Will Dean privatize Social Security?

[WilliamPitt]

IMPORTANT EDIT: I consider the question to be answered in the thread below. Dean has come out solidly against privatization. Please feel free to let this now descend into a mud fight. :)

Original post:

Please, sweet Jesus, no flames. I'm not trying to stir stuff up here.

I spoke tonight with an old friend of mine, an elder in the Democratic tribe, who has been root-down involved in every Presidential campaign since 1968. He is an FDR liberal to the bone. We had a wide-ranging conversation, and just before I had to get off the line (A bunch of people walked into the apartment), he said he was worried that Dean would privatize Social Security. I didn't have time to say "Whaa?" and I have not had the chance to call him back.

I respect this person's opinions immensely. He marched with King, got gassed in Chicago, worked with Bobby Kennedy, died a little with Carter, fought Reagan, fought Bush, worked with Clinton, died a lot when George stole the race, and worked for every candidate we've had. No human I know has a better grasp of politics, so this assessment caught me up short.

What are the chances he is right? Slim? None? I'd like to call him back tomorrow and refute the charge, but I have to be armed.

For those knee-jerk Dean attackers (i.e. Dean can do nothing right, so this must be true), please save it. For those knee-jerk Dean defenders (i.e. anyone who criticizes Dean is a fool), please save it. You know who you are. Serious topics deserve serious discussion. Thanks.

(edited to remove a swear)

[Malikshah]

1. No flames here--but no, I don't think he will, given the chance

Though there are lot of ifs to go before Howard Dean would even be presented with the reality of said choice (i.e. I'm cutting out the campaigning issues) from what I know of his policies, I do not think he would privatize SS.

Privatizing SS would smack of another style of corporate welfare, something of which I do not think Dean is a great admirer.

To paraphrase someone who your acquaintance might admire-- The times, they are a changed. . .

I find it fascinating that he would say that of Dean--not to go into too much analysis, but the nature of politics has changed quite a bit over the last decade. Old rules, old paradigms don't apply, alas.

More importantly, we are living in a tenuous credit-based existence at all levels of society (individual, local, state, federal) and are in hock up to our earlobes (love that commercial on TV about that...)
I just don't see folks like Dean, or others who would play roulette with SS. He doesn't appear to be that reckless fiscally.

Of course, I could be wrong. It has happened on occasion. Just my 2 cents

[loyalsister]

48. "conservative"

in some ways isn't such a bad thing. If the definition is limited to caution and weighing options carefully. I really think it is also the last kind of person who would be inclined to privitize SS.
People who personally like to set up savings accounts and dedicate a portion of money to it after they meet the bills, aren't usually the people who are regulars at the roulette tables in Vegas.
I think he also does have a social conscience, otherwise, he wouldn't be calling for a repeal of the tax cuts.
The mix of caution and social conscience make it very difficult for me to imagine him doing something as reckless as privitizing SS.

[Julien Sorel]

2. If this issue is important to you, and you're anti-privatation, it would

probably be wise to get an answer now, when you can guess what he will say, rather than later, when a putative president Dean would be free to follow his instincts rather than be bound by campaign rhetoric -- assuming, of course, that he considers such things binding.

[WilliamPitt]

3. This is why I ask

because this would be a 100% deal-breaker for me.

[Julien Sorel]

12. I apologize for the lack of clarity in my original post.

I meant get an answer from him now. I didn't see anything on his web page on the topic, and his record on such issues suggests he could go either way, but if he's pinned down now, during the primary, he's certain to be anti-privatization, whereas later, it's anyone's guess.

[boilerbabe]

29. There's always the worry that someone will not be able to fulfill

campaign promises once they find the hard reality of office. It's going to be a very big job cleaning up after Bush and Co. so even if half of what Dean promises comes about, I'm sure it will still be a lot better than what we have now...

I assume you are a Clark supporter. I don't know much about him, so feel free to fill me in. He's rather good looking anyway, but don't know much else about where he stands on anything.

XOOOOO
Boilerbabe

[WhoCountsTheVotes]

4. Look how many Democrats voted to privatize Medicare just now

or at least open the door a bit. I know Gephardt, Kucinich, and Edwards wouldn't, but I can't say the same for the rest of them.

[mikehiggins]

5. Dean most likely would not BUT

Bush most absolutely, positively will. The smirk is on a role and every day that passes makes it less and less likely we'll be able to beat him unless we find some way to pick up the indies AND some GOPer's. I actually think it would be possible to garner some traditional conservative votes if the Democratic party doesn't go totally wacky with litmus tests and purity standards. A lot of old line conservatives are horrified by Bush's deficits and the way in which he is saddling our kids with the ultimate price of his reelection campaign.

[sandnsea]

6. It's a judgment call

You have to do the research and make up your own mind. Seems to me.

[WilliamPitt]

16. This thread we call 'research'

as there are squadrons of Dean supporters here who can likely guide me to the data.

[AP]

24. I want to know what your esteemed friend thinks about this more than

I want to know what my fellow DU'ers think about this.

Why does your friend think that Dean would do this?

[WilliamPitt]

26. Because he sees Dean as a serious fiscal conservative

and, apparently, was worried about this. Like I said, it was at the end of the conversation. Thanks to the data below, I'll be able to school him tomorrow, and it is a rare day indeed when I can school this guy.

[AP]

34. Perhaps your friend has gone to school on Deans record as governor?

You have read the Cato Inst quotes in the Weekly Standard, right? And did you see his arguments for preferring HMOs, right?

Maybe your friend knows something, and he's not convinced by Dean's election year conversion to liberalism?

[WilliamPitt]

36. That's part of it

In no way does he see Dean as a liberal.

[dsc]

38. You mean the article which is completly error ridden

the one that talks about a vocher program which doesn't exist, mis characterizes Dean's record on both income and property taxes, and has several other errors.

[AP]

57. No, the one where Dean says about himself that he's for deregulation

and that he doesn't like the Democrats' enthusiasm for tax policy (which I take to mean that he's not a big fan of progressive taxation).

"You folks at Cato," he told us, "should really like my views because I'm economically conservative and socially laissez-faire." Then he continued: "Believe me, I'm no big-government liberal. I believe in balanced budgets, markets, and deregulation. Look at my record in Vermont." He was scathing in his indictment of the "hyper-enthusiasm for taxes" among Democrats in Washington.

http://www.weeklystandard.com/Content/Public/Articles/000/000/003/073ylkiz.asp

[Hep]

62. Some folks love to jump on buzzwords

without ever considering the meaning of the words. And the problem with that is that this creates the biggest obstacle to objective thought. Our brains are programmed with, "deregulation=BAD" and every time we see the word used, no matter the context, no matter the point, we think "BAD".

Regulation has to work. If there are regulations on an industry that aren't achieving their goal. Get rid of them. How am I wrong?

[AP]

67. Dean admitted that the deregulation he wanted so much was bad.

When he decided to run for president as a Democrat he told the VT legislature that he was glad they didn't pass the CA-style deregulation he so ardently supported.

He couldn't run from his record and pretend that he didn't want energy deregualtion badly, so he decided to confess it was terrible.

So, are you happy to have a guy who's smart enough to know that he needed to cover his tracks on that very serious issue, or are you troubled by the fact that he ever supported such bad ideas?

Since there are some other candidates who have a lifetime of consistent, democratic attitudes behind them, that queston is easier to anser during the primaries.

[Hep]

69. I appreciate

that someone is willing to remain objective and admit mistakes when he makes them.

[Capn Sunshine]

53. It's also a leap many make

due to the "Dean" relation to "Dean Witter Reynolds " and his whole upbringing in that environment.

But hey, lots of us were raised by republican capitalists.

[lastliberalintexas]

73. Howard Dean is NOT related to Dean Witter

Just wanted to make that correction.

[sandnsea]

35. Exactly

You listen to the Dean supporters.

That's why I didn't refer you to anything. Didn't figure you'd listen anyway.

[WilliamPitt]

40. Actually

I was also hoping also to hear from anyone who could make the case that he does support privatization. This we call debate. But people gave me Dean's own words on the subject. Instat victimhood doesn't suit you.

[sandnsea]

44. Why?

He just evolves anyway. You either see the past statements and choices he made in Vermont Medicaid and draw conclusions, or you don't. It isn't like he's going to issue a position paper on his web site saying he's for privatizing social security. He's not that stupid.

And your statement along the lines of being able to set your friend straight pretty much tells me that you weren't interested in hearing anything negative anyway.

[WilliamPitt]

47. That's right. You got me. I hate debate.

Or maybe I was unaware of any statements he had made one way or the other, and that a lack of statements might have been indicative, and perhaps his record in Vermont might offer an indication. But, again, his words answered the question.

