America: If you bought "Iraq", why didn't you buy "Social Security Reform"

[Fire Walk With Me]

?

Do you sense the same mechanisms at work in both? Salesmanship based upon pure lies? So why "Iraq" and not "SS"?

Do you believe that Bush lied about Social Security? And not Iraq? Or Iraq as well?

Is America ready to admit that Bush lied about "Social Security"? If so, can we get consensus about "Iraq"?

Iraq: The official war of the Bush family since 1991.

[waiting for hope]

1. I think most

people weren't willing to let go of something they have invested in most of their lives by working - hit someone in the pocket or give them a risk such as that asinine's plan, they will stand up and say no....

[tularetom]

2. Most people I know have a vague sense he lied

about both but they really aren't that exercised about it. A politician lied? Big fuckin deal. Of course they never think about all the death and destruction as a result of the lies but so what. They can still get gas for our SUV and buy all kinds of cheap Chinese crap at Wally World, so life is good. Ain't their kids gettin killed.

[thoughtanarchist]

3. social security -- 9/11 -- social security -- 9/11 -- social security --

social security -- 9/11 -- social security -- 9/11 -- social security -- 9/11 -- social security -- 9/11 -- social security -- 9/11 -- social security -- 9/11 -- social security -- 9/11 -- social security -- 9/11 -- social security -- 9/11 -- social security -- 9/11 -- social security -- 9/11 -- social security -- 9/11 -- social security -- 9/11 -- social security -- 9/11 -- social security -- 9/11 -- social security -- 9/11 -- social security -- 9/11 -- social security -- 9/11 -- social security -- 9/11 -- social security -- 9/11 -- social security -- 9/11 -- social security -- 9/11 -- social security -- 9/11 -- social security -- 9/11 -- social security -- 9/11 -- social security -- 9/11 -- social security -- 9/11 -- social security -- 9/11 --

Sold to the nation in red white and blue that fears for their collective scrotums that social security will cause a devastating havoc the likes of which we have not seen since.........


:nuke:

[Cha]

4. According to

bill kristol quoted in The Nation..that's when smirk's presidency(sic) started "unraveling"..was when his pushing the privatization of SS was Dead in the Water.

snip~

"George W. Bush's plan to privatize Social Security, the centerpiece of his second-term agenda, is dead. Conservative pundit William Kristol argues that this Bush defeat began the unraveling of his presidency: "The negative effect of the Social Security is underestimated," says Kristol. "Once you make that kind of mistake, people tend to be less deferential to your decisions." There was an "entire Republican agenda, based on the idea that we reform these entitlement programs," says New York Times columnist David Brooks. "That's gone now because of the failure of Social Security." A remarkable progressive mobilization caused Bush's defeat--and progressives can learn much from the anatomy of that victory."

Maybe the Americans need it a little closer to home like SS is? That's why the bushites didn't want any pictures of the coffins with fallen Soldiers inside to be seen on tv or in the newspapers.


http://www.thenation.com/doc/20051219/editors

[mermaid]

6. I Agree

SS hits closer to home.

Iraq had me pissed off, yes...but, hell...it wasn't me or my family! It wasn't like anyone I knew, loved, or cared about was going to die. I knew Iraq was shit...but I also knew Bush wanted it, and was gonna have it, and there was nothing I could do...and, since it wasn't all that personal to me, I didn't fight all that hard to prevent it.

SS, on the other hand, directly hits a lot of people right where it hurts most. Me, I was TERRIFIED at the idea I would pay into SS all my life, and then get shafted at the end. And I wasn't alone in that fear.

Fear is one hell of a motivator.

[Fire Walk With Me]

7. Isn't anyone worried about the generations of new terrorists the Iraq

invasion has created? The WTC attack is supposedly linked directly to Bush 1 ignoring Bin Ladens requests for troops to respect and/or leave holy land. Now we're planting seeds of terror again, and calling it a fight for democracy. Too bad the democracy is killing so many Innocent Iraqis in the process.

It's going to come home to roost, and no one will remember supporting the Iraq invasion when it happens.

[Cha]

19. I was..I listened to all those

writers on the Net who talked about that..and my sister and I went to NYC on Feb 15, 2003 and yelled our heads off for 7 hours with hundreds of thousands of other patriots in the City and counting all around the USA and the World there were Millions marching and protesting that day!

And bush in his snide smirky way called us a "fringe group"..yeah, whose fringe now?

