<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN"> <HTML><HEAD> <META http-equiv=Content-Type content=text/html;charset=iso-8859-1> <STYLE></STYLE> <META content="MSHTML 6.00.2600.0" name=GENERATOR></HEAD> <BODY id=MailContainerBody style="PADDING-LEFT: 10px; FONT-WEIGHT: normal; FONT-SIZE: 10pt; COLOR: #000000; BORDER-TOP-STYLE: none; PADDING-TOP: 15px; FONT-STYLE: normal; FONT-FAMILY: Verdana; BORDER-RIGHT-STYLE: none; BORDER-LEFT-STYLE: none; TEXT-DECORATION: none; BORDER-BOTTOM-STYLE: none" leftMargin=0 topMargin=0 acc_role="text" CanvasTabStop="true" name="Compose message area"><?xml:namespace prefix="v" /><?xml:namespace prefix="o" /> <DIV> <DIV>John,  This is not a hostile question, but can you give us some evidence of Clinton's efforts on behalf of social security during the impeachment fight?  BTW, did you know that an AFL-CIO person (I think in Arkansas) once said that Clinton was the kind of person who would put his arm around your shoulder while he pissed down your pant leg. </DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Michael Yates</DIV> <BLOCKQUOTE style="PADDING-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; BORDER-LEFT: #000000 2px solid; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px"> <DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial">----- Original Message ----- </DIV> <DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial"><B>From:</B> <A href="mailto:jlacny@earthlink.net">John Lacny</A> </DIV> <DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial"><B>To:</B> <A href="mailto:lbo-talk@lbo-talk.org">lbo-talk@lbo-talk.org</A> </DIV> <DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial"><B>Sent:</B> Saturday, March 06, 2004 9:51 PM</DIV> <DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial"><B>Subject:</B> Re: [lbo-talk] Kerry/DLC vs. Social Security (the imperialism of theliberal)</DIV> <DIV><BR></DIV>Yoshie writes:<BR><BR>> Democrats are better at big "structural reforms" like the<BR>> "Welfare Reform" than Republicans, since the latter have<BR>> a much less ability to manufacture consent among unions,<BR>> liberal NGOs, and the like -- and the next targets will be<BR>> Social Security and Medicare<BR><BR>Meanwhile, back in the real world, Clinton fought efforts to privatize<BR>Social Security. Robin Blackburn in "Banking on Death" argues that Clinton<BR>fought as hard as he did because he wanted to shore up his base in the midst<BR>of the impeachment fight. But nevertheless, that was reality.<BR><BR>Also in the real world, it is Bush who is talking about partial<BR>privatization schemes for Social Security, and it is Bush who is planning on<BR>turning Medicaid into a block-grant program. There's an easy explanation for<BR>why the Democrats are more quick to defend Social Security than they were<BR>AFDC: Social Security is universal rather than means-tested. In the case of<BR>Medicare and even Medicaid, there are also other people who get paid<BR>(hospitals, etc.), so that they're economically important programs with<BR>constituencies that include not only poor people but some elite elements as<BR>well, which makes it easier and more rewarding for the Democrats to defend<BR>them. The Republicans attack these programs regardless. That is the<BR>difference, and it means something.<BR><BR>Yoshie is essentially making the "worse the better" argument here, and<BR>offering little in the way of evidence. Another way of putting it is to say<BR>that she is talking out of her ass.<BR><BR><BR>- - - - -<BR>John Lacny<BR><BR>People of the US, unite and defeat the Bush regime and all its running dogs!<BR><BR>___________________________________<BR><A href="http://mailman.lbo-talk.org/mailman/listinfo/lbo-talk">http://mailman.lbo-talk.org/mailman/listinfo/lbo-talk</A><BR></BLOCKQUOTE></DIV></BODY></HTML>