Falsiness
We've had truthiness for some time. Now, a new concept, perhaps created today by the Washington Post:
Yes, it is true that Social Security does not contribute one cent to the national debt. But that fact doesn't fit with the Republican party line, so we will label it "true but false," i.e. really false, but sort of true in, uh, well, the real world, where Washington Post reporters spend as little time as possible, and which doesn't really count if it interferes with conservative economic cant.
How can a country where this is what passes for top of the line journalism hope to survive?
"Yes, Social Security in the past has not contributed to the nation’s debt. But it’s basically a meaningless fact...We are going to label this with that relatively rare rating: “true but false.”
Yes, it is true that Social Security does not contribute one cent to the national debt. But that fact doesn't fit with the Republican party line, so we will label it "true but false," i.e. really false, but sort of true in, uh, well, the real world, where Washington Post reporters spend as little time as possible, and which doesn't really count if it interferes with conservative economic cant.
How can a country where this is what passes for top of the line journalism hope to survive?
Comments
He says: “To some extent, this is a matter of theology.”
Well… it’s not unless Bachmann or Palin becomes president.
I thought theology was about… y’know… God?
WTF kind of meaningless line is “To some extent, this is a matter of theology.”? That’d be false if it even made sense. It’s not even a fact that is false, or a truth that is a fiction, or a non-fiction that is a fable, or a zebra that is a brick.
Meanwhile you’ve got less that 20 days to do something about the debt.