Why The Democrats Hate Greenspan

From FOXNews: Greenspan Urges Social Security Cuts

The Democratic candidates, of course, went nuts.

Kerry: "If I'm president, we're simply not going to do it."

Edwards: "an outrage."

Kucinich (as if he really matters): "a disgrace."

So what would cause such a violent reaction? The absolute bugaboo of the liberal Democrats: responsibility.

Social Security is too great a burden on our future economy to continue in its current form. It is a generally accepted fact by both sides of the debate that something must change. Either taxes will go up or benefits will go down (or there will be a complete transformation of the program, but that seems unlikely at this juncture).

Greenspan is correct in that the government has made promises that it does not have the funding to cover. Greenspan is also correct in suggesting that the tax cuts are beneficial in trying to promote a healthy economy.

In short, Greenspan has suggested that the government should act responsibly, providing for an atmosphere conducive to growth and at least making a pretense of balancing the budget. But to suggest that the government should act responsibly is in absolute contrast to the entitlements crowd. They believe that the entitlements are sacred cows and need to be paid for by additional taxation - even at the expense of ending up on the backside of the Laffer Curve. So Social Security, in its current form, is an untouchable - which means that taxes must be raised.

The Democrats aren't upset that Greenspan pointed out the SS is broken. Rather they are upset because he pointed out their plan of action with an unremarkable clarity in the consequences of their action. They fear that the public will turn against them if they knew the truth. So they have to resort to attacking the messenger.