With his lack of understanding of the Social Security system, Senator John McCain has finally convinced me, a proud Fresno native and lifetime Republican, to cross over and vote for Senator Obama in November.

I do not want to be misled and carried away once again, by the rhetoric of the Bush establishment that has usurped the GOP, and has misled loyal Americans in 2000 and again in 2004.

It has finally dawned on me (the slow learner thant I am) that my loyalty has to be to the USA first, and not to the political party, and those who are using it to enhance their personal wealth and agendas.

God Bless America...!

Since the dawning of Reaganomic and Bushie politics, social contracts between We the People and the government are as good as were the treaties with the Native Americans. But it seems that the latter are getting even with gambling joints up to our ears.

If it has always been done that way then there should be enough for everyone now asc well but they say there isn't. Perhaps if they give it onlt to those that have paid into it there should be enough and cut the amount the politicians receive to what we receive.LOL like that will ever happen. Poor power to McCain if he can come up with a better way.

Jackie, my understanding is that you only get Social Security if you paid into it now. If you haven't paid into it (e.g. because you're disabled) you may qualify for SSI. You're not advocating abolishing SSI, are you?

I always wondered how so many people have received SSI. Who you ask, Drug addicts (those who have been in prison so many times that they are considered disabled) so they get SSI and even get back pay, thousands of dollars. Then there are the children who have 2 parents have had a disability of some sort and get SSI but never worked and will never work and their parent both work and use the money for whatever they want. The list goes on why does nothing get done with these issues.

McCain's comment is a little worrisome in terms of his clear lack of understanding of how a major government-run program operates, one he has presumably cast votes on many times in the past. Also, his lack of understanding suggests there may be similar gaps in his understanding of other issues, gaps that lobbyists and other opportunists would be happy to fill.

He doesn't have to worry about his pension from Social Security, first of all. Does he have gaps in his memory to make such a statement? I can understand that there are problems due to the proliferation of giving out money to people who never paid into it. This is something that wasn't in the program when it was initiated. However, most folks in this country haven't saved enough to cover their retirement and this is the sole source of income for them.

That small pensions given to farm laborers who had not paid into the system did not worry us the wage earning generation paying into the system. It was that, or have a category of old American workers being totally destitute
because of the unwise exemption of farm labor income from Social security payroll deductions. Probably none
of those hapless old farm workers are alive any longer.

What irked us to no end was the fact that the government kept raiding and borrowing from the Social Security fund to pay for programs that could not have received legislative approval.
But the government never paid those moneys back.

What irked us to no end that wealthy grandparents adopted their grand children so they could
receive Social Security pensions to age 18, and sometimes beyond if they were students. A loophole
that should have been plugged as soon as it was discovered.One of our very young cousins got the entire amount as allowance.

In a recent Business Week article John McCain extends tax cuts for all corporations and faster write offs for investments in equipment. This is a campaign fund raising plan that does not pay attention to the present, let alone the future.
Barack Obama’s support of business is more proactive and aimed at problem solving. Government should support growth of regional clusters in the same industries and would help existing companies collaborate on new products and technologies so that they could compete better globally. Also, money would be spent on improving infrastructure and providing training for workers. Attending to our leading strength, innovation, the Democrats would develop ‘green’ technologies as a way to create jobs, a great way to boost the fading middle class that the wealthy would like to destroy.
Business Week also sides with Obama by proposing increased grants and loans to high-tech startups, greater national funding for research and development, and using environmental regulations to slow imports from polluting manufacturers overseas.

No MAike I am not saying the should abolish. I was unable to get SSI because as a Federal employee of 22= years we did not pay into it but yet some addict or person with other issues that have not worked can get it without paying in to it as well as their children. I found that as a federal employee I am totally screwed. Thank God I can get a portion of my pension even though I am not returement age. There has to be a better policy.