I think I sense a deep frustration in you; this thread offered you no chance to bash the guy, so now you're coming after me for some bizarre reason. My part in this conversation, therefore, is concluded.

[AP]

58. I have to agree with sandnsea's sentiment

If there are a few statements on the web site which suggest that he doesn't like privitization now, how do you trust them? It woudn't be the first time he posted something on his website which says the opposite of a position he held as Governor up until 2002.

What you're left with is people like your friend who've observed politics for decades and realize that maybe you can't trust election year conversions.

How do you convince a guy like that that a few things on a web site should indicate a change in policy?

[Blue_Roses]

45. A "judgement call"

no, I don't think so, it's a question that needs o be answered. I have a mother who depends on medicare and a "judgement call" doesn't help her.

A "judgement call" gives serious room for doubt.

[sandnsea]

46. It's all one has

Like I told Will, do you think he's going to issue a position paper on his web site saying he's for privatizing? Not likely. And if he ever said it in the past, he'd just say he changed his mind.

I think people have to look at the choices he's made in the last 10 years, really look at them, and try to make a judgment on the choices he'd make in the future.

[WilliamPitt]

49. Can you give me your perspective?

It's what I was hoping for.

[sandnsea]

50. No

I'm not trying to be difficult here, really. But if you really want to know the truth about these candidates, I really think YOU have to do the work.

[WilliamPitt]

51. And part of the work isn't talking to other people?

[sandnsea]

52. It's not ALL the work

It's certainly not the most important work. You asked for info to refute the charge. Not to find out the truth. If you want the truth, I think you need to thoroughly research it yourself. It's just an opinion.

[Blue_Roses]

54. No-you're dead wrong

It's certainly not the most important work.

See this is where I, and many others see you as wrong. IT IS important work to find out where the future of MANY regarding retirement security is headed.

It's certainly not the most important work. You asked for info to refute the charge. Not to find out the truth.

See once again, you're wrong. Asking the question demands the truth and as far as I can see, it hasn't been reach. To answer a question with, "find out the truth" is stonewalling ( in other, I don't know).

Anyone who SAYS they support a candidate needs to prepared to back-up what that candidate stands for. No ifs, ands or butts, allowed on that one.

[Cleita]

7. I think he has spoken out against privitization.

But I would check out his website to be sure. He pretty much outlines what he stands for there.

[zeemike]

8. Doesn’t it bother you?

That out of the blue charges are just planted and left to ferment?
It is a well-used tactic like the one of John McCain where it was said the North Viet Nam erected a statue to McCain for his service to the cause of the Viet Cong.
Now the Dean camp has to defend itself against the charge which keeps them busy so that some one else can take the lead.

[WilliamPitt]

17. Out of the clear blue?

This was an old, old friend of mine on the phone. He seemed to have legitimate concerns which I couldn't follow up on, and so am doing so here. I guarantee that my friend is not part of the anti-Dean conspiracy.

[zeemike]

20. Will Clark privatize the military?

That should also be a fair question sense he was in it for so long.
And it has been privatized to a great extent already.
Why is no one asking this? Does Clark have a position on this?
I have great concerns that Clark will privatize the entire government including SS but no one is taking me seriously.
But then I am a no body without credentials so what should I expect.

[WilliamPitt]

23. The deregulation talk he put up the other day

has me worried, too.

[Julien Sorel]

27. Privatize the military?

Yes, I, too, have nightmares about it. I also worry that he will privatize roads and highways, parks, the FBI, and the IRA. On the other hand, with a privatized military, maybe I could buy a nuke of my own. Always wanted one of them suckers. I could buy an entire nuclear silo, and live in it, like Jung's Tower at Bollingen only upside down. Maybe Jung's Tunnel? Or is that too Freudian? Somehow it seems appropriate to introduce psychology into this part of the thread. And hell, home security? It don't get better than your own nuclear weapon. I found another reason to support Clark!

[Donna Zen]

59. This thread is about SS

Clark has stated his opposition to privatization. He is also quite clear that there must be a mix of when it comes to regulation vs deregulation. He has also been stated that enforcement and strengthening of the laws will do more to curb dishonest corporations than re-regulating those parts of the private sector that have already been deregulated.

