those that criticize him on this point fail either to understand his position, or fail to understand how social security works, or both.

social security is just like the surge spin ... there is relative solvency when compared to medicare/medicaid ... but there is a long-term issue for anyone younger than 40. obama is not catering to the right ... this is pundit spin to evoke fear & confuse the issue. obama is saying this about social security to attract younger voters and to fix a serious long-term issue, similar to global warming.

the most recent article i can quickly find on the subject is at msn money, written by Liz Pulliam Weston. she writes:

Myth No. 4: Social Security will run out of money in 2041. Social Security will still be receiving payroll taxes from workers in 2041. What may have disappeared by then are the assets in the Social Security trust fund.

Even that isn't cast in stone, however. The Congressional Budget Office in June 2006 projected that the trust fund wouldn't dry up until five years later, in 2046. The CBO used different assumptions than those used by the Social Security Administration, projecting faster growth in worker earnings, higher interest rates and lower inflation.

Here's how the Social Security Administration projects the timeline:

In 2017, Social Security will begin paying out more than it takes in. For the first time, it will have to use the interest being paid on the securities it holds in order to meet its obligations.

In 2027, Social Security would have to start redeeming the securities themselves.

By 2041, Social Security would have cashed in the last security, and the system would have enough revenue to pay out only 75% of promised benefits. That percentage would drop over time if Congress failed to act.

if social security were a private pension, the trustees of this private pension would be in jail. "borrowing against" social security's trust fund would be considered illegal in a private setting.

this is from the NATIONAL CENTER FOR POLICY ANALYSIS:

In the 2003 Trustees Report, the present value of the difference between the system’s revenues and expenditures over the next 75 years is projected to be $4.9 trillion. Including the $1.4 trillion trust fund as an offsetting asset, or dedicated funding source, lowers this unfunded obligation to $3.5 trillion. New this year is an estimate of the infinite horizon unfunded obligation. That number is a whopping $11.9 trillion without the trust fund or $10.5 with the trust fund offset.

with unfunded liability the choices are clear ... just like global warming ... fund the liability now so that the trust fund can grow; stop borrowing against it for other things like paying interest on the nat'l debt or wars ... or address a massive problem in the future. or ... just change the benefit so that all of us who are paying for boomer retirement get less than we paid in to the plan.

addressing this fairly for the longer term is not a "right wing policy" ... privatizing social security is. privitizing means dissolving making the defined benefit plan (also known as a "pension") which is what "social security" is ... into a defined contribution plan (like a 401(k)). the reasons big corporations are dissolving their pension plans and making them 401(k) plans to to transfer the risk and liability to their employees and off of their shoulders. companies like fidelity and e-trade love this because we now get charged fees to change stock choices, transfer money, etc., etc. this is why buschco. want this ... to fuel big business, and to offload a serious problem onto the young. obama does not want this, he wants to fix the pension plan so we all get our fair share.

I also received a Michelle Obama e-mail denouncing the Clinton attacks ... and this was one full day prior to Barack's announcement to let it all slide. The misleading attempts to show Obama as "just the same kind of politician" as Clinton often results in Obama backer vitriol. The talking point thrown around here that "Obama backers can't handle criticism" is pure bullshit. The vitriol stems not from valid criticism, but from misleading storylines. There is a difference, and many journalists worth their salt seem to get it. I believe that Joan probably "got" her e-mail from Michelle Obama after she saw him decry the opposite, but this likely is a microcasm of the more pervasive argument that Joan is behind the times ... a flag she wears proudly with her "what about the 60's" invention.

As the Obama ad says, time to turn the page.