th, 2008 at 11:26 amMcCain is about as stupid as his base.
August 12th, 2008 at 11:26 amHe works, his wife is worth millions, and he still collects $24,000 a year. Hell yeah the system is broken, but instead of fixing it so the people who need the money get the money, McSame thinks that by blowing the whole thing up, it will make things all better.
How much farther out of touch can this man be?
August 12th, 2008 at 11:27 amHe IS kind of a nitwit, isn't he?
August 12th, 2008 at 11:28 amProtesters won't be let in under Republican rules. They better not be wearing any "offensive" t-shirts.
August 12th, 2008 at 11:31 amJustice for Rowan Says:
You're out of school here, we know better and your lying won't change what we know.
Maybe if mccain let real people attend his so called "town hall meetings" instead of invited cheerleaders he would get imput from real Americans but that would be counter productive for his agenda.
August 12th, 2008 at 11:32 amMcNumbNuts will be at least triple-dipping after he is trounced in November. He will get his social security and a pension from both the military and Senate. On top of that, he's riding the Cindy gravy-train.
He's living the American dream. Only in America can a wastrel like McNumbNuts succeed. All it has taken is (1) a legacy admission to the Naval Academy followed by a "social" graduation; (2)tossing his first wife under the bus; (3) marrying an heiress whose daddy could finance his first elections; and (4) an ignorant electorate in Arizona.
August 12th, 2008 at 11:33 amAlso, since McCain has never worked for any job that wasn't paid for by the government, and he is getting retirement benefits from those government jobs, he should not be allowed to collect Social Security in the first place. In essence, he is double dipping. And then there's that pesky $54,000 a year he is paid by being rated 100% disabled by the military. Isn't that a sweet deal, one I believe many current disabled vets would love to get.
August 12th, 2008 at 11:33 amOver the last few months there has been much said about the "enemies" of the ideas held by the publishers of and commenter's on TP. The comments have run the gamut from humorous, sarcastic, satiric, parodistic, to punny; from good taste to poor taste. These comments have been assimilated without much negative ado and applauded when a little thought is involved as with the word play with the "Mc" in Senator McClain's name and the spurious references to Bush, Cheney, Rove, et al. Over those same months there have been references to the perceived "faults" of the "good guys." There have been numerous comments about Senator Obama's race, Speaker Pelosi's equivocation, Vice-President Gore's stature (figuratively and literally) and Senator Edwards' proclivity toward infidelity. None of which have incurred the wrath of the holier-than-thou for the author as did a humorous comment I submitted yesterday which included those concepts limned earlier (humor, sarcasm, satire, parody, and pun) and referenced the traits outlined above. I do apologize if I did indeed ruffle the feathers of anyone who understood and appreciated the good-natured approach of the comment. For those illiterate hypocrites who took exception to the author and not the comment I would suggest you return to whence you came or admit to being the "trolls" you are.
August 12th, 2008 at 11:34 amJustice for Rowan Says: If we are being honest, we have to admit that Social Security is broken and needs an overhaul.
Social Security s not broken. The Republican way of stealing from it is what's broken. Kick out the conservatives and watch what begins to heal.
August 12th, 2008 at 11:34 amJustice for Rowan Says:
Without an overhaul, there will soon be more money going out of the Social Security Trust Fund than there will be going in. If we are being honest, we have to admit that Social Security is broken and needs an overhaul.
Prove it. Just because you say it doesn't make it true.
August 12th, 2008 at 11:35 amHmmmm,
$24K / yr for Social Security
$58K / yr for disability
Seems to me McSubsidy grabs $82K / yr on 'us'.
America, let's at least pro-rate his Senate salary based on days worked.
2008 / no attendance, no votes = $0.00
Next, let's charge him $5 for each lie told on the trail...
17,000 lies X $5 = $85K
OK, now we're getting somewhere...he owes US $3,000.
No checks, McMoney, cash on the barrelhead only.
August 12th, 2008 at 11:35 amOh, but that's ...DIFFERENT, isn't it??
*eyeroll*
August 12th, 2008 at 11:37 amHow abut justice for Lam?
Or Iglacias?
Or any other of the US Attorneys displaced by corruption & pols?
August 12th, 2008 at 11:40 amJustice for Rowan Says: Anyone who thinks that Social Security needs fixing must reject its benefits?
Not the point. The point is that McCain can afford to put his money (actually tax payers money) where his mouth is to take a stand on principal. Since he has no scruples, he takes the money he doesn't need and just whines about a system that isn't broken so he can pander.
August 12th, 2008 at 11:41 amJustice for Rowan Says:
Your link shows just how sick you really are.
Why aren't you more concerned about the condition of our medical health care system in general......10 hour plus waits in emergency rooms don't refelect the best medical care in the world does it now?
August 12th, 2008 at 11:41 amMcGrampa: Degenerating one group at a time
August 12th, 2008 at 11:41 amSocial Security Solvency:
http://www.ssa.gov/OACT/TR/TR07/trTOC.html
So, Social Security will have a problem in 32 years so we should all panic now! Besides, Obama has several plans to address the problem. The best plan is to raise the cap on paying into Social Security.
Right now the cap is set at $90,000. So you pay taxes on your first $90,000 and then stop paying taxes. But people making over that, many of whom pay less than nothing in tax because of all their tax shelters, will end up with huge retirement incomes from work and investments and then still collect their social security. Nice gig for them, huh.
I say we reform the income tax system by going back to what it was designed for in the first place, taxing "income" not wages. If we taxed all the income at the same rate we are now taxing our wages, this country would be flush with money. And the wage earner would come out way ahead. But the rich guys won't be quite as rich, so it's not going to happen.
August 12th, 2008 at 11:42 amJustice for Rowan at 11:29 am
"Without an overhaul, there will soon be more money going out of the Social Security Trust Fund than there will be going in."
The worst case scenario I have heard is that they will be able to pay 87 per cent of benefits. With more children in school right now than at the height of the Baby Boom, I don't see a shortage for long. The problem is the cons don't want to pay the system back the money they have stolen from it.
August 12th, 2008 at 11:42 amJustice for Rowan Says:
Anyone who thinks that Social Security needs fixing must reject its benefits?
Anyone who thinks that Unemployment needs fixing must reject its benefits?
Anyone who thinks Medicare needs fixing must reject its benefits?
I don’t think so.
Then how about you start by defining how it is brokan and then you can get busy suggesting the best course of action to "fix" it.
Otherwise, you're adding nothing to the argument.
Oh, and BTW, just because McCain does not HAVE to give back his benefits because he says they are disgraceful, don't you think it would be the honorable thing to do?
August 12th, 2008 at 11:43 amJustice for Rowan Says:
Anyone who thinks that Social Security needs fixing must reject its benefits?
Anyone who thinks that Unemployment needs fixing must reject its benefits?
Anyone who thinks Medicare needs fixing must reject its benefits?
I don’t think so.
Nope, just the hypocrites who take the benefits when they don't need them and then complain about them.
August 12th, 2008 at 11:44 amGrrrrrrrrr...Mcnumbnut's is raking in S.S.,. Disability and how much from his senate job.?..This piece of lieing shit should be medicated, straped to a mental nut case bed and locked up....Unbelievable....P. B. & J, today that stand's for Peace and Blessings to all but the troll's and Jail for the corrupt in this administrtion..
August 12th, 2008 at 12:16 pmJustice for Rowan Says:
Anyone who thinks that Unemployment needs fixing must reject its benefits?
There are a whole bunch of Republicans in Congress who will have to make that decision for themselves on November 5.
