Clarification/Follow-up by Yiddishkeit on 03/01/05 11:17 am:
Elliot-

In your comments to my rating you re-emphasized your question and I'll address that from an historical perspective.

**The question...'Keep out the gov't, leave me my free choice' to retirement spending?**

Simply because Roosevelt was a Democrat. If Wilkow looked at the initial program he could see that actually Democrats wanted the gov't (in a very trusting way) to be the caretaker (in their pockets) when it came to financial retirement. However, for many liberals, that does not extend into the morality of what happens in the bedroom or how much alcohol anyone should consume.


Catch you later I'm off to Tai Chi class.


Bobby


PS. Why don't we have a Martial Arts and Physical Fitness board?

Clarification/Follow-up by tomder55 on 03/01/05 11:58 am:
Wilkow may be stealing some thunder from Sean Hannity . Hannity freqently makes the point that liberals are not pro-choice on gun rights, not pro-choice when it comes to allowing people the option of setting aside a part of their Social Security money for private investment ,not pro-choice on allowing individuals the option of setting up medical savings accounts.

Clarification/Follow-up by ETWolverine on 03/01/05 1:27 pm:
Bobby,

You are right in how it came about, historically speaking. But I still say, and you don't seem to disagree, that the positions are contradictory.

C-ya-l8er, Grashopper.

Elliot

Clarification/Follow-up by ETWolverine on 03/01/05 1:31 pm:
Probably right about the original source.

Still a good point, though.

Elliot