GOP Senate Nominee Sharron Angle Breaks Her Silence

[bodecea]

GOP Senate Nominee Sharron Angle Breaks Her Silence - KLAS-TV Channel 8 News Las Vegas

LAS VEGAS - As Sharron Angle greeted supporters at Stoney's Restaurant in Las Vegas, 8 News NOW Reporter Nathan Baca approached her to ask about her Social Security plan.

Her website calls for "transitioning out" Social Security and Medicare.

"Why do you want to eliminate (Social Security) for younger folks, because your plan calls for transitioning out," Baca asked.

"You believe the Harry Reid lie," Angle replied.

When asked to define "transitioning out", Angle said, "Transition into a personalized account… personalized Social Security accounts that they can't raid."

She told the assembled media she'd answer four questions, but refused to answer Baca's question about a previous Angle statement in which she said, "If this Congress keeps going the way it is, people are really looking towards those Second Amendment remedies." Baca kept asking into the parking lot, but received no answer.

The reaction from the Angle campaign was swift. A campaign spokesperson called Nathan Baca "an idiot" and another term that can't be repeated. The campaign spokesman did say he would detail Angle's positions, but he refused to answer on camera

Holy shit Republicans and Tea Partiers, you nominated a candidate that is somehow worse than Harry Reid. I never thought it was possible, but you somehow accomplished it.

Wow, that interview clearly proves she's worse than moonbat Harry Reid .....

She was interviewed by Roger Hedgekook....two birds of a feather. He used to be our mayor and was charged and convicted for corruption...and now he's a right wing radio pundit. Terrific.

 

[oreo]

GOP Senate Nominee Sharron Angle Breaks Her Silence - KLAS-TV Channel 8 News Las Vegas











Holy shit Republicans and Tea Partiers, you nominated a candidate that is somehow worse than Harry Reid. I never thought it was possible, but you somehow accomplished it.

And EXACTLY what did she state that was incorrect?

1. Social Security and Medicare are headed to bankruptsy--because in fact, the Federal Government has raided it over decades to pay for wars--give-a-ways to foreign countries and about anything and everything that had nothing to do with Americans social security or their health care--- Putting your 12.6% of your gross wages--that you and your employer pay toward your social security into a SAFE--bombproof simple passbook savings account would net you much more than the diddly sqwat you're going to get back from the Federal Government.

2. Obviously the EPA has failed in the Gulf. Primarily it is because of their insistance that we cannot drill in Anwar and many parts of this country--that we are in a mile deep water--in which we cannot plug this hole. I would call that complete failure and incompetance.

Now what else do you liberals feel that the Federal Government should help you with--

If she believed that, why didn't she stand up and state that she wants to dismantle Social Security and the EPA? If its her position, she should be willing to defend it

She did say that---- Transistioning into private funded social security that is LOCKED up until you retire into PRIVATE funds or banks that are guaranteed to pay a certain amount of interest over your lifetime of working would net you much more than the diddly sqwat that you're going to get from the Federal Government--who is very well known for raiding this fund when they need money elsewhere. Da--Duh--Da--Duh--Da--Duh.

Also you and I both know that what gets in the way of energy production in this country--and not only oil and natural gas--but wind--solar--hydro-plants and nuclear power plants is the EPA.

 

[rightwinger]

And EXACTLY what did she state that was incorrect?

1. Social Security and Medicare are headed to bankruptsy--because in fact, the Federal Government has raided it over decades to pay for wars--give-a-ways to foreign countries and about anything and everything that had nothing to do with Americans social security or their health care--- Putting your 12.6% of your gross wages--that you and your employer pay toward your social security into a SAFE--bombproof simple passbook savings account would net you much more than the diddly sqwat you're going to get back from the Federal Government.

2. Obviously the EPA has failed in the Gulf. Primarily it is because of their insistance that we cannot drill in Anwar and many parts of this country--that we are in a mile deep water--in which we cannot plug this hole. I would call that complete failure and incompetance.

Now what else do you liberals feel that the Federal Government should help you with--

If she believed that, why didn't she stand up and state that she wants to dismantle Social Security and the EPA? If its her position, she should be willing to defend it

She did say that---- Transistioning into private funded social security that is LOCKED up until you retire into PRIVATE funds or banks that are guaranteed to pay a certain amount of interest over your lifetime of working would net you much more than the diddly sqwat that you're going to get from the Federal Government--who is very well known for raiding this fund when they need money elsewhere. Da--Duh--Da--Duh--Da--Duh.

Also you and I both know that what gets in the way of energy production in this country--and not only oil and natural gas--but wind--solar--hydro-plants and nuclear power plants is the EPA.

Nothing against her position. If she believes those things, she should stand up and defend her position and not try to say "The election is about Harry Reid and not me" She was asked specifically about her position and she ran away

Let her stick to softball questions from FoxNews

 

[oreo]

Well it looks as if Angle has support from Oreo. I guesss if your IQ is in the low 80's a candidate in the mid 80's (on a great day) must seem to have the right stuff.