August 12th, 2008 at 12:18 pmMcSame gets almost $180k/yr from his Senatorial salary. How the chingadera does he get to keep al;most $2000/mo from SS?
August 12th, 2008 at 12:19 pmMcCain is working, despite his disability, so why is he even getting a check in the first place?
I thought you either had to be unable to work or retired to collect benefits.
_____________
Well... seeing as McShame appears to be delusional half the time, he prolly really can't work in the true sense of the word... 'n seeing how much time he doesn't spend doing his job as an elected official, he might as well be retired, no? Jes' pointin' it out, thas all.
August 12th, 2008 at 12:21 pmtokin,
August 12th, 2008 at 12:23 pmBecause the Senator isn't a McElitist.
Just what is this 100% disability? Iraq vets who loose limbs don't get 100% disability benefits, so what gives?
August 12th, 2008 at 12:24 pmJustice for Rowan Says
August 12th, 2008 at 11:29 am
Without an overhaul, there will soon be more money going out of the Social Security Trust Fund than there will be going in. If we are being honest, we have to admit that Social Security is broken and needs an overhaul.
_______________________________________________________
Utter nonsense. Social Security is a program that has worked for decades. It isn't "broken".
As with any long-term program, there will be times when adjustments, or tweaks, will need to be made to accommodate changing conditions. For example, people are living considerably longer now than they were when the program started in the 1930's. Assuming this trend continues, there may need to be at some point an adjustment to the age at which retirees can collect benefits. This is an adjustment, not an overhaul.
Asking for an overhaul for a system that isn't broken (or calling for its destruction) is akin to ripping out your entire kitchen because the garbage disposal is jamming. Or getting rid of your child because he's outgrown his sneakers. No thinking person would think either of these scenarios makes any sense. Ditto for Social Security.
August 12th, 2008 at 12:25 pmFred says:
Why aren’t you more concerned about the condition of our medical health care system in general……10 hour plus waits in emergency rooms don’t refelect the best medical care in the world does it now?
I'd like to know where you get the idea that we have the best medical care in the world? In a study done by the W.H.O. in late 1999 (you know, the end of the Clinton era) had the US ranked 37th in advanced countries .
here's an excerpt form a N.Y. times article from 1 year ago today;
"Healthy lives. We have known for years that America has a high infant mortality rate, so it is no surprise that we rank last among 23 nations by that yardstick. But the problem is much broader. We rank near the bottom in healthy life expectancy at age 60, and 15th among 19 countries in deaths from a wide range of illnesses that would not have been fatal if treated with timely and effective care."
And when it comes to the Social Security reference McCain made about "being paid for by taxes from today's young worker". He's right and wrong. He's right that it needs fixed he's just not completely accurate about it being a disgrace that it's funded by today's young worker. Here's a quote from the SSA's own website.
August 12th, 2008 at 12:26 pm"The baby boomers, the large number of people born between 1946 and 1964, will be retiring starting around 2008. Today, there are three workers for every beneficiary; by the year 2030, there will be two workers for every beneficiary. Based on current economic assumption, during the second decade of the next century benefit payments will exceed tax revenues and Social Security will have to redeem its trust fund reserves to meet its obligations. This means selling the securities it holds back to the government. To pay for them, the government would need to raise general taxes or sell new long-term securities in the private market. To meet the cost of the baby boom’s retirement, Social Security will have to be strengthened.
Would somebody please post a link (from a reliable source) stating that the $58,000 (or so) McCain receives from the military is for disability? I had read that's his military retirement pension.
We can point to a lot to highlight McCain's hypocrisy. Certainly enough that we can keep things factual.
August 12th, 2008 at 12:28 pmWe are told by our government that social security is broken.
We are told that due to the large numbers of baby boomers retiring the SS fund is giving out more money than it is taking in.
I say bullshit! First of all are we ever told SS is broken because the greedy bastards in DC are STEALING from it to pay for their wars and other pet projects...nope!
They make it seem like fixing the SS problem is a complex issue that we citizens just couldn't possibly comprehend. Well it isn't exactly rocket science. Raise the wage cap from the first $90,000.00 made to the first $750,000.00 made AND THEN PUT A LOCK BOX ON THE SS FUND SO THAT OUR GREEDY, CORRUPT POLITICIANS CAN NO LONGER STEAL FROM IT!
And if anyone really believes that putting ones retirement (SS) money into the greedy hands of those soul less bloodsuckers on Wallstreet, would be a good thing you are more delusional than the most idiotic republican troll.
August 12th, 2008 at 12:31 pmFlippy Mcspin continues to fracture the Republican base.
Just keep talking Flippy.
August 12th, 2008 at 12:32 pmMissmolly, I tried to thank you yesterday for engaging in a good conversation with me. I knew that there were progressives who could maintain their integrity in conversations with a conservative. When I hit the post button, I got error messages that there was no connection to TP. So, though it is late, you have my thanks.
August 12th, 2008 at 12:32 pmLook! It's the mental midget from Fantasy Island, Tattoo.
First he's a fake marine, then a "concerned" Wingnut.
But always and idiot.
How about something more relevant than 10 year old facts?
And no links??? What else would you expect from a lying Repuke, it's just who they are.
August 12th, 2008 at 12:33 pmTry reading something other than the BS peddled by Faux nooze at least ONCE IN A WHILE:
link
Both of these indices include “financial fairness” (FF) as a factor with 25% weight in measuring the system’s performance. FF is measured first by finding a household’s contribution to health expenditure as a percentage of household income (beyond subsistence), and then looking at the distribution of this percentage over all households. The wider is the distribution, the worse a nation will perform on the health performance index (other things equal). But it should not be surprising at all that a larger percentage of poor people’s income will be spend on health than would be spent by the rich. Insofar as healthcare is treated as a necessity, we should expect that people will spend a decreasing fraction (not a decreasing amount, but a decreasing fraction) of their income on healthcare as their income increases. Rich people tend to spend a larger percentage of their income on luxuries than do the poor.
August 12th, 2008 at 12:39 pmNever mind on the link about McCain's pension. After doing some digging myself, it's apparent that his $58,000 is indeed a retirement pension that McCain was allowed to start collecting early due to his disability (injuries sustained during his service).
Last April, McCain's own staff referred to it as a "disability pension", which probably caused that perception.
August 12th, 2008 at 12:39 pmCorrection to John McCain: Whats an absolute disgrace is the way the republican party enabled and cheerleaded the destruction of the poor, middleclass and our constitution at the hands of the Bush administration for the past 7+ years.
August 12th, 2008 at 12:39 pmIf the Republicans would pay to the Social Security Fund would return the principal and pay the interest that would have accumulated on all the funds they transferred to the General Fund from Social Security, as the law requires, there would be no need for this discussion. The easiest and most obvious fix to the Social Security "System" is to vote out, convict, fine, and jail all the Republican incumbents.
August 12th, 2008 at 12:40 pmOh hello DieNowForHairgrease I see you still have no scruples, morals, or tact. TP don't you just love the armchair quarterbacks who always talk about doing but just CAN'T!
I didn't think I had to link the SSA or the NY Times for you but if I must continue to do your homework for you, here you go
the SSA:
http://www.ssa.gov/kids/finace1.htm
The NY Times:
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/08/12/opinion/12sun1.html?pagewanted=print
Do you need any book reports done for you too? Can you find your mom and have her read what's in these posts to you. I'm sure, if you ask nicely, she read slowly and explain it to you as she goes.
