Say It Ain't So, Hillary Clinton - You're Open to the Idea of Raising the Retirement Age?

[portlander23]

Say It Ain't So, Hillary Clinton - You're Open to the Idea of Raising the Retirement Age?
Zaid Jilani
Alternet

She offered a lot of the same rhetoric many Democrats are now saying, that we need to look at how the poorest Social Security recipients are faring and think about how to shore up payments there. But she also left the door open to raising the retirement age if there were a way to exclude people who are not working labor-intensive jobs, while at the same time not fully endorsing simply raising the tax cap, which would ensure the system is fully funded going forward.

Question: You mentioned something very interesting: enhancing Social Security. So can you tell us how you might strengthen Social Security?

Clinton: Yes, you know, I think there are three parts to what we have to do with Social Security, and the first is we really have to defend Social Security from the continuing efforts by some to privatize it, which I have been studying and opposing for a long time because the numbers just don’t work out. And in the Bush administration when I was in the Senate I was one of the leaders in the fight against the plan to privatize and it is something that I, number one, will focus on: we are not going to privatize Social Security.

Secondly, I am concerned about those people on Social Security who are most vulnerable in terms of what their monthly payout is. That is primarily divorced, widowed, single women who either never worked themselves or worked only a little, so they have either just their own earnings to depend on or they had a spouse who also was a low-wage worker, and the first and most important task I think is to make sure that we get the monthly payment for the poorest Social Security recipients up. So that would be the first thing I would look at.

Thirdly, we do have to consider ways to make sure that the funding of Social Security does maintain the system. I think we have a number of options; this would be something that I would look at, I would not favor raising the retirement age. And I don’t favor it because it might be fine for somebody like me, but the vast majority of working people who have worked hard and have had a difficult, maybe last couple of decades trying to continue to work, it would be very challenging for them. If there were a way to do it that would not penalize or punish laborers and factory workers and long-distance truck drivers and people who really are ready for retirement at a much earlier age, I would consider it. But I have yet to find any recommendation that I would think would be suitable.

And I want to look at raising the cap. I think that’s something we should look at how we do it, because I don’t want it to be an extra burden on middle-class families and in some parts of the country, there’s a different level of income that defines middle class. So what do we skip and what level do we start at? And we have to consider that. So those are my three priorities in looking at Social Security.

To be clear, Clinton is not outright endorsing a clear hike in the retirement age like many of the Republicans are. But while she also seems to be open to raising the tax cap, she is not giving a figure or specific plan yet, and is making the suggestion that raising payroll taxes on families that earn over $100,000 would be an “extra burden” to those people, when actually the increase would be fairly modest.

Opening the door to any hike in the retirement age or offering opposition to simply eliminating the tax cap would put her out of step with most Americans on this issue, according to polls.

Related:

A Trojan Horse In Clinton’s Pledge To “Enhance” Social Security?

Why It's Misleading to Swear to Protect the Poor's Social-Security Benefits

Seems like "The Third Way" is another way to describe what is popular among Democratic Party voters.

[JackInGreen]

1. Shouldn't even be looking at it

But I don't expect anything else.

[JaneyVee]

2. So her not being in favor of raising it means she's in favor of raising it?

Zaid is a Bernie fan so I expect nothing less than distortion.

[workinclasszero]

4. The Bernie fans are in panic mode

throwing **** against the wall to see if anything sticks.

[giftedgirl77]

5. Thank you

Apparently it's opposite day on DU.

[jeff47]

27. I would consider it. But I have yet to find any recommendation that I would think would be suitable

If she's not in favor of it, why would she consider it?

[BlueCaliDem]

40. Sanders supporters are panicking...

Too many anti-Clinton posts in the Latest Threads this morning. I hope they're getting well paid for their efforts.

[JoePhilly]

77. You have to look at the words she used ...

She clearly used ALL of the words necessary to support the OP's interpretation, doing so in the correct order and arrangement, as I demonstrate below.

She said ...

I would favor raising the retirement age. And I favor it because it might be fine for the vast majority of working people who have worked hard and who really are ready for retirement at a much earlier age, I would consider it. I have to find any recommendation that I would think would be suitable.

I've kept the original word order, and simply removed all the words Hillary really did not mean to say.

Its easy!!!! You just need a piece of construction paper that only shows some of the words and hides the others.

[still_one]

101. LOL

[Dr Hobbitstein]

3. Reading comprehension fail...

Not surprising, though.

"I would not favor raising the retirement age. And I don’t favor it because it might be fine for somebody like me, but the vast majority of working people who have worked hard and have had a difficult, maybe last couple of decades trying to continue to work, it would be very challenging for them. If there were a way to do it that would not penalize or punish laborers and factory workers and long-distance truck drivers and people who really are ready for retirement at a much earlier age, I would consider it. But I have yet to find any recommendation that I would think would be suitable. "

I put key phrases in bold, because it seems you don't understand the words.

[azmom]

7. So, if she finds a way that fulfills her requirements,

She would do it. Correct?

[Dr Hobbitstein]

9. And if it fullfilled those requirements,

would you be opposed to it?

Here's a hint: there's nothing that's going to fulfill those requirements, which is WHY she stated those requirements.

[azmom]

12. Really? So why even bring it up? Just say no.

Why even talk about something that has no possibility at all?

[Dr Hobbitstein]

18. Because some people deal in nuance.

Some people like to EXPLAIN their positions. I prefer a politician who actually discusses WHY they feel the way they do. Easily digestible soundbites are for the plebeians.

[jeff47]

57. If nothing could ever meet those requirements, why pretend something could?

Isn't that just an attempt at giving the illusion of "I'm negotiable on this subject" when she isn't?

[Dr Hobbitstein]

67. Once again, nuance.

If you can't see it, I can't help you.

[seaglass]

22. Because it shows that she investigated it and dismissed it as not viable. What could possibly be

wrong with that?

This OP is shameful.

[jeff47]

48. If it's not viable, why does she say she would consider it? (nt)

[JoePhilly]

87. To screw with the GOP.

Let them make proposal after proposal.

Then shoot it down.

[azmom]

91. why?

[JoePhilly]

92. Because they clearly love the pain.

Let those idiots keep reminding people that they want to destroy SS.

[azmom]

96. If she came out firmly against it,

You think they would stop trying to destroy it?

[jeff47]

29. Good job not bolding the sentence where she says she'd consider it. (nt)

[BlueCaliDem]

45. ...

[Dr Hobbitstein]

68. Good job failing reading comprehension. Nt

[jeff47]

70. She's said she'd consider it, but hasn't found a proposal she likes yet.

Your desire to support your candidate does not actually change what she said.

[Dr Hobbitstein]

71. Consider it IF it meets certain criteria.

IF is the operative word.
The criteria has not been met.

I will buy a large house IF I win the lottery.

You would admit you were wrong IF you were intellectually honest.

[dsc]

8. Is this somehow unclear to you?

I would not favor raising the retirement age Do we need it to be skywritten for you?

[portlander23]

10. She should just take a position

Instead of dancing around one.

[dsc]

14. Again what is dancing around about this

I would not favor raising the retirement age

[azmom]

15. Honestly, just like TPP, as of today....

If this happened.....
It needs to be looked at.....
We need a review.....

[Armstead]

21. Read the rest of her convoluted sentence please

In typical Clintonian doublespeak, she leaves all options on the table and takes no position whatsoever.

[jeff47]

30. Is this somehow unclear to you?

I would consider it

[BlueCaliDem]

49. Oy vey

OR...at least try your darnedest.

[jeff47]

53. No, cherry picking is pretending she only expressed opposition.

Her position is she has not yet seen a proposal to raise the age that she likes. Not that she is opposed to raising the age, period.

[LiberalArkie]

37. What happens if congress passes a bill that raises it and does something else that she wants

will she veto it or sign it. She could still say that she opposes the bill, but I am signing it because this bill also eliminates that dreaded capital gains tax. Or what ever it is attached to.

[Hortensis]

11. She offered an honest and organized summary of our options and

her positions. Fact is, people in general are living far longer and some are staying healthier far longer. IMO, delaying the age when we start drawing SS for another 20-35 years and more, for those who are perfectly able to work, is an option that should be considered along with all the others. Including shaking down the billionaire class until it no longer exists.

[azmom]

13. 20 or 35 years? You have got to

Be joking?

[Hortensis]

64. 65+20=85. 65+35=100. Lots of people are now and more will be living that long.

Half of all Americans alive at 65 can expect to live to 85, especially women. The 85-and-over age group is the fastest growing one in America, expected to more than triple over the next couple of decades. Further, although America's average life span is significantly lower than other advanced nations, many have lived healthier lives deliberately or inadvertently avoiding what are causing experts to scratch their heads over this and will live longer than current data suggest.

