With Mitt Romney's pick of Rep. Paul Ryan as his vice-presidential running mate, the accusations against Ryan have already started.

Obama and the Democrats will accuse Romney, Ryan, and Republicans of wanting to destroy Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid, and push grandma off the cliff to her death in order to avoid funding these programs--and, of course, for the classic "tax cuts for the rich."

Obama and the Democrats will promote themselves as the protectors of the status quo for these same programs.

However, as reported last week, that's a dubious thing for them to want to protect.

People retiring today are part of the first generation of workers who have paid more in Social Security taxes during their careers than they will receive in benefits after they retire.

Even as citizens can expect to receive less money than we pay into Social Security, Social Security is still on course to go bankrupt and suck money out of the federal government's general fund. As citizens lose money on Social Security, the government loses even more.

Meanwhile, David Axelrod is out there saying that the Ryan plan would put Medicaid into a "death spiral."

It takes a special kind of incompetence to construct a system so twisted that citizens are forced to participate, and which results in both the government and the citizens losing money. And it takes a special kind of perversion to attack Ryan for a plan that they claim would put Medicaid in a "death spiral" when all these programs are already in a death spiral.

But that's the type of incompetence the government is demonstrating with Social Security, and the kind of perversions Axelrod is peddling to give Obama another term in which to bring Social Security closer to its sudden collapse.

Medicare and Medicaid are in similar situations.

All these programs are scheduled to go bankrupt and will take our country down with them. When that happens, everyone can expect all benefits to be cut drastically--or entirely. Rather than slowly modifying the programs over time so as not to cause a major shock to current (or soon-to-be) beneficiaries, Obama's defense of the status quo means we can expect Social Security benefits to suddenly drop so drastically virtually overnight that the beneficiaries will not be able to adjust their budgets fast enough. The elderly that already depend on Social Security will not have enough money to cover their rent, their food, and their out-of-pocket medical bills. Some will complain loudly about having "paid into" the system for decades, but it won't matter. The government has already irresponsibly spent that money. It won't matter what's fair, it won't matter how much we've "invested." When there are zero dollars in the government's coffers, beneficiaries will be paid zero dollars.

On our current course, the future of all government programs is bleak indeed.

So as Obama and Democrats demonize Republicans for suggesting changes to these programs to avoid their imminent bankruptcy, the real question should be how Obama and Democrats are willing to endorse the status quo that will soon condemn the elderly to such a miserable situation.

Obama once said that fixing Social Security was relatively easy. Yet, years later, the national debate hasn't touched the topic in any significant way. The president has focused on stimulus, Obamacare, Dodd-Frank financial regulations, Sandra Fluke, Zimmerman in Florida, gay marriage, and telling entrepreneurs "they didn't build that." Nothing on Social Security (but apparently Sandra Fluke is back!).

Now that Rep. Ryan's selection as running mate brings Ryan's proposals to the table, expect Democrats to attack them while simultaneously offering nothing in terms of solutions themselves.

And, no, tax increases Democrats will inevitably propose don't count as solutions. We've already increased the Social Security tax multiple times over the program's history to accommodate the program's failings. But, as has been the case in the past, those tax increases have only been band-aids.

We've never addressed the real problem with Social Security: The fact that we are giving our "retirement" money to the government for "safe-keeping." Could there be a more foolish system for retirees? Could there be a more attractive system for politicians that enjoy spending tomorrow's retirement funds on today's roads, bridges, and re-election campaigns?

So when you see Obama and Democrats attacking Republicans for suggesting alternative solutions to our entitlement problems, keep in mind that Obama and Democrats are tacitly supporting a system that will soon go bankrupt and leave the elderly and the poor without a safety net.

And Republicans are the bad guys?