August 12th, 2008 at 12:41 pmThat's right up there with Bob Dole's mother getting Medicare - remember that moment back in '96? The Doles can't take care of their own family? They've got their mother on socialized medicine - the horrors!
August 12th, 2008 at 12:41 pmThose poor seniors... if they protest, they won't be let in. And might even get arrested like the lady who was arrested for carrying a McCain = Bush sign.
August 12th, 2008 at 12:41 pmMcCain is just another welfare recipient. He takes every handout that the government offers even while holding a public office that puts him in the upper echelon of earnings in this country. Social Security was designed to be the safety net for retirement. When rich people like John McCain drain money from it there is less money for the people who really need it.
August 12th, 2008 at 12:42 pmLike it or not, McCain did pay in to the SS fund so he should receive benefits...them are the rules. But to call it an absolute disgrace and to say that the young Americans are paying for retirees is b.s. so are people in their 30's, 40's, 50's...and it isn't just young Americans, it's foreigners, here legally and illegally who are paying in.
As someone pointed out at a previous thread, the illegal workers who use illegal or forged ID's and SS#'s are still paying taxes, the difference is that many do this just to have the ability to work but are too afraid to file a tax return for fear of being busted so they don't receive a tax return.
August 12th, 2008 at 12:47 pmGrampy McSame says - My friends back in the day we would all save our sea shells for a rainy day, but some people had to use their sea shells to buy food and stuff, they would get all old and not have any shells, well too bad for them, all you have to do is go to the shore and grab some, and that's how we invented wall street, we would get some of my friends together and we would grab other people's shells and make them our own, we would tell them that we are investing for their future, but in reality we were going on dunken topless (Cindy does a great lap dance) BBQ's were we throw cow pies at the people with no shells, I like hot sauce on my cow pies, that way they don't taste like shit....oops, sat in a bowl of pork n' beans again...mmmmm, warm.
Ah, I see you have a complete grasp of the subject gramps, carry on.
August 12th, 2008 at 12:48 pmEver heard of the "Echo Boomers"? That is the children of the Baby Boomers, who now vastly outnumber their parents' generation and are starting to have their own children. There are more children in school now than at the height of the Baby Boom and they will all be workers as we retire! There is not going to be a shortage of future contributions into Social Security, in the long run it will be fine, only a spot shortage will occur about ten years from now. What terrifies these cons is that they might have to pay back all that money they have stolen from the system as the GOP used it to buy votes from the gullible in the form of tax breaks, which mostly went to the top anyway.
August 12th, 2008 at 12:50 pmThe big secret in Social Security they don't want the people to know is that income from "passive investments" (rental properties, stock sales, dividends)is not subject to SS, only W2 earners and self employed people pay on that first $100k.
phantasymanINphantasyland Says
August 12th, 2008 at 12:26 pm
I’d like to know where you get the idea that we have the best medical care in the world? In a study done by the W.H.O. in late 1999 (you know, the end of the Clinton era) had the US ranked 37th in advanced countries .
here’s an excerpt form a N.Y. times article from 1 year ago today;
“Healthy lives. We have known for years that America has a high infant mortality rate, so it is no surprise that we rank last among 23 nations by that yardstick. But the problem is much broader. We rank near the bottom in healthy life expectancy at age 60, and 15th among 19 countries in deaths from a wide range of illnesses that would not have been fatal if treated with timely and effective care.”
_________________________________________________________
Since I don't have access to that NY Times article, or the sources that contributed to it, I can only make a few educated guesses.
I believe that the United States has some of the best (if not THE best) health care in the world. We are just as cutting-edge as everyone else when it comes to medical technology, skills, equipment, pharmaceuticals, and anything else needed to save lives and keep people healthy.
Where we fall short is in providing our citizens access to this wonderful health care. A high infant mortality rate can be indicative of a mother not receiving adequate prenatal care, a mother having medical issues of her own that are not being managed properly, or even giving birth under less than ideal conditions. The other points you raise in that article excerpt -- lower life expectancy and deaths from treatable conditions -- can also be explained by people not getting the care they need.
It's shameful that in this country, one of the richest on earth, so many people go without medical care due to their not being able to afford it. Without regular doctor checkups, wellness programs, and management of medical conditions, the deck has always been stacked against the poor. And increasingly, it's spreading to the middle class.
August 12th, 2008 at 12:50 pmRE40 DieNowForPeas,
That's a fantastic link you got there... thanks for proving my point that the United States does not rank #1 in it's health care. Though your link is from a little bit more "slanted" point of view than mine, at no time does it mention the US being #1.
August 12th, 2008 at 12:50 pmphantasymanINphantasyland Says:
RE40 DieNowForPeas,
That’s a fantastic link you got there… thanks for proving my point that the United States does not rank #1 in it’s health care. Though your link is from a little bit more “slanted” point of view than mine, at no time does it mention the US being #1.
August 12th, 2008 at 12:50 pm
______
Why do you hate America, Trajan?
August 12th, 2008 at 12:52 pmNo, You Sir are a disgrace.
August 12th, 2008 at 12:52 pmoops.
No, You Sir are an absolute disgrace.
August 12th, 2008 at 12:54 pmso, how can you fix social security by cutting taxes?
second, i make less per year than what mccain makes in social security per year.
that's amusing....
August 12th, 2008 at 12:54 pmHouse of Roberts Says: Ever heard of the “Echo Boomers”? That is the children of the Baby Boomers, who now vastly outnumber their parents’ generation and are starting to have their own children. There are more children in school now than at the height of the Baby Boom and they will all be workers as we retire!
I heard that there are 78 million boomers, 35 million Generation X, and 78 million Generation Y (or echo boomers).
When the Boomers retire, there aren't enough Gen Xs to replace them. Not sure how that issue will resolve itself, but I think it might be a good time for restoring worker's rights, since we'll be in higher demand than we are now.
August 12th, 2008 at 12:58 pmMissHusseinMolly,
I couldn't agree more. The "c-section" rate is deplorable in this country and can be closely attributed to the lack of beds and or funding for doctors (including their high insurance premium rates). Midwifery care in America is pretty much on the endangered species list, meanwhile practicing (real) midwives have a less than 1% c-section rate and roughly the same percentage when it comes to infant mortality. And most of them did not have 8 years of med school and all the best "high-tech" equipment. It's not just SSA or private health care scenarios that will rescue this country from dismal ratings in almost every study (compared to the rest of the world) it's an overall change in philosophy that every situation needs every available gadget or gizmo to have a positive outcome.
August 12th, 2008 at 12:58 pmMissHusseinMolly,
I couldn't agree more. The "c-section" rate is deplorable in this country and can be closely attributed to the lack of beds and or funding for doctors (including their high insurance premium rates). Midwifery care in America is pretty much on the endangered species list, meanwhile practicing (real) midwives have a less than 1% c-section rate and roughly the same percentage when it comes to infant mortality. And most of them did not have 8 years of med school and all the best "high-tech" equipment. It's not just SSA or private health care scenarios that will rescue this country from dismal ratings in almost every study (compared to the rest of the world) it's an overall change in philosophy that every situation needs every available gadget or gizmo to have a positive outcome.
August 12th, 2008 at 12:58 pmRE 58&59
August 12th, 2008 at 1:00 pmSorry, I don't know why that posted twice.... it wasn't that good of a post ;-)
Like it or not, McCain did pay in to the SS fund so he should receive benefits…them are the rules.
Do senate members pay SS tax? Don't they have their own pension plan that is separate from SS? City of Chicago workers don't pay SS, they contribute to a pension plan instead.
