Is McCain really this clueless?
It's always worth taking a break from vacation to behold the spectacle of a politician blowing off his own foot.
John McCain this week has uttered a couple whoppers that are so egregious, it prompts one to wonder whether he
Is McCain really this clueless?
Dick Polman, Inquirer National Political Columnist
It's always worth taking a break from vacation to behold the spectacle of a politician blowing off his own foot.
John McCain this week has uttered a couple whoppers that are so egregious, it prompts one to wonder whether he is subconsciously trying to sabotage his own campaign, or whether he is as verbally inept as the president he seeks to replace, or whether he simply lacks the most fundamental knowledge that is required of any Oval Office denizen.
The topic was Social Security. During a Monday town hall event (and bear in mind that he thinks he excels best in town hall events), the presumptive Republican nominee stated: "Americans have got to understand that we are paying present-day retirees with the taxes paid by young workers in America today. And that's a disgrace. It's an absolute disgrace..."
One day later, on CNN, McCain said virtually the thing while railing against the Social Security program: "Let's describe it for what it is. (Today's workers) pay their taxes, and right now their taxes are going to pay the retirement of present-day retirees. That's why it's broken..."
We all know that McCain would prefer to spend his time talking about national security and about how Iraq is the central front in the war on terror. We're all aware by now of his public admission that he is a tad knowledge-challenged about the biggest domestic issue of all, the economy. But we might arguably expect that the presidential nominee of a major party would at least have a working knowledge of the most popular domestic program since the New Deal.
Because here's the thing: What McCain describes as "an absolute disgrace" and "broken" are the rules that have governed the Social Security program since its inception 73 years ago. Current workers are always taxed, via the payroll levy, to support the retirement security of current seniors. That's how the pay-as-you-go policy has always worked. That's not a "disgrace," that's the law.
There are several possible ways to interpret McCain's remarks, none of them very flattering:
1. He's truly ignorant of how Social Security works, which, among other things, is not the best way to attract senior voters, or any voters who'd like to believe that a guy auditioning to run the country is at least minimally in touch with reality.
2. He does know how Social Security works (it's hard to imagine he doesn't, not after two decades in Washington), but somehow failed to articulate whatever he really intended to say - just as he has done on other recent occasions, such as when he twice confused the Sunnis and the Shiites (which Brit Hume of Fox News defended as a possible "senior moment").
3. He actually does believe that the fundamental precepts of Social Security are an "absolute disgrace," and wants to overhaul them.
It has long been an axiom that any Republican seeking to overhaul Social Security is doomed to suffer political damage; witness President Bush, who drained his '05 capital while stumping in vain for partial privatization. And it has long been an axiom that any Republican who verbally disses the program (inadvertently or intentionally) is doomed to suffer political damage; witness Barry Goldwater, the 1964 presidential nominee who was slaughtered on election day in part because he was on record as having stated, "I think Social Security ought to be voluntary. This is the only definite position I have on it."
Yesterday, a McCain spokesman tried to cover the candidate's tracks (they've been mopping up a lot lately) by stating after the fact what McCain might have been intending to convey: "The disgrace is our failure to fix the long-run imbalance in Social Security - a failure of leadership evidenced by our willingness to kick the problem to the next generation of leaders. He's also describing the looming and increasing demographic pressures confronting the Social Security system and Washington's utter failure to address it."
But that's not what McCain described as a "disgrace." Instead, he targeted the underlying premise of the program itself. Either he did this because he is inarticulate; or because he really doesn't know how it works; or because he's an idealogue who wants to undo the best of the New Deal. Whatever the reason, the Demcrats and the senior groups now have him on video. As Barry Goldwater discovered, while trying unsuccessfully to distance himself from his own words, that kind of talk can kill a presidential candidacy.
Look, I have voted for Dems and Reps in the past although I lean to the right on more issues than on the left (I am pro-gay marriage and anti-gun for the record), and even I am fed up with columnists like this one who are so predictable in their criticisms of anyone with an R next to their names. John McCain is right about our social security program. All one needs to do is take a look at how Canada has managed their program and it will become evident that ours is nothing more than a Ponze scheme that will go broke eventually. For decades we should have been managing SS like a pension plan with a governance system that would have prevented politicians (from both parties) from raiding the proceeds. We did neither and are soon going to have to face the day of reckoning. McCain is absolutely correct about social security. If Polman had 1 ounce of objectivity, he would admit that. Instead, he is just another paid shill for Obama.— MDefl
Comment removed.- social security is one of the greatest achievements in the history of the federal gov't. nothing about it is a disgrace. republicans are just continuing their agenda of trying to destroy the social safety net for the middle and working class in america. they are just continuing to try to figure out ways to steal from the poor and give to the rich— Ryan
- Gotta love the liberal spin . If they cant counter the point they deflect the issue with b.s— kwallen
- Comment removed.
