Your story came up as I was writing a thank you to Chuck Todd on a post that has nothing to do with Hillary.  lol.
But, if you don't see it, I want to say what you said to Russert today about Hillary getting a free pass and not having to answer for anything made my day.
Finally someone said it in the paid media on air.  My guess is that anyone who was watching was toasting you.
It is ridiculous they way the media is blatantly trying to shove Hillary at us.  Many feel they have no choice.  While they paint Obama as an idiot and inexperienced and Edwards as a vainglorious shallow opportunist, they proceed to portray Hillary as the the second coming.  it is so sad and frustrating to many of us because no matter how we try, we are ignored.
It galls me when the talking heads sit around pretending to be in wonder as to why the polls are not moving and then heap blame on Obama and Edwards for falling behind.
I wonder where the three would place in the polls if the truth was known.  The troubling aspects of Hillary's character and ethical problems.  ect. ect.
And if they knew many of the big names in foreign policy say Obama is right and that the dean of FP endorsed obama.  Mica's father, bzrezinski.
Or ted sorenson, ect. ect.  Yet when some minor celebrity endorsed Hillary it is breaking news.
No one allows Obama's years as a constitutional law professor, his 8 years in the state senate (where he did alot of important legislation - including a successful revamp of health care - unlike Hillary)to be taken as real experience while Hillary's 8 years waving is concidered important experience.
No one touts Obama's judgement and leadership and ignores Hillary's lack of it.
Again, thank you.  many out here appreciate it.
One question:  do you think it did any good?  will there be a change of policy?
I honestly doubt it.

My social security?? What security? It's gone. Guess who I blame?

Q: Which Political Party took Social Security from the independent “Trust” fund and put it into the General fund so that Congress could spend it?

A: It was Lyndon Johnson and the democratically controlled House and Senate.

Q: Which Political Party started taxing Social Security annuities?

A: The Democratic Party, with Al Gore casting the “tie-breaking” deciding vote as President of the Senate, while he was Vice President of the U.S.

Q: Which Political Party eliminated the income tax deduction for Social Security (FICA) withholding?

A: The Democratic Party.

Q: Which Political Party decided to start giving annuity payments to immigrants?

A: That’s right! Jimmy Carter and the Democratic Party. Immigrants moved into this country, and at age 65, began to receive Social Security payments! The Democratic Party gave these payments to them, even though they never paid a dime into it!

http://www.savessi.com

HillBilly sure ain't gonna be the one to put the money back into the bank either.

She is certainly a piece of work-I will never understand the Dems rush to nominate unelectable candidates-Mondale, Dukakis, Gore, Kerry, now Billary?? She is even worse then the prior losers.

i believe a 2001 report would be issued after George Bush took the Oath of Office in January 2001.  Raising social security taxes might be one alternative - another would be growing the economy  and increasing the technical and skilled working population with immigrants. I believe that even today the Bush administration does not allow highly trained foreign nationals to be employed here in the US -  

Hillary can't keep all her lies straight anymore

Bush has spent enough money on Iraq to pay for social securty for 50 years. A wae that was not needed

yes , hillary will defend ss ,ok,, she wants that extra grand a month when she turns 62. to add to her millions and senate -president retirement . a pity she didnt have to live on 1000 a month .

VOTE for Ron Paul for president ,,the only republican canidate in the running that could possibly beat Hillary. and im not part of any group or conspiracy. have just studied the situation thoroughly.

does anyone tell us the truth?

Its simply a lie, though one I suppose all candidates might be guilty of telling. Social security payouts will have to be altered, either by reducing benefits or pushing back eligible ages. And social security numbers aren't as daunting as a few other entitlement projections.

Why does MSNBC always cover Hillary's story with a negative tone? I have noticed that other candidates does not receive similar treatment.

Why don't you be fair in your coverage and treat every candidate the same way?

Always looking for ways to bring her down while promoting Giuliani as a hero, media made fake hero.

there goes Hillary again, trying to reinvent history and the wheel at the same time.