August 12th, 2008 at 1:01 pmmcchimpy has been wrong on every single point.
Remember the polls were wrong in Iowa.
August 12th, 2008 at 1:01 pmmcchimpy ain't close to Sen. Obama. This will be a democratic monumental landslide.
misshusseinmolly Says: A high infant mortality rate can be indicative of a mother not receiving adequate prenatal care, a mother having medical issues of her own that are not being managed properly, or even giving birth under less than ideal conditions.
Which comes from not treating women as equals to men - something all other Inustrialized Nations with universal health care do.
Women as equals also decreases crime rates, improves productivity (GDP) and raises standards of living and longevity for all.
But we can't solve thi inequality until we stop letting Conservatives run the government.
August 12th, 2008 at 1:01 pmSince you feel obligated to offer to educate those here I will inform you now that my statement about the best health care in the world was sarcasm.....look it up.
It's the defense the right uses to discredit a national or socialized health care system that takes the profit out of it and actually could turn it into a real health care system.
By the way, you were probably on board for the swiftboating of Hillary Clintons attempt to change that in the era you mention...you know the Clinton era.
August 12th, 2008 at 1:05 pmunbelievable Says:
Which comes from not treating women as equals to men - something all other Inustrialized Nations with universal health care do.
Um yeah, as unpopular as I know I'm going to be treated for this response... I agree that may be an issue but not as much as you think. Some of the countries that rank higher have large muslim populations. Muslim women are property of muslim men. And this country does well to treat women as equals (of course we are not the best) but it's not for lack of trying. There are many rights that women have that men do not, so please let's not go down that road. I can see it's a sore subject for you. As is the reverse for me...
August 12th, 2008 at 1:08 pmunbelievable at 12:58 pm
"...I think it might be a good time for restoring worker’s rights, since we’ll be in higher demand than we are now."
Corporations don't want experienced OLDER workers, they want 35 year olds with 25 years of experience.
August 12th, 2008 at 1:12 pmWe will have to ressurrect labor unions, but without the old union stigma of the past. Most younger guys have this chip on their shoulder of "I don't need the union, I get along just fine" until they get older, then they get cut loose from their job just as they start to need the good benefits of the health insurance they never used. They never had the experience of seeing what a union could do for their grandfathers, fathers and uncles, because there weren't any.
You have outed yourself as a mis-informer. Since when are the countries you mention even in the same class as the ones unbelievable mentions.......that's not apples and oranges as you would deceptively imply.
August 12th, 2008 at 1:12 pmMcCain has long supported gutting Social Security. In 2005, he campaigned for President Bush’s radical Social Security privatization plan, though he denies it today. In 2008, McCain said his plan would create “private savings accounts…along the lines that President Bush proposed.”
So he's against Bush's plan except, well, when he's for it. Sounds like his position on Bush's war and Bush's tax cuts.
In any case, you can fool the voters on a lot of things but when you start screwing with Social Security, you're toast.
http://progressiveworldreview.com
August 12th, 2008 at 1:14 pmphantasymanINphantasyland Says: Um yeah, as unpopular as I know I’m going to be treated for this response… I agree that may be an issue but not as much as you think. Some of the countries that rank higher have large muslim populations. Muslim women are property of muslim men. And this country does well to treat women as equals (of course we are not the best) but it’s not for lack of trying. There are many rights that women have that men do not, so please let’s not go down that road. I can see it’s a sore subject for you. As is the reverse for me…
What? That's nonsense. Scandinavia ranks at the top of nearly every study and they do not have a high Muslim population. They do, however, have equal rights laws and a respect for women as equals to men.
I know it's worse here than you admit because I've not only been to those countries to see the difference, but I am a woman living here where we make less money and treated as second class citizen because of crap in the bible(s).
It might be worse in the Middle East, China, India, etc. but that doesn't mean we women should settle for less just because it could be worse. That's ridiculous.
August 12th, 2008 at 1:14 pmFred says:
Since you feel obligated to offer to educate those here I will inform you now that my statement about the best health care in the world was sarcasm…..look it up.
My apologies, I get it now, I didn't catch on when I first read your post.
How could I be on board with Hilary Clinton during her husband's reign as president? She was not elected to anything at the time so her politics were pretty much irrelevant. Just as I'm sure you are not on board with Laura Bush's Burmese crusade.
August 12th, 2008 at 1:15 pmHouse of Roberts Says: Corporations don’t want experienced OLDER workers, they want 35 year olds with 25 years of experience.
They can want what doesn't exist, but it doesn't mean they won't have to find a compromise when this reality kicks in.
What's worse for them is that the Gen Y folks have very high expectations and 60 Minutes did an expose on this how companies are having to cater to them, or they go and start their own companies because they were raised to believe they can do anything.
I figure the pendulum is also due to swing bak in the opposite direction, as it can't get much further to the right :)
August 12th, 2008 at 1:18 pmreign? Excuse me? I guess Nancy's war on drugs was something you could sign on to though, right?
August 12th, 2008 at 1:19 pmGotta run kids - it's been fun :)
August 12th, 2008 at 1:20 pmHe was being snarky, get it. It's your side who says we don't need a national healthcare program and that it will ruin the best system in the world. Get a clue.
August 12th, 2008 at 1:21 pmSo if McCain is wrong to accept Social Security, then it must follow that all the Democrats are wrong to accept tax breaks, right? The complain left and right about all the tax breaks for the rich. Well someone should explain that to Warren Buffett and his 17.7% tax rate, Teresa Heinz and her 12% tax rate and John Edwards, who dodged nearly $600K in Medicare taxes.
August 12th, 2008 at 1:21 pmunbelievable Says:
Obviously I cannot argue with you over this. You, though, are granted something many of these people in other countries are not granted, the ability to vote for those who will improve your situation. And sometimes in the interst of fairness, we have to agree that the basics of equality can be overlooked. I think this country has made and continues to make great strides in equality for women, bible or no bible, we have come a long way and yes we still have a ways to go. Just like any other movement, there are those who try to pervert the movement by using it for selfish gain. I wish you nothing but the best in the crusde that is obviously close to your heart. Just as banning "routine infant circumcision" is close to mine, but that's an arguement for another thread.
August 12th, 2008 at 1:26 pmSirWillae Says:
These must be the rest of them then....you know, the republicans.
Companies don't pay any taxes
August 12th, 2008 at 1:27 pmYeah, like black people too huh. Please tell me who would be gaming an equal rights movement other than the right trying to make it look like something other than what it is in order to marginalize the movement?
August 12th, 2008 at 1:31 pmNobody is required to take SS benefits. Anybody who has money and thinks they are deplorable should stop taking them. And progressives think the tax laws are unfair and that all people who make big money should be paying more, what's your point. And how exactly did edwards dodge $600k in Medicare taxes since there's a cap on the amount income you pay SS on. That's how you fix the system, take the cap of high income earner. Also why isn't there a coordination of benefits for people who get federal paychecks. Maybe a law that says there's a two payment limit so the poor can get Medicare and Medicaid. But people with big money getting at least three separate benefits, what a bunch of pigs.
August 12th, 2008 at 1:31 pmI'm sure SirWillae is a typcial 19% Bushist deadender, probably collects welfare, uses food stamps, while living in a rusty trailer and writing letters to the editor complaining about how the rich are forced to pay for socialist programs.
August 12th, 2008 at 1:32 pmAnd how exactly did edwards dodge $600k in Medicare taxes since there’s a cap on the amount income you pay SS on.
