Reply #26: Then how do you explain this:

[Martin Eden]

"Each of the plans under consideration is fully paid for, replacing revenue the Social Security Trust Fund would have lost from lower payroll tax receipts with money made up from either alternative revenue sources or spending cuts."

Stating it repeatedly only proves my point -- the "general fund" and the Social Security Fund are being mixed. Do you think that can only go one way -- adding to the SS equation but never subtracting from it?

The Republicans are hypocrites because they always wanted it one way and now they're arguing the other. Now YOU are trying to have it both ways by saying Social Security can be bolstered from the general fund. I bolded replacing revenue above because that "revenue" is not taxes specifically dedicated to Social Security -- but is being tied to it as part of an overall budget deficit equation!!!

You and I can argue this back and forth ad infinitum ad nauseum, but the bottom line is that once Democrats go down the road of tying SS revenues in with general revenues they have played right into the hands of those who want to destroy the program.

I'm done. You can have the last word if you like.