Every time the Republicans bring up the phony Social Security crisis, Democrats should say "If you want to talk about something that could be disasterous 40 years down the road, lets talk about Global Warming". Both Social Security and Global Warming involve using models to predict what is going to happen in the future. The difference? With Global Warming, the worst case scenario is somewhat worse than only being able to pay 80% of benefits. If Republicans respond by saying that there is no Global Warming crisis, that is a perfect opportunity to ask what exactly the evidence for a Social Security crisis is. If anything, the evidence is better for Global Warming, and the stakes are much higher. Why is Bush, an oilman, ignoring one 'crisis' while promoting the other? The recent Tsunami only helps make the point that Mother Nature can be quite devestating. We need to pay more attention to the envioronment and the Republicans seem to be providing a good opportunity to talk about why. At the very least this tactic might slow the push to destroy Social Security.