And where you have come up with the bizarre notion that Clark will privatize the military, is beyond all reasoning.

Please read "The Two Percent Solution" if you already haven't. It is a timely book being passed around the halls of power.

A "president" Dean could very well privatize SS, because between 2004-2012, the system will move from a system with a surplus to a system that will need additional input in dollars. Coupled with Dean's general take on tax policy, I would think it probable that he will go with privatization.

Dean's past record would not indicate a clear position either way. What the record does show is a politician that often moves to the convenient as opposed to the principled and difficult.

[sfecap]

No.

Retirement Security

Governor Dean will protect the integrity and solvency of Social Security. The impending retirement of the Baby Boom generation will put great stress on the system, but the Governor believes that the repeal of the Bush tax cuts and a return to sound economic policies will help resolve many of the challenges, and that a strong and growing economy is the best solution to keeping Social Security intact. He will continue to adamantly oppose any attempt to privatize Social Security, and he opposes raising the retirement age.

The Governor will also work to strengthen the private pension system. Pensions should be easily portable, and retirement savings should be invested prudently. To this end, Governor Dean will support putting those who advise and invest pension savings for others under strong fiduciary standards.


http://www.deanforamerica.com/site/PageServer?pagename=policy_policy_economy_reclaimingtheamericandream

[WilliamPitt]

18. Outstanding

Thank you.

[sfecap]

21. Welcome. Will I have personally talked with him about this subject...

He is against privatization of SS. He also spent some time with me discussing pension reform and protections. In particular, protecting employee pension plans against corporate plundering in the event of a company filing bankruptcy. He would back legislation requiring pension plans to be fully funded. I am very concerned about the fact that many employees have seen their pensions deeply cut or even disappear in those cases.

Dean is very aware of the problem and spoke at length of what could be done to prevent this in the future.

I was impressed...

[WilliamPitt]

22. Totally cool

Thanks.

[boilerbabe]

30. Thanks you said it better than I just did...

I see Dean people, too!!
XXXXXXOOOOOOOO
the Boilerbabe

[dajabr]

9. Not a chance...

Social Security is the foundation of retirement security. Social Security accounts for the majority of income for most seniors. In fact, it is the only source of income for 20 percent of all Social Security beneficiaries. Elderly poverty in this country has been reduced from 35 percent in 1960 to just over 10 percent today in large part because of Social Security. Social Security is particularly important for elderly women in this country who are likely to be more dependent on Social Security and have greater life expectancy than men. Social Security must be protected. It must be a generational commitment between young and old that protects the basic features of a universal program that provides a guaranteed income due to retirement, disability or death.

That’s why Howard Dean opposes the Republican agenda of privatizing Social Security. He does not believe it is necessary to raise the retirement age in order to put Social Security on a sound economic footing for the long run but he is committed to taking the steps necessary to ensure that Social Security will be there for the next generation as it has been for us and our parents.

http://www.deanforamerica.com/site/PageServer?pagename=policy_policy_health_seniors

[WilliamPitt]

19. Outstanding

Thank you.

[Skwmom]

60. Outstanding?

How can you be certain that Dean won't look at this issue later on and say that based on "new facts" he's decided privatization is the way to go. He's flipped flopped so much on the retirement age alone that to take this statement at face value is rather mind boggling. It seems like that the Democrats are just as blind as the Republicans when it comes to assessing their candidates.

It really bothers me that Dean, a physician, has previously advocated a retirement age of 70. If you look at his record and things that he's said, he seems more like a Republican than a Democrat. If Dean was elected I could see him being the biggest Democratic sell-out of all. Now wouldn't that be ironic.

[NewYorkerfromMass]

64. Good point

and not without merit. The age 70 thing was ludicrous and appalling and a good example of how out of touch Howard is.

[Hep]

71. Yeah, damn Dean

for CONSIDERING solutions to a problem. What an asshole he must be. The last quality I want in a president is an open mind and a strong desire to solve problems.

[Hep]

68. Well

can YOU make an argument for privatization?

[retyred]

10. I hadn't thought of that

but given his past statement vs his present statement, I can see where that may be a concern, I think he might, given the opportunity....It would be a great question to ask the man himself.



retyred in fla
“good night paul, wherever you are”
read the book

[pruner]

11. what past statement vs present statement?

what are you talking about?

