Oct 22, 2010
Rick Crawford tries to prove he doesn’t support privatizing Social Security by citing the endorsemen
In Case You Missed It
Rick Crawford tries to prove he doesn’t support privatizing Social Security by citing the endorsement of a group that does
In yesterdays debate, Rick Crawford (AR-Truth Impaired) tried to convince viewers that he does not support privatizing Social Security despite the mountain of evidence of his support for the proposal to gamble Social Security funds on Wall Street.
But, in defense of Crawford position, he chose to cite the support he’s received from the 60-Plus Association which supports privatization.
Crawford, Causey hit on old themes [Frago, Arkansas Democrat Gazette]
Causey said Crawford favored privatizing Social Security, which Crawford denied. Crawford cited an endorsement by the 60 Plus Association, a Washington, D.C.-based organization of conservative senior citizens, as evidence that he would oppose privatization.
“If they had any reservations at all about me privatizing Social Security, I’m certain that they would not have given that endorsement. So statements to the contrary are false,” Crawford said during the debate at Arkansas State University.
However, on the 60 Plus website, a 2005 news release from the organization praises President George W. Bush for his leadership during a period when Bush was advancing a plan to privatize Social Security, and cites surveys showing support from older Americans for privatization.
After the debate, Crawford spokesman Ted Prill said, “To be honest with you, I don’t know what [60 Plus’] bent is on that particular issue.” [Arkansas Democrat Gazette, 10/22/10]
Two outrages — G&FC, Crawford [Brummelt, Arkansas News]
2. Republican congressional candidate Rick Crawford should be defeated on account of now knowing what he’s talking about.
In a debate with Chad Causey in the 1st District last night, he repeated that he does not believe what he is once on record saying he believed, which is that we should allow for the partial privatization of Social Security by letting younger recipients keep some of their contributions for personal investment.
In support of his position, he said in this debate that he had been endorsed by some Washington outfit, the 60 Plus Association, and that this group wouldn’t have endorsed him if he was in favor of partial privatization of Social Security.
But it turns out that the 60 Plus Association is a Republican group that, in 2005, embraced George W. Bush’s ill-fated scheme to privatize Social Security partially.
Crawford’s press aide said after the debate that, to tell the truth, he didn’t what the group’s position was.
Look, I’m OK with Crawford if he was for privatization before but now is against it. We all change our minds. The important thing is not to imperil it by privatizing it.
But to stand up and say something stupid in a debate just last night, to ally yourself with a group devoted to the thing you profess to be opposing — well, that’s starting to be relevant to the race at hand. [Arkansas News, 10/22/10]