Posted on 09/11/2011 12:18:07 PM PDT by SeekAndFind
Mitt Romney didn’t wait long to begin his attack on Rick Perry over Social Security—his campaign is doing door-to-door distribution of a flier attacking Perry on the issue.
The flier, which a campagn spokesman said is being left at the doors of Florida GOP primary voters, portrays the GOP primary as a two-candidate race—“Two candidates. Only one will protect what’s important to you,” is the headline.
Of those two, it says, Perry is “reckless and wrong on Social Security.” The bold-face tagline: “Rick Perry: How can we trust anyone who wants to kill Social Security?” Romney, it says, favors “entitlement reform,” but “wants to save Social Security.”
Perry has not directly advocated abolishing Social Security, although he has called it a “Ponzi scheme” and questioned whether it’s constitutional. In last week’s candidates debate at the Reagan Library debate, the two clashed on the issue, and Romney accused Perry of being “committed to abolishing Social Security. But during the debate, Perry promised emphatically that he wouldn’t do anything to affect the benefits of current retirees or those nearing retirement.
Romney isn’t paying attention to the nuances, however. In the nation’s biggest swing state, which happens to have the second-largest population of 65-plus residents, he clearly hopes to put Perry’s views into question.
Romney’s move makes it virtually certain his clash with Perry in the Reagan Library debate will be repeated Monday in the Tampa debate sponsored by CNN and the Tea Party Express.
Thinking generational warfare is worth winning is a loser for a Repub. This simply disqualifies himself.
Pray for America
THIS IS ROMNEY BEING ROMNEY.
ROMNEY -—> PROTECTS OBAMA, SUPPORTS IAG, SHARIA
ROMNEY ——> ATTACKS GOP CANDIDATES AND MORALS
Even a “straw plan” would be better than none. It would illustrate the sort of thing Perry has in mind.
Romney’s making the rest of the field look better every day...
If you kill SS, you have to compensate those who have paid into it all their lives.
I will start this by saying that I am not a Perry supporter in that I have been a regular contributor to SarahPAC from its inception. As it stands right now, she is not in so I have to look at the current choices in the light that I must objectively watch the game and to educate myself on each of the announced candidates.
Either I saw a different debate or some here are totally missing what I heard him specifically describe by saying seniors and soon to be recipents will not be cut out of what they have been promised all of their working lives. He was very specific that the young workers of this country would be those who would lose in the current Ponzi scheme.
So why not everyone here at least be honest when debating the issues so we all do not become losers because of it? There is a long time until the primaries begin so how about noting the facts instead of making them up, or worse, leaving them out because you have already placed your stake in the ground. We will all be richer by doing so and end up with the best candidate possible to rallye behind when we oust the Poser.
Now, for Mitt and reportedly Michelle laying plans to label him a SS killer and throwing seniors out of their homes crap we hear constantly from the Democrats. Supporters for either should be ashamed they are taking that “win at any costs” attitude that has laid politics in the public relations mess it is mierd in today.
I’m sorry. That information is classified.
I'm with ya...
Assets grew from about $47 billion at the end of December 1986 to about $2.6 trillion by the end of December 2010. The assets of the Trust are invested in US Bonds , backed by the full faith and credit of the federal government by law. The SS Trust fund is the largest holder of US debt. Social Security will not be bankrupt unless the US defaults on that debt.
The Social Security trust fund holds $2.7 trillion dollars of government bonds. Is the USA going to default on those bonds? Incidentally, at present China owns only $1.2 trillion.
More than half of Americans, 56 percent, would be less likely to vote for a presidential candidate who favored phasing out Social Security so that workers could invest their payroll taxes in the stock market, according to a nationwide poll in June by The Wall Street Journal and NBC News. That included 64 percent of Democrats and 57 percent of independents, whose swing votes decide elections, and even a 45 percent plurality of Republicans. Only one-third of Republicans said they would be more likely to vote for someone who espoused ending Social Security.
Mittens actions say “if I can’t have it, no one can”. He’s clearly a RINO and I probably would sit out the election rather than vote for Mittens.
Mittens actions say “if I can’t have it, no one can”. He’s clearly a RINO and I probably would sit out the election rather than vote for Mittens.
What are you sorry about? WHO classified such?
That was a joke. Why do you want to know my school’s tuition rate other than to know where I am?
Oh please get over yourself already. A rounded off figure is fine. See you like to splash yourself as in the inside but you don't put up anything to present gravitas as to backing up what you spout. I could care less what the literal name/address of where you teach. I just wanted a ballpark figure what parents are getting charged to have their children manipulated.
Are you saying because the majority of Americans are morons, nothing should be done about the Ponzi Scheme?
Charles Ponzi, small potatoes compared to DC Politicians
You might examine your premise.
whoa!
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.