:shrug:

[retyred]

33. Since you asked

Before: dean said: "The way to balance the budget, is for Congress to cut Social Security, move the retirement age to 70, cut defense, Medicare and veterans pensions, while the states cut almost everything else.

Now: I'm not ever going to cut social security benefits ... Maybe you look at the retirement age going to 68. Maybe you increase the amount that get payroll tax—I'm not in favor of cutting benefits.

On edit: BTW: I posted my response to the original question before it was posted that he addressed this very question and said he wouldn't privatize SS.



retyred in fla
“good night paul, wherever you are”
read the book

[jpgray]

13. Nobody knows what Dean will do. We know what he SAYS he will do.

Witness our Congressional dems for this one--politicians are interested in power, or they wouldn't be politicians. Telling lies, making some false promises, and putting a nice face on unhealthy policies, or bills filled with graft, goes with the territory. Dean wants power, so he has to get votes. Does he have to justify a record? No, he does not, as much of his extant record is sealed. So he can say whatever he wants. How do you know if you he will do what he says? You don't. But what I do know is this--he'd have to be very stupid not to say the right things most of the time. My guess is he will indicate that SS is safe, but will not rule out in so many words privatization, or if he does rule it out, he will reserve the right to alter it by other means. As Kerry gave an antiwar speech and voted "yes", Dean can easily run on "SS is safe!" and later privatize it or otherwise alter it.

Yay Democracy!

edit: clarity

[dweller]

14. why refute the charge?

if this person is as well respected as you say he is, why not ask him for the reasons he feels this way?

there is your answer if you are open to it. Then make up your own mind to explore.

dp

[madfloridian]

15. A quote from his site.

http://www.deanforamerica.com/site/PageServer?pagename=policy_policy_economy_reclaimingtheamericandream

SNIP...."Governor Dean will protect the integrity and solvency of Social Security. The impending retirement of the Baby Boom generation will put great stress on the system, but the Governor believes that the repeal of the Bush tax cuts and a return to sound economic policies will help resolve many of the challenges, and that a strong and growing economy is the best solution to keeping Social Security intact. He will continue to adamantly oppose any attempt to privatize Social Security, and he opposes raising the retirement age.

He did say he might consider raising the age to 68 to stabilize it if necessary. He is against privatizing.

[retyred]

39. Not to nit pick but

In the quote from the dean site in bold you posted "he opposes raising the retirement age"

Then you posted: "He did say he might consider raising the age to 68 to stabilize it if necessary."

How do you oppose something while being willing to consider it?




retyred in fla
“good night paul, wherever you are”
read the book

[madfloridian]

43. I did that on purpose. I heard him say it.

He said he had considered it once, but he did not like the idea. Do you hate Dean, or do I just annoy the hell out of you?

I was putting it there before someone jumped in and said "he said he might raise it"

Thanks so much for being sure I don't make a single mistake or misspeak.

Interpret it as you wish. Retyred, there is nothing I can say that would satisfy you. So be it. What you are doing to me in various threads is not very nice.

OOps! Now I left myself open to being called a whiner, a baby, and a half-assed martyr. Gee, thanks so much.

[fabius]

25. I see no reason to believe this.

Dean hasn't really talked much about Social Security to my knowledge.

On thing that's painfully evident, is that Dean IS a deficit hawk. Even at the risk of giving John Kerry ammunition.

Now, to support all the people my age starting in about 15 years, we need all the FICA revenue we can manage. If you take some of that revenue stream and "privatize" it, then you have NO PRAYER of meeting the revenue stream needed without IMMENSE deficits. In fact it'll be very tough as it is, even if Chimp is sent back to Crawford in '04.

Dean surely knows this. He's a smart guy with some experience in finance.

In fact, (and we ALL need to realize this) the gory details of your candidate's platform are kind of unimportant. We're on a runaway train. Stopping the train is important. What happens after it's stopped can be figured out then.

The exact platform of any successful Democratic President will not get implemented anyway. Let's just stop the madness and give American a breather. At this point I'd be pretty happy with a Congress and President that did NOTHING WHATEVER for four years. It would be an improvement.

[boilerbabe]

32. I agree, it's going to be a big job to undo all this...n/t

[boilerbabe]

28. From what I know, Dean would not privatize SS

I have been a volunteer on Dean's campaign for quite a while now, and as far as I can tell, he would be totally against privitization of anything, medicare, social security or anything else. He is FOR providing universal services to all, but I don't think his plan is to parcel the responsibility out to private corporations.

