I know posting has been sporadic lately, but I try not to post unless I have something to say. Because I have no grand pronouoncements ready for the moment, I figured I'd, well, troll Kinja's politics digest in search of something to comment on. I came across this question from The National Review's blog's Tim Graham:
block|
Why are the same people who are saying there's no crisis in fixing the Social Security crackup in mid-century the same people who say we have to act now to prevent the earth from warming up a Fahrenheit degree or two by 2100?
|block

Because we can fix Social Security much easier than we can stop global warming, you dolt. Last time there was a social security crisis, which was 1980s we fixed the same kind of problem the White House wants us to think will be the death of the program.

If you want to continue on Graham's line of reasoning, perhaps we should ask why those people who are so concerned about Social Security reform don't seem to be concerned with the damage being caused by the Bush administration's record present and projected deficits? Curious how the Republican view of what constitutes a looming crisis seems, well, a bit arbitrary.