<...I remember one part about telling "wrinkled Americans the Republican Party wants to take away their Social Security".

That is so much BS...

Anyway, no one says the Republicans want to take away Social Security. Did you hear that? No one says the Republicans want to take away Social Security.

Now. Can you admit it? The guy misstated at best, lied at worst. And if you can't admit this one, what's the use.

I really don't see the wiggle room, unless you want to use the rhetoric of some inner city representative.

The DEMOCRATIC PARTY does not say the Republicans want to take away Social Security.



This actually took very little time, but I had to get my kids to bed and do a lot of formatting.

Check this out. The official Weekly Democratic Radio Response, which one would assume represents the official position of the Democratic Party:

Hello, I'm Senator Jon Corzine of New Jersey.



Like most Democrats, I believe that all American families should have the opportunity for a secure future -- a future free from the fear of terrorism and free from fundamental threats to our quality of life.

That's why Democrats stand with the President in the war on terrorism. But it's also why we feel so strongly about our obligation to defend and strengthen Social Security.

Social Security expresses the best of America's values. It promises Americans who work hard, pay their taxes, and play by the rules, that they'll be able to retire with decency and dignity. It also protects individuals who become disabled and families who lose a breadwinner.

Each week, America's workers send a portion of their paycheck to the Social Security Trust Fund. In our view, these Social Security payments should be used for Social Security, and only for Social Security. But too often in the past, that trust has been broken.

In recent months, President Bush and congressional Republicans have again pushed for raids on Social Security to finance tax breaks for large corporations, including -- incredibly -- a $250 million tax break for Enron. As you might imagine, these raids would jeopardize the long-term financial security of hard working American families.

But there's a second danger. The Republicans also want to privatize Social Security, taking trillions of dollars from the Trust Fund to finance private accounts, and forcing deep cuts in guaranteed benefits. But they won't say that now.

Republican congressional leaders want to wait until after the Fall elections before revealing their plans to privatize Social Security and cut your benefits. They want to sweep these cuts under the rug. But the facts are clear. President Bush's own Social Security commission has developed privatization plans that would require drastic reductions in future Social Security benefits. For some seniors, these cuts would exceed 25 percent. In the future, seniors could face far deeper cuts in benefits -- up to 45 percent. And these cuts would apply to everyone, even those who don't invest in private accounts.

Seniors can't afford these cuts. After all, the average Social Security benefit is less than $10,000 a year. That's already inadequate. President Bush's commission may believe that $10,000 a year for seniors is too much. We disagree.

Social Security is the safety net of last resort for seniors, the disabled, and families who lose a breadwinner. Privatizing the program would shred that safety net. Instead of cutting benefits, we need to build on Social Security with a prescription drug benefit for seniors under Medicare.

Before I came to the Senate, I was a businessman. I ran one of America's largest financial companies. And I can tell you: seniors need their Social Security benefits -- all of them -- a whole lot more than big corporations need another tax break.

Nor do we need deep cuts in Social Security benefits in order to save the program. The numbers prove that's wrong. While the Social Security Trust Fund faces long-term pressures, the entire Social Security shortfall is less than half the cost of last year's tax cut, which primarily went to the well-off. Remember that the next time you hear Republicans argue that we have no choice but to cut benefits.

We as Democrats have made our choice. For us, standing up for fairness, and for the economic security of all American families - is a matter of commitment to principle. We will consistently and unequivocally reject raiding Social Security to pay for more giveaways to powerful corporate interests. And we will never accept privatizing Social Security and cutting benefits.

The bottom line is this. The Bush approach will take the security out of Social Security. Democrats want to strengthen it. If you agree, I hope you'll stand with us. The future economic security of your families is at stake.

I'm Senator Jon Corzine of New Jersey. Thanks for listening.



Boldface is mine. I chose, this time, to ignore the outright fabrications.

Now, it's entirely possible that one could read through this without coming to the conclusion that the Democrats are telling us that the Republicans are going to totally wreck Social Security, but it would take a mental block that would stop a neutrino in its tracks.

Maybe you want to try a little wriggling...saying that "raiding, shredding, cutting and jeopardizing" Social Security isn't exactly the same as "taking it away." Go for it, I won't stop you. But you won't be kidding anyone.

Just to keep it on the up and up, I researched only the Democratic National Committee official web site, and ignored countless tirades on the web sites of individual politicians, pundits, and talking heads.

The Democrats didn't seem that worried about cutting benefits when they raised taxes on Social Security payments.

By the way, I don't have any particular "faith" in Boortz. I'd barely heard of him when I found his list, and thought it would be useful as a jumping-off point for discussion.