Thursday, February 03, 2005

Bush lies… no surprise but read it anyway…

For those of you who missed the State of (Dis)Union last night, I thought I'd post something to help you understand just how amazingly untrue (burning) Bush's statements were. It wasn't too hard to find something, news is all over the web. Hell, I even heard criticism on the morning news (which might actually be a sign of hope).

I decided to send you this post from fellow Blogger, Bob Harris, which reads in part:

Bush glossed a lot of details, but he did give at least one plain, specific fact on the numbers... I quote:

By the year 2042, the entire system would be exhausted and bankrupt.

Horseshit. According to the Congressional Budget Office's authoritative numbers (.pdf document), updated just last Monday: if absolutely nothing changes, benefits aren't even projected to begin declining until 2053, at which point (prepare to quake in mortal terror):

CBO finds that the benefits paid will be 22 percent lower than the scheduled benefits.

Bankrupt? Bankrupt? Bullshit. Even something as mainstream as CNN"s Money section is now running a "Reality Check" article, politely saying Bush "may have overstated Social Security's problems," given that (in the exact words of the head numbers guy at the GAO) "the program will never go bust."

Bad days, folks. But best you stay informed.

And let's not forget that lying to Congress is an impeachable offense. Hands up all those who think that means anything!... anyone?... anyone?

Update: care of The Rude Pundit:

And the Rude Pundit is sick of hearing how "bold" is every fucking thing Bush proposes.... It is not "bold" to target gays for isolation and denigration in the Constitution; it is not "bold" to cut domestic programs that mainly help those in poverty so that massive tax cuts can be made "permanent;" it is not "bold" to say that you want to create a Social Security system that no longer guarantees a retirement benefit for seniors and that cuts benefits to others; it is not "bold" to hinder scientific developments under the veil of "protecting life;" it is not "bold" to declare that that we should make sure that people on death row are actually guilty; it is not "bold" to imply that you will use military force to impose your political will on other nations. If this is what passes for "bold" in this America, then, indeed, cowards should hold their heads high and declare that their pusillanimity is actually "bold" retreat.

No comments: