Dems slam GOPers on Social Security

This is a complete lie by the DEMs
The GOP proposed letting people have the OPTION (OPTION= THEIR CHOICE!) to take a very small portion and invest it. NO mandatory anything.

Absolute demagoguery by the Dems.What do you expect of a party who responds to every crticicsm of policy or fact-based question with "Oh, that's another one of those little distraction" and then presses on to another subject.

Tom Shakopee wrote:

To every Senior Citizen, this is right out of the Democratic Play Book. That is to scare people with extreme worst case scenarios. That, if the constituients just trust them to hold on to their money it will all be safe. In reality, Democrats want to hold on to your money in order to spend it. What do you think pays for their programs. If investing retirement was so risky, why are there 401K's. Why does Government encourage us to invest for retirement. I, personally, want control of my money, what is wrong with Republicans wanting to allow a percentage of retirement to be placed in well-diversified market accounts that will earn a greater return than money sitting in Govermental Coffers just waiting to be spent by Liberal Democrats.

Wow, how I would LOVE it if I could opt out of social security! I would LOVE to pull my monthly withholdings and place them in with my current 401k INCLUDING the additional 7.25% matching funds that my employer must contribute to social security. I would have quite a nice nest egg built up by now (even in light of the couple less then lucrative swings in the market) over and above what I already have. Not to mention WAY more then what I will recieve in monthly benefits from the existing social security program. Let me opt out!!! Thieves!

The same ol' tired Democrat excuses. They don't want to give workers the right to decide to invest 3% of what normally would go into Social Security, and make an investment into something that will give a return of more than 2% which is what SS is getting......I can get double that at my Credit Bureau! And they don't want to give you this right, because that would decrease the amount in the Social Security fund for them to rob and replace with an IOU, which they've been doing for years! Typical fanatic liberals !!!

How can the democrats blame anyone but themselves for all this BS. They are all retarded.

Hey this Soc Sec mess was addressed as a "core" element in Bush's initial term but the dems would not endorse it then or now. So it went no where. So here we are with an $11 trillion debt, the dems want yet another $160 billion stimulus package to go with the first one. And we see that the ONE wants to take our money and "spread the wealth around". Wow, that must be the soc sec plan he talks about, if you are in ACORN or any other community agitator program, better known for sucking out our taxpayer money so they can get more money do nothing productive.

Tom Shakopee wrote:

To every Senior Citizen, this is right out of the Democratic Play Book. That is to scare people with extreme worst case scenarios. That, if the constituients just trust them to hold on to their money it will all be safe. In reality, Democrats want to hold on to your money in order to spend it. What do you think pays for their programs. If investing retirement was so risky, why are there 401K's. Why does Government encourage us to invest for retirement. I, personally, want control of my money, what is wrong with Republicans wanting to allow a percentage of retirement to be placed in well-diversified market accounts that will earn a greater return than money sitting in Govermental Coffers just waiting to be spent by Liberal Democrats.

So it's the liberal Democrats spending all of our money and not the liberal Republicans?

I have been forced to put 13% of my income into Social Security for the past 35 years. No choice. In my last statement, I am told that if I continue to contribute for the next 15 years I will enjoy a whopping $20,000/year income from SS.

I have voluntarily contributed 6% of my income into a private IRA for the past 23 years. In my last statement I am told that it will be worth well over $1,000,000 by the time I retire and give me an income of almost as much as I am making today.

And when I retire I expect the Socialist/Democrats to decide that SINCE I DON'T NEED Social Security, I don't get it.

It happened in England-- they taxed the fools that saved for their retirement 75% on their savings, giving it to the people that didn't save for retirement. Now virtually everybody in England doesn't save for retirement, they depend 100% on the gubbermint.

And no, JTY, the libs had a lot of help from our Compassionate Conservative (read: liberal) president and congress. The practice of purchasing votes with tax money is now completely entrenched in our public policy. That's why the Emergency Bail-out Bill had PAGES OF PORK. They can't stop.

"The markets may be stabilizing, but Democrats are quietly acknowledging that volatility is a good thing — at least when it comes to the politics of Social Security and the senior citizen vote."

Yea it's just great. So the dems acknowledge that they want things to be bad for political gain. Typical.

Aquinas wrote:

This is a complete lie by the DEMs
The GOP proposed letting people have the OPTION (OPTION= THEIR CHOICE!) to take a very small portion and invest it. NO mandatory anything.
Absolute demagoguery by the Dems.What do you expect of a party who responds to every crticicsm of policy or fact-based question with "Oh, that's another one of those little distraction" and then presses on to another subject.

Baloney. The GOP and its leaders have been trying to privatize my hard earned SS money since the Reagan era. No way am I letting those people in Wall Street and the rich CEO's get their hands on money I have been saving for years. The distrators are the GOP and the bait and switch games as well as their speaking in circles to say nothing.

Carolyn wrote:

How can the democrats blame anyone but themselves for all this BS. They are all retarded.

I question the intelligence of anyone that makes a blanket statement such as the above. All words to say nothing except to demean and degrade another - typical!!!!!!!!!!

Super Wayne wrote:

<quoted text>
Wow, how I would LOVE it if I could opt out of social security! I would LOVE to pull my monthly withholdings and place them in with my current 401k INCLUDING the additional 7.25% matching funds that my employer must contribute to social security. I would have quite a nice nest egg built up by now (even in light of the couple less then lucrative swings in the market) over and above what I already have. Not to mention WAY more then what I will recieve in monthly benefits from the existing social security program. Let me opt out!!! Thieves!

