Joeslogic
03-24-2006, 09:32 PM
With election year coming up the Dems like they have for about the past 40 or so years will be scaring the old people into thinking that the republicans want to do away with their social security.
However the March 16 Proposed amendments indicated the Dems are full of shit they have a vested interest in "terrorizing" old people on election year.
Yesterday, Senators Jim DeMint and Mike Crapo introduced an amendment to prevent the current Social Security Surplus from continuing to be spent. 53 Senators voted against it.
After the vote, DeMint issued the following statement:
“Sadly, fifty-three senators turned their backs on America’s seniors,” Senator DeMint said. “There is simply no way to save Social Security if we don’t have the courage stop using the surplus as a secret slush fund. I’m thankful there were forty-six senators who stood with America’s seniors to end the raid. We will not be deterred by cynics who offer no solutions.”
“Those who voted against this amendment voted to raid Social Security,” said Senator DeMint. “Now, every senator will be on record whether they oppose or support the raid. This said absolutely nothing about personal accounts, it was about whether you believe Social Security should be saved or allowed to wither on the vine.” (http://www.townhall.com/blogs/capitolreport/TimChapman/story/2006/03/17/190269.html)
I challenge you to look with your own eyes at: who voted yea, and who voted nay.
U.S. Senate Roll Call Votes 109th Congress - 2nd Session
as compiled through Senate LIS by the Senate Bill Clerk under the direction of the Secretary of the Senate (http://www.senate.gov/legislative/LIS/roll_call_lists/roll_call_vote_cfm.cfm?congress=109&session=2&vote=00068)
However the March 16 Proposed amendments indicated the Dems are full of shit they have a vested interest in "terrorizing" old people on election year.
Yesterday, Senators Jim DeMint and Mike Crapo introduced an amendment to prevent the current Social Security Surplus from continuing to be spent. 53 Senators voted against it.
After the vote, DeMint issued the following statement:
“Sadly, fifty-three senators turned their backs on America’s seniors,” Senator DeMint said. “There is simply no way to save Social Security if we don’t have the courage stop using the surplus as a secret slush fund. I’m thankful there were forty-six senators who stood with America’s seniors to end the raid. We will not be deterred by cynics who offer no solutions.”
“Those who voted against this amendment voted to raid Social Security,” said Senator DeMint. “Now, every senator will be on record whether they oppose or support the raid. This said absolutely nothing about personal accounts, it was about whether you believe Social Security should be saved or allowed to wither on the vine.” (http://www.townhall.com/blogs/capitolreport/TimChapman/story/2006/03/17/190269.html)
I challenge you to look with your own eyes at: who voted yea, and who voted nay.
U.S. Senate Roll Call Votes 109th Congress - 2nd Session
as compiled through Senate LIS by the Senate Bill Clerk under the direction of the Secretary of the Senate (http://www.senate.gov/legislative/LIS/roll_call_lists/roll_call_vote_cfm.cfm?congress=109&session=2&vote=00068)