“I see a lot of fellow baby boomers, and we’re all thinking about the problems we’ll confront,” Clinton said. "We'll confront"? Who does she think she's fooling? She'll confront nothing compared to the common citizen. She'll receive her Senator's salary for life - unless she actually does get elected president, then she'll get a President's salary and perks for life - and the Clintons are already millionaires. Normal citizens will "confront" increased taxes, deminished benefits, and socialization verging on communism if she is elected.

It doesn't matter what the solvency estimate was in 2001, since Bill Clinton, George W Bush, and even Bush 41 have nothing to do with solvency. Social Security law, guiding both revenue and benefits, was changed in the 1980s, and has been untouched since. The lies our government tells about Social Security are among the most egregious in politics. Bill Clinton has partial privitization on the table because it made sense. The Feds engage in Enron accounting, keeping the net revenue from Social Security on the balance sheet, but omitting the debt  to the trust fund. With proper accounting, there was never a surplus in the 1990s, and right now, our annual deficit is about 100 billion more than Bush and Congress says it is. If politicians really want to get honest about Social Security, they would pay it from general revenue, which essentially it is, even though that's not the way it shows in the books.

Maybe if illigal immigrants were not allowed SSN benefits then maybe it would be solvent for a little while longer. Did Hillary support the legislation that approved SSN for immigrants?  If she did vote for the measure then she should explain to the people who paid into the program why she is giving away those benefits to those who never paid into it..

A Clinton who speaks the truth, sure! You can
bank on anything she says, if you enjoy the Nation in bankruptcy. Mrs. Clinton promises everything to any group that she addresses. This behavior was learned from Mr. "I did not have sex........"

The reason Bush wants to privatize social security is because he is all about big business. Why does he care if our retirement is placed on a dice table. Why does he care if we have to watch the stock market and economy every day to see how we can live after we retire. Just like his health care, he doesn't have to worry about it. Everyone knows that social security is a very small part of ones income after retiremnt. With companies moving out and out sourcing, retirement plans are not a sure thing either. Did not a lot of people loose their pensions because of corporate scandals? Look at the auto industry now saying that they can't afford pensions and health care for retired people right now.

Stop the Presses ... Hillary Clinton will not cut Social Secutity Benefits to the Elderly and Disabled !!!! :-)

The Clinton's fiscal policy is like their moral policy-EXTINCT!

I can still remember the birth of Social Security and how my father cast a suspicious eye on the first, albeit small, deduction made from his paycheck.  The originaal concept of S.S. was very sound and was a beacon in the darkness of old age... with very positive results.  It flourished for a long time, until someone found a way to channel the surplus to other areas and the system began to be diluted.  If the system had been left the way it was planned, there would be a huge surplus in the account and our seniors would be able to retire gracefully, and, at the same time, open new jobs for those younger citizens advancing into the workforce.  I also feel that our wealthy and educated citizens would easily be able to privatize, but the less educated lower class would not be intellectually or financially capable of investing anything at all.  I think privatization would send us back into the dark ages with those less fortunate living in the streets and digging through garbage cans.  (Perhaps we are closer than we think!) Please make Social Security work for the betterment of our Senior Citizens.

A Clinton making stuff up?  Say it ain't so!!!


So, all the Hillary worshippers want to replace Bush, who they say makes things up, with Hillary, who makes things up.

I for one would much rather have the extra money in my pocket to invest as I see fit.  
I am already able to put away nearly 30% of what I make and would much rather pick my own retirement plan than have the government do it for me.

Boy those Clintons sure are making Bush look real good.  The bush admin are saints to glorify, they are right up there with dear Jesus and so like god.  George is so in touch with the lord and the lord don't mind him killing  people. Praise Bush and God fearing soldiers everywhere.

anyone that thinks taxes won't have to be increased sometime in the near future is fooling themselves, the police action in iraq is being paid for on the taxpayers credit card, the wealthy elite are soaking up the money being spent in iraq through corporate holdings in the corrupt war machine, another clever way the republicans engineered to take from the poor and give to the rich, then when the bill comes due the working class will be asked to pay for it all again only with interest tacked on this time. the massive dept from iraq will also be used as an excuse to try and dismantle pesky social programs like social security and medicare which the wealthy elite don't need, but a hell of a bunch of other people do since business has seen fit to eliminate any pension or insurance plans for the retired. this country used to be a place where if you worked hard you could expect to retire in dignity, for most it has become a country where you are now forced to retire in poverty, not exactly a feather in our hat,what’s clintons plan to correct these problems? if she has one she certainly is doing a poor job of explaining it, john edwards has a feasible plan to address these issues, vote for a better america not business as usual, hillary is part of the problem, not the answer

MK,MO.  Hard to interpret your writings - it seems to be one long sentence, with little punctuation, and a lot of cut and paste from the DailyKOS.

