Menu
Forums
New posts
Search forums
What's new
New posts
New media
New media comments
New profile posts
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Members
Current visitors
New profile posts
Search profile posts
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles and first posts only
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Log in
Register
Forums
Non-Cattle Specific Topics
Coffee Shop
RUMORS!!
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Help Support CattleToday:
Message
<blockquote data-quote="CottageFarm" data-source="post: 942470" data-attributes="member: 16552"><p>:nod: The Annenberg Trust has been very left leaning for decades.</p><p> Case in point: FDR's Social Security promises. While it is true that the email's assertions are erroneous, you would expect a "Fact Checker", to not only correct the mistake, but fully disclose all of the truth. Here's one example.</p><p></p><p>Myth: FDR promised that SS taxes would be deductable from gross income</p><p>Fact: FDR promised that SS <u>Benefits</u> would never be taxable, not that the FICA taxes paid would be deductable</p><p>Fact: Up to 85% of SS Benefits may be taxable under current law. </p><p>I consider these some important details that were left out by the "fact checker". When you have a more complete picture, you realize that the email, while wrong in detail, was not as totally out in left field as the writer suggests. :bang: </p><p></p><p>Moral of the story: Don't believe everything you read. In this case, yes, the email was giving wrong information, and that makes the subsequent sender look bad. But the so called fact checker, wasn't precisely correct either, and still makes anyone who repeats it look bad. </p><p>I say, always do your own research and find multiple, independent sources for information, before repeating it to someone else.</p><p></p><p>Valerie, you may have been taken a bit with the information sent to you, but again, there was a whole lot more to the story than was presented in the "refuting" statement as well. I wouldn't feel too bad about it now, and just watch out for it the next time.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="CottageFarm, post: 942470, member: 16552"] :nod: The Annenberg Trust has been very left leaning for decades. Case in point: FDR's Social Security promises. While it is true that the email's assertions are erroneous, you would expect a "Fact Checker", to not only correct the mistake, but fully disclose all of the truth. Here's one example. Myth: FDR promised that SS taxes would be deductable from gross income Fact: FDR promised that SS [u]Benefits[/u] would never be taxable, not that the FICA taxes paid would be deductable Fact: Up to 85% of SS Benefits may be taxable under current law. I consider these some important details that were left out by the "fact checker". When you have a more complete picture, you realize that the email, while wrong in detail, was not as totally out in left field as the writer suggests. :bang: Moral of the story: Don't believe everything you read. In this case, yes, the email was giving wrong information, and that makes the subsequent sender look bad. But the so called fact checker, wasn't precisely correct either, and still makes anyone who repeats it look bad. I say, always do your own research and find multiple, independent sources for information, before repeating it to someone else. Valerie, you may have been taken a bit with the information sent to you, but again, there was a whole lot more to the story than was presented in the "refuting" statement as well. I wouldn't feel too bad about it now, and just watch out for it the next time. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Forums
Non-Cattle Specific Topics
Coffee Shop
RUMORS!!
Top