We also (related to above but not entirely explaining it) are in the middle of massive epidemics of obesity, diabetes, kidney failure, vascular disease, and dementia; also lung disease and heart disease. People have been starting to live healthier for some time, but the costs of care for those epidemic illnesses will be enormous before they start declining to healthier levels.

The miracles of modern medicine assure that not nearly enough of them will die early enough to avoid running bills and to offset the costs of the healthy ones who live long. Quite the contrary! Most of those people, of course, will not be able to work on, those who actually are able to work at all at 65, and somehow the money has to come from somewhere.

Not at all impossible, but nothing's free. And should it be for those gifted with an extra 15 to 35 years over what the less fortunate will have had?

[Armstead]

19. She won't be doing any shaking doen of the billionaire class

Nor even asking the well off to pay a little more.

Payment should be progressive. Payback should be consistent for everyone. Period.

[jeff47]

31. You just came out in favor of raising the retirement age to 102.

IMO, delaying the age when we start drawing SS for another 20-35 years

That would mean no Social Security until 102.

[Hortensis]

97. Is this how you usually interpret what you read, Jeff47?

Ridiculous conclusion. No one said any age raise, but it would probably be anywhere from 1 to 3 years -- if at all. It's just speculation about an option to be considered.

[jeff47]

98. Forgot what's in your own post?

To quote you:

IMO, delaying the age when we start drawing SS for another 20-35 years

We start drawing Social Security at 67 now. What's 67+35?

[Hortensis]

100. Umhm. There is more than one way to interpret that, isn't there?

I'm sorry I presented such a heavy challenge, but I would expect readers to say, hmmm, she couldn't have meant THAT -- Oh! Gotcha! She meant when we START drawing SS for the rest of our lives.

We're long-lived in my family, btw; three of us lived over 100 in the past decade. You don't really want to support me for 40 years, do you, the first 15 of which I cautiously but reasonably expect to spend traveling, gardening, doing fun volunteer work with my friends?

[TheKentuckian]

69. 87 - 102 to start drawing? Batshit crazy. The current age is 67.

[Hortensis]

99. Is this how you usually interpret the written word, Kentuckian?

Ridiculous conclusion. No one said any age raise, but it would probably be anywhere from 1 to 3 years.

[TheKentuckian]

102. Yes, seeing that I read in English. What other interpretation was I to glean from

"She offered an honest and organized summary of our options and

her positions. Fact is, people in general are living far longer and some are staying healthier far longer. IMO, delaying the age when we start drawing SS for another 20-35 years and more, for those who are perfectly able to work, is an option that should be considered along with all the others. Including shaking down the billionaire class until it no longer exists."

I have to ask what else could you conceivably being attempting to express?

If you meant something entirely else then consider recalibration of your writing to be a clearer representation of your intent for others to digest.

[WDIM]

16. We need to get rid of the cap and lower the retirement age.

More proof Hillary is a right winger. Wolf on sheeps clothing. And is being blindly followed out of a false idoletry.

[mythology]

23. The math on that doesn't work

You can't have increased life expectancy and cut the number of years people pay into the system and have that balance out just on raising the cap.

[jeff47]

32. Actually, you can.

Because eliminating the cap raises that much more money.

[WDIM]

66. Any income over $117,000 isnt taxed for SSI

We have people making millions per year. Completely removing a cap from SSI would be more than enough to allow people to retire at 60 and support the disabled.

[Recursion]

105. Sure you can, if wages go up (nt)

[Armstead]

17. My God! Can she ever say anything straightforward??!?

She is open to all possibilities, she has preferences but she will explore all options and study it, and look at possible exceptins or extenuating crcumstances..........

[WillyT]

20. K & R !!!

[Robbins]

24. She is engaging in double talk

trying to sound like she supports SS but giving code words to top 1% that shows i am really with you.

more and more reasons why I would never vote for her.

[mythology]

25. Helpful hint

If you are going to misstate what somebody says, at least don't paste the part where they say the exact opposite of what you're claiming. At least then people have to click the link to see that you are misstating things.

[jeff47]

33. "I would consider it" means she's opposed?

Or did you not actually read all of her statement?

[BlueCaliDem]

52. In order to criticize her,

her "detractors" have succumbed to cherry picking what she actually said and twisting her words.

