The great Viking Pundit harmonic convergence

Quite suddenly, the MSM is starting to sound suspiciously familiar. Please, gentlemen, if you’re going to copy my work here please give me a hat tip. Here’s the rundown.

From Opinion Journal: “The Solvency Trap - President Bush calls the Democrats' bluff on Social Security”

Mr. Bush deserves credit for taking on a problem in Social Security that does not become acute on his watch, and we still hope he succeeds. Even if he loses this year's battle, he is winning the larger war of ideas by making the GOP the party of reform.

Here’s Michael Barone in “The Perils of Obstructionism”:

At the moment, Democrats seem determined to reject this progressive approach. But even Old Media's polls, often slanted on this as on other issues, show that voters recognize there is a problem. So far as I can tell, no Republican was defeated in 2002 or 2004 by a Democrat who pledged "no change in Social Security." Republicans who had a plan beat Democrats whose plan was a blank piece of paper.

Fred Barnes writes that “Just saying no is the Democrats’ mantra”:

In the short run, obstructionism works. Bush has been stymied on Social Security. The question is whether there will be retribution in the 2006 midterm election. Democrats seem unworried. Sen. Teddy Kennedy claims Democrats still represent "majority opinion" in America. Of course, that's what Daschle thought before he was defeated last year.

Stephen Moore analyzes “W’s Olive Branch”:

But congressional Democrats have shown themselves to be incapable of engaging in a grown-up discussion about how to modernize Social Security — a pension program designed for 1930s America.

USA Today has an editorial: “Bush's Social Security gamble puts pressure on Democrats”

Bush's willingness to begin addressing that unpleasant reality puts pressure on Democrats to do the same. They have refused to negotiate until Bush gives up on private accounts, but eventually they'll have to do more than complain.
They don't want Bush's dessert course because it's politically unpalatable. And they don't want the spinach because the taste is too bitter. So what do they want? What dish do they intend to contribute to this political potluck?

The Washington Post also has an editorial “The Challenge to Democrats”:

These are criticisms that Democrats should voice. But the president has presented ideas that are reasonable enough to serve as the starting point for action. Yes, personal accounts pose risks. But they are also likely, albeit not certain, to enrich the retirement of the majority of workers who opt for them; they should not be dismissed as heresy. Yes, cutting the value of future pensions relative to wages might force some middle-class Americans to save more privately or work a bit longer, but the pain is less than under many other proposals. The Social Security system does need fixing. And the longer Congress ducks it, the more the fix will hurt.

And Stanley Kurtz has a series of posts (here, here and here) on the Corner.