We can't worry about the election, we have to fight for social security

It is the issues we need to address now, and do everything to stop them from destroying our country

cant we do both? That is what seperates us from them. We have the ability to multi-task.

Voting accuracy is the priority.......no doubt in my mind. This Fraud must stop....we need to clean up our country. Nothing will occurr until this is done.

Everyone should have a hobby.

its electoral fraud. one issue.

social security is done for if they are not stopped. you, i, will be powerless to do anything about it. we wont be able to vote anyone it to protect it.

until the summer of 2006! We MUST keep it alive until it's fixed! Also remember, the voter rights law forces evoting machines in EVERY state by 2006!

However, I also think we cannot forget about SS! I feel sure the Pubs will be hoping we get distracted by something...ANYTHING...so they can push this SS and tax reform BS through! We really do have to work on BOTH!!!!!

this is not to devalue the importance of SS...its part of
our income too.

yup- put a gun to your head,turn up the drip, or just give up and die cause george and his zealots don`t give a fuck about anyone ,let alone senior citizen leeches. i`ve got about ten more years before i
"retire" and some people around here wonder why i`m so fuck`n pissed Kerry surrendered-he doesn`t have to worry about choosing

if something comes up that tells me there will be a concentrated fight from the Democrats, I will most certainly do everything I can to keep privatization from happening . But they will have to fight harder than I in order to earn my committment. I am tired of being the water girl.

Doesn't matter if they are Pubs or Dems! Mine are both Pubs, but I'm not letting up at all! Remember, their most important thing is to get re-elected! Sure, they pay attention to K street, but if enough people scream, they pay attention to the voters! Remember, the $$ comes from K Street, but the vote comes from us!

and the state went Kerry. They seldom cross party lines and one was selling the unfortunate Medicare bill to vulnerable seniors as if it were a chocolate Easter bunny all wrapped up in pink cellophane.

I am just a little short on energy these days.

putting my generation against my children`s generation. people wonder just how low bush can go, well here it is folks....

I have been casually thinking today of writing my Senators and Congressman asking exactly how much the U.S. Government owes the Social Security program in "markers." If the GAO is the source of that figure, I would like to know what it is. If no one has been keeping literal tabs, now is the time to start to compute it.

Those who have paid into this program and are now looking at Bush*s threat to reform this Ponzi (not sure how that is spelled) scheme should demand an accounting. After all, if there is a plan to factor in the transition fee of privatizing, originally estimated to be 1 million dollars, currently estimated at 2 or more, future retirees just 10 years short of retirement could see their benefits cut by 50 percent or more. Obviously, the amount the government has "borrowed" from this fund must be repaid.

Another point is this: some anti-choice people are saying they want to not pay for abortions with their tax money. I say I don't want to pay for illegal, immoral wars with my social security taxes. The surplus Bush* has spent the last four years helped finance his attack on Iraq. He used the social security surplus to help finance that. On the pretense of borrowing it, a privatization plan offsets any government IOU's. Let's hold their feet to the fire and demand an accounting.

He wants a fight; he's got one. (I am still enraged about his political capital speech....)

those who want to get their hands on this huge pool of money it is ...drum roll please....a social contract between the government and it`s citizen....and who is going to be effected the most-red states

Social security relates to a policy, voting integrity is a fundamental premise.

THE SMALLER BATTLES, SOME OF WHICH WE SHOULDN'T EVEN NEED TO BE FIGHTING IF TH COUNT WAS CORRECT.

Social Security was designed and passed in the '30s to be a windfall cash cow for the government. At that time the average life expectancy was 56 years (before the advent of antibiotics in the early '40s). "Uncle" figured much less would be paid out than taken in.

It is now to the point that roughly three 'payers' are 'supporting' one 'payee'. Absolutely unsustainable as the 'baby boomers' reach 65 yrs. and life expectancy is now in the high 70s.

Privatization for those entering the workforce is the only logical way to force retirement saving unto the young, who think they will never get sick or old..

In fact, I think a very fine 'progressive', ie. punish the rich, measure would be to "means test" for paying out SS and Medicare.

Al Gore said about a year ago social security was fine until 2047. Once the program gets past the baby boomer retirement, it will fall back to safer numbers. If some minor tweaking is done, no major reform is necessary.

If Bush* wants to encourage younger people to save for retirement, he could simply give them a tax break. (In fact, monies channeled into a 401K are pre-tax.) That's the excuse Bush* gives for starting the dismantling of social security as we know it.

Social security was never intended to be an investment program. It was intended to be an insurance policy against poverty for seniors. That's it, plain and simple. Republicans have always despised this program started by FDR, and many want to see it abolished.

By the time many of us baby boomers reach 65, medicare will have evolved into a standard HMO, with premiums comparable to what other insureds pay, social security benefits will be severely cut, and from that reduced payment seniors will have to pay for their health insurance. The only question will be, where will they get money for food? Make that, will they have money for food. If the answer is no, will the Republicans care? No. They will say we can't afford "entitlement programs" -- even if one has paid into this fund for 40 years. Get a job.

the system is "solvent" untill at least 2045, well past the time most of my generation is dead. forced retirement savings? you mean forced 401k`s ya right..give the stock market trillions of dollars,no thanks,been there, done that. "means test" is nice in theory but no matter what the income, if they paided in they get the money back, that is the contract. now if all the rich people want to give back the money..

balances is gone.