There is no retirement for employees of the federal government? What are they supposed to do for their
retirement?
Today I read in the Bee that helpless old people have to go on a waiting list for meals on wheels.

My God that is positively Charles Dickens' England
How long can such very old people wait? And what is the alternative?

Gimmi those commy pinko
Danes any old day.

Good bless America, this
blessed people!

Isabel,
Remember, 60 Minutes reported on the Danes being the 'happiest' people or country of people two years in a row. After the 1974 OPEC gas crunch Denmark started a massive conservation program that puts them now at a strong advantage, incl. a 100% tax on autos to finance the trains and subways.

It's pretty clear that most of the bloggers here are liberal Democratic Obama fans, saying whatever is necessary (credible or not) to sway others bloggers to do the same.

It's also discouraging to me that the moment John McCain, or any Republican mispeaks, or is less than perfect, the pitchforks come out and he/she is burned at the stake by the media, other democrats, and bloggers.

On the other side of the isle, if a democrats mispeaks, especially if it is your Messiah, Lord Barack Obama, the mainstream media, and his supporters are mute, or making excuses for him.

It would require you to be half-asleep not to have noticed the mile long list of idiotic gaffes this greenhorn politician has made. For instance, he recently said he has visited nearly all 57 states (in the U.S.)??? And how about the day to day about-face changes of his position on nearly every major issue?

And how about this one...a few weeks ago he said... Venezuala and Iran are not any threat to the U.S., because they are tiny countries. If he believes this, then why can't we win the war in Iraq? He's a walking contradiction.

It is so obvious--he is in WAY OVER HIS HEAD.

Redpeach, you must not have been paying that much attention to what others post if you think the majority are pro-Obama. Regular posters like Brian Murray, T.C. Morgan and McIntyre are conservatives. Isabell Lawson is a middle-of-the-road type. She doesn't like Bush, but has said nothing in favor of Obama that I've seen. Jackie Krage appears to lean towards Bush, although she's not usually overly partisan. Swift is liberal, but he's not too fond of Obama.

As for Obama on Iran, what he actually said is that Iran is tiny compared to the old USSR, which is undeniably true. But he didn't deny that Iran poses a threat to U.S. interests in the Middle East. You appear to be relying on a right-wing source for your slant. Are you seriously suggesting that the world's sole remaining superpower should feel threatened by countries like Iran and Venezuela? Does the Republican Party have anything left to offer except fear?

Mike D.

You must be the one not paying attention, because Murray, T.C. Morgan and McIntyre did not post any comments on this specific blog--McCain and Social Security.

I agree, Isabell Lawson is a different animal, and seems to be all over the place in her opinions.

In lue of your comments defending your greenhorn candidate. I will repeat myself: Liberals can't take it when their Messiah, Lord Obama is called on the carpet for his near endless gaffes. You go into overdrive to spin and misrepresent what Obama does and says, hoping onlookers are not intelligent enough to see through the lies.

Concerning Iran and Venezuala: In an era of WMD's (dirty bombs, poison gas, anthrax, etc.), anyone who thinks we should gage the threat of a country only by the size of its land mass is braindead. As you all very well know, minute amounts of these substances can bring a large city/country to its knees. Furthermore, these countries are openly threatening the U.S.

Why do you spend so much time trying to mislead, and misrepresent the facts? What's in it for you? Are you on Obama's payroll?

Since I am neither mineral nor vegetable, I must be animal. (Is there a computer language symbol for laughter.)

As for this animal being "all over the place" with her opinion...it's not
all over...it's above it.

It is the hallmark of the objective thinker to aim for the highest vintage point possible to be able to take in the widest panorama possible. Nothing that occurs in socio/political, socio/economic life happens in a vacuum. It's all a matter of cause and effect.

This animal also likes aphorisms. They contain a lot of wisdom in very few words.

exempli gratia: "One intelligent woman has millions of natural enemies; every stupid man in the world." (Maria v. Ebner Eschenbach) Even Arnold Schwarzenegger may remember her from his school days.