Maybe your friend knows something the rest of us don't. I would never shrug off any opinion from a venerable person such as that. You never know...But truthfully, I don't feel Dean's approach is that of one who is siding with corporate interests in any way. I feel he has avoided that as much as possible. If he even appeared to lean towards that...I would gladly withdraw my support.

The fact that his campaign is leaning on us supporters so hard for funding, since we all voted to not take the matching funds, would indicate that we as a group do not want this guy to be beholden to conglomerates. It's almost impossible to avoid, this is true, but that's the intent anyway. Whether it works or not, we shall see. I am getting broker by the minute with all the calls for financial assistance with many worthy entities right now. They are cutting severely into my beer money, dammit.

XXXXXXXXXXXOOOOOOOOOOOOO
the Boilerbabe

[dsc]

31. a few things

One, clearly that answer wasn't terribly hard to find given how fast several people got you one. I am literally amazed at the number of people who post here with an issue they care about so much they won't vote for a candidate on just that issue alone but don't know how candidates stand on that issue. That literally boggles my mind. This time around I am not a single issue voter but if I were, and I have been in the past, I would make Damn sure I knew how that candidate stood on that issue before I considered supporting him. That seems to make sense.

Two, Your friend needs to understand one of two things or maybe both. Privatizing SS will cost money not save it. At least in the short term. We are currently, and will be for a decade or two more, running surplusses in the SS fund. Thus privatizing, which takes SS money and gives it to people, costs the government money. Fiscal conservatives oppose that. It also will cost money in that for several years we will be paying full benefits to people out of reduced taxes. Thus those surplusses will be deficits. No fiscal conservative favors that course of action.

[WilliamPitt]

37. Answers to both

One, I come here with questions like this because the answers are so lightning-quick. Two, good point.

[dsc]

41. I wasn't criticising you

or I didn't mean to but this seems to be a constant pattern. I have seen people do this on guns, the IP conflict, and other things. It strikes me as odd is all.

[WilliamPitt]

42. Oh, I know

:)

[quaker bill]

55. It would be inconsistent with the rest of his policies

He believes in a role for Government in the marketplace. He recently spoke of 're-regulation'. He belives in taking responsibility for committments, (raising taxes, balancing budgets).

Privitization is an attempt by republicans to abdicate responsibility for spending all the SS surplus on military misadventures since the big payroll tax increase in 1981. They want to do it by talking Americans into taking a 55 percent SS benefit reduction in exchange for the illusion of control and a vague promise of perhaps more money someday.

As a former broker he has to know of the vast private sector profit motive underlying SS 'privatization'. He also has to know the alarming extent that such accounts would be fattened 'cash cows', tied to a post and prepared for slaughter at the hands of speculators.

Finally as public policy, he has to understand the caveat "past performance does not imply future performance' bit handed out with any speculative investment. The punch line is with privatized SS accounts there will be winners and losers. Government will either have to pick up the pieces for the losers or let them starve in the streets.

[Zynx]

56. I will think for a little about that, and...

my answer is no. A Democrat, particularly a guy like Dean, would never do that.

[CWebster]

61. Disgusting display, Pitt

baiting at the troll level. Truly dispicable.

Why would you even post the suggestion based on something as lame as this if it were not to intentionally poison the debate? Your fantasy illusions about military images (the latest one was in referring to the recent death of a DUer as "fallen")are on the same level as Tweety, but this is shameful.

[Hep]

63. If I may quote Josh from West Wing,

Privatize soc- buh, juh, THAT'S THE OTHER GUYS!

[mrgorth]

65. No chance of Dean doing that

he just likes balanced budgets. Worry not. BTW, for questions like this www.deanissuesforum.com is a great resource.

[NewYorkerfromMass]

66. I prefer "Dean Watch"

http://bushwatch.com/deanwatch.htm#kerry

[Hep]

72. Why the #Kerry?

Makes it look REAL objective, and makes Kerry look great too.

[CMT]

70. since no evidence is given to support that Dean would actually

privatize Social Security and we are going by the word of an anonymous democratic elder--then I will say that I take Dean at his word that he will not privatize Social Security.

By the way, you know who else marched with King, supported Bobby Kennedy, fought Reagan, fought Bush, worked with Clinton, died alot when George stole the race, and worked with every candidate we ever had?

Lieberman.