McCain's bizarre response to Blitzer on Social Security (updated)

[ProSense]

October 23, 2008

MAYBE MCCAIN SHOULD STOP DOING INTERVIEWS....

At this point, it stands to reason that John McCain would want to do as many television interviews as possible, getting his message out and reaching a large audience. Of course, that only makes sense if McCain is prepared to say intelligent, persuasive things during these interviews.

Did you happen to catch McCain on CNN's "Situation Room" yesterday?

McCain argued, for example, that as the financial crisis unfolded, he's been "very consistent," while Obama "has been all over the place." This, of course, is backwards. He went on to suggest the way to stimulate the economy is to cut federal spending, which, again, is backwards. Moments later, McCain slammed the bailout package that he voted for.

There was also this bizarre exchange:

BLITZER: Let's talk a little bit about your support -- and correct me if I'm wrong -- you did support President Bush's plan to overhaul Social Security and allow Social Security recipients to use about 10 percent of their Social Security savings in the stock market. That collapsed, obviously. It didn't go forward. Knowing what we know now about the volatility of the stock market, is that still a good idea?

MCCAIN: The reason why the talks collapsed is because the Democrats insisted on agreeing to tax increases before we sat down.

This, again, is completely backwards, as if McCain doesn't really remember the events of 2005. Worse, when Blitzer pressed, McCain refused to answer the substance of the question.

<…>

I was, at first, inclined to think McCain is cracking under the pressure, leading to his confusion about so many issues, but the truth is, he's been like this for a while.

The full (and bizarre) exchange:

BLITZER: Let's talk a little bit about your support -- and correct me if I'm wrong -- you did support President Bush's plan to overhaul Social Security and allow Social Security recipients to use about 10 percent of their Social Security savings in the stock market. That collapsed, obviously. It didn't go forward. Knowing what we know now about the volatility of the stock market, is that still a good idea?

MCCAIN: The reason why the talks collapsed is because the Democrats insisted on agreeing to tax increases before we sat down. So, let's -- let's -- let's understand history.

(CROSSTALK)

BLITZER: What about private Social Security...

(CROSSTALK)

MCCAIN: OK. That's what they wanted to do.

BLITZER: ... investments in the stock market?

MCCAIN: And all this other stuff was -- was worth negotiating.

And I will protect, as president of the United States, the Social Security benefits of retirees and future retirees. I will protect those benefits and I will do whatever is necessary to protect those benefits. And I have said that time over time.

Every -- every even-numbered year, the Democrats run out, scare the senior citizens, say, they're going to raise your taxes, they're going to destroy Social Security -- same old stuff. I have seen it for, oh, so -- more years than I can count.

I'm not scaring any senior. I'm going to preserve their -- and protect their Social Security benefits, despite what ads may be run, and the senior citizens, as well as all citizens in this country.

(CROSSTALK)

BLITZER: And the notion of a 10 percent, using 10 percent in the stock market?

MCCAIN: They know me about -- about how I'm going to fix Social Security, and I'm going to make their Social Security the best I can, and we will preserve the benefits that they have, and I will protect Social Security.

BLITZER: And the 10 percent?

MCCAIN: And I will protect Social Security.

BLITZER: All right.

MCCAIN: And I will sit down at the table with the Democrats. And, by the way, we can keep -- you know, this is -- I will give you this -- this is -- I'm telling you, I'm going to protect Social Security.

(CROSSTALK) BLITZER: All right.

MCCAIN: And that's what I have done my entire career. And I will do what Ronald Reagan and Tip O'Neill did. And that is save Social Security and make Americans aware that, unfortunately, present- day retirees are -- have -- working Americans today are not going to receive the same benefits as present-day retirees, unless we fix it. Now, I think I can do it, convince the American people that we will sit down together.

OMG!

McCain on Social Security: ‘An Absolute Disgrace’

Update:

Social Security Alt.Universe

By Josh Marshall

CNN just played the Social Security portion of John McCain's interview with Wolf Blitzer. And two key points stood out.