And this concludes my contribution to this verbal slug fest.

Redpeach, I've not misrepresented any facts, and these unfounded accusations are getting a bit tiresome. When you said "most of the bloggers here," I thought you were talking about this blog - Opinion Talk, not this specific thread.

As for your argument that Obama is "green," at least he doesn't say naive things like drilling for oil offshore will be a short-term solution to high gas prices, like McCain did. And while focusing on speculative threats in Iran and Venezuela, you, like Bush, seem to be forgetting the guy who actually did harm our country on Bush's watch. Does the name bin Laden ring any bells?

Mike D.

The only unfounded accusations are coming from your camp...and your arguments are not only tiresome, they are anti-American. Blaim Bush, Blaim Bush, Blaim Bush --- now that is by far the most tiresome, and copout argument in existance today. Get over your hatred for Bush. Stop using him as your scapegoat.

Bait and switch is an old trick used by those who don't have an argument. But if we must now turn away from Iran and Venezuala, and discuss Osama Bin Laden, according to your theory Al Queda could not possibly be a threat to the U.S., since this Islamo-facist organization does not have a country--they have zero land mass.

And just a reminder, President Clinton also failed to take out Bin Laden. He knew he was a threat to national security, but was unable to stop Al Queda's missions, on the first WTC attack, on the Cole, and on the U.S. Embassy in Africa. These major events all happened on Clinton's watch.

But playing the blaim game, and hindsight gets us nowhere. Instead, our country needs to unite against a common enemy--Islamo-facism. I don't shy away from the term, because I believe in telling it like it is. And that is what they are. Their mission is world domination through conquering the free world, and implimenting Sharia Law.

Just curious, how is it naive to propose the use of our own energy resources to solve our energy problems, and gain independence from unstable foreign oil? This is only common sense. And I see you conveniently omitted the pro-American innovation part of McCains energy platform. As you know, McCain plans to up the annie towards energy independence, and reward effective alternative energy innovations through financial rewards--this will give inventors tremendous insentive.

Unlike the left, Republicans believe in American innovation, which has been solving problems for humanity since America's beginnings.

Look up zero-sum ecomonics. This is one of the weaknesses of the liberal mindset.

Redpeach, you are long on accusations, but short on substance. Do you equate "blaim [sic] Bush" with being "anti-American"? Since when does being opposed to a president equal being anti-American? That doesn't sound like the America I know.

And by the way, neither Saddam nor Hugo Chavez could be considered "Islamo-facsists" by any stretch of the imagination. The one that most fits that term is bin Laden - the guy that Bush allowed to attack America, then allowed to get away at Tora Bora, then proceeded to forget about while he pursued the war he really wanted to fight.

Mike D.--It is Anti-American to perpetuate hatred for your own country, or your President. You are absolutely doing that, and it is harmful to our country, to American citizens, to those who travel, and/or do business abroad, to foreign relations, and world affairs.

Liberal Democrats, the news media, and communists-minded persons have been indoctrinating America in self-loathing for the past 50 years. And there is a large population of Americans who are just plain fed up with it.

If you and your comrades would believe in peace, half as much as you hate Bush, we could maybe get somewhere.

Back to the old bait and switch game again? You ask me about Al Queda, then when I answer the question, you apply my answer to Hugo Chavez and Saddam. I cannot say if you are confused or are intentionally trying to mislead your readers.

"Mc Cain and the Social Security disgrace" is being lionized by two
males. One seems constitutionally incapable of validating any ideas
that are in opposition to his, and the other must have gotten his wisdom
straight out of George Rockwell's writings. And neither of them contribute
very much to the topic at hand. One seems to be in command of English
orthography, while the other can't spell his way out of a paper bag.

Your friendly neighborhood "different animal" meow!

In a final statement Redpeach reveals the true nature of this discussion. I wager on the first impression.

Isabell-
I am glad you are back, so I can apologize for the comment, which I think you took the wrong way. 'A different animal' is a coined phrase used to describe something unusual. It was not meant as a negative. Personally, I have trouble following your line of thought in your writing. Thus the comment--all over the place. I do percieve that your emotions play a large role in your forming your opinions, and have found this approach to be a stumbling block, leading to abandonment of important principles.

That may not make sense either. But anyway...I apologize.

The observation that I do not like Bush, and that I do not support Obama is correct. Neither did I support Hillary Clinton.

Though I knew next to nothing about John Edwards,
I liked what he had to say.

"I began my presidential campaign here to remind the country that we, as citizens and as a government, have a moral responsibility to each other, and what we do together matters. We must do better, if we want to live up to the great promise of this country that we all love so much".

Tragically, that statement
was repeated when he quit the race. Edwards was a middle of the road candidate.

Unfortunately,the American Middle Class, once the backbone of America, has given up on itself, and the nation tends to lean toward the radical. I am too old to really be affected one way or the other....but I weep
for those who come after my generation... dubbed the "Silent Generation."
Perhaps had we been less silent, we would not be in the mess we are in now, about 50 years later.

This may be too late in the topic to get any attention, but what I'm seeing here is one of the problems this country is facing. The polarization is ear-splitting. It doesn't do anyone any good.

You know Isabell, that quote you put up from John Edwards reminded me of the Barack Obama I knew before January '08. Yes I've followed him for 4 years and wanted him to run. I've always known this man to have his ears to both sides of the aisle. He's a listener and a moderator and has been since his years in Harvard. That's one of the qualities that earned him the prestige of being elected President of the Harvard Law Review in only his second year.

In recent months I've noticed this campaign has forced him to appear to be a different sort of person than the one I know he is as I guess any campaign will do to any candidate. I've noticed a lot of changes in McCain as well. I used to like McCain for a republican but he's changed and moved around and tried to appeal to this group and that just as much as Obama has.

I've always believed, and still do, that Obama just wants to fix the things that are wrong with this country. He has no personal agenda, no scores to settle, and hasn't earned any enemies....yet. No Redpeach...he's not the Messiah no matter how tickled you are with yourself for your attempt at humor. He's just trying to fix what's wrong and bring peace and respect back to this country. Is that so wrong? Should we all hate each other because of who we vote for? Aren't we all Americans first?

Wait...redpeach...I've changed my mind...flip flopped if you will. I was just thinking that "John McSame" is a funny name so I'll give you Obamassiah...which in retrospect is sort of funny in it's own right. Carry on.

It is never too late for the exchange of ideas. But it is always too early to go to war. For whatever reasons, presidential candidate, Obama, was
ready to storm up San Juan Hill right into Iran, early in his campaign. And
that's the time I lost interest. And now he is ready to send more troops
into Iraq. Obama? Mc Cain? What's the difference? But I am guilty of digressing from the topic Social Security, yet I really want to respond to the post signed "scot". Reconciliation has become a rare practice.

I am not a pacifist like Tolstoy, who does not even allow for self-defense.
But I subscribe to the words authored and sang by my daughter's generation:

"This weary world has had its fill of talk of war from every hill...."

As for the different Obama you knew prior to January 2008, and you have
faith that he is till there.....from your lips to God's ear!

I too hade made an attempt at satire on the name OBAMA, for president of
a Euro-based nation. But it turtled like all the cream puffs I ever tried to make. Women got into the blog, left and right, ready to exile me to one of Dante's hells. With tongue in cheek; it was almost palpable.

scot signed off "Aren't we all Americans first" Maybe that in itself has become a problem. And it surely is in conflict with the American doctrine of Global Community.

Americans will have to accept that there are other people in this
world. In Europe of today, most of them have a higher living standard than we. And those Americans who are existing only on Social Security pay are in deep economic trouble.

Pax vobiscum my friend