Just 2 more weeks and we will forever after only refer to this clown in the past tense...unless charges are brought ;)

Bush said his effort showed it's politically safe to campaign on changing Social Security

OK, I'll admit my hand reflexively goes for the remote when Bush comes on TV, but I remember being shocked the first time I heard Bush talk about these social security savings accounts. And it was definitely after the election in '04. Did he actually campaign on it?

What's more, "private investment accounts" now appear "attractive"? To whom, exactly?

To that hard core of believers who think SS is just a ponzi scheme. There are a lot of them out there, some even have their own radio shows. They're not going away, and the Repubs WILL go after SS again, as soon as they come up with another name for their "reform"

One of Bush's best accomplishments, (maybe the only): No White House grounds squirrels were killed during his tenure! -Kevo

I'm sure Cheney is proud of the abject security failure that was 9/11 since it gave him the excuse to try do destroy our Constitution.

Bush was not totally incompetent on every single thing he did, but he was close enough that I'm not going to bother to waste my time identifying areas where he wasn't a complete screwup. No other president comes close to Bush in the competition to be worst president ever. Cheney was just a bonus bit of evil and incompetence.

It's hard to reconcile such a small, ridiculous man with all the suffering he has caused.

He just thinkin about the rocks glass, heavy crystal. And how the ice drops into it and rings it and spins around the bottom. And then you smell the bourbon and it sprays from rock to rock, bloop bloop bloop from the bottle. And he can look at it, nice color, for about a half a second and then drink it down and then pour some more and have some.

As I recall I only saw one instance of Bush even mentioning privatization of social security during the 2004 campaign, a stop in VA during June. His handlers were quick to quash that talk and tell reporters he didn't mean it.

If they think it's "success" now, just think how the revisionists will play it.

I once heard that David Lee Roth of Van Halen fame read a book a day. While I always had my doubts about that, I find that much more believable than Bush's supposed reading list. Roth might have been a loud-mouthed jackass, but at least the man can talk properly and could be mildly interesting. Bush doesn't even have that going for him.

And to answer someone else's question: No, Bush did not campaign on Social Security reform in 2004. They claimed he did after the election, but if I remember correctly, he only mentioned it a few times and certainly didn't make it a platform he stood on. How could he? His only platform was: Kerry sucks. Quite a mandate he got from that, too.

Just 2 more weeks and we will forever after only refer to this clown in the past tense.

No, I'm afraid we'll be stuck with Barnes for a long, long time.

Yeah, that reverse reform (malform, dysform?) attempt of Social Security by Bushites really sucked and looks even dumber now. I remember we had plenty of good discussions here at WaMo PA and our talking points sounded good and seem to have gotten around. Many of the letter writers in Newsweek soon after were making the same points (hard to show connection, but nice to see anyway.) BTW, did we ever resolve whether the SS Bonds held for future retirees are "real bonds" that the government has to honor per the Constitution, or just a place-holding illusion, etc?

BTW, are dolts like Barnes "for real" or cynical players? And WTF with someone (Cheney) noting an externally caused (and partly his crew's own negligence anyway) event itself a "highlight of his career"? These people are incredible, yet somehow they actually exist.

Where the heck does a professional sycophant like Benen get off accusing others of sycophancy?

It really is sad and disgusting seeing how partisanship corrupts people.

Danp: And it was definitely after the election in '04.

"I earned capital in the campaign, political capital, and now I intend to spend it." - G.W.Bush Nov. 2004

how'd that go?

like everything else...

C'mon everybody! Be nice! Ya gotta admire Georgie. He's given the words "tunnel vision" and "obtuse" new meaning.

You go into the history books with the legacy you have...

More refutation for those who claim that aWol is a sharp feller; not out of it; not the village idiot.

Hey a-troll, Steve of course is more sympathetic to Democrats than not on general grounds, but he'd never pretend that a failed mess or the latter's clearly idiotic proposals were successful etc. It is much more a Republican trait to be incapable of criticizing one's own. Remember your God Reagan (BTW, your people's own Obama-like "Messiah" figure back in the day) once had the 11th Commandment:
Thou shalt not criticize a fellow Republican.
That's just what figures, and your kind have been following that folly ever since.

One strong indicator, among many, that Bush doesn't read is that he doesn't want to talk a lot about books he has read and loved. When I read a book that really moves or inspires me, my friends, bless their tolerant hearts, get more than a Cliff's Notes summary. Of course, as a true Republican, maybe Bush doesn't feel the need to share.

What's more, "private investment accounts" now appear "attractive"? To whom, exactly?

To the people who want to eliminate Social Security. You have to realize that what's happened in the stock market is not an argument against privatization. Rather, it is Exhibit A for privatization. Privatizing is not about giving people more control over their planning for retirement. It's about making retirement impossible.

I'm always astounded that Republicans seem to be under the impression that the only saving for retirement that's allowed in this country is Social Security. Do none of them have IRAs? No Keoughs? No 401(k)s or 403(b)s?

Or is the issue that they don't want any of us little people to have those tax-advantaged retirement savings options in addition to Social Security and want to restrict us to what they feel we should be allowed to have?

The R's dont' want a system that so many people have to pay into (still not fair enough due to the cap) but a system that the savvy and well-connected can make out well in, but not everyone else.

He also said it was important to have raised private investment accounts as an attractive option in reforming Social Security.

Sandwiched in-between the financial panic of 2000 and the even larger panic of 2008, raising the consciousness of all Americans has for sure guaranteed the existence of Social Security almost exactly as it is.

Social Security is a low-risk, low-yield retirement plan that everyone should have in his or her portfolio. Everything else is optional.

Stocks and other "securities" (as risky investments are called) may be good in the long term, but for a definite term nothing is as good as Social Security. If you retired in 2008, aren't you glad that you have SS?

Bush's opinion on this topic is certainly unique.

Ahhhhh...the Beltway Boy(s). Watching Barnes and that other idiot defend the worst administration in US history was a weekly comedy show. I guess Bush figured he at least owed the guy a sandwich for hanging himself out to dry. If Bush ever stopped short,who would break their nose first,Barnes or Rove?

Can you imagine if this clown had succeeded in privatizing Social Security? This fool doesn't get that this is all the money some people have to survive on every month.