Prediction (and I hope I'm wrong)

[yesthattom]

Bush’s proposal to end Social Security is going nowhere. Meanwhile, Bush Jr. now says that a constitutional amendment to ban Marriage Freedom (i.e. same-sex marriage) is “off the table.” So, the Radical Right is threatening to block the Social Security bills if Bush doesn’t put the constitutional amendment back on the table.

My fearful prediction is that Bush is only pretending to no longer support the constitutional amendment so that he can get both through. It’s simple: he waits until the bill to end social security is almost at a vote and he “gives in” to the constitutional amendment, gets support for both, and he gets both.

Ugh.

Comments

my fears are different

[cos]

That wouldn't work if he tried it. I don't think the religious right has enough political strength to put him over the top on either issue. I think he's gonna lose on social security and on the amendment.

However, he could do a lot of damage with social security despite not getting the phase-out privatization through. To begin with, a big part of the strategy so far has involved casting lots of doubt on the safety of treasury bills. Don't trust the IOU's, say the Republican congresscritters. Better hope foreign bankers don't believe these people believe what they're saying! Secondly, there's a theory I find plausible, that Bush's fallback is, "okay, y'all said you have no problem with personal investment accounts as long as we don't divert from social security to do it", and uses that as a way to create a new category of tax-free super-accounts with few restrictions, where wealthy people can shelter all of their wealth from taxes.

[pyffe.livejournal.com]

HEY! Maybe he knows that since he doesn't need to be elected again, he can just drop what he doesn't want to concentrate on?

Nah! That'd be too optimistic of me.

After all, we as Americans have a duty to prevent our children from getting hit with those nasty little "Gay Rays".

[prettypammie.livejournal.com]

Hmmm. If he's a savvy enough politician (and I suspect he is, or at least his advisors are) he knows that he is better off letting the same-sex marriage issue be fought at the state level, and keeping the administration out of it. No matter which side he supports, he can't but lose. Taking sides on an extremely emotional issue with many supporters on both sides is a bad idea. He just has to hope that no bill lands on his desk for him to sign, vetoe, or otherwise allow it to become law.

-Pam