The lower I.Q's on this board cannot seem to take their gross pay-check amount and multiple that by 12.4% to get the amount of each and every pay-check that their social security is dedicated too.

Then these lower I.Q's cannot multiply that yearly amount to their life-time working years--and do a SIMPLE equation of (time--and interest compounded) and see what that amounts too--LOL

Nope--they prefer that the Federal Government take that enormous amount of money--and diddly it back to them--of course after they continually reduce pay--ees benefits--because they have raided their retirement savings fund--Da--Duh--Da--Duh--Da--Duh--

 

[oreo]

If she believed that, why didn't she stand up and state that she wants to dismantle Social Security and the EPA? If its her position, she should be willing to defend it

She did say that---- Transistioning into private funded social security that is LOCKED up until you retire into PRIVATE funds or banks that are guaranteed to pay a certain amount of interest over your lifetime of working would net you much more than the diddly sqwat that you're going to get from the Federal Government--who is very well known for raiding this fund when they need money elsewhere. Da--Duh--Da--Duh--Da--Duh.

Also you and I both know that what gets in the way of energy production in this country--and not only oil and natural gas--but wind--solar--hydro-plants and nuclear power plants is the EPA.

Nothing against her position. If she believes those things, she should stand up and defend her position and not try to say "The election is about Harry Reid and not me" She was asked specifically about her position and she ran away

Let her stick to softball questions from FoxNews

So you have completely avoided the topic--of the Federal Government raiding social security--and your original question to me--so I take it you have now "cried" Uncle in this statement---

She never stated this election is about Harry Reid--she stated that Harry Reid is all about making this election about her. She answered the "specific" questions she was asked.

 

[Wry Catcher]

And EXACTLY what did she state that was incorrect?

1. Social Security and Medicare are headed to bankruptsy--because in fact, the Federal Government has raided it over decades to pay for wars--give-a-ways to foreign countries and about anything and everything that had nothing to do with Americans social security or their health care--- Putting your 12.6% of your gross wages--that you and your employer pay toward your social security into a SAFE--bombproof simple passbook savings account would net you much more than the diddly sqwat you're going to get back from the Federal Government.

2. Obviously the EPA has failed in the Gulf. Primarily it is because of their insistance that we cannot drill in Anwar and many parts of this country--that we are in a mile deep water--in which we cannot plug this hole. I would call that complete failure and incompetance.

Now what else do you liberals feel that the Federal Government should help you with--

If she believed that, why didn't she stand up and state that she wants to dismantle Social Security and the EPA? If its her position, she should be willing to defend it

She did say that---- Transistioning into private funded social security that is LOCKED up until you retire into PRIVATE funds or banks that are guaranteed to pay a certain amount of interest over your lifetime of working would net you much more than the diddly sqwat that you're going to get from the Federal Government--who is very well known for raiding this fund when they need money elsewhere. Da--Duh--Da--Duh--Da--Duh.

Also you and I both know that what gets in the way of energy production in this country--and not only oil and natural gas--but wind--solar--hydro-plants and nuclear power plants is the EPA.

The EPA does put roadblocks in place, but the alternative will be rivers that die - and sometimes catch on fire - acid rain and deadly smogs. As for trusting banks and bankers to safeguard my retirement, I think not. Banks are not my friend or yours, banks are in business to earn profits and there is no guarantee the money put in today will not be used to fund ventures which fail - banks can fail too (of course then the tax payer would get to bail them out - ah, at least their stock holders and CEO's).

 

[rightwinger]

Right now, everyone has the option of opening a Retirement savings account through a 401K or IRA. Most Americans should have one. What the recent Stock crash showed was having all of your retirement in one of these accounts is risky.
Most companies have given up their fixed pension plans for 401Ks. This leaves most Americans without a source of a fixed income device that they can count on. Social Security fills that role. By balancing your retirement between Investments, Social Security and Real Estate you lessen your chance of being wiped out in an economic downturn

 

[oreo]

If she believed that, why didn't she stand up and state that she wants to dismantle Social Security and the EPA? If its her position, she should be willing to defend it

She did say that---- Transistioning into private funded social security that is LOCKED up until you retire into PRIVATE funds or banks that are guaranteed to pay a certain amount of interest over your lifetime of working would net you much more than the diddly sqwat that you're going to get from the Federal Government--who is very well known for raiding this fund when they need money elsewhere. Da--Duh--Da--Duh--Da--Duh.

Also you and I both know that what gets in the way of energy production in this country--and not only oil and natural gas--but wind--solar--hydro-plants and nuclear power plants is the EPA.

The EPA does put roadblocks in place, but the alternative will be rivers that die - and sometimes catch on fire - acid rain and deadly smogs. As for trusting banks and bankers to safeguard my retirement, I think not. Banks are not my friend or yours, banks are in business to earn profits and there is no guarantee the money put in today will not be used to fund ventures which fail - banks can fail too (of course then the tax payer would get to bail them out - ah, at least their stock holders and CEO's).