For some strange reason, they're posting as many anti-Clinton posts as they can this morning. I actually thought I'd logged on to the Freeper site for a moment.

[NCTraveler]

26. So being against it is now being for it.

You op is what the spreading of a lie and propaganda looks like.

[jeff47]

35. She said "I would consider it". That isn't being against it. (nt)

[NCTraveler]

42. It's like you can't read a full article. It isn't that long.

Keep acting as if these attacks are coming from the left. Good on you.

[jeff47]

44. Yes, it isn't that long. It's so odd you can't find this part

I would consider it. But I have yet to find any recommendation that I would think would be suitable.

She said she's waiting to hear the "right" proposal for raising the retirement age.

Yes, I know, if you stop at the first sentence of the paragraph, she says the opposite. That might be kinda what people are talking about when they accuse her of having no firm positions.

[seaglass]

47. Do you realize that a comma does not signify that the next word is the start of a new sentence?

This is the sentence:

"If there were a way to do it that would not penalize or punish laborers and factory workers and long-distance truck drivers and people who really are ready for retirement at a much earlier age, I would consider it."

Not this:

I would consider it.

[jeff47]

51. And those platitudes does not change that she would consider it.

Again, her objection is not that raising the retirement age is wrong. It's that she has not seen a "good enough" proposal for it.

[seaglass]

62. It does not change that your post was deceptive. I have no idea who Hillary is not including in

her sentence:

laborers and factory workers and long-distance truck drivers and people who really are ready for retirement at a much earlier age

The only ones I can figure out who are left are those who don't want to retire.

[jeff47]

65. Well, it wouldn't include me.

I have a desk job - I write computer software. It isn't physically intensive. I could probably physically do it for a very, very long time.

That doesn't mean I want to do it for a very, very long time.

I can pretty much guarantee I'm going to be on the losing side of any "only raise retirement age for some people" proposal.

Also, raising it for some people but not others is a fantastic step for dismantling the entire program. Make it "unfair" to enough people, and the program will lose support, allowing more cuts and "unfair" parts, allowing more and more cuts until it can be killed.

Social Security can not be destroyed head-on. It can only be broken piece-by-piece. Different retirement ages is a piece.

[seaglass]

73. I have a desk job too and am closing in on early retirement. I include myself in the

"people who really are ready for retirement at a much earlier age."

There is nothing wrong with me physically or mentally but I am ready, so why would that not include me?

[jeff47]

74. Because the program has to be based on something more than "I wanna".

If we're going to say some people can retire earlier and some people can't, we have to define that "can't" group.

What Clinton describes as defining that "can't" group as people who are still physically able to do their jobs.

Social Security already has incentives for retiring later - you get lots more money per month. So someone who doesn't feel like signing up already won't sign up.

But if we're going to make Social Security not available for some people until later, that will need a hard rule on who has to wait.

[seaglass]

75. Considering that she said she would not favor raising the retirement age I think this conversation

is pointless.

[jeff47]

76. No, she said she hasn't seen a proposal she likes. You quoted it in reply 47.

But you are free to take your ball and go home.

[seaglass]

82. We fundamentally disagree that she wants to raise the retirement age. I suppose we could speculate,

assume and just plain make shit up but it is no longer interesting to me. Am I required to make a certain number of replies before I can depart the conversation?

[jeff47]

83. Not at all. I'm just not going to let a lie sit unchallenged. (nt)

[seaglass]

84. lol. have fun. n/t

[portlander23]

39. I published the full context from the article

Wherein she both said she was against it and open to it.

[Nitram]

28. It ain't so, Portlander. "I would not favor raising the retirement age."

"...it might be fine for somebody like me, but the vast majority of working people who have worked hard and have had a difficult, maybe last couple of decades trying to continue to work, it would be very challenging for them."

Nice misleading title you got there, dude.

[jeff47]

34. "I would consider it" means she's opposed? (nt)

[Nitram]

36. Meaning she will always listen to proposals.

She clearly stated her intentions. You are distorting the meaning of the entire exchange. I do appreciate that you included the whole context in your post. I consider your title misleading.

[jeff47]

41. So she's waiting for a proposal to raise the retirement age.

That's quite a bit different from "she opposes raising the retirement age", don'tcha think?

Also, not my title. I'm not the OP.

