Manders on Social Security = Wrong!

Sorry for the lack of posts...my job's been a killer lately.

So I got a little bit of a pleasant surprise as I was wending my way home yesterday. I was listening to Bill Manders on KOH rant about God knows what (probably something to do with illegal immegration or Nancy Pelosi's Syria trip, two of his favorite topic as of late), and all of a sudden he switches gears. He says that he is about to read something that will either "light up the phone boards" or make the lines go silent, as in something that either everyone or no one knows. So I perked up my ears and took a listen.

Then he began reading something I heard before. On liberal talk. Where they debunked everything line by line thanks to a well-researched Snopes article (link).

What did he read? Social Security talking points.

He asked for people to give the answer to a program that originally:

1. Was completely voluntary
2. Participants would only pay 1% of the first $1400 of income
3. Monies invested would be tax-deductible, and
4. Annuity payments would not be taxed as income.

I had to call. To be fair, I didn't hear those last two (or know if those last two were even spoken) because I was dialing and talking to the call screener about my answer. I didn't want to give out my real name (though I toyed with "Blue"), so I gave the first name I could think of: Roy, after Roy Rogers. I was put on hold.

Whilst on hold, I heard that Manders pick up another person's line, a guy by the name of Steve. Steve correctly stated that it was Social Security that Manders was talking about. Since the Social Security list came out of a spam e-mail, I have a feeling that's where he heard it. The whole e-mail is full of anti-Democrat lies that have been well documented and debunked, so I was confident that I could set them straight if I got on the air.

I have to tell you before I continue: It's easier to scream at a radio host when you're not on the phone with him. Also, some of the wording may not be the same as how it actually happened, but the spirit is the same. I didn't tape it (I wish I had) and don't have a transcript. If you do, my e-mail's to the right.

Anyway, I was listening to Steve's exchange with Manders, who asked the caller about which president took Social Security from the independent fund and put it in the General fund. He didn't know, so Manders said "Let's see if Roy knows."

Showtime.

He asked me the same question, and I said that I too did not know. (The correct answer is no president, because the money has not been moved since the program's inception in 1939, but I honestly didn't know off-hand.) He asked me what I wanted to talk about, and I responded that I was going to answer "Social Security" as my answer but that he talked to Steve first. He then had both of us stay on, as sort of a competition to see who knew the talking points more. The killer for me: He called us "smart guys." Oh Manders, if you only knew...

He then moved down the line and asked us a question that I did know the answer to: I don't remember at this point in time, but I know it began with "Which political party..." Steve answered "The Democrats." Manders then asked me, and I said, "Well, I would say the Democrats, but the problem is that it would be a lie that was debunked on Snopes.com."

Manders was taken aback for a quick second but kept going. "It's all a lie, huh." I said something to the effect of "Yeah, it originated from a spam e-mail going around." He said that in fact he had compiled all of these "facts" (my air quotes). Not knowing how to react, I said, "Oh, I though you got those from an e-mail because the $1400 thing tipped me off."

That was it. I was done. He said "Nice talkin' to you," and I said, "No problem."

There were many things that I should have said. I should've told him that I heard the same talking points two days ago on the Thom Hartmann show on Air America. I should've told the listeners that the truth is out there. I should have said my blog name, or at least something more intelligent than "no problem," but that was that. I turned off my cell and continued listening.

Not surprisingly, Steve "won" the debate. However, I believe that this debate ended prematurely. Manders was going to go on down the line, spouting falsehoods all the way. I bet he would've gone down to Al Gore causing the taxation of Social Security annuities in 1993 (they were taxed at 50% in 1983, a joint effort from President Reagan and the Democratically-controlled Congress; the 1993 effort made that 85%). He then would've mentioned his personal favorite, given his propensity to talking about immigrants every other show: Jimmy Carter and the Democrats started giving annuity payments to immigrants who never would've paid a dime into the system. Which would've segued into a tirade about the Democrats and immigration, sliding into the topic of illegal immigrants and the Millennium Scholarship, his topic on today's show.

But he didn't get that far. I cut him short, and he wasn't interested in having someone steal his thunder. He just said, "Yeah, Social Security is not what it was intended to be," without a second thought to "Roy". I just wish I had a print-out of the Snopes page in front of me, where I could've quoted part of the Social Security Act.

Oh well, too many coulda-woulda-shoulda's. Time to focus on the future. I'm going to call Thom Hartmann on AAR tomorrow to tell him about my experience. To the rest of you, keep on the lookout for right-wingers spouting the same lies about Social Security. I provided the debunking link above, but here it is again: http://www.snopes.com/politics/taxes/sschanges.asp.

~ Deep Blue a.k.a. "Roy"