Why don't you just read the link and find out? BTW, that cap only applies to Social Security taxes, not Medicare taxes.
I’m sure SirWillae is a typcial 19% Bushist deadender, probably collects welfare, uses food stamps, while living in a rusty trailer and writing letters to the editor complaining about how the rich are forced to pay for socialist programs.
Funny, coming from someone whose screen name is "shoeless". In any case, it's good to know that, when you have no argument to make, you can just resort to sensationalism. I hope that works out for you while you try to come up with something coherent to say.
August 12th, 2008 at 1:36 pmAMcG773 Says:
Like it or not, McCain did pay in to the SS fund so he should receive benefits…them are the rules.
Do senate members pay SS tax? Don’t they have their own pension plan that is separate from SS? City of Chicago workers don’t pay SS, they contribute to a pension plan instead.
That's an interesting point. I also wonder if the US military pays into SS? McCain has never worked in the private industry so one can say that the US government (our tax dollars) has paid McCain's SS taxes.
August 12th, 2008 at 1:37 pmFred Says:
Yeah, like black people too huh. Please tell me who would be gaming an equal rights movement other than the right trying to make it look like something other than what it is in order to marginalize the movement?
Could you please explain to me what it is that you want me to admit to? If you are going to argue that no one has ever used the womens lib or the equal rights movements for their own personal gain, then you are more biased than any conservative I've ever met. If you just want me to say that it's the darn republicans that are always guilty of stuff like that then again you will be mistaken. They may have done a great many bad things, but I am not the defender of the republican party nor am I here to partake in such childishness. I am here to understand views that I am not altogether familiar with. If you don't need another person agreeing with you or seeing your points (and probably admitting that I was worng) then I will happily move along to a more centrist website (if there are any). If the sharing of views and a general understanding are what you would like from at least 1 conservative, then let's engage in a healthy debate sans name calling and "I told you so's".
August 12th, 2008 at 1:40 pmSirWillae Says:
I hope that works out for you while you try to come up with something coherent to say.
What do you say to a poor slob who lays awake nights worrying that the uber-wealthy Republicans have it too tough in life?
August 12th, 2008 at 1:43 pmSirWillae Says:
Funny you mention Warren Buffet, since he's the person who raised the whole issue of inequality in taxation. Buffet was the person who had his own employees determine that they were paying twice the rate he was and has issued a challenge to other CEOs.
August 12th, 2008 at 1:44 pmI guess you mean something like this post by you:
I'm no centrist and you can move freely as you please, away is fine, I'm not the least interested in your opinion. I will however hold you to truth so quit projecting your own charactor flaws onto others.
August 12th, 2008 at 1:47 pmgummitch,
August 12th, 2008 at 1:48 pmThis fool hates Warren Buffet precisely because he raised the question of taxation inequality. As a typical corporatist tool, he believes the poor have too much money and the rich don't have enough.
Childisness huh, got mirror?
August 12th, 2008 at 1:50 pmSirWillae Says:
So if McCain is wrong to accept Social Security, then it must follow that all the Democrats are wrong to accept tax breaks, right? The complain left and right about all the tax breaks for the rich. Well someone should explain that to Warren Buffett and his 17.7% tax rate...
Warren Buffet has a problem with that tax rate because it's much less than his secretary who pays 30%. He challenged the Forbes 500 crowd to check to see if they are paying less tax than their secretaries. No one took him up on the challenge because they all knew it was the case.
The reason why very wealthy pay less taxes than the average worker is because the tax they pay on investments is so low. And this is exactly the opposite of what the founders intended.
in·come
–noun
1. the monetary payment received for goods or services, or from other sources, as rents or investments.
They envisioned a tax on money people made from investments, rentals, sales, etc. They did not define "wages" as being "income". In the early years "income" was taxed. Then the government started tilting towards taxing wages. Now there is a huge gap between taxes on income and taxes on wages.
In other words, the very rich can sit around doing nothing while living off their investments and pay much less in taxes than the average Joe who works 40+ hours for minimum wage.
There's something very wrong with that picture.
August 12th, 2008 at 1:53 pmFirst you explain this. Are you saying that the people who the equal rights movement benifit are abusing the system by getting a better job, etc. because of the movement or just what exactly are you saying?
August 12th, 2008 at 1:54 pmFunny you mention Warren Buffet (sic), since he’s the person who raised the whole issue of inequality in taxation.
Yes. Yes, he did. And I applaud him for it. However, just like John McCain isn't rushing to the Social Security office to return his "disgraceful" benefits, I somehow doubt Warren Buffett (yes, his name is spelled with 2 t's) is mailing checks to the treasury to return all of this tax savings, either.
The moral is that you shouldn't throw stones in a glass house. If you're going to call John McCain a hypocrite for receiving Social Security benefits, then you should be prepared to acknowledge hypocritical Democrats who receive tax breaks. I know you'd like to believe that the Democrats are beyond reproach, but that's just fantasy.
August 12th, 2008 at 1:54 pmFred Says:
I guess you mean something like this post by you:
We'll there's a little history behind the lying coward who goes by DieNowForPeace. He is THE gutless wonder. He did nothing the last few days except question and/or ridicule others (including my) military service. There are others that have sustained meaningful conversations without chickenshit little copouts like anonymously poking fun at a REAL CITIZEN's service. I'm sure there's a word out there more degrading than coward and when I find it, I'm sure he'll still fit the definition. We're I a progressive, I'd still put as much distance between me and that turd as possible.
August 12th, 2008 at 1:57 pmAnd if you notice in my posts to other TP members, ones with valid arguements and points, you'll see I've been more gracious than I'm sure you'd expect from your "enemy" that is a conservative.
Fred says:
Childisness huh, got mirror?
Absolutley, I challenge you to find where I have childishly defended the republican party... or defended it at all.
August 12th, 2008 at 1:59 pmphantasymanINphantasyland Says:
Real class act yourself aren't you?
I'm done with your lying ass.
August 12th, 2008 at 2:00 pmbye bye
August 12th, 2008 at 2:02 pmRich Democrats get into politics to raise their own taxes. Rich Republicans get into office in order to give themselves tax cuts.
They must have a good laugh at these poor dopes who will do anything to make sure they get those tax cuts.
August 12th, 2008 at 2:03 pmmccain is taking the money while trying to destroy a system that benifits many Americans, including old republicans. I would just drop it I were him, it's gonna cost him big time.
August 12th, 2008 at 2:06 pmBilbo Hussein Baggins Says:
In other words, the very rich can sit around doing nothing while living off their investments and pay much less in taxes than the average Joe who works 40+ hours for minimum wage.
There’s something very wrong with that picture.
The ultimate goal of the Republicans is to eliminate capital gains, dividend, and estate taxes. Then, the wealthy in the US will be a true aristocracy. They and their descendants will live tax free forever.
August 12th, 2008 at 2:09 pmSirWillae Says:
Funny you mention Warren Buffet (sic), since he’s the person who raised the whole issue of inequality in taxation.
Yes. Yes, he did. And I applaud him for it. However, just like John McCain isn’t rushing to the Social Security office to return his “disgraceful” benefits, I somehow doubt Warren Buffett (yes, his name is spelled with 2 t’s) is mailing checks to the treasury to return all of this tax savings, either.
No, he's doing the conscionable thing by working to change the entire system.
And thanks so much for the spelling lesson. It's really important for you to buttress your arguments by correcting other people's spelling of proper names.