Oh Brother--so you TRUST the Federal Government with your money? Social Security, in fact, a better PONZI scheme that Bernie Maddof ever thought of. In fact--it's BRILLIANT--(that is if you can multiply)--- Obviously--you have never heard of guaranteed bank accounts--guaranteed certificates of deposit--guaranteed insurance annuities--that have WORKED for many DECADES.

As far as the EPA---if this oil spill would have happened in Anwar--it would have been fixed day one. Now we're in a mile deep water--that we cannot fix because of the EPA.

 

[oreo]

Right now, everyone has the option of opening a Retirement savings account through a 401K or IRA. Most Americans should have one. What the recent Stock crash showed was having all of your retirement in one of these accounts is risky.
Most companies have given up their fixed pension plans for 401Ks. This leaves most Americans without a source of a fixed income device that they can count on. Social Security fills that role. By balancing your retirement between Investments, Social Security and Real Estate you lessen your chance of being wiped out in an economic downturn

There are investments into guaranteed or (FDIC backed) certificates of deposit--that could not be raided by the Federal Government and has a GUARANTEED interest bearing on it.

No one is SUGGESTING that we take social security and invest into ABC twiddle company for retirement. Bush mentioned that a portion be put into these guaranteed instruments--and liberals had a coniption fit over it.

Liberal politicians and reporters ALWAYS scare the American Public away from doing this--by saying well look at the Stock Market Crashes--and it works every time with morons.

 

[rightwinger]

Right now, everyone has the option of opening a Retirement savings account through a 401K or IRA. Most Americans should have one. What the recent Stock crash showed was having all of your retirement in one of these accounts is risky.
Most companies have given up their fixed pension plans for 401Ks. This leaves most Americans without a source of a fixed income device that they can count on. Social Security fills that role. By balancing your retirement between Investments, Social Security and Real Estate you lessen your chance of being wiped out in an economic downturn

There are investments into guaranteed or (FDIC backed) certificates of deposit--that could not be raided by the Federal Government and has a GUARANTEED interest bearing on it.

No one is SUGGESTING that we take social security and invest into ABC twiddle company for retirement. Bush mentioned that a portion be put into these guaranteed instruments--and liberals had a coniption fit over it.

Liberal politicians and reporters ALWAYS scare the American Public away from doing this--by saying well look at the Stock Market Crashes--and it works every time with morons.

Those instruments are paying 1.5% right now. Not something to carry you through your retirement.

The bigger problem is what happens to the people who are in their 40s and paying into Social Security for 25+ years? Once you start to siphon off Social Security into private accounts, there is nobody to pay for their eventual retirement.

Pay your Social Security, invest in a 401K and pay off your house

You will be ready for anything that happens once you retire

 

[Political Junky]

Thank you, Tea Baggers, for guaranteeing Reid's reelection. Your hate destroyed your chances.

 

[Barb]

Thank you, Tea Baggers, for guaranteeing Reid's reelection. Your hate destroyed your chances.

Did it ever occur to anyone that they don't want to win? There's a pretty shitty list of facts to work within. Why not let the dems have credit for hard work and sacrifice when they can swoop in once again when the ink is near black to burn the crops and plow the fields with salt for the next go-round?

 

[oreo]

Thank you, Tea Baggers, for guaranteeing Reid's reelection. Your hate destroyed your chances.

Our "hate" destroyed our chances---- Can you get a little more "specific" about what "hate" you're actually talking about?

 

[oreo]

Right now, everyone has the option of opening a Retirement savings account through a 401K or IRA. Most Americans should have one. What the recent Stock crash showed was having all of your retirement in one of these accounts is risky.
Most companies have given up their fixed pension plans for 401Ks. This leaves most Americans without a source of a fixed income device that they can count on. Social Security fills that role. By balancing your retirement between Investments, Social Security and Real Estate you lessen your chance of being wiped out in an economic downturn

There are investments into guaranteed or (FDIC backed) certificates of deposit--that could not be raided by the Federal Government and has a GUARANTEED interest bearing on it.

No one is SUGGESTING that we take social security and invest into ABC twiddle company for retirement. Bush mentioned that a portion be put into these guaranteed instruments--and liberals had a coniption fit over it.

Liberal politicians and reporters ALWAYS scare the American Public away from doing this--by saying well look at the Stock Market Crashes--and it works every time with morons.

Those instruments are paying 1.5% right now. Not something to carry you through your retirement.

The bigger problem is what happens to the people who are in their 40s and paying into Social Security for 25+ years? Once you start to siphon off Social Security into private accounts, there is nobody to pay for their eventual retirement.

Pay your Social Security, invest in a 401K and pay off your house

You will be ready for anything that happens once you retire

1.5% right now guaranteed for someone's working life will still net you more than the Federal Government would ever pay back. It's called money--time--interest--yeild.

You just complained about 401 K's---- And even with someone in their 40's working for another 25+ years now--because the Federal Government has RAISED the age in which you can retire from 65 to now 67--for a certain age group--because they don't have the funds---would still net more for those 40+ year olds than not.

Change is necessary.