>Privatization is theft at worse, gambling at best. We do have the
>wordsmiths, we just don't command the airwaves. If our
>representation of "personalizing social security" were "gambling
>with social security" or "stealing social security," it would get
>heard; but we don't get the air time.
Those aren't really the same. It's hard to sell "stealing," since it's too easy to make the government the thief of "our" money, and "personalizing" is just restoring what should be ours before the feds took it. And "gambling" doesn't work all that well because: 1) lots of people like gambling, and 2) lots of people think they're so clever they can beat the market. If I were Luntz-like, I could come up with something around "security" that might do the trick, since W has done so well with it in the terrorism field.
Doug