August 12th, 2008 at 2:09 pmFred says:
First you explain this. Are you saying that the people who the equal rights movement benifit are abusing the system by getting a better job, etc. because of the movement or just what exactly are you saying?
Actually it explains itself, throughout history people have perverted movements for selfish gain. It's happening to conservatism right now with the Bush admin. It has happened to religious movements, civil rights movements, freedom and deomcracy movements all over the globe. I was not trying to make it a difficult statement to understand.
If I need to reference something in particular, let's look at child support for instance. When I gained custody of my oldest son, I applied with the CSEA for child support from my ex. When it was determined that she did not have a job and was collecting public assistance, the magistrate told me she was under no obligation to pay due to her lack of employment (though she was perfectly healthy enough to get a job and there were no underlying circumstances that I'm aware of). Now on the other hand, we'll take my recently divorced fellow weekend football player. He had recently lost his job at Chrysler (downsized) and was living on public assistance (unemployment)as well. His ex took him through the same court system in the same county when he was ordered to pay a dollar amount each month whether or not he had a job. If that's equal rights, I guess I need the definition of equal explained to me. My point is that somewhere along the way, that system (tied directly to equal rights) has been perverted.
August 12th, 2008 at 2:09 pmphantasymanINphantasyland = TP's latest "concerned troll".
August 12th, 2008 at 2:12 pmFred says:
I’m done with your lying ass
Of course you are. It takes progressives with intestinal fortitude to engage in a conversation based on fact with the goal of enlightenment. I do apologize if my FACTS and my links to those FACTS are hard for you to understand. As do I apologize that I take my military service honorably and personally and will not let some stooge get away with his hit and run cowardly tactics.
August 12th, 2008 at 2:14 pmI'm sorry if any of that offended you. As for lying, please point out where I did any such thing.
phantasymanINphantasyland Says:
You're a fool who ignores all the good done by a sytem in lieu of only seeing a few bad apples to justify the villification of a postitive movement.
good luck and good night.
August 12th, 2008 at 2:14 pmAudio of McCain on Social Security is up here.
August 12th, 2008 at 2:14 pmphantasymanINphantasyland Says:
So, you would have been ecstatic if Dubya and McDepends would have been successful on their selling of privatization of SS 2 years ago?
If so, then all the Wall Streeters would have made HUGE profits and with the collapse of the Market, all the SS funds would have been down even further than they are now.
Typical Repug response would be: SO!!??
August 12th, 2008 at 2:16 pmQuit whining phantasy,
You want child support from a woman? You were in the service? What am I supposed to believe, that you don't have any proverbial boot straps?
What kind of a pathetic man would try to collect child support from a woman in America?
August 12th, 2008 at 2:17 pmAnd the MSM pointing this out will happen in..........never.
August 12th, 2008 at 2:18 pmFred Says:
What kind of a pathetic man would try to collect child support from a woman in America?
One who believes in equality. Just because you have a superiority complex and you believe you are better than women does not mean that feeding, clothing, schooling, and daycare for the child of a single parent is not expensive. Besides the money was for our child (her son) and not for my personal gain.
August 12th, 2008 at 2:20 pmNo, he’s doing the conscionable thing by working to change the entire system.
If Buffett TRULY feels that he should be paying more in taxes, why wait? Why not just start writing checks to the treasury? He can help pay down the national debt. That's exactly the logic you're applying to McCain, isn't it? Since he feels Social Security is disgraceful, he shouldn't wait until it's abolished. He should stop receiving benefits RIGHT NOW.
McCain says Social Security is a disgrace. But McCain is following the law by accepting Social Security benefits (benefits, by the way, that he "earned" by paying Social Security taxes). Buffett says his taxes are too low. But Buffett is following the law by paying less in taxes. Please demonstrate some capability for rational thought by applying the same standard to both. To do otherwise is a spectacular demonstration of partisan blindness.
August 12th, 2008 at 2:20 pmUpside99 says:
So, you would have been ecstatic if Dubya and McDepends would have been successful on their selling of privatization of SS 2 years ago?
I never made such a claim. Though I cannot say that I would oppose letting Americans take a small percentage of the money they invest in social security and being allowed to invest it privately. I trust those on Wall Street just a tad more than I trust any government... even a conservative one.
August 12th, 2008 at 2:23 pmphantasymanINphantasyland
Oh, yuk...some one had sex with you? She must of been very drunk or drugged up for that.
August 12th, 2008 at 2:23 pmBuckie Boy Says:
Oh, yuk…some one had sex with you? She must of been very drunk or drugged up for that.
Someday, after naptime and recess, you might just get as lucky. Though you better get a good job, because getting a woman to have sex with you will not be free.
August 12th, 2008 at 2:26 pmlawr1999 Says:
he probably ended up with a hefty cash buyout too.
I'll bet you'd like to believe that... but when you're laid off there's no buyout. Unless there's something built into his union contract that no one told him about...
August 12th, 2008 at 2:28 pmThat's a good laugh, how about a demonstration?
By the way, where were you when women across America, not men were trying to collect what was fair from thier deadbead dads? Now it's a fairness issue because you need help? You're just pathetic.
August 12th, 2008 at 2:28 pmLawr1999 says:
unemployment benefits aren’t “public assistance”.
What would you call it then?
August 12th, 2008 at 2:31 pmhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unemployment_benefits
phantasymanINphantasyland Says:
Anecdote snipped.
My point is that somewhere along the way, that system (tied directly to equal rights) has been perverted.
Inequalities in child support systems have little or nothing to do with civil rights movements, and your anecdote is just that: an anecdote. Here's a counter-anecdote. My wife spent years trying to get child support from her daughter's father. Eventually, the court determined that he should be paying some monthly pittance and that he was about $15,000 in arrears. He was allowed to pay that 15K off at about $25 month; when he stopped paying anything at all, he got a couple of testy letters in the mail and eventually a reduction in the pittance to less than a pittance. He never came close to paying off the 15K; in fact, he probably paid off less than $1,000 of it.
Sh!t happens, but this has nothing to do with civil rights. Sorry, but you're a very long way from proving your argument.
August 12th, 2008 at 2:34 pmFred Says:
By the way, where were you when women across America, not men were trying to collect what was fair from thier deadbead dads? Now it’s a fairness issue because you need help? You’re just pathetic.
Okay so now I have to champion everyone else's cause before I can champion one of my own? Please enlighten me on all the causes you've championed. I'm sure you were all for the other side of the coin too weren't you. Just as I'm sure you are against S.S. reform except in the case of Barrack Obama, he can do whatever he wants to reform S.S. Let me know if I'm getting warm here because you really are all over the map...
August 12th, 2008 at 2:36 pmTalking to Trollups is like asking KKKarl to fly...
August 12th, 2008 at 2:37 pmphantasymanINphantasyland Says:
Upside99 says:
So, you would have been ecstatic if Dubya and McDepends would have been successful on their selling of privatization of SS 2 years ago?
I never made such a claim. Though I cannot say that I would oppose letting Americans take a small percentage of the money they invest in social security and being allowed to invest it privately. I trust those on Wall Street just a tad more than I trust any government… even a conservative one.
And you think this would 'fix' SS? Are you an investment banker? Or just naive enough to believe what Wall Street/BushCo wants you to believe?
August 12th, 2008 at 2:37 pmIt's insurance fool. Too bad you are so ignorant. Why do you try to take a side about things you know nothing about? People pay a part of each check into a fund and the employer contributes too.....it's not the same as "public assistance" at all.
August 12th, 2008 at 2:39 pmgummitch Says:
Sh!t happens, but this has nothing to do with civil rights. Sorry, but you’re a very long way from proving your argument.
