<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: GOP May Seek a Deal on Accounts</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.outsidethebeltway.com/archives/gop_may_seek_a_deal_on_accounts_washingtonpostcom/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.outsidethebeltway.com/archives/gop_may_seek_a_deal_on_accounts_washingtonpostcom/</link>
	<description>Online Journal of Politics and Foreign Affairs</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Fri, 27 Nov 2009 04:40:28 -0600</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.5</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: Clint Lovell</title>
		<link>http://www.outsidethebeltway.com/archives/gop_may_seek_a_deal_on_accounts_washingtonpostcom/comment-page-1/#comment-37813</link>
		<dc:creator>Clint Lovell</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 01 Mar 2005 02:24:56 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">/?p=9411#comment-37813</guid>
		<description>This is dumb politics.  What kind of compromise do we want to make?

Oh, yeah - now I get it.  We&#039;ll let you raise taxes on us like you did with GW&#039;s Dad so you can turn around and use it against us in the next election when the economy takes a header because of a lack of job formation, lowered market confidence, accelerated currency devaluation, and reduced capital investment this will undoubtedly create unless monkey&#039;s fly out of Ted Kennedy&#039;s suit pants.

Then again, we might make a deal on what&#039;s behind Door Number Two, Dingy Harry.  We can do a massive benefit reduction so that Social Security becomes a real joke, not just a future fiscal one.  No thanks.  Socialist solutions to financial matters don&#039;t really work.  Just ask the Europeans.

Nope.  There&#039;s only one deal to be done here - complete privatization of these large federal entitlement programs because THIS IS THE ONLY WAY they will ever become self-sustaining, balanced, fiscally solvent and accountable to the people and nation they are supposed to serve.  Where else other than the free market are we going to get the $11 trillion those dumb-dumb donkeys &quot;borrowed&quot; and squandered?  Santa Claus only comes once a year and his little operation can&#039;t haul that much money.

Sooner or later.  There is no other choice.  The only argument now is over how much time and money we are going to waste until they finally step up and do the right thing - no deal.

If you want to see the numbers and policy components that make privatization REALLY work, please download &quot;The Fix For Social Security&quot; at our corporate website and then smack a lib and say, &quot;I told you so.&quot;</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>This is dumb politics.  What kind of compromise do we want to make?</p>
<p>Oh, yeah - now I get it.  We'll let you raise taxes on us like you did with GW's Dad so you can turn around and use it against us in the next election when the economy takes a header because of a lack of job formation, lowered market confidence, accelerated currency devaluation, and reduced capital investment this will undoubtedly create unless monkey's fly out of Ted Kennedy's suit pants.</p>
<p>Then again, we might make a deal on what's behind Door Number Two, Dingy Harry.  We can do a massive benefit reduction so that Social Security becomes a real joke, not just a future fiscal one.  No thanks.  Socialist solutions to financial matters don't really work.  Just ask the Europeans.</p>
<p>Nope.  There's only one deal to be done here - complete privatization of these large federal entitlement programs because THIS IS THE ONLY WAY they will ever become self-sustaining, balanced, fiscally solvent and accountable to the people and nation they are supposed to serve.  Where else other than the free market are we going to get the $11 trillion those dumb-dumb donkeys "borrowed" and squandered?  Santa Claus only comes once a year and his little operation can't haul that much money.</p>
<p>Sooner or later.  There is no other choice.  The only argument now is over how much time and money we are going to waste until they finally step up and do the right thing - no deal.</p>
<p>If you want to see the numbers and policy components that make privatization REALLY work, please download "The Fix For Social Security" at our corporate website and then smack a lib and say, "I told you so."</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: DC Loser</title>
		<link>http://www.outsidethebeltway.com/archives/gop_may_seek_a_deal_on_accounts_washingtonpostcom/comment-page-1/#comment-37711</link>
		<dc:creator>DC Loser</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 28 Feb 2005 13:17:19 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">/?p=9411#comment-37711</guid>
		<description>We may disagree now about the nuclear option but I remember the years when the GOP were in the political wilderness and today&#039;s memory seems very short.  I just think it&#039;s a bad idea to do away with some of the protection the minority enjoys in the Senate, as someday the GOP will live to regret that decision.  I do believe the filibuster is a tool of compromise, even if it&#039;s just a 40 member minority that&#039;s obstructing the will of the majority.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>We may disagree now about the nuclear option but I remember the years when the GOP were in the political wilderness and today's memory seems very short.  I just think it's a bad idea to do away with some of the protection the minority enjoys in the Senate, as someday the GOP will live to regret that decision.  I do believe the filibuster is a tool of compromise, even if it's just a 40 member minority that's obstructing the will of the majority.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: James Joyner</title>
		<link>http://www.outsidethebeltway.com/archives/gop_may_seek_a_deal_on_accounts_washingtonpostcom/comment-page-1/#comment-37710</link>
		<dc:creator>James Joyner</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 28 Feb 2005 12:52:19 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">/?p=9411#comment-37710</guid>
		<description>DCL:  I don&#039;t see how that follows.  Changing the rules to preclude a minority from tying up nominees, whom the Constitution only requires a simple majority, isn&#039;t really related to trying to build consensus on an issue without majority support.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>DCL:  I don't see how that follows.  Changing the rules to preclude a minority from tying up nominees, whom the Constitution only requires a simple majority, isn't really related to trying to build consensus on an issue without majority support.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: DC Loser</title>
		<link>http://www.outsidethebeltway.com/archives/gop_may_seek_a_deal_on_accounts_washingtonpostcom/comment-page-1/#comment-37708</link>
		<dc:creator>DC Loser</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 28 Feb 2005 12:06:24 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">/?p=9411#comment-37708</guid>
		<description>Funny talk about compromises from the same people that are talking about using the &quot;nuclear option&quot; in the senate.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Funny talk about compromises from the same people that are talking about using the "nuclear option" in the senate.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Gary and the Samoyeds</title>
		<link>http://www.outsidethebeltway.com/archives/gop_may_seek_a_deal_on_accounts_washingtonpostcom/comment-page-1/#comment-37693</link>
		<dc:creator>Gary and the Samoyeds</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 27 Feb 2005 23:31:40 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">/?p=9411#comment-37693</guid>
		<description>Anything is better than paying 12% your whole working life and being means-tested into getting ZERO after retirement.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Anything is better than paying 12% your whole working life and being means-tested into getting ZERO after retirement.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