[Nitram]

46. OK, I give. You've made up your mind.

But please don't put words in Clinton's mouth. She didn't say, "she's waiting for a proposal to raise the retirement age" or anything similar. She was quite clear that she is against raising the retirement age. Period.

[jeff47]

55. I'm not putting words in her mouth.

She literally says she would consider proposals to raise the retirement age, but has yet to see one that she likes.

That is not "against raising the retirement age. Period."

[Dawgs]

59. The problem is that you still trust her. n/t

[Godhumor]

38. So laying out why she is against raising the age actually shows she is open to raising the age?

Last edited Fri Oct 30, 2015, 12:18 PM - Edit history (1)

She gave her answer on raising the age (No, in case you missed it) and then explained why she is against it. She says right there that someone who works like her might be planning on working later in life, but that for a large chunk of workers, retirement is needed at the current age.

There is no plan to change the retirement age that accounts for those who need to retire due to the work they perform, so she does not support raising the age of retirement for Social Security.

Amazing that providing an explanation for her thoughts is used to ignore what she actually said.

[jeff47]

43. It does when she says she will consider raising the retirement age in the same paragraph. (nt)

[Broward]

50. This mealymouthed answer on SS should be unacceptable from a Dem nominee for President.

[Broward]

56. Yeah, that sums up many posters here. Sad but true.

[Faux pas]

58. Oh why not

she's got her's. I can't believe how dug in her supporters are. They must not be 'listening'.

[wilsonbooks]

60. A few tidbits from DU past

http://www.democraticunderground.com/10024379279

[portlander23]

63. Yeah her record on this is spotty

[upaloopa]

61. The difference I see here is that Hillary says it like

it is. These issues are much more complicated than her detractors will admit. Hillary takes the time to explain the issue fully. She has studied the issues and has developed an understanding of the complexities and tries to pass that on to us.
Bernie on the other hand and his supporters are satisfied with one or two word talking points without any real investigation of what the outcomes will be.
Raise the cap, Medicare for all, break up the banks, free college education, raise taxes. All nice sounding words but what does it take and what will the out comes be for everyone involved? Crickets!
So if Hillary doesn't mimic their sound bites she is an evil,corporate, Wall Street loving third way sellout to the middle class.
It doesn't take much work to say hooray for a sound bite.

[Dr Hobbitstein]

72. But we want easily digestible sound bites!

Nuance isn't allowed. Black and white thinking only!

[JoePhilly]

78. Looks like the author of that article is a liar, plain and simple.

Either that or his visual system is impaired such that his brain is unable to see every word in a quote, and as a result ... when he looks at this quote ...

I would not favor raising the retirement age. And I don’t favor it because it might be fine for somebody like me, but the vast majority of working people who have worked hard and have had a difficult, maybe last couple of decades trying to continue to work, it would be very challenging for them. If there were a way to do it that would not penalize or punish laborers and factory workers and long-distance truck drivers and people who really are ready for retirement at a much earlier age, I would consider it. But I have yet to find any recommendation that I would think would be suitable.

.... he sees it like this ...

I would favor raising the retirement age. And I favor it because it might be fine for the vast majority of working people who have worked hard and who really are ready for retirement at a much earlier age, I would consider it. I have to find any recommendation that I would think would be suitable.

The author should go get a CAT scan.

[portlander23]

80. Really?

http://thinkprogress.org/person/zaid-jilani/

Zaid Jilani is a Senior Reporter/Blogger for ThinkProgress.org at the Center for American Progress Action Fund. Zaid grew up in Kennesaw, GA, and holds a B.A. in International Affairs with a minor in Arabic from the University of Georgia. Prior to joining ThinkProgress, Zaid interned for Just Foreign Policy and was a weekly columnist at The Red & Black, the University of Georgia’s official student newspaper. He is a co-editor at the Georgia-based blog Georgia Liberal and a regular on RT America's The Alyona Show and The Thom Hartmann Show and has been a guest host on Al Jazeera English's The Stream. He is also an occassional contributor to the op-ed pages of The Atlanta Journal-Constitution.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zaid_Jilani

Zaid Jilani is an American blogger and campaigner for the Progressive Change Campaign Committee (PCCC), which is also known as BoldProgressives.org.[1] Born and raised in Georgia to parents of Pakistani origin, he attended the University of Georgia, where he helped found its first progressive newspaper.[2] Prior to working for PCCC, he was a blogger for ThinkProgress, a blog for the Center for American Progress.[3] In 2011, he had been working as a campaigner for the Democrats.[2] He is a frequent writer for a number of outlets including Salon (website), The Huffington Post, and The Nation.[4][5][6] Following the NSA wiretapping scandal of 2013, he presented over 100,000 signatures to the United States Congress against government spying on American citizens.[7]

He's not mentally impaired, and he's done a lot of great reporting.