First, McCain fabricated an alternative history of the 2005 Social Security battle in order to create a new tax talking points. According to McCain, and he repeated this again and again, "the (Social Security) talks broke down because the Democrats insisted as a precondition that we raise taxes."

That's very weird. First, there were no Social Security talks. And the Democrats didn't make any demands to raise taxes. They didn't even propose raising taxes. As many of you know, I followed that debate extremely closely. And McCain just made this stuff out of whole cloth. Really bizarre.

Second, Blitzer asked if McCain still would have favored President Bush's privatization plan, as he did in 2005, that we see how volatile the stock market it is. McCain repeatedly refused to answer the question and instead repeated the tax precondition fib.

Blitzer actually complicated the matter by misstating what Bush proposed -- claiming he proposed allowing people to put 10% of their Social Security funds in the market rather than just under 20%. But the key point remains -- after standing behind privatization as recently as a few weeks ago, now McCain refuses to say he still supports it.

(Video: http://www.talkingpointsmemo.com/archives/239168.php">Social Security: John McCain's Alternate Universe)

[damntexdem]

1. Keep repeating lies and throwing out random comments rather than answering questions ...

and maybe the weak-minded will vote for him.

[quantass]

2. Hilarious. Is there a video?

[ProSense]

4. Yeah, this is must-see TV. n/t

[ProSense]

7. Added a clip to the OP. n/t

[ProSense]

3. Aside from this crazy statement:

MCCAIN: The reason why the talks collapsed is because the Democrats insisted on agreeing to tax increases before we sat down. So, let's -- let's -- let's understand history.

He's basically saying that Democrats prevented the privatization of Social Security, and evidently not realizing that's a good thing.

As for the rest, he pulls a Palin, rambling on nonsensically without responding to any of Blitzer's followup questions.

[theothersnippywshrub]

8. He's starting to talk like Palin. How bizarre. n/t

[Democat]

5. Does McCain not hear the questions or not understand them?

Imagine this guy talking to foreign heads of state. Frightening!

[progressivebydesign]

6. Perhaps McCain has been this clueless all along, all these years, and it's just more obvious.

I've been wondering if he's as daft as Bush and so many other repubs that become legends in their own mind. Could it be possible that McCain is truly that lame all along, and this is the first real chance for America to see him that up close for a prolonged period?

Or is he totally losing it? I wonder.

[TheKentuckian]

10. I think the Republiscum got it right in 2000

Bush is a better fit for the White House than McGollum.

[Vinca]

9. I couldn't make heads or tails out of that interview. It sounded like

he was claiming Democrats wanted to privatize social security, but he was there to save it . . . or something. This guy needs his meds upped.

[ProSense]

18. He dosen't know what he's saying. n/t

[barack the house]

11. It's only the social security and medicare cuts we need to keep on and that's all. He's done.

[barack the house]

12. It's only the social security and medicare cuts we need to keep on and that's all. He's done.

[Essene]

13. is there video of him supporting privatization of social security?

Look, what Americans need is some straight talk. Every man, woman and child in America needs to know it's going broke, and we've got to do the hard things. We've got to fix it for the future generations of Americans. Don't we owe that to young Americans today? I say we do. It's got to be bipartisan. And you have to go to the American people and say we won't raise your taxes. We need personal savings accounts, but we got to fix this system.

Source: 2007 GOP primary debate in Orlando, Florida Oct 21, 2007

======================

We’ve got a ticking time bomb out there. And it’s called the Social Security Trust Fund. And starting in 2014 there’ll be more money going out than in. There’s a $5 trillion unfunded liability out there in the form of the Social Security Trust Fund. If we can put the money in quick, then we will be able to allow people to invest their payroll taxes into investments of their choosing and make a huge amount of difference in the solvency of their retirement fund.
Source: GOP Debate in Manchester NH Jan 26, 2000

=============================

McCain today called for allowing workers for the first time to invest a portion of their Social Security in private accounts.McCain called for “bold, genuine reform that allows workers to invest some of their Social Security savings, privately, in higher yielding accounts.” “Promoting investment in America by every American worker would give lower-income Americans the ownership they deserve in the country we share, as well as grow their Social Security more rapidly,” said McCain.
Source: www.mccain2000.com/ “Press Releases” Jun 2, 1999

==================================

* McCain supports the following principles regarding Social Security: Invest a portion of the budget surplus into the Social Security trust fund.
* McCain “believes comprehensive structural reforms are needed, but that current beneficiaries and participants receive the benefits they were promised.”

