Nevada journalist notes Fox & Friends’ whitewashing of Angle’s Social Security position
June 14, 2010 11:34 am ET by Terry Krepel
Earlier today, we noted how Fox & Friends’ Steve Doocy falsely suggested that it is "misinformation" and "not true" that Republican Nevada Senate candidate Sharron Angle wants to "get rid of Social Security" -- in fact, that’s exactly what Angle wants to do, according to her own website and Fox’s own prior reporting.
We’re not the only ones who noticed the whitewashing Angle received on Fox. Politico’s Ben Smith highlights comments by Nevada journalist Jon Ralston:
U.S. Senate hopeful Sharron Angle said that during an astonishing interview on “Fox and Friends” this morning in which the hosts claimed she is a political newcomer (not so) and was endorsed by Sarah Palin (not so).
The interview climaxed with Steve Doocy saying to her, “Perhaps it’s a misinformation or mischaracterization but some have said you are out to get rid of Social Security. That’s not true, right?”
Angle: “Well, that’s nonsense. I have always said we need to make the lockbox a lockbox, put the money in there for our senior citizens. They came here in good faith paying into a system and Harry Reid has put an IOU in for 24 years. He has been raiding Social Security. What we need to do is personalize Social Security so the government can no longer raid it.”
Personalize?
That’s quite the different spin from Angle after her past comments about privatization --and her onetime view that Social Security is “hard to justify.” (Of course, Reid is going to have to justify his policies on Social Security, but Angle clearly has been told to massage (no, not the Scientology massages) her position for popular consumption.)
Follow-up? Don’t be silly....
In the meantime, do look at our brand new, freshly scrubbed website which now features thoughts and ideas of someone close to the candidate and explains how she might have said things in an entirely different way if she had know her previous statements would be coming back to take a big ol' bite out of her backside. It's pretty, and shiny, and has a lot of red, white, and blue. And that's what's most important in November. Details are for losers.
You would not want the local savings and loan to put your money into a lockbox - they'd stop being a "and loan" business if they did. And you'd stop earning interest if they did - money doesn't magically earn interest just because it's in a savings account, you know. It earns interest for you because people pay interest on loans from the bank!
And money put into the Social Security trust fund gets loaned out and interest is earned, which benefits recipients.
The only reason one would want a lockbox is if one is concerned that the USA won't repay a debt to the trust fund, and if the federal gov't reneges on that debt, we've got lots bigger problems than not having a lockbox.
But no one who campaigns for a lockbox will EVER tell you that!