"A wise and frugal government which shall restrain men
from injuring one another, which shall leave them otherwise free to regulate their own pursuits of industry and improvement, and shall not take from the mouth of labor the bread it has earned. This is the sum of good government."
(Thomas Jefferson)

Friday, September 9, 2011

Rick Perry at the debate says Social Security is a Ponzi Scheme -- MSNBC Chris Matthews agrees

When I logged on to Hot Air this morning, I almost fainted to see that Chris Matthews was agreeing with Governor Perry that social security is a ponzi scheme.  Knew others would, but Chris Matthews would have been almost my last guess.  Had to read this twice to be sure I read it right.  Didn't have the stomach to watch the video even if I agreed with what he was saying.  You can view the video at Hot Air.  I am still in shock about his words:
Chris Matthews first put forth what he thought Social Security was originally intended to be: “You pay for it while you work. When you retired and have no other form of income, this will help you out. In fact, a lot were impoverished in the old days without Social Security. It’s a great anti-poverty program. But then people started to live past 65. Even the great Franklin Roosevelt didn’t make it to 65. In those days, if you made it to 65, you were lucky. You got a few bucks on Social Security.” 
Then he put forth what it has become: “Today, lots of people fortunately make it past 65,” he said. “They live into their 80s and 90s. They’re still getting checks. The system doesn’t work that way anymore. It’s not as healthy as it once was. So, how does a Republican deal with the fact it is a Ponzi scheme in the sense that the money that’s paid out every day is coming from people who have paid in that day. It’s not being made somewhere.” 
Does anyone honestly believe that Karl Rove is not pulling candidate Romney's strings now?  It has had the fingerprints of Rove all along but site after site has figured out that Rove is the puppet master for Romney -- he pulls the strings and Romney speaks.   This latest attack on Perry by Rove and Romney on his words about the ponzi scheme are backfiring.  Someone had to tell the truth and Romney's comments that “Under no circumstances would I ever say, by any measure, it’s a failure. It is working for millions of Americans” didn't go over well.

It has been a failure from Day One when the money people paid into social security was put in general revenue for the Congress and President to spend at their whim.  It has never been in a lock box like some Americans have been led to believe as they have been lied to by politicians.  That is epic failure that this money was sent to the Government for the general revenue fund not to be put in a fund that the Federal Government could get interest on the eventual recipients money.  Can someone explain to me why that is not a failure of social security on the part of the Federal Government?

This is like reliving 2008 all over again and in some cases like reliving 1980 when Bush 41 would attack Reagan.  Close my eyes and I can remember the attacks by Bush 41.  Doesn't Rove know any other way to operate except being nasty?   Romney attacks on Perry are increasing with vitriol as Rove and Romney see that this attack on the ponzi scheme didn't have the desired affect so now they are doubling down.

Democrats won't need any ammunition as Karl Rove and Mitt Romney are providing the ammunition they can use against Perry which won't work for them either.  Most adults are not as dumb as they think we are and just want the truth.  If you don't want the truth, then you most likely are not voting Republican.  What they don't understand is that this Rove strategy we saw against McCain wasn't liked in 2000 and is liked less now.  In 2008, after Romney finally threw in the towel, he promised to help McCain by campaigning in Michigan and other states.  He never kept his word to Senator McCain so why would we think the recent flip flopper on Global Warming would keep his word now.

