He should've played the Jack

Meeting privately with 22 black religious and business leaders who backed his reelection last year, Bush warned that Social Security shortchanged Black Americans, since they have, on the average, a shorter lifespan that other races. Of course the Liberals disagreed -- why is not really important since the real reason is that they simply want something to complain about Bush. But some conservatives didn't like Bush's comments, either. Michelle Malkin dislikes his tossing race into an issue where, she feels, it doesn't belong.

First of all objecting to the privitization of Social Security because the private investments might go bad is like standing in the middle of a sinking ship yelling at people to not use the life boats because they might not be safe. Privitization is inevitable. The death of Social Security is inevitable.

Second, as to demographic desparity as a factor -- it's always been a factor. Men have put a heck of a whole lot more into SS, yet women benefit more, because they have longer lifespans. Would we seriously reject it based on that? As for Blacks being shortchanged. We are talking averages here, and if the numbers includes all social programs, Blacks have benefited proportionally (per capita), much more than other races to the various social programs enacted over the years (let me qualify that by saying they've recieved more money per capita. They actually have been hampered by those programs in other areas -- but that's another story...). Not that I'm complaining. I just think the whole picture should be looked at, not just a small part.

I agree with Michelle, it was a bad call on Bush's part.

Hat Tip: Outside the Beltway
Source: LA Times

Posted by Jack Lewis at January 27, 2005 08:44 AM