Bachmann “clarifies” Social Security/Medicare comment

Due to having jobs and lives, we don’t get our posts up quickly. That means we missed blogging about the fallout from Bachmann’s comments on Medicare and Social Security. We are delighted to see that Clark and Reed are having fun with it. So is the DNC:

Meanwhile, reporters at various Minnesota publications have had trouble pinning down what exactly Bachmann meant by that. We were too lazy to save the link, but we seem to recall seeing a spokeshole from her office “clarifying” the comment without actually explaining anything. Luckily for us, she agreed to an inteview with the St. Cloud Times, published Feb. 14, in which she admitted that she wants to screw everyone under the age of about 55:

What we know right now (is) that going forward, Social Security and Medicare will be bankrupt and they will be broke. Congress has not yet put forth a credible plan, so seniors won’t be put in an enviable position. We have to take up the issue and we need to address it. There are a number of proposals on the table. One, my colleague from Wisconsin Paul Ryan has a proposal. I have taken a look at that. I am open to a number of different ideas. The one thing we do know, the current system isn’t sustainable. The system is going to be dead broke by 2017.

We need to keep faith with those on Social Security and Medicare and make sure federal government keeps its promise. For those within 10 years of receiving those programs, they need to be kept on (the) same terms as before. We know we can’t sustain this going forward. For those younger than those ages, we have to reform the system so the monies they put in they will receive.

Please see our previous post to read about why the “broke by 2017” thing is a lie that CNBC (not MSNBC, mind you) has already debunked. Handy for scaring people into doing what she wants, but not actually true. Ryan’s budget proposal does have the advantage of being honest about Medicare etc. being expensive, but mainstream conservatives have already distanced themselves, so good luck with that.

Our main objection to all of this is that we, and everyone else under 55 who has ever had a legal job, will be fux0red by it. Let’s say Ryan manages to privatize this thing (which is part of what he calls for in this budget “roadmap”). Every cent you’ve ever put into the system since you started working would be gift-wrapped and handed to Wall Street. Maybe you will make money, maybe you won’t, but either way they will. You have only to look at recent Wall Street history to see why this is an awful, awful idea.

This interview contains several other goodies worth mentioning. In true politician fashion, she fails to answer direct questions, even the one they asked twice about whether she supports anything in the health care bill. When asked to name stuff she’s done to benefit the Sixth District, she mentions a Haiti relief bill and a nonbinding resolution honoring foster families.

But what caught our eye is that she wants people to be able to deduct health insurance costs from their taxes, and opposes the current bill in part because it doesn’t do that. Self-employed people should be laughing right about now, because they can deduct health insurance costs on their taxes and have been able to for years. In fact, it’s right there on the 1040, so if you’re not self-employed but you’re a careful reader, you may even know this.


%d bloggers like this: