• Slippery assertions in GOP debate causes Perry to slip right off the stage, Breaks neck
    15 replies, posted
[quote]WASHINGTON — Texas Gov. Rick Perry declared in the latest Republican presidential debate that he had never advocated turning Social Security over to the states. His denial was hard to fathom given his past rhetoric about the program. "Let the states do it," he said last year, for example. Also in Thursday night’s debate, Michele Bachmann misread presidential approval polls and denied making a statement that she actually did make just the week before, concerning a vaccine for girls. Mitt Romney denied supporting an Obama administration education program that he had praised. But the most consequential exchange may have been over Social Security, and Perry’s changing thoughts about it. A careful parsing of Perry’s words over the past months shows that his position on Social Security is not cut and dried. As he said in the debate, he believes that states should be allowed to exempt certain state or local government employees from the program, in favor of a state-approved alternative. That’s already the reality in some places, including at least three Texas counties. Far more radical is the idea of essentially dismantling Social Security as a federal entitlement and making states responsible for basic retirement security of all its citizens. He asserted in the debate, "We never said that we were going to move this back to the states." But at times, Perry has sounded very much in favor of doing just that. In a November appearance on MSNBC, he said of Social Security, "Get it back to the states. Why is the federal government even in the pension program or the health care delivery program? Let the states do it." What’s clear is that Perry, in his book and afterward, trashed Social Security as a "Ponzi scheme" and "crumbling monument to the failure of the new deal" and has since backtracked on such harsh words, especially since rival Romney has come to the defense of the popular entitlement. A look at some other statements in the Florida debate and how they compare with the facts. BACHMANN: "President Obama has the lowest public approval ratings of any president in modern time." THE FACTS: That’s true, if you leave out Harry Truman, Richard Nixon, George W. Bush, Jimmy Carter, George H.W. Bush, Lyndon Johnson, Ronald Reagan, Bill Clinton and Gerald Ford. All of them at some point in their terms dipped lower than Obama’s low point of 38 percent job approval, according to Gallup’s comparison. ___ ROMNEY: "I don’t support any particular program that he’s describing," he said, disputing Perry’s claim that Romney favors some of President Barack Obama’s education initiatives, specifically the Race to the Top program. THE FACTS: Romney was reluctant to tell Republican primary voters he doesn’t hate every Obama policy. Romney does indeed support some of the specific policy changes encouraged by the Race to the Top program and said as much earlier in the week. Speaking in Miami on Wednesday, he praised the president’s education secretary, Arne Duncan, for the program. And during the debate, Romney acknowledged supporting elements of the initiative, including teacher evaluations and charter schools.[/quote] [url]http://www.bostonherald.com/news/us_politics/view/20110923slippery_assertions_in_gop_debate/srvc=news&position=also[/url] [B]sensationalism |senˈsāSHənlˌizəm| [/B]noun[I] (esp. in journalism) the use of exciting or shocking stories or language at the [B]expense of accuracy[/B], in order to provoke public interest or excitement: media sensationalism.[/I] [highlight](User was banned for this post ("Fake news title." - Swebonny))[/highlight]
HUGE title mislead
I only came in here because I thought he actually broke his neck.
Well, I was expecting something interesting. I suppose, in a sense, that was somewhat interesting.
Jesus, could you at least change the title or something?
Christ. My heart skept a beat.
I'm gonna pretend I didn't read the article and live under the happy assumption that he actually broke his neck.
Sensationalist Headlines is not to be taken literally how many times do we have to go over this.
just because the forum is called "sensationalist headlines" doesn't mean you can make titles like "BARACK OBAMA IS FUCKING DEAD" and have them be about obama failing in the polls or something
We should just change it back to In The News, good riddance.
[QUOTE=OvB;32448727]Sensationalist Headlines is not to be taken literally how many times do we have to go over this.[/QUOTE] mostly the titles are exaggerated, not entirely misleading where the article doesn't even mention half of it.
RICK PERRY'S METAPHORICAL SEX MIDGET EATEN BY METAPHORICAL BADGER more news inside
[QUOTE=OvB;32448738]We should just change it back to In The News, good riddance.[/QUOTE] personally, my vote is lock thread and ban op. I stopped reading the article as soon as I realized OP flat out lied in the title.
[QUOTE=ButtsexV3;32449109]personally, my vote is lock thread and ban op. I stopped reading the article as soon as I realized OP flat out lied in the title.[/QUOTE] Well yeah do that too.
I'm disappointed. I thought that he was actually injured.
This title is secondary school sensationalist 'journalism'.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.