Reading this piece on the NYTimes site (where it's attributed to 'AP'), I just KNEW it was the Pickler. Josh Marshall confirms it below.
Since the beginning of his second term, Bush has been pushing to allow younger workers to create voluntary personal accounts funded out of their Social Security payroll taxes. Democrats accuse the White House of seeking to privatize the Depression-era program and have been unified in opposition to the idea.
http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/national/apwashington_story.asp?category=1152&slug=Bush%20Social%20SecurityA TPM reader lists the atrocities:
1. “Since the beginning of his second term” The writer forgets that Bush has been trying to gut social security as far back as his first failed run for Congress in the 1970’s.
2. “to allow younger workers” The writer uncritically passes along Bush’s concept of “younger” even though it excludes many fresh faced workers.
3 and 4. “voluntary personal accounts” The writer accepts, without informing the reader, Bush’s strained, but politically preferred, use of the words “voluntary” and “personal.”
5. “out of their Social Security payroll taxes.” The writer falsely implies that Bush’s plan is funded by current tax receipts and not from borrowed funds.
6. “Democrats accuse the White House of seeking to privatize” The writer misleads the reader by letting objective fact appear to be a partisan attack. A fair wording would be “Democrats criticize the White House for seeking to privatize…”
7. “Depression-era progam” The writer apparently believes Social Security is just a minor legacy program that was mistakenly left untouched after the Works Project Administration closed up shop. Social Security’s was created in the Depression era, but the program has been modernized over the last six decades and retains broad contemporary popular support.
http://www.talkingpointsmemo.com/archives/week_2005_06_19.php#005856I expect nothing less from Nedra Fucking Pickler, but why the AP continues to employ her is a mystery.