<Bigawd, the R's have to complain about this one, because it's true.

As usual, completely ignoring any discussion of the facts. No. It isn't true, and I demonstrated that it wasn't true. But then, a hardcore liberal will keep repeating a dogmatic lie even if you jam the truth down his throat with a toilet plunger. Which is why I used the term, "futile."

A bit of history:

The best way to keep Social Security a rock-solid guarantee is not to make drastic cuts in benefits; not to raise payroll tax rates; and not to drain resources from Social Security in the name of saving it.



Instead, I propose that we make the historic decision to invest the surplus to save Social Security.

Specifically, I propose that we commit 60 percent of the budget surplus for the next 15 years to Social Security, investing a small portion in the private sector just as any private or state government pension would do. This will earn a higher return and keep Social Security sound for 55 years.

- Bill Clinton, in his 1999 State of the Union address.



Naturally, being a socialist he would have had the government invest the money, which would solidly cement the already too-solid links between corporate America and the government. One can imagine the corruption possibilities involved in the government deciding where to invest billions in Social Security funds.

Private investment of Social Security funds should be done ONLY by the individuals involved.