Rick Perry is getting a lot of attention for describing Social Security as a "
Ponzi scheme." What is missed by focusing on this provocative soundbite is that Perry's point is not that Social Security must be fixed, but that it should be scrapped. Perry believes that states should be permitted to
opt out of Social Security and supports the radical, legally unsupportable and highly unpopular notion that Social Security, as well as Medicaid, is
unconstitutional.
I don’t think our founding fathers when they were putting the
term “general welfare” in there were thinking about a federally operated
program of pensions nor a federally operated program of health care.
What they clearly said was that those were issues that the states need
to address. Not the federal government. I stand very clear on that. From my perspective, the states could substantially better operate those programs if that’s what those states decided to do.
It would be helpful if the media would cease being enamored of another purportedly macho straight talker with a Texas twang, and realize that Perry is another dangerous case of
All Hat and No Cattle.
1 comments :
What business does Rick Perry have "thinking" about what the founding fathers meant? General Welfare is a plain enough term and if the nation decided a long time before Rick Perry was even born to set up programs such as Social Security and Medicare who is he to try and cornhole them into a states rights issue?
These states rights motherf*ckers are all for it until they aren't, which is usually when they want to the federal government to be brought to bear on an issue (most often financially remunerative) dear to them.
I hope Romney can do the dirty work of making Perry look like the total outlander he is so we can go about the business of getting Obama elected to a second term we can all be disappointed in.
Post a Comment