Guest: You know what really pisses me off? You probably don't care, but I'm gonna tell you anyway. You obviously hold a point of view that is different from the majority of our Mudcat friends. But you are afraid to identify yourself when you want to express an opinion, because it might piss somebody off!

Folks that don't agree with me don't bother me a bit. Some of my best friends on the Mudcat are liberals, but they damn well identify themselves when they post a message.

Now, get with the program! (to borrow a phrase from Robert)

Robert: Please re-check my message, por favor. I didn't say SS "was in good shape." I said it's not about to go belly up! But, it IS (in say thirty years or so) unless something is done to correct it pretty quick. No doubt about it.

'Tis a puzzlement to me why the liberals take such pride in declaring to one and all that they are "progressive." May I respectfully pose the question: if the Democrats (read liberal) are so damn progressive, why are they digging their heels into the turf so hard to try to keep the U. S. Social Security system exactly the way it is now, when both Democrats and Republicans agree that changes must be made?

Why are they so opposed to Bush's efforts to move our defense system into the 21st century and beyond, instead of remaining in the dated "Cold War" mode?

Any young person today (under say 40) that wouldn't welcome the opportunty to invest some of his/her SS funds in the stock market and does not do it is, in my opinion, simply not viewing things realistically. The market is down now, yes. But follow any ten year period of the market for the past fifty years, and I believe you will find that in the long run the market has done very well. We have had a great run for the past two or three years, and it will happen again. And the economy started heading south last year, so don't point your finger at Bush. He had nothing to do with it. If it's still this bad next year, point away.

The Democrats are progressive? I don't think so.

DougR

r