- obama does not only talk down to blacks,he talks down to everyone,he is an elitist flip flopper just like john kerry, that is why he will not win in november.— jack russell
- Just like you, I don't know what his intentions were with these comments. Don't get me wrong either, because I am not voting for him, but I find it rather ironic that, while you are criticizing someone for either being inarticulate or uneducated on a topic, you yourself spell Democrats incorrectly. Haha. This is why everyone needs an editor/ spellchecker- not just McCain. Funny.— winnieski206
- it is a disgrace because it doesnt account for shifting demographics and the ratio of retirees to workers, which has steadily narrowed since social security's inception. the real joke here is that obama's only solution is to raise taxes and nothing more, i.e. a temporary and completely unimaginative fix for a problem that will just recur as demographics continue to evolve over time. im really impressed vy how quickly this newspaper has made itself into a patsy for the obama campaign— pennst1143
- Ryan, The SS system is going broke. Bill Clinton himself said that. It is grossly mismanaged. There will be no safety net if we don't act to fix it. Why is that hard to understand?— MDefl
- McCain's sense of humor is weird to say the least. Remember his version of "Barbara Ann"? Now he follows it up with a joke about lung cancer. Maybe he can go on tour with Andrew Dice Clay after he loses the election.— p-diddy
- jmc - - How about those socialist parking tickets!— p-diddy
- Comment removed.
- If your beef is with intelligence why pick Obama over Hillary? What I can not believe is that the Democrats have picked Obama in place of Hillary. I am not a big fan but she is one sharp girl. This country is in trouble when they pick an inexperienced teen idol who speaks in generalizations and a guy too old to think quickly as their two candidates for President. Democrats keep shooting themselves in the foot by picking candidates way too left of the average American. They will probably lose the election as a result. I would vote for Hillary over both of these guys and I am a Republican!— mikemusa1
- If you prefer he can spell it out for you. When the program started 70 or something workers to one retire. Now its something closer to 4 to 1 and soon it will be less. Thats what he trying to say. Which every side of politics you stand for you should acknowledge the problem. It is time for private accounts. I'm 26 and i would have 30+ thousand in personal account now. Instead my money was stolen for something i will never get when i retire. Get away from the politics and understand the issue. Govt takes money spends it on something else pays a little to retires and doesn't anticipate an aging population and lowering birth rate. That's why the system doesn't work. Vote libertarian and bring our money back. Honest hard working Americans can plan their retirement better. We don't need some awful centralized system taking 12.4% (6.2 u pay) (6.2 employer pays) from our paychecks. There plenty of other issues with McCain that you can hit. This was a poor one. You lost my respect sir.— eichen18
- This is a lead story at the top of your website? It's too ridiculous to even be OpEd. The writer and the paper should be embarassed.— This_Is_Embarassing
Cited by the Columbia Journalism Review as one of the nation's top political reporters, and lauded by the ABC News political website as "one of the finest political journalists of his generation," Dick Polman is a national political columnist at the Philadelphia Inquirer. He is on the full-time faculty at the University of Pennsylvania, as "writer in residence." Dick has been a frequent guest on C-Span, MSNBC, CNN, NPR and the BBC. He covered the 1992, 1996, 2000, and 2004 presidential campaigns.
ARCHIVES
All commentaries posted before April 18, 2008, can be accessed at www.dickpolman.blogspot.com.
- American Spectator
- David Limbaugh
- Free Republic
- Glenn Reynolds
- Hugh Hewitt
- Human Events
- John Hawkins
- Matt Lewis
- Michelle Malkin
- National Review
- Opinion Journal
- Power Line
- Red State
- The Brody File
- The Daily Caller
- Town Hall
- Weekly Standard
- Center for American Progress
- Crooks and Liars
- Daily Kos
- David Corn
- Huffington Post
- Media Matters
- Mojoblog (Mother Jones)
- Open Left
- Political Animal
- Salon's War Room
- Talking Points Memo
- Tapped
- The Democratic Strategist
- The Grey Matter
- Unclaimed Territory
- Andrew Sullivan
- Attytood
- Chi Tribune's The Swamp
- CJR's Campaign Desk
- CNN's Political Ticker
- CQ Politics
- FactCheck.org
- Gail Collins
- Howard Kurtz
- Mickey Kaus
- NBC's First Read
- Obit
- Political Wire
- Politico
- Politics Daily
- Pollster.com
- Real Clear Politics
- The Atlantic Wire
- The Fix
- The Moderate Voice
- The Plank
- USA Today On Politics
- Wonkette