As David Freddoso points out, Karl Rove and Mitt Romney are definitely not on the same page as Ronald Reagan but then I was reminded today that Romney became an Independent during the Reagan/Bush years.  Now he wants to claim the Reagan mantle? Romney who dissed both Reagan and Bush 41 now holds on to every word of a man in his 80's.  Know there must be some word I am missing for that.
Update: David Freddoso gives Perry “two cheers” for essentially echoing Ronald Reagan and a generation of Republican leaders: 
So why are people like Karl Rove and former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney attacking Texas Gov. Rick Perry for repeating the same truth that Reagan and countless other Republicans have spoken for decades? In his book “Fed Up!”, and then again at Wednesday’s Republican debate at the Reagan Library, Perry rightly labeled Social Security as a “Ponzi scheme.” Yes, it’s a provocative phrase but the Texas governor understands that most Americans have had it with mealy-mouthed political talk. 
But instead of supporting Perry’s courage in speaking frankly about entitlements, the Romney campaign wants conservatives to believe that Perry’s “Ponzi”comment automatically disqualifies him from being the GOP nominee. If Republican primary voters buy that argument, it will be a disaster for our country’s fiscal future. The big three entitlements, Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid, add hundreds of billions to our federal debt every year. And the drain they are inflicting on our economy will only get worse. Why not speak bluntly about this fact? 
Should Perry be specific about how he proposes to fix Social Security and insure the benefits of those who are or are nearing retirement? Absolutely — and no doubt he will in the days ahead. But so should all the Republican candidates, as well as Democrats like President Obama. Anything less is just business-as-usual gibberish from the professional politicians in Washington.
Let’s recall what Perry actually said (bold by Hot Air), PERRY: 
Well, I think any of us that want to go back and change 70 years of what’s been going on in this country is probably going to have a difficult time. And rather than spending a lot of time talking about what those folks were doing back in the ’30s and the ’40s, it’s a nice intellectual conversation, but the fact is we have got to be focused on how we’re going to change this program. And people who are on Social Security today, men and women who are receiving those benefits today, are individuals at my age that are in line pretty quick to get them, they don’t need to worry about anything. But I think the Republican candidates are talking about ways to transition this program, and it is a monstrous lie. It is a Ponzi scheme to tell our kids that are 25 or 30 years old today, you’re paying into a program that’s going to be there. Anybody that’s for the status quo with Social Security today is involved with a monstrous lie to our kids, and it’s not right.
So yes, Perry was talking about changing the program, and not eliminating it. He will have to follow up with a plan to do so, of course — but as Freddoso writes, Perry’s challenge will now force everyone else to do so as well. Isn’t that what elections are about? 
Excerpt:  Read More at Hot Hair 
Because of snippy remarks from some other candidates about Governor Perry returning to Austin in daylight to see the devastation with the Bastrop wildfire which caused him to miss the DeMint debate, I posted this on a site (have added a few things today) about my feelings on Mitt Romney who seems to feel he is entitled to the nomination along with Karl Rove and Bush 41 who are pushing him:
As everyone knows, Governor Perry has been involved with his responsibilities as Governor with the massive fire that hit Bastrop along with other fires since he returned to Austin on Sunday afternoon to survey the damage. 
Romney has been prepping for debates and running for President since January 2007 when he decided not to run for reelection as Governor of MA. That is over 4 1/2 years of constant running for President yet when watching the debate on my DVR this morning, I didn’t see him as a clear winner but someone who sticks their finger in the wind to see which way conservatives are headed today. We already know he flip flopped on global warming recently. He is way too establishment and supported by Karl Rove all these years for me. 
The job growth under Romney as Governor was close to zero yet he was on the attack against Perry when he has been unemployed since early January 1997. 
I want a candidate who will go in and shake-up DC not be the status quo for the weak dollar that the Ivy League Presidents seem famous. I want a fighter not an establishment type from the Bush 41 camp which is who Romney is after endorsing Kay Baily against Rick Perry trying to take him out so he couldn’t run against the Bush 41 favorite son Romney. 
Not to mention Romney in 2006 as head of the RGA chose the consultant for the Independent Bush 41 candidate Rylander for his consultant. Imagine the head of the RGA with a consultant from an independent race trying to take out a sitting Governor. Didn’t like her son as press secretary either. :) 
Considering what Governor Perry has been through the last few days, I think he did an excellent job against others who have been through the debates especially Romney and Paul who debated in 2008 as well. Do I want a debater or a leader? I will take Perry who is a leader hands down over a man who calls himself unemployed and has been running for President for since 2006. 
As I was  putting this post together, it hit me that what we saw with Governor Perry at the debate Wednesday night was the real deal not someone who had been using his time before the debate to prep his answers.  He had been out in the field surveying damage from the wildfires and meeting with various heads of agencies to get some help for the people who had been affected.  There were no stand ins for several days for other debaters so he could prep -- the Governor didn't have time for that as he had a real job to do as Governor that affected people's lives. 
On the other hand, you have Romney who Rove has been prepping and it makes you go -- why would I want someone who has to be prepped who has been running for over 4 1/2 years versus the real deal?  Whose ideas are Romney using?  His own or Rove's?  
We will stick with the real deal Rick Perry to be our next President and Romney can go build his   $12M dollar mansion in LaJolla, CA.  Then Rove can go on Fox and continue to pontificate how he knows what everyone is going to say or do as he continues to attack Rick Perry.  He is looking smaller by the day with these attacks.  Don't know what he hopes to gain but I know plenty of people who were part of the Bush campaigns who want nothing to do with him.  His dirty tactics have worn thin. 
We are looking forward to the reaction of more people as they learn to know who Rick Perry is and start to understand he tells it like it is not the usual sugarcoating to buy votes and then flip when the person gets in office.  You know what you have with Governor Perry -- he is the 'real' deal from Paint Creek, Texas, an A&M grad, and former C-130 pilot who is now the Governor of Texas where the economy is good and job creation is ongoing.     

1 comment:

SJ Reidhead said...

My high school American history teacher taught that it was a Ponzi Scheme, and used those very words. I will not say when that was.

The Pink Flamingo