(Mario Anzuoni / Reuters)
Republican presidential candidate Mitt Romney sees the political value of campaigning on the promise of protecting Social Security. At least that was the
core of his attack on Texas Gov. Rick Perry in last night's debate. Meanwhile, Perry is continuing to display his stunning ignorance on what Ponzi schemes really are.
SIMI VALLEY, Calif.—There was one thing and one thing only on the minds and lips of Mitt Romney's aides and advisers after Wednesday night's Republican presidential primary debate: Texas Gov. Rick Perry's position on Social Security.
Perry doubled down during the debate on his past statements of Social Security as a "ponzi scheme" and a "monstrous lie." But Romney—the former Massachusetts governor—and his campaign looked past the rhetoric, calling that a distraction from the substance of Perry's position on the issue, which they said amounts to being in favor of ending the program.
A top Perry aide refused, under repeated questions from The Huffington Post, to rule out the idea that Perry would favor dissolving altogether the 76-year-old program that pays out benefits to seniors.[...]
"This is going to be a really big deal," said Lanhee Chan, Romney's policy director. "To make the argument that Social Security effectively has to be eliminated is a complete non starter."
"You've got millions of Americans who depend on Social Security," Chan added. "He's going to have a really tough time explaining why he wants to kill Social Security."
Perry's camp was defiant under fire.
"[Romney] can pound all he wants," Perry communications director Ray Sullivan said. "That does say something about how he feels about his condition in his race, I think. The governor will roll out policy ideas and solutions to the nation's ills throughout the course of the campaign."
But Sullivan refused to explicitly deny that Perry wants to "end" the program, despite repeated attempts by HuffPost to clarify Perry's stance.
It is a huge vulnerability for Perry—even senior teabaggers understand that they paid into Social Security their whole lives, it's their money. Perry's team seems to recognize that in their refusal to clarify what exactly their candidate would do with the program, they've got a problem. There's a gulf between his rhetoric and any real plan for the program other than abolishing it that they just can't breach. While they're working on that, they might also talk to their boss about what Ponzi schemes really are.
Seems with this squabble going on, some strong words, and some action from President Obama on keeping Social Security strong for the next century (hint, lifting the payroll tax cap) would be particularly helpful.