You know, it's ok to just say you disagree with someone.

[riversedge]

85. He wrote a sensationalist piece and you fell for it hook line and sinker!

"I would not favor raising the retirement age." HRC

[JoePhilly]

89. I said he was VISUALLY impaired ... and yet you read MENTALLY impaired.

Perhaps you AND the author of the article should take a reading comprehension class.

The author of that article totally misrepresented what she actually said.

That's poor Journalism.

As a result, I do not care what his background is or what his credentials are.

[brooklynite]

79. Let's put this in perspective...

[riversedge]

81. You should delete Your OP. It is a misleading article headline that contradicts the actually

story that is published. Do the right thing.

[portlander23]

86. Really?

Last edited Fri Oct 30, 2015, 03:40 PM - Edit history (1)

Point 1, the title of the linked article:

Say It Ain't So, Hillary Clinton—You're Open to the Idea of Raising the Retirement Age?

Exactly the title I've used.

Point 2, Zaid Jilani's analysis:

But she also left the door open to raising the retirement age if there were a way to exclude people who are not working labor-intensive jobs, while at the same time not fully endorsing simply raising the tax cap, which would ensure the system is fully funded going forward.

Point 3, The part of the quote from which the conclusion was drawn:

If there were a way to do it that would not penalize or punish laborers and factory workers and long-distance truck drivers and people who really are ready for retirement at a much earlier age, I would consider it. But I have yet to find any recommendation that I would think would be suitable.

Is left in full context, and leads to the analysis in point #2.

What is the problem? Disagree with Zaid Jilani's analysis, but there's nothing misleading in the article or what I've posted.

Also, please refute thiis with Mrs. Clinton's policy positions. As far as I've been able to find, she's been fairly consistent in being against outright privatization, but she seems flexible on the cap (and whom would be affected by raising the cap), suggesting means testing, and she has definitely not come out in support of increasing benefits as Sanders and O'Malley have.

Hillary Clinton on Social Security

Privatization off the table; but maybe payroll cap increase
Source: Megan R. Wilson in TheHill.com weblog, "Clinton vs. Warren" , Aug 24, 2014

No lifting cap on payroll tax; that taxes middle class
Source: 2008 Philadelphia primary debate, on eve of PA primary , Apr 16, 2008

Bipartisan commission, like in 1983, to address crisis
Source: 2008 Philadelphia primary debate, on eve of PA primary, Apr 16, 2008

FactCheck: No, teachers & police won't pay if cap over $102K
Source: FactCheck.org analysis of 2008 Philadelphia primary debate , Apr 16, 2008

etc.

I've looked, and I can't find any clear statements of her policy in 2015. Please post them if you can.

We're not going to skip debate just because the conversation makes you uncomfortable.

[riversedge]

94. I read the entire story and took in the context. Enough said.

Enjoy our delusion.

[JoePhilly]

90. He should leave it up ...

Last edited Fri Oct 30, 2015, 04:28 PM - Edit history (1)

... so that others can mock it for the silliness that it is.

[riversedge]

93. Well, now that is a good way t0 think about this stupid OP, thanks.

thinking about ii like that keeps by BP down.

[Todays_Illusion]

88. little bit here, little bit there, Hillary is a third way libertarian and why the rich love her so.

[jfern]

103. Libertarians don't support endless wars

[Todays_Illusion]

104. There is evidence that you are wrong since most of the current office holding Republicans are

extremely war mongers and would not be in office without the support of the most famous and wealthy libertarians.

[CharlotteVale]

95. So she's open to creating different classes of SS recipients based on their occupations

and their gender.

But I'm supposed to be all reassured because she claims she's against privatizing Social Security?

I don't see how her proposals are much better. And her prevaricating on the cap is just total disingenuousness.

[SmittynMo]

106. Don't fall for her bs

She's open to the idea?

What she really means: I'll put it on the back burner and make it the next president's problem.

Want the truth? http://www.democraticunderground.com/1017305337