Oh, Norm...

Via Talking Points Memo, at Forbes.com we have a story about Social Security where our own Norm Coleman in mentioned, along with several other politicians. Coleman, talking about how he weathered attacks that he was for privatizing the program, he said. "I countered it by being very clear that I supported personal accounts and opposed privatization." True Norm-speak.

If we substitute "personal accounts," that focus group-tested phrase that Republicans are flocking to, with "private account," which has pretty much been declared synonymous by the White House and everybody else involved, we have this: "I countered it by being very clear that I supported private accounts and opposed privatization." Which is not much different than the Senator saying that he supports cars and opposes driving.

So what does this mean? I see two options. The first, more likely possibility is that prevaricatin' Norm fully supports privatizing Social Security, but like many Republicans he is hemming and hawing and insisting that he opposes it right up until he votes for a privatization bill that is "moderate" and "fiscally sound" and "makes Social Security perfect forever" even as it "creates huge deficits" and "drastically cuts guaranteed benefits." We've seen this before. A lot of Republicans seem to be taking this path, and Coleman, being a herd animal, will follow.

There is one other possibility, though. You can believe in cars but not driving if you see cars as a museum piece only. So maybe he wants to set up "personal accounts" that are just pretend portfolios that people can play with. Of course, when you retire the money isn't real and you will get the same guaranteed benefit as everybody else, but if your portfolio does especially well perhaps the Social Security Administration will send you a button or a t-shirt or something. Kinda like those fake stock portfolio projects we all did in business class. That would be fun, yes, but it is hard to see that as solving Social Security.