January 31, 2005
ONLY CONSIDER THE CONTROVERSIAL IF I FAVOR IT (via John Resnick):
Transcript for Jan. 30
Guests: Sen. John Kerry, D-Mass. (Meet the Press, Jan. 30, 2005)
MR. RUSSERT: Let me turn to Social Security and find out your current thinking. I want to take you back to your campaign in '96 when you talked to your hometown paper, the Boston Globe, and said that, "Dramatic changes are needed to make sure Social Security benefits are available for future retirees." Kerry "said the next Congress should consider controversial measures, such as raising the retirement age and means-testing benefits, called it `wacky' that taxes that pay for the system do not apply to income over $62,700." It's now 90,000. "I know it's all going to be unpopular."Posted by Orrin Judd at January 31, 2005 5:10 PMSEN. KERRY: So I was right about wacky.
MR. RUSSERT: Well, we'll see if he runs it--"We have a generational responsibility to fix them."
And then in 2003, you said--"Declaring `I am blessed to be wealthy,' Senator John F. Kerry said that, if elected president, he would consider some form of means-testing for rich Americans as part of a broader review of ideas to shore up the Social Security system." ... But "`Rich people are getting checks from poor people well beyond what they put in the system,' said Kerry. ...Another idea Kerry said he would consider is raising the cut-off point after which people no longer pay into the system. ...`Maybe people ought to pay up to $100,000 or $120,000, I don't know,' the senator said."
Specifically, Senator, do you still agree with yourself? Should we raise the retirement age or consider it? Should we raise the cap on income level that people pay payroll tax?
SEN. KERRY: Precisely what I said in 1996 is "We should consider" a number of these things. We did consider them. I considered them. Others did. I rejected them.
Kinda makes you wish they were still doing campaign ads, huh?
Posted by: John Resnick at January 31, 2005 5:36 PMDoes he even what the words he uses mean?
Posted by: Brandon at January 31, 2005 6:25 PMFlip-flop, flip-flop. The way Russert beat up Hanoi John was, as the kids say, awesome.
Posted by: Lou Gots at January 31, 2005 8:12 PMI supported exploring it, and I supported it, but not I don't and I'm not. Get the man an IHOP franchise quickly!
Posted by: Dave W. at January 31, 2005 8:29 PMI still tremble when I think that this idiot was thought to be a serious candidate for president.
Posted by: Robert Schwartz at February 1, 2005 3:05 AMTo be (a little) fair, this is perfect legislatorese, and one of the reasons that Senators don't become President. This type of faux-clever language game was also the main failing of the Contract with American, in which the Republicans only actually promised "votes" on certain issues, but gave the impression that they were promising that they would vote affirmatively and get those issues passed. One of the big problems after 94 was that they didn't deliver on what the people thought they had promised.
Posted by: David Cohen at February 1, 2005 7:48 AMThe only question I have about Kerry is whether he gets to sit in front of or behind the last guy selected in the NFL draft, when they hold that Mr. Irrelevant parade in Pasadena before the Rose Bowl next year.
Posted by: Bart at February 1, 2005 9:43 AM