Social Security Poker: It's Time for Liberals to Ante Up

By NICHOLAS D. KRISTOF

Liberals are making a historic mistake by lining up so adamantly against Social Security reform.

It's impolite to say so in a blue state, but President Bush has a point: there is a genuine problem with paying for Social Security, even if it isn't as dire as Mr. Bush suggests.

As Bill Clinton declared in 1998 about Social Security reform: "We all know a demographic crisis is looming. ... If we act now it will be easier and less painful than if we wait until later." Mr. Clinton then made Social Security reform a central theme of his 1999 State of the Union address, saying, "Above all, we must save Social Security for the 21st century."

Kristof goes on to accuse Democrats of not having a plan to save Social Security. But he's wrong.

How many times must it be said: cancel the Bush tax cuts those making $350,000 per year.

The response, of course, is "Bush says that's a non-starter," to which you reply "Tough titty...that's my plan."

You see, he's not saying "you don't have a plan," he's saying "you don't have a plan Bush will accept." And your marketing simply echoes the Republican age-based approach. "If you make less than $350,000 you don't have to worry...and if you make more than that you don't have to worry."

Besides, and correct me if I'm wrong, I believe "cancel the tax cuts" is more a matter of "let them expires as agreed upon" and "don't implement future cuts that you haven't even gotten yet anyway."