Source: Project Vote Smart, 1998, www.vote-smart.org Jul 2, 1998

===========================================

[Essene]

15. found one... from 2004 (folks need to see this)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uth20YjXPsU&NR=1


"Without privatization, I don't see how you can possibly, over time, make sure that young Americans are able to receive Social Security benefits."

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FyBwMy27Aoc

[bushisanidiot]

14. McHate is a bald faced liar who has only gotten where he is because of his name

and his POW status. He has not done a damn thing to help this country since holding office. Every single time he runs to the side that's winning. He only stands up to his party when he knows it's not a popular issue... then he runs back to his party when he wants them to help him personally.

he's nothing but a whore who will do or say anything to get elected.

NO BACKBONE WHATSOEVER!!

[FLyellowdog]

16. He's so confused at this stage of his game, he doesn't know shi*t from shinola.

[ProSense]

17. Why is there no media coverage of this utterly bizarre interview? n/t

[karynnj]

19. This is incredibly scary - and sad

McCain seemed to have absolutely no idea what happened in terms of Bush pushing for privatization.

[seasat]

20. He contradicts himself on taxes too.

First he says:

The reason why the talks collapsed is because the Democrats insisted on agreeing to tax increases before we sat down. So, let's -- let's -- let's understand history.

Then he says:

Every -- every even-numbered year, the Democrats run out, scare the senior citizens, say, they're going to raise your taxes, they're going to destroy Social Security -- same old stuff. I have seen it for, oh, so -- more years than I can count.

Then he says:

And I will do what Ronald Reagan and Tip O'Neill did. And that is save Social Security and make Americans aware that, unfortunately, present- day retirees are -- have -- working Americans today are not going to receive the same benefits as present-day retirees, unless we fix it.

Does he even remember what Regan and O'Neill did? Here's the answer via a Paul Krugman column.

For many middle- and low-income families, this tax increase more than undid any gains from Mr. Reagan's income tax cuts. In 1980, according to Congressional Budget Office estimates, middle-income families with children paid 8.2 percent of their income in income taxes, and 9.5 percent in payroll taxes. By 1988 the income tax share was down to 6.6 percent -- but the payroll tax share was up to 11.8 percent, and the combined burden was up, not down.

He first falsely accuses Democrats of wanting tax increases then accuses Democrats of saying Repubs wanted to raise taxes followed by stating that he'll do something similar to Reagan's solution which was to raise payroll taxes. The only logical explanation is that Repubs like him think only income taxes are real taxes and regressive payroll taxes don't count. Either that or he's lost it again.

[ProSense]

21. Good post. I think it's straight confusion. n/t

[seasat]

23. Repugs have a narrow view of the definition of taxes.

I agree that he's probably confused. He was probably caught off guard by Blitzer asking him a real question.

I noticed, though, that Repubs really only view income taxes and corporate taxes as actual taxes. McCain used the same frame when criticizing Obama's tax proposal. He accused Obama of wanting to give the poor more than they paid in income taxes as a form of welfare. They ignore the regressive payroll taxes, communication taxes, gas taxes, and other federal fees. They also view income taxes strictly at the marginal rates instead of at the effective rates. Realistically, the whole tax burden including state and local taxes needs to be viewed relative to all sources of income but they know they couldn't promote their platform if that was actually presented.

It's no wonder Repubs oppose education reforms that promote critical thinking. They'd lose their base if they actually thought about the rhetoric from their party.

[JimWis]

22. I had to read that a couple times. McNuts just seems to ramble

on and has no context to what he is saying. He is getting worse every day.