You are probably right, it does not prove my point. I was merely citing an example of my experience with corrupt systems. Here's one more to the point... If a mother to be decides she no longer wants to be pregnant or have a baby, she can go to a local clinic and have an abortion, thereby forfeitting her rights as a parent. If abortion is about the right to choose, why can a mon not choose to go abort his rights to said child? I'm not saying I like either option, but if we truely wanted equality, men would be able to abort their parental rights thereby also assisting in your dead-beat dad problem as well.
August 12th, 2008 at 2:42 pmIs that a little better?
I meant "man" not "mon" sorry, I have fat fingers sometimes.
August 12th, 2008 at 2:43 pmI said you were pathetic and now you have proven it beyond all doubt.
Try for just once in your life to be a part of something bigger than yourself and your little universe.
August 12th, 2008 at 2:43 pmUpside 99 says:
And you think this would ‘fix’ SS? Are you an investment banker? Or just naive enough to believe what Wall Street/BushCo wants you to believe?
I did not say it would "fix" anything. I would just like to know that there's at least some portion of my hard earned money going to my retirement tax that I have control over. I'd like to know what you think will "fix" social security.
August 12th, 2008 at 2:46 pmphantasymanINphantasyland Says:
bla bla bla, Nero fiddles as Rome burns. Get a life and try to understand some peoples real problems in this country, problems made political instead of medical by blathering fools like yourself.
August 12th, 2008 at 2:50 pmFred says:
I said you were pathetic and now you have proven it beyond all doubt.
Try for just once in your life to be a part of something bigger than yourself and your little universe.
Because guys like you who do nothing but post on message boards with other people like you are so BIG in this world. I've done plenty for this society, in fact I'd like to know how much is enough? When is it ever enough for you blood-suckers? Those like you who want me to give, give ,give but what do I get in return? When are you going to be part of something that takes care of someone like me? Please, I emplore you, please join me next May for our NoCirc march on Washington. Join me at the marine reserve base some weekend. Join me the next time there's a flood or hurricane as we raise money and collect clothing for those who have been displaced from their homes. I challenge you, be something other than a mouthpiece for political party.
August 12th, 2008 at 2:51 pmIt appears you are wasting your time arguing about Mr. Buffet’s sincerity.
No, I'm not. There's a HUGE difference between giving money to charity and paying taxes. One is optional. The other is not. If Warren Buffett he CHOOSES to give his money to charity, that's his choice. On the other hand, we do not have a choice when it comes to taxes.
It's a lot easier to be sincere when nobody's putting a gun to your head.
August 12th, 2008 at 2:57 pmFred says:
bla bla bla, Nero fiddles as Rome burns. Get a life and try to understand some peoples real problems in this country, problems made political instead of medical by blathering fools like yourself.
In fact, I challenge you to have one coherent response to anything I've said. You've laid out no plan, no groundwork, you haven't even addressed a single question I've asked you. All you've done is shout your little hatred, called me names, etc. What do you propose? Let's go back to the thread's title. What did John McCain say that was so bad? Is it that he wants SS reform, because Obama wants it too. Is it because his response wasn't word for word precise to what a liberal would have said? Please present to me one coherent arguement, I am all ears.
August 12th, 2008 at 2:57 pmlawr1999 says:
I would call it exactly what Wiki calls it, unemployment insurance. I am going to bet you didn’t bother to read the article you linked
Yes, unemployment insurance funded by taxes. And who pays taxes? The people... The people are generally reffered to as the "public". You, my friend, are arguing semantics to dismiss the point of the statement altogether.
August 12th, 2008 at 2:59 pmphantasymanINphantasyland Says:
I guess you think you are the only vet left behind. Lots of of are vets and some of us were around in the nam era. You should read more. I'm leaving you behind now just as the rest of the world seems to have. Bye.
August 12th, 2008 at 3:05 pmYou're a fool. No taxes paid go to unemployment insurance. It is totally funded by employees and employers. If you don't work you can't draw it...simple and majestic.
See ya in the funny papers.
August 12th, 2008 at 3:08 pmFred says:
You’re a fool. No taxes paid go to unemployment insurance. It is totally funded by employees and employers. If you don’t work you can’t draw it…simple and majestic.
Like I said... arguing semantics in an attempt to dismiss the point. It's usually what the loser of an arguement will do when he has nothing reasonable to say.
Thank you for your 'nam service. DieNowForPeace will probably call you a fool for killing for your corrupt government. I, on the other hand, applaud you. My father is a Vietnam vet, 2 tours with 2 congressional medals of honor, though he took a bullet and some shrapnel in his arm and back, not a single purple heart. Thanks to the US government and her military, true heroes are rarely rewarded for heroism.
August 12th, 2008 at 3:17 pmMy badd, not the "medals of honor" he got 2 "distinguished flying crosses". I was typing without completely thinking, I know it's typical of us conservatives.
August 12th, 2008 at 3:20 pmphantasymanINphantasyland Says:
Thank you for your ‘nam service. DieNowForPeace will probably call you a fool for killing for your corrupt government. I, on the other hand, applaud you. My father is a Vietnam vet, 2 tours with 2 congressional medals of honor, though he took a bullet and some shrapnel in his arm and back, not a single purple heart. Thanks to the US government and her military, true heroes are rarely rewarded for heroism.
You just blew your cover phantasy!
NO ONE has ever been awarded 2 Medals of Honor in the history of the military. I am a Vietnam combat vet and RESENT your lying bullshit and have now reduced you to what you are; a typical wothless lying Repug troll.
August 12th, 2008 at 3:22 pmupside99 Says:
NO ONE has ever been awarded 2 Medals of Honor
Thanks I know, that's why I corrected myself before you even had time to google the words "congressional medal of honor".
August 12th, 2008 at 3:28 pmWhat’s your beef, troll?
Excuse you for calling me a troll.
My beef is that a lot of people here are applying a double standard. McCain says he doesn't believe in Social Security. So people are faulting him for collecting it (conveniently ignoring the fact that he paid for those benefits). On the other hand, many, many Democrats complain about tax breaks for the wealthy while they, themselves, are the beneficiary of those tax breaks. If you want McCain to put his money where his mouth is, then you should demand the same of Edwards, Heinz, Buffett and many, many others.
NO ONE has ever been awarded 2 Medals of Honor in the history of the military.
You might want to double check your "facts" on that one.
August 12th, 2008 at 3:29 pmphantasymanINphantasyland Says:
upside99 Says:
NO ONE has ever been awarded 2 Medals of Honor
Thanks I know, that’s why I corrected myself before you even had time to google the words “congressional medal of honor”.
Hey Asswipe, I didn't have to Google the MoH. I have worked on a publication about that award as a result of my knowing one from Vietnam. So don't assume anything, K?
August 12th, 2008 at 3:38 pmMy Bad, I meant to say that there were no VIETNAM-era double winners. I apologize for that mistake. That was the publication I was working on.
August 12th, 2008 at 3:42 pmYou mean like people who rant and legislate against homsexuality when they are homosexuals themselves, that kind of double standard. Note: nothing wrong with homosexuality I thought I should qualify it before you took it to the moon. I am talking about the hypocracy.
You mean like the clear skies initiative that the bush admin has pushed which is anything but what it's title implies.
I would say that it is you who should put down your stones and leave our glass houses alone.
seriously, you want to come here and accuse us of hypocracy? Where's the justice? How about a justice system that says they can't procecute admitted lawbreakers.