Put your money in a 401K - watch it dwindle and go away before you can retire. Keep the GOP hands off the SS accounts; they give SS to persons who have NEVER paid into SS; immigrants bring their relatives to America and immediately apply for SS benefits for them - free money...no way. Only those who have paid in should be able to use the funds. Keep the Wall Street thieves and 'investment bankers' hands off MY money!

FACTCHECK.ORG : Obama's Social Security Whopper

http://www.newsweek.com/id/160179


In Daytona Beach, Obama said that "if my opponent had his way, the millions of Floridians who rely on it would've had their Social Security tied up in the stock market this week." He referred to "elderly women" at risk of poverty, and said families would be scrambling to support "grandmothers and grandfathers."
That's not true. The plan proposed by President Bush and supported by McCain in 2005 would not have allowed anyone born before 1950 to invest any part of their Social Security taxes in private accounts. All current retirees would be covered by the same benefits they are now.
Obama would have been correct to say that many workers under age 58 would have had some portion of their Social Security benefits affected by the current market turmoil – if they had chosen to participate. And market drops would be a worry for those who retire in future decades. But current retirees would not have been affected.
more at newsweek.com ...

The "Bush plan" would have offered the same options currently available to Federal employees. Obama wants to reverse that option?

http://money.cnn.com/2005/02/02/retirement/st...

Carolyn wrote:

How can the democrats blame anyone but themselves for all this BS. They are all retarded.

Dems and Repubs make me think of two guys who shoot a third man. Then they both try to con the American public into thinking that it was the other parties bullet who actually killed the man.

No way. No how. No McCain/Palin/Bush. No way. No how. Never.

What else is new? The Democrats have long demagogued that 'Republicans want to throw Grandma into the snowbank'. Wellstone used that very line dozens of times.

MsMoppet wrote:

<quoted text>
Put your money in a 401K - watch it dwindle and go away before you can retire. Keep the GOP hands off the SS accounts; they give SS to persons who have NEVER paid into SS; immigrants bring their relatives to America and immediately apply for SS benefits for them - free money...no way. Only those who have paid in should be able to use the funds. Keep the Wall Street thieves and 'investment bankers' hands off MY money!

1> No Republican has ever advocated that people be required to invest their SS money in private accounts.

2> If you don't like immigrants who never earned the benefits getting them, why are you voting Democrat? Are you really that ignorant?

MsMoppet wrote:

<quoted text>
Baloney. The GOP and its leaders have been trying to privatize my hard earned SS money since the Reagan era.

This is a lie. No Republican has EVER advocated requiring this.

<< No way am I letting those people in Wall Street and the rich CEO's get their hands on money I have been saving for years. >>

Those 'rich CEOs' are mostly Democrats.

Chairman Obama will provide equally for his people. Already the children are singing praises to his glorious works.

CyBear wrote:

<quoted text>
This is a lie. No Republican has EVER advocated requiring this.
<< No way am I letting those people in Wall Street and the rich CEO's get their hands on money I have been saving for years. >>
Those 'rich CEOs' are mostly Democrats.

Well, someone's a liar. I think it's...CYBEAR.
-“Without privatization, I don’t see how you can possibly, over time, make sure that young Americans are able to receive Social Security benefits.”[John McCain, C-Span Road to the White House, 11/18/2004]

-“As part of Social Security reform, I believe that private savings accounts are a part of it — along the lines that President Bush proposed.”[John McCain, Wall Street Journal, 3/3/2008]

Not only was McCain “a big booster” of Bush’s 2005 plan to privatize Social Security, but one of his top economic advisers, Carly Fiorina, recently told conservative radio host Bill Bennett that McCain “supports private accounts as one of the ways to reform the system” and that “he will continue to be supportive of those.”

Kanjorski Defends Bailout Bill (Chmn, House Banking Subcommittee)


http://www.citizensvoice.com/articles/2008/10...

The economy is more important than an election, Rep. Paul Kanjorski said Wednesday, defending his support of the more than $700 billion economic bailout package that passed in the Senate last Wednesday and the House of Representatives last Friday.

Paul "Free Money" Kanjorski is below the national radar on the meltdown, but right in the middle of it.
He received the 7th highest amount of campaign contributions from Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac amongst Congressional crooks since 1989, and he's a "friend" of Charlie Rangel.

http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0907/566...

http://www.tradingmarkets.com/.site/news/Stoc...

http://www.youtube.com/watch...

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2008/08/01/eve...


False Signatures Aided Fannie Mae Bonuses, Falcon Says

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles...



Federal regulator Office of Federal Housing Enterprise Oversight released a damning report on accounting irregularities at mortgage finance giant Fannie Mae. One critical finding was that in 1998, Fannie misstated expenses in order to meet earnings targets that triggered huge executive bonuses.

1998 Salary and Bonus of Senior Fannie Mae Executives

Officer Title Salary AIP Award/Bonus

James A. Johnson Chairman and CEO $966,000 $1,932,000

Franklin D. Raines Chairman and CEO Designate $526,154 $1,109,589

Lawrence M. Small President and COO $783,839 $1,108,259

Jamie Gorelick Vice-Chairman $567,000 $779,625

J. Timothy Howard EVP and CFO $395,000 $493,750

Robert J. Levin EVP, Housing and Comm. Develop.$395,000 $493,750