    A FUN VISIT WITH TERESA!   |
Posted on 10/17/2004 6:08:39 PM PDT by hipaatwo
Kerry/Edwards/NYTimes campaign has launched another sleazy attack in an apparent effort to define just how low low really is.
First, the NY Times ran a Bush quote from an event the reporter did not attend, then within hours of the piece running, the Kerry campaign managed to put an ad together and have the press releases done and all the media reporting on it.
New Kerry Ad Exposes Bush's January Surprise - Social Security Privatization Just over two weeks before the election, the Kerry-Edwards campaign Sunday released a new ad revealing George Bush's real agenda - his intention to "come out strong" to privatize Social Security should he be sworn in for a second term. ... JOHN KERRY: "I'm John Kerry and I approve this message."
NARRATOR: "The truth is coming out... George Bush has finally admitted that he intends to privatize Social Security in a second term. 'I'm going to come out strong after my swearing in,' Bush said, 'with...privatizing of Social Security.'"
-- Bush at Private Luncheon: "I'm Going to Come Out Strong After My Swearing In With ... Privatizing of Social Security." "'I'm going to be real positive, while I keep my foot on John Kerry's throat,' George W. Bush said last month at a confidential luncheon a block away from the White House with a hundred or so of his most ardent, longtime supporters, the so-called R.N.C. Regents. ... 'I'm going to come out strong after my swearing in,' Bush said, 'with fundamental tax reform, tort reform, privatizing of Social Security.'" (Ron Suskind, "Without a Doubt," New York Times Magazine, 10/17/04)
There's only one problem. The reporter in question, Ron Suskind, did not attend the event he got the quote from. Further, it was not televised, it was a private event and there were no transcripts available. Yet he reports the quote as fact.
Suskind does not explain how he got the controversial quote so accurate but does say about an earlier quote "According to notes provided to me, and according to several guests at the lunch who agreed to speak..."
So Suskind got "notes provided to him" and that was good enough to run such an important quote. I hope Bill Burkett was not the source. Is this what passes for reporting at the Times today?
The Kerry/Edwards/NYTimes campaign has decided they can't convince voters with ringing endorsements so they'll scare old people to death.
For their part, the Bush campaign is denying the quote and some even claimed Suskind made the quote up from whole cloth. In the end, it is of little use, the media is running wild with the story, facts be damned.
--Oh, and who is Ron Suskind that the New York Times is having write a 10 (web) page story on Bush just days before the election? He is the author of "The Price of Loyalty: George W. Bush, the White House and the Education of Paul O'Neill.''"
What do you think the odds are that the NY Times would let John O'Neil write a piece on John Kerry next Sunday?
Update: Jim Kouri is working this story for Wizbang and he has been in contact with Fox News who has questioned the Kerry camp. So far, Kerry is saying "Hey, it was in the NY Times". (paraphrased of course)
The big final MSM push started today, IMO. They are coordinating with the kerry campaign. The next two weeks will be jaw-dropping in bias and dishonesty by the media.
It's about time Bush says John Kerry "is not fit for command."
This is in summary what JFK's band of brothers has been saying all along and there is no one better qualified to make this judgment, nor more obligated to pass this assessment on to the American people (or forever hold their peace). Bush would just be concurring that they were right.
Kerry keeps throwing out fabricated lies in preemptive attacks to take Bush off message, just as he did in the debates. It would be time to take him off message and for him to answer to his brothers.
The New York Times--frabricate? Naaaaaaaaaw ...
Looks like we have another Old Media problem.
If true that would be a plus for him(Bush) in my book...
boy you got that right!!.....it started with Koppels piece of crap lie about Kerry in VietNam ( NOT ONCE DID THEY WANT TO INVESTIGATE HIS RECORDS OR THE FACT HE WONT SIGN THE 180 ) .. but Koppel got killed by ONeil....but the rest of the weekend, on every single show was a push for Kerry, and the New York Times with their lies that kerry and others used as if that was some kind of gospel truth....its maddening!!
"Kerry: Bush planning ‘January surprise’" (click through to article on msnbc)
"Kerry: Bush would break promise on Social Security" (click through to article on cnn)
A major Kerry donor has personally told me that Kerry plans to grant a pardon to cop killer Mumia Abu Jamal within a month after taking office.
The MSM are LIARS .....
oh yeah Pres Bush's actual quote was a great one....he said that he would allow "younger" americans to use part of their SS if they wanted to , to invest on their own....that is a GREAT idea.....but it had nothing to do with guting the system as it is now.....the NYTimes Reporter just did a hit piece and it was an out and out lie and now Kerry is running with it.....I hope it KILLS HIM...
The NYT is not known for its accuracy or its impartiality. They still have not retracted their story based on the forged CBS memos.
Does the President actually get sworn in a second time when re-elected?
Well .. just what "town" was he going to ..??
Seriously, the President has been talking about this for over a year. I find it amazing that Kerry has just now picked up on it. The President's plan is to allow younger workers to begin to put a portion of their SS money into a private account.
The President has also said several times that those who are currently receiving (or about to receive) payments from SS .. are NOT A PART OF THE PROGRAM.
WHAT MORE DO PEOPLE NEED TO KNOW ..?? I'm glad my son (who has a young family) can begin now to have money put into a money market or 401 type of plan, and when he retires, he will have 3-4 times the amount of money he would have if he had stuck with just SS alone.
What the dems don't like about it is two-fold. First they don't like it because it means they lose more control over people's lives - especially after they retire. Secondly, they don't like it because IT MEANS THERE's LESS MONEY COMING INTO THE TREASURY FOR THEM TO SPEND. That can also mean that since the money usually paid into the treasury will no longer be there - a whole bunch of trimming of govt will be necessary.
No wonder Kerry's "going to town" .. the barn is about to be looted.
Please am email address to the NYSlimes
As we say so often around here, there is nothing the left won't do.
Bump; ping. Here's the Suskind scam.
CyberAnt that was brillant!!
amen!!....
LETTERS TO THE EDITOR
E-mail to letters@nytimes.com.
OP-ED/EDITORIAL
For information on Op-Ed submissions, call (212) 556-1831 or send article to oped@nytimes.com. To write to the editorial page editor, send to editorial@nytimes.com.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
