Lieberman responds to Krugman with LTTE in NY Times

[Larkspur]

http://www.nytimes.com/2005/03/18/opinion/l18lieberman.html?

Paul Krugman ("The $600 Billion Man," column, March 15) claims that when I say that every year we do nothing about Social Security's coming insolvency we add $600 billion in unfunded liabilities, I am "helping to spread a lie."

Nonsense. Experts we've consulted at the Social Security Administration have confirmed this estimate.

Everyone knows that Social Security is on a path to insolvency. Every year that we wait to make the program solvent will cost us more.

I know that Mr. Krugman opposes the president's carved-out private savings accounts. So do I. But if we stop there, the victims will be tens of millions of seniors who need Social Security to escape poverty.

As a columnist, Mr. Krugman has the right to just say no. As a lawmaker, I have a responsibility to work with other members of Congress in both parties and with the administration to protect this great program.

And as a Democrat, I feel a special responsibility to preserve one of my party's most effective initiatives ever.


Joe Lieberman
U.S. Senator from Connecticut
Washington, March 16, 2005

[BillZBubb]

1. Puke, puke, puke.

Lieberman is a loser for us. He is spreading a lie, but he believes it. He's bought into the Repug "sky is falling" bullshit.

[Kikosexy2]

5. Bring...

in his replacement and QUICK!!

[Lerkfish]

2. wow. just wow.

Bush can't even convince republicans this is a good...rats are deserting this ship left and right, but lieberman stays on board?

whazzzup with that?

[BrklynLiberal]

3. Repuke-ass kisser.

[THUNDER HANDS]

4. he misses the point of what Krugman was saying

Joe writes:

"Nonsense. Experts we've consulted at the Social Security Administration have confirmed this estimate."

Yeah, but their political hacks for the Bush administration now, Joe. They are not to be listened to.


"As a columnist, Mr. Krugman has the right to just say no. As a lawmaker, I have a responsibility to work with other members of Congress in both parties and with the administration to protect this great program."

Bush doesn't want to protect SS. He wants to destroy it. So do other Republicans.

Joe, nothing good is going to come from you working with them on this. The best thing would be to stall, stall, stall, until (a) Bush is out of office or you get a Dem controlled Senate. Whatever comes first.

[SOS]

21. Here's what upset Joe

"In his Jan. 15 radio address, President Bush made a startling claim: "According to the Social Security trustees, waiting just one year adds $600 billion to the cost of fixing Social Security." The $600 billion cost of each year's delay has become a standard administration talking point, repeated by countless conservative pundits - who have apparently not looked at what the trustees actually said.

In fact, the trustees never said that waiting a year to "fix" Social Security costs $600 billion. Mr. Bush was grossly misrepresenting the meaning of a technical discussion of accounting issues (it's on Page 58 of the 2004 trustees' report), which has nothing to do with the cost of delaying changes in the retirement program.

But in his latest radio address, Mr. Bush - correctly, this time - attributed the $600 billion figure to a "Democrat leader." He was referring to Senator Joseph Lieberman, who, for some reason, repeated the party line - the Republican party line - the previous Sunday."

Lieberman doesn't bother to address Krugman's point.

[freethought]

25. He didn't offer much in facts or figures to prove his point either

I kind of used to like Joe Liberman. He seemed reasonable enough. Now, I am hoping that the "Dump Joe" mood will grow in Conn.

[glitch]

6. If you say so Joe

NOT. Not a bit of substance in this LTTE. As a U.S. Senator letter to the NYT, this is embarassing.

[gratuitous]

10. Exactly

Not a word about what he intends to do, and a bunch of fluff about "experts" at the Social Security Administration. Either Lieberman is totally ignorant of the politicking going on throughout the corrupt Bush administration, or he's hoping that we are, when he cites administration "experts" for any proposition.

You have taken a vile position, Joe. Repent.

[glitch]

12. Repent is a good word that we don't use enough. Thanks for the reminder

just in time for sign-making :)

[kentuck]

7. He had to respond...

A lot of voters in CT read the NYTimes...

[Copperred]

8. When is Leiberagent....up for re-election?

[Eric J in MN]

22. 2006. A college professor is planning to launch a

primary challenge.

I'd prefer if Meryll Streep did.

[Norquist Nemesis]

9. " As a lawmaker, I have a responsibility to work with other members"

How's that workin' for ya, Joe? *kiss kiss* ;)

[Edgewater_Joe]

11. As Insensitive As It Is, This Must Be Said

Joe Lieberman has become Zell Miller with matzo crumbs.

Jackass.

[Bob3]

13. Oh shut up.

It's almost impossible to deal with the half truths and self serving deceptive gibberish in this hunk of junk.