I'm laughing so hard I can barely continue.
How about those of you who believe in the rights of a fetus but not a childs right to basic medical and educational needs after birth? Could it be the hypocracy that drives you to use abortion as a polititcal hammer when you really don't care at all.
How about the joke, well it's really not funny, of spreading democracy in a violent and vengeful way that costs 100's of thousands of lives, but it's worth it, look at the results after 5 years of the worlds largest military might taking on a small country, a state really with .05% of the worlds miilitary might. Seems like we could do much better, huh?
August 12th, 2008 at 3:43 pmUpside99 says:
Hey Asswipe, I didn’t have to Google the MoH. I have worked on a publication about that award as a result of my knowing one from Vietnam. So don’t assume anything, K?
Fair enough, I'll excuse your faux pas if you excuse mine. I have no reason to lie on any of my posts as I expect that what folks like you tell me is the truth. Lying will only increase the divide not close it. You have my apologies for my "assumption".
August 12th, 2008 at 3:52 pmBefore you ask, he was in B-troop, 1st btn, 9th cav. - The most decorated unit in the Vietnam conflict. If you want a good story for your publication, there's some American heroes that you could interview. These guys used agent orange like we use Axe body spray. They say the effects of agent orange can damage up to the next 4 generations. Many of these guys suffer from all sorts of PTSS and have had many other troubles functioning in society. If you've ever met one of these brave men, you'll know what I mean.
August 12th, 2008 at 4:00 pmNote: nothing wrong with homosexuality
There isn't? Geeze, that should be news to Bill Clinton. You know, the president who approved "Don't Ask, Don't Tell". Sam Nunn would also be surprised. He was the Democratic Senator who led the Congressional opposition to lifting the ban on gays in the military. You should also tell Barack Obama about this. Last time I checked, he was still against gay marriage. Personally, I have no problem with homosexuality. But it's clear that many Democrats do.
I would say that it is you who should put down your stones and leave our glass houses alone.
Well at least you admit to living in a glass house...
seriously, you want to come here and accuse us of hypocracy?
Yes, I do. Is there something wrong with that? Do you not believe in healthy discourse? Do you believe that you are so OBJECTIVELY correct that there's simply no room for reasonable disagreement? Or are you just guilty as sin and don't want to own up to it?
How about a justice system that says they can’t procecute admitted lawbreakers.
You mean like... William Jefferson?
How about the joke, well it’s really not funny, of spreading democracy in a violent and vengeful way that costs 100’s of thousands of lives, but it’s worth it, look at the results after 5 years of the worlds largest military might taking on a small country, a state really with .05% of the worlds miilitary might. Seems like we could do much better, huh?
Yeah, how about that? Why don't you ask all of your beloved Democrats in the Senate who voted to authorize that war.
Look, I hold no love for the GOP. But this fantasy that you have that the Democrats are simply beyond reproach is... is beyond belief. They're just as bad as the Republicans. It's absurd to listen to people with their demonize the other party when their party is doing exactly the same thing. Politicians have one job: get elected. They will do anything to achieve it. Beyond that, everything is secondary.
August 12th, 2008 at 4:08 pmpeople are faulting him for collecting it (conveniently ignoring the fact that he paid for those benefits).
~SirWillae
No, he didn't. People who came before him paid those benefits, remember? From the topic of the thread:
“[P]resent-day retirees have always been paid their benefits from the taxes paid by current workers. That has been true from Social Security’s inception,” noted Dean Baker of the Center for Economic and Policy Research.
So, no, McCain didn't paid for those benefits.
In fact, McCain himself is aware that he didn't paid those benefits. He must be, otherwise he couldn't have called this fact a "disgrace".
I am not faulting him for collecting those benefits -they are his, after all. I am faulting him for benefiting from an arrangement he thinks is an "absolute disgrace".
Apparently, he either is guilt-free, remorseless and without a conscience, or he doesn't stop to think before opening his mouth.
you should demand the same of Edwards, Heinz, Buffett and many, many others
When/if they use the word "disgrace" to describe a situation from which they benefit (and do not seem to be bothered by it, a la McCain), then I'll start questioning their moral standing as well as their mental sanity.
August 12th, 2008 at 8:35 pmLook, I hold no love for the GOP. But this fantasy that you have that the Democrats are simply beyond reproach is… is beyond belief. They’re just as bad as the Republicans.
Name one democrat who ever wore a purple heart bandaid.
Just one, and you prove your point.
Otherwise...
August 12th, 2008 at 8:38 pmOh, my...
I came back just to see if SirWillae had replied, and happened to re-read my post... "didn't paid"?
::sigh::
Maybe I've been reading some of the trolls' postings for way to long -it seems poor English is contagious after all.
August 12th, 2008 at 9:50 pmFrom a man that has been paid fromt the American Taxpayers from the moment he was born.
$58,00 per year from the V.A. while he can't even vote for todays veterans?
It must make a Republican feel so dirty recieving $58,000 a yr off the Gov't trough....................
August 13th, 2008 at 3:03 amSo, no, McCain didn’t paid for those benefits.
He didn't? And here I thought Social Security was insurance. You're claiming McCain didn't pay the premiums? What the Social Security Administration does with those premiums is entirely besides the point. McCain paid his premiums and is now collecting his benefits. Perhaps you would be happier if I said that he "earned" those benefits.
When/if they use the word “disgrace” to describe a situation from which they benefit (and do not seem to be bothered by it, a la McCain), then I’ll start questioning their moral standing as well as their mental sanity.
Obviously only one other politician is getting as much press coverage as John McCain these days. That makes it hard to point to a specific politician say they used the word "disgrace". However, I maintain that the Democratic Party, as a whole, have condemned the Bush tax cuts. Yet a large number of them have directly benefited from those same tax cuts. And if they were truly bothered by it, they would take some sort of personal action, just like you think McCain should return his Social Security benefits. For example, they could help pay down the national debt with all the money they saved because of the Bush tax cuts.
You're applying a double standard, plain and simple. The fact that you can't see it clearly demonstrates your partisan blindness. Perhaps one day, you'll be able to use your own brain instead of just repeating what your party tells you.
Name one democrat who ever wore a purple heart bandaid.
Personally, I think being videotaped accepting bribes is far worse than wearing a purple heart band-aid. But I guess you disagree. Well, that's your right. But don't expect people to give any credence to your opinion.
August 13th, 2008 at 9:53 amLets see my choice is John McCain or that smart black man Barack Obama?
McCain who does not know how to use a computer but is willing to learn if we elect him – I’ll just vote for that smart black man.
My Choices are: John McCain who says the economic downturn is psychological? - Na! I'll vote for the smart black man.
McCain who says you are better off under George Bush? - Nope I'll vote for the smart black man.
Mc Cain who wants to continue killing more people looking for weapons of mass destruction that do not exist? - Gee! I'll vote for the smart black man.
McCain who believes that we should stay the course but is not willing to support the people he puts in harms way. - I'll take a chance on the smart black man.
Should I vote for a man that does not know that 9-11 was caused by Osama Bin Laden not Sedam Hussein? - Easy! I'll vote for the smart black man.
Vote for the man who does not know if the Sunnis or Sheits are our enemies? - No way I'll vote for the smart black man.
Vote for the man who helped put our government on the China, Saudi Arabia credit card? - Not a chance I'll vote for the smart black man.
Vote for the man with the worst temper in the Senate to have his finger on the nuclear button? - No way - I'll vote for the smart black man.
August 15th, 2008 at 7:40 pm