Bush proposes expanding the welfare state

As a now certified Blogger, the Vega understands that this brings great responsibility and certain sacrifices, such as watching the preznit's Survivor episode last night.

But the Vega preferred watching Kevin Brown pitch his first "quality start" of the season, albeit in a losing effort.

Apparently, I didn't miss much.

But a couple of points certainly struck me. First, from the Boy King:

First, millions of Americans depend on Social Security checks as a primary source of retirement income, so we must keep this promise to future retirees as well. As a matter of fairness, I propose that future generations receive benefits equal to or greater than the benefits today's seniors get.

Secondly, I believe a reformed system should protect those who depend on Social Security the most. So I propose a Social Security system in the future where benefits for low-income workers will grow faster than benefits for people who are better off.

By providing more generous benefits for low-income retirees, we'll make this commitment: If you work hard and pay into Social Security your entire life, you will not retire into poverty.

One of the reasons Social Security has proven to be the most popular and most endearing New Deal program is that it is not a welfare program. Middle class Americans also benefit from the program (especially its insurance aspect). On the other hand, many middle class Americans tend to be at least mildly hostile to welfare. What Bush proposed last night (and I'm sure, Dear Reader, this isn't the first place you've read this today on the internets) is to turn what's left of Social Security -- after he's gutted it -- into a welfare program for the poor. By doing so, it wouldn't take long for Congress to eliminate it altogether, in the next frenzy of "welfare reform."

I can hear the GOP argument now: "'Socialist insecurity' gives the elderly poor a 'disincentive' to take that minimum wage greeter job at Wal-mart."

As Bush has now certainly learned, going after Social Security remains the "third rail" of American politics. Going after a welfare program aimed entirely or primarily at benefiting the poor carries with it few, if any, political consequences (never mind what Bush's plan considers poor and middle class)

The Bush/Cheney/Rove ability to combine hypocrisy and deceit in one proposal is simply stunning.

The second thing that struck me is, has JimmyJeff been given a "daily press pass" again?

QUESTION: Mr. President, a majority of Americans disapprove of your handling of Social Security, rising gas prices and the economy. Are you frustrated by that and by the fact that you are having trouble getting attraction [sic] on your agenda in a Republican-controlled Congress?

"Are you frustrated?" What kind of a question is that?