But one thing: Joe you have been elected as a Representative of your state and the needs of it's inhabitants. Your duty is to them not the current power structure. Sometimes that means you don't play nice with the geek in the white house putz.

Yeesh. What a waste of protein

[hfojvt]

14. name some of those experts Joe

Is it the Heritage Foundation, the Cato institute, John Snow? Inquiring minds want to know. Also, Joe never answers the heart of the matter:
"The same type of "infinite horizon" calculation applied to the Bush tax cuts says that their costs rise by $1 trillion a year. That's not a useful measure of the cost of not repealing those cuts immediately.

So anyone who repeats the $600 billion line is helping to spread a lie."

If the $600 billion is true and Joe is willing to say it and defend it, then the $1 trillion must be true as well, and Joe, if he was on the correct side instead of the 'right' side, would be willing to say and defend that. Which side are you on Joe? As far as I can see, after the working class pulls your dagger out of their back, they can say 'et tu, Joe?'

[Eric J in MN]

15. This is ridiculous.

There is no way to calculate the cost of not-changing something when you don't know what the changes would be.

Suppose a woman had a job which paid her expenses now, but which she predicted wouldn't be able to meet her expenses someday.

It would be bogus to say, "EVERY YEAR SHE STAYS AT HER CURRENT JOB SHE'S LOSING THOUSANDS IN THE LONG RUN" because no one knows what other jobs she might get.

[Name removed]

16. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[zbdent]

17. BS artists start out with "Everyone knows . . ."

True BS artists, like an unnamed pillpusher, start with "Every sane/right-thinking/person with a bit of common sense knows . . ."

[SmokingJacket]

34. I warned my freshman college students about that in Rhetoric 101.

"Everyone knows..."

Joe??? Don't you have a better way to support your argument??

[in_cog_ni_to]

18. Oh PUHLEEEEEZE, Joe! Go have lunch with Zell

why don't you? :grr:

[antigop]

19. Please -- write LTTE's to the NY Times about this

Please.

[Arugula Latte]

20. Poor Joe.

It's not easy going through life looking like a frog.

[jonnyblitz]

23. I am in the wrong part of CT to vote for/against him. sigh. nt

[Beacho]

26. Yes you are

He's a senator, that's a statewide office. Everyone in CT is eleigible to vote for him

[tabasco]

28. A senator is a statewide office .....

so I don't know how this could be. ??????

[applegrove]

24. I don't know that krugman is always right. The facts are we do

not have enough information because Bush refuses to put his plan or his assumptions about the future growth of the USA out there.

We don't know. Of course we will be fighting each other, squabbling and getting nowhere. Same thing happens when you fight a sheet on a clothesline in the dark. We will squabble amongst ourselves and we will get apathetic... and it works out great for Bush. In another year he may be traveling the country with Anita Bryant on SS - the longer Bush keeps this racket going with us all ready to fight and with no facts to dig into.. the better for him. He may only want to exhaust the Democrats (using emotional exhaustion of an enemy is a typical sociopathic tool). He will decide to quit the tour on Wednesday next..then start it up again on Friday.

Demand Bush put 'PEN TO PAPER'.

[K-W]

31. Krugman isnt asking for your faith. His arguments are reasoned

and his evidence sourced. If you dont know if he is right or not it means you havent read his work and checked his facts.

Regardless the simple truth is that there is no crisis, that Social Security has always been very well run and has already projected into the future and planned ahead. Yes, there is a strong possibillity that many years down the road SS might start running a deficit. Lets wait until there is a good opportunity to solve that problem rather than rushing years ahead to fix it.

Yes Bush should put pen to paper but we dont need to see his plan to know that it isnt designed to help people and that he is lying already and will continue to lie to get popular support.

Bush doesnt get the benefit of the doubt, he doesnt deserve it.

[applegrove]

32. I agree but in case you have not noticed .. information is a tool they

use to envicerate their enemies. I would insist on seeing Bush's plan before I came to any final conclusions. Krugman's facts may be based on a growth rate of 2% at the worst. USA may be facing a growth rate of -2% in the long term. Bonds don't sell at all when the rate of growth is deflation. Do you see the problem?

Unless we know what Bush & his assholes are looking at.. we will squabble and fight. Because we need the information.

Bush & his crew are well aware of that. There cannot be a fully effective opposition if we do not have all the facts. It is a tool sociopaths often use.

[Beacho]

27. Tell that to Joe

Then it would make more sense

[K-W]

29. EVERY YEAR WONT COST US BECAUSE IT HASNT HAPPENED YET

He is either a complete moron or a liar, either way the fact that he is in congress is a shame.

[Beacho]

30. Gee, I'm surprised he didn't just respond on Hannity And Loser

That's his usual forum, when he feels like attacking democrats or paying homage to his GOP overlords.

[Radio_Rick]

33. Further reduced my respect for Joe.