The day after Bush's SOTU speech (Feb. 4), USA Today's frontpage story on social Secirity gives a textbook example of how the MSM deceives and manipulate - as usual, on behalf of the minoroty party, the Democrats. "[Bush]'s been talkng about creating an 'ownership society' for decades....One problem: most American's don't agree with his [Social Security reform] plan." Inside, the poll results reads "How people feel about about a system that allows workers to invest some of their Social Security taxes in stocks and bonds, even if guaranteed benefits are reduced?" 55% - "It's a bad idea." Just one problem with the question: it's wrong. Just like the Dems smearing of the issue during the 2004 presidential campaign, it isn't even half of Bush's proposal. When the question includes the fact that Bush wants to make the invested account inheritable - to one's spouse or family after death - the results reverse. When more accurately rendered in poll questioning, Bush's proosal wins significant majoraties of support. But there's no hint of the truth in USA Today. Of course, USA Today is not alone in deceiving and misleading the public. They are joined by CBS News, the New York Times, and many other major media sources. http://www.mrc.org/cyberalerts/2005/cyb20050204.asp#1 SO - that American's respect jounalists like used car salesmen is any surprise? -Orson
Don't forget that in 1998 President Clinton, Senator "Chappaquidick" and a host of other Democrats were hollering "We must save Social Security." All of a sudden, with no previous action taken, it doesn't need fixing.
Has there ever been any government social program that worked? Not that I can think of. Remember when Social Security was thought of. 1935 Average life expectancy - 63 years Social Security full payment age - 65 years Just like all government programs, the plan is to steal your money so you never receive any back. Without government social programs there is no need for so many politicans. Just a thought
Summarization of Orson's posts... They can be summarized quite simply: "Whatever BS the Bush administration is peddling now = good" vs. "Any other opinions, but especially those of evil newsmen, Democrats, and the working poor = bad" I can't wait for the day when Orson attempts to explain some yet-to-be-thought-of new Bush policy, like eliminating all taxes on people who earn more than $200,000 per year as somehow good for the rest of us.... Believe me, should that come to pass somehow Orson will find a way to justify it as the only possible alternative to shore up our national interests.... The one-sidedness of his arguments is telling - never has he responded with a "gee! I didn't think about that!" or "well, you have a point too" unlike some of the more liberal posters on this board (e.g., yours truly) and anyone else with half a brain.... No offense Orson..... just pitching it back at you.... - Carl