[No Exit]

13. WRONG, Little Billy.

Bush's presidency was doomed from the moment he let a cancer like you and your anti-American neocon friends be insiders in his administration, and be his guides for foreign policy.

He let you all in a long time ago. But cancer doesn't show at first. The social security debacle was just the first time they found a lump.

[Fire Walk With Me]

5. Add "Mission Accomplished" and "Plan for Victory"

A nice smirk for your collection:

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,11069-1898091,00.html

People have to see that each and every sound out of their mouths is utterly empty, and are designed that way.

[chookie]

8. Bingo

They thought it was going to be that easy.

The American electorate -- thank heavens -- is far more intelligent and nuanced than they imagined.

I'm feeling more optimistic than I have in years. Two years ago I would have said we were on a course towards a wide war in the middle east -- now I say it is highly doubtful -- because Middle America has utterly rejected it. It's basically been a leaderless rebellion apart from Murtha, but I'll take it....

Ha ha Remember when people said "If George W sez it is so..." -- they're obviously having a koolaid hangover.

WHAT I DON'T GET -- however -- is why the Democrats aren't dancing on the graves of the newmedicare prescription programpushed through the congress at 2am 2 years ago against the advise of the Democrats -- everyone, except Big Pharm -- hates it, and regards it as a confusing sham and possible a con job. Why are the Dems saying "WE TOLD YOU SO WE TOLD YOU SO!!" I guess it's impolite.... I guess we have to wait for some moderate Republican to be the voice of our frustrated and angry seniors over the new prescription programs.....

PS -- Don't pee yourself with surprise -- but Rick Santorum has been running ads, prior to his re-election campaign, declaring how he has been responsible for keeping Social Security intact for seniors. Yeah, right.

[mermaid]

9. Don't Worry

I'm a Pennsylvanian, and I think Pennsylvania has finally seen through Rick Santorum. He's gone...unless Diebold can save his ass.

[EC]

10. I think it's because on this issue the Democrats came out hitting

and should have done the same with the war...from the very beginning.

Also, too many of us have been waiting for our money to be returned to us.

[reformedrepub]

11. Both parties

had been saying Iraq had WMD, and so did the UN.....If you aksed the American public if it thought going to war to liberate the people of Iraq is a good idea, im quite sure the majority would have said no....But since they used the WMD angle, the public bought it, and it was quite easy for the GOP to trot out Bill Clinton's speeches about the dangers of Iraq and WMD as well as speeches by a whole alot of top Dems from the same angle. Hell, I believed he had them.....

[90-percent]

12. WMD's

Wolfowitz said the war was fought for WMD's BECAUSE THAT'S THE ONLY THING THEY COULD ALL AGREE ON!

OK, let's have a war.

But, why?

Oh, yeah, why indeed?

-85%

[Bridget Burke]

18. But Clinton did not invade Iraq.

Sure, Iraq might have had WMD at one time. But anyone reading the news--not just watching Fox--realized the invasion was based on a lie.

[raccoon]

14. I think many Americans thought if the US invaded Iraq,

it would be like Gulf War Part I. That is, we'd be in and out quickly, with few American casualties.

As the body count mounts and our servicemen/women are still there more than two years later, with no end in sight, they get impatient with it.

If there had been a draft, I don't think there's any way the invasion of Iraq would have happened. Since there isn't/wasn't, most people didn't care because it didn't affect them personally, in the sense of a family member being in actual combat.

SS is different; every American over 65 gets it, and everyone else hopes to get it one day. It affects all Americans personally.

Bottom line: Most people are only concerned about an issue if it's their ass that's in the fire, or about to go into it.

[MrBenchley]

15. Huh?

America's disagreement with the Chimp about Social Security isn't and never was really based on "lying about it"...it was "what a stupid fucking idea that is."

Hell, there could be people opposed to the war in Iraq who could think Bush was honest but incompetent and clueless. Murtha, for example, wants a pullout but thought the ideas underlying the war were good ones. His opposition today is based on the lack of a winning strategy and the unnecessary danger that incompetent leadership has put our troops in.

[Toots]

16. People care about their parents, even some Republicans

That is what this was about. Robbing people's parents of their retirement. Even some of the most rabid Republicans have a soft spot for their parents..... 3rd rail of politics and Bush* thought he was special. He could do what no one had done before.... Yes it showed there was vulnerability within the Party...They don't yet control everything...

[hatrack]

17. Social Security = MY money Iraq = Other Peoples' kids dying

nt