Anyway, for what was decipherable . . . .

Do higher tax rates always result in higher tax revenue?

Please define "wealthy elite".


The rest of the manifesto seems to be a stream of conscious for social programs, against corporations, a challenge to Clinton, Hillary I imagine, and last but certainly not least, an endorsement of Edwards.

On second thought, nevermind, the eyes ache enough.

Boy those Clintons sure are making Bush look real good.  The bush admin are saints to glorify, they are right up there with dear Jesus and so like god.  George is so in touch with the lord and the lord don't mind him killing  people. Praise Bush and God fearing soldiers everywhere.#######

Finally, someone gets it!!

Loved your piece! Thank you!  GAO Comptroller General David Walker (appointed by Pres Clinton) is going around the country saying that entitlements is $50 TRILLION underfunded (SS, Medicare, Medicaid)--equals over $400,000 per household if spread around to everyone.  But HC says "she will protect the program through fiscal responsibility."  What a blatantly irresponsible statement.

Face facts, folks, if you are my age (late 40s) and counting on SS to retire, you'll be eating at food banks.

The only way to make it work is by changing demographics (i.e., legalizing all those young illegals), raising the retirement age (already 68 for me), raising taxes (already way too high) or privatization.

Me, I'm all for privatization. Based on my returns, I could do a lot better than the paltry 1% I can expect from my SS taxes--assuming I even see any of it.

What political pandering. Clinton vows not to reduce benefits nor raise the retirement age. So her plan should be called the "Stick-it-to-Younger-Workers" plan because the only other option is SUBSTANTIALLY raise taxes on them.

The sad truth is no one, republican or democrate has any idea what to do about social security.  Both parties have played with and used all future monies that should be going to ss.  The war in Iraq has striped every government office except the Pentagon.  Most of our debt is held by China.  It will take us 10, 20 or 30 years to pull out of the financial mess that Bush and his cronies have put us in.  The rich have gotten much much richer and the middle class has lost almost everything.  
I am voting for Clinton.  No one else seems as strong.  God save us all from the mess that Bush has created.
 

Bruce, NV - Me, I'm all for privatization. Based on my returns, I could do a lot better than the paltry 1% I can expect from my SS taxes--assuming I even see any of it.

Wait until if Hillarator/Edwards/Obama gets in.  Look for another 15-20% of your paycheck to be vaporized for national health care.

Social Security is not an entitlement.  I don't know who keeps perpetuating that myth.  Social Security is a retirement/insurance program that we all pay into and collect the benefits from when we retire.  It should not be privatized for the simple fact that it IS retirement insurance.  It's a guarentee of a certain benefit for life upon retirement much the same as an annuity.   It's easy to critize Social Security now because all or most of us don't remember what it was like for the elderly poor prior to the program.  My parents remember.  They remember a time when there was no such thing as a social safety net for anyone.  The people of this country were desperate and the Republicans of the time could have cared less.  Our country almost collapsed into a dictatorship because of it.  If anyone doesn't believe me, read up on it. Thank God for FDR.  Our country will be eternally grateful.

And as far as the lies of the Clinton's are concerned....can any of you here who keep bringing that up actually say that with a straight face?  The Bush lies are far more prolific and damaging to this country than any lie about an affair could be.  Bush is certainly the worst president we have ever had and possibly the most dangerous to our form of government.  Some of you have let your ideaology get in the way of your common sense.  

Ideology lol wow you better check out these before passing judgment.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a0-HkVcMOSw part 1 of 12 search for the rest..

Message (please, no HTML tags. Web addresses will be hyperlinked):