Bush Cheated In The Debates
As you may recall, photographic evidence that Bush used a magnetic in-ear listening device during the first presidential debate with Kerry clearly showed that Bush cheated and that his own camp had no faith in his ability to actually debate a real politician. The subsequent killing of NY Times story on "Bulge-gate" and the three or four explanations the White House offered has been summed up beautifully in this article on FAIR's site. Just ask yourself, why did the Bush camp specifically call for no cameras to be placed behind their candidate? Why did Bush exclaim "Now let me finish!" when he was in the middle of his own speech, with no one interrupting him and the warning light not flashing? This story is important because it shows Bush cheated, lied, and that his own camp knows he's an idiot.
Monday, February 07, 2005
FAIR-L
Fairness & Accuracy In Reporting
Media analysis, critiques and activism
http://www.fair.org/index.php?page=2055
ACTION ALERT:
USA Today Covers for Bush's Social Security Distortion
February 7, 2005
In its February 3 edition, USA Today not only failed to challenge a George
W. Bush distortion about Social Security-- it actually changed Bush's
remarks to make them more accurate.
Summarizing Bush's case for privatizing the program, reporter Judy Keen
explained: "Two days after winning re-election, Bush said his top priority
would be Social Security, which he says will go into the red in 2018 and
won't have enough money to pay promised benefits in 2042." And in a Q & A
piece, the paper made the same claim: Answering the question, "Is Social
Security bankrupt?" the paper responded that "Bush says that in 2042, it
won't be able to pay 100 percent of guaranteed benefits; CBO says 2052."
But Bush's claims about Social Security's solvency have not usually been
so nuanced. In a January 11 appearance, Bush spoke of a system that would
be "flat bust, bankrupt" by the time workers in their 20s were set to
retire. And during the State of the Union address that prompted USA
Today's coverage, Bush gave his most familiar description of Social
Security's finances: "By the year 2042, the entire system would be
exhausted and bankrupt."
That claim is misleading, if not completely false; the Social Security
trustees, using very conservative assumptions about economic growth,
predict that the program will be able to pay about 75 percent of benefits
after 2042, while the Congressional Budget Office believes that point will
come ten years later. Even then, the system will be able to pay more to
future retirees than current recipients get; and some economists argue
that if the economy grows about as quickly in the future as it has in the
past, Social Security may in fact never run short of cash.
By changing Bush's false claim to a more accurate one, USA Today committed
a serious journalistic error. The primary news value in Bush's comments
was their deceptive nature; by "improving" them, USA Today did Bush a
favor-- and its readers a disservice.
ACTION:
Ask USA Today to print a clarification noting that they mischaracterized
Bush's claims about Social Security's demise.
CONTACT:
USA Today
Brent Jones, Reader Editor
Phone: 1-800-872-7073
mailto:accuracy@usatoday.com
As always, please remember that your comments have more impact if you
maintain a polite tone. Please cc fair@fair.org with your correspondence.
----------
FAIR produces CounterSpin, a weekly radio show heard on over 130 stations in the U.S. and Canada. To find the CounterSpin station nearest you, visit http://www.fair.org/index.php?page=5
You can subscribe to FAIR-L at our web site: http://www.fair.org . Our subscriber list is kept confidential.
FAIR
(212) 633-6700
http://www.fair.org/
E-mail: fair@fair.org
Fairness & Accuracy In Reporting
Media analysis, critiques and activism
http://www.fair.org/index.php?page=2055
ACTION ALERT:
USA Today Covers for Bush's Social Security Distortion
February 7, 2005
In its February 3 edition, USA Today not only failed to challenge a George
W. Bush distortion about Social Security-- it actually changed Bush's
remarks to make them more accurate.
Summarizing Bush's case for privatizing the program, reporter Judy Keen
explained: "Two days after winning re-election, Bush said his top priority
would be Social Security, which he says will go into the red in 2018 and
won't have enough money to pay promised benefits in 2042." And in a Q & A
piece, the paper made the same claim: Answering the question, "Is Social
Security bankrupt?" the paper responded that "Bush says that in 2042, it
won't be able to pay 100 percent of guaranteed benefits; CBO says 2052."
But Bush's claims about Social Security's solvency have not usually been
so nuanced. In a January 11 appearance, Bush spoke of a system that would
be "flat bust, bankrupt" by the time workers in their 20s were set to
retire. And during the State of the Union address that prompted USA
Today's coverage, Bush gave his most familiar description of Social
Security's finances: "By the year 2042, the entire system would be
exhausted and bankrupt."
That claim is misleading, if not completely false; the Social Security
trustees, using very conservative assumptions about economic growth,
predict that the program will be able to pay about 75 percent of benefits
after 2042, while the Congressional Budget Office believes that point will
come ten years later. Even then, the system will be able to pay more to
future retirees than current recipients get; and some economists argue
that if the economy grows about as quickly in the future as it has in the
past, Social Security may in fact never run short of cash.
By changing Bush's false claim to a more accurate one, USA Today committed
a serious journalistic error. The primary news value in Bush's comments
was their deceptive nature; by "improving" them, USA Today did Bush a
favor-- and its readers a disservice.
ACTION:
Ask USA Today to print a clarification noting that they mischaracterized
Bush's claims about Social Security's demise.
CONTACT:
USA Today
Brent Jones, Reader Editor
Phone: 1-800-872-7073
mailto:accuracy@usatoday.com
As always, please remember that your comments have more impact if you
maintain a polite tone. Please cc fair@fair.org with your correspondence.
----------
FAIR produces CounterSpin, a weekly radio show heard on over 130 stations in the U.S. and Canada. To find the CounterSpin station nearest you, visit http://www.fair.org/index.php?page=5
You can subscribe to FAIR-L at our web site: http://www.fair.org . Our subscriber list is kept confidential.
FAIR
(212) 633-6700
http://www.fair.org/
E-mail: fair@fair.org
Well Done, Mr. Bush
Bush unveiled his budget today. To meet his "goal" of reducing the deficit to half of what it is by 2009, he has proposed drastically cutting back spending on many domestic programs, while increasing military spending. It's a wonderful legacy to bequeath America: slash education and health funding while exporting all of America's resources to finance his boondoggle in Iraq. Read about it in the Washington Post, here. The article states:
About 150 programs in all would be shuttered or radically cut back to help meet Bush's goal of shaving the budget deficit in half by 2009. One out of every three of the targeted programs concerns education. Medicaid funding would be reduced significantly and even major military weapons programs would be scrapped to make more resources available for the war in Iraq.
Bush unveiled his budget today. To meet his "goal" of reducing the deficit to half of what it is by 2009, he has proposed drastically cutting back spending on many domestic programs, while increasing military spending. It's a wonderful legacy to bequeath America: slash education and health funding while exporting all of America's resources to finance his boondoggle in Iraq. Read about it in the Washington Post, here. The article states:
About 150 programs in all would be shuttered or radically cut back to help meet Bush's goal of shaving the budget deficit in half by 2009. One out of every three of the targeted programs concerns education. Medicaid funding would be reduced significantly and even major military weapons programs would be scrapped to make more resources available for the war in Iraq.