« BACK  |  PRINT

RS

EDITOR OF REDSTATE

The Truth About Salt, Rick Perry and Dana Milbank’s “Fact Checking”

Today, in the Washington Post, Dana Milbank takes on Governor Rick Perry and his new book, Fed Up. Now you would think that in a 200 page book that deals with countless issues – including Perry’s bold but accurate claim that Social Security is bankrupt and that the members of the Supreme Court serve as the “Grand Ayatollah’s” of the Constitution – he might get past one line about how much salt we can put on our food. But, no – THAT is what bothered him.

Perry’s book is officially due out next Monday, so we’ll have a more detailed review forthcoming. But let’s take a quick look at this “controversy.”

In a litany of complaints about intrusive government, the Governor says the following:

We are fed up with being overtaxed and overregulated. We are tired of being told how much salt we can put on our food, what windows we can buy for our house, what kind of cars we can drive, what kinds of guns we can own, what kind of prayers we are allowed to say and where we can say them, what political speech we are allowed to use to elect candidates, what kind of energy we can use, what kind of food we can grow, what doctor we can see, and countless other restrictions on our right to live as we see fit.

So, Dana Milbank seems bothered because the regulation in question about salt is actually about processed food and not how much salt you “can put on” your food. Really? This from the guy who claimed that Fox News only had one Democrat on for election night coverage, when in reality there were numerous.

Milbank points to Politifact’s determination that the allegation that the federal government can tell us how much salt we can put on our food is false. But what Milbank doesn’t note is that even Politifact acknowledges that the FDA sponsored an Institute of Medicine (IOM) report called “Strategies to Reduce Sodium Intake in the United States,” and that the April 20 report recommends the FDA “expeditiously initiate a process to set a mandatory national standard for the sodium content of foods.”

Politifact gets hung up on the fact they are “studying it” and that there isn’t actually someone in our homes telling us how much we can “sprinkle.” Seriously?

Has anyone not heard of a turn-of-phrase?

Fine – change it to “how much salt we can consume in our foods” and it’s hard to say the federal government is not involved in that process – whether there are regulations in place yet or whether there are just studies. Excuse conservatives for wanting to kill this stupid idea in the cradle.

More importantly, excuse me for spending even a waking moment on what Dana Milbank has to say…

COMMENTS

  • http://www.flaliberty.org scorpio0679

    Even as a Floridian, I love most things that come out of Texas, including their calculators and politicians. Rick Perry in particular is one guy I am VERY interested in seeing run for president. Out of all the rumored contenders, he is the only one that I think both is likely to win and who I would enthusiastically support.

    A book published right after the 2010 midterms seems like a strong indication of a run. Has he taken any other steps, any visits to New Hampshire or other indications?

  • MrMosis

    Alls I know is he vigorously shuts the idea down every time it is mentioned. And by vigorously, I mean it is as if he is purposefully leaving himself no wiggle room at all in the future. I wonder what the real reasons for this are….

  • http://www.WILLisms.com WILLisms

    Save us from the tyranny that is PolitiFactTexas. They have a special obligation to get it right, since they claim to be this ultimate arbiter of truth in the world, yet they get so many things absolutely wrong. It’s partisan editorializing with a left-wing worldview disguised as straight fact-checking. And they put it on the front page.

    I have to drive around Austin and see their smug billboards everywhere. It is incredible how brazen their clear political motives been from the very beginning.

  • johnt

    and almost as bad, the world isn’t breaking the way she wants it to.
    She isn’t having as much fun as when Dick Cheney was in the hunting accident, and she dressed up as a hunter, but worse, as a man. She thought that was satire.
    Democracy & elections are holy to little old liberal [?] women like Dana, but only when they win.
    A normal person could have seen this coming, but maybe the girls of the media were counting on a bigger turnout from the dead and the illegals, or a miracle from Soros.
    Oh well Dana, back to baking pies and more trips to the beauty parlor.

  • http://www.ArchitecturalShots.com mdyou

    …whenever I read anything that twit writes.

  • msctex

    . . .if the Olbermanns and Matthews of the world, and to a lesser degree the Milbanks, exist solely to annoy us. That were we to make a pact to ignore them and stop reacting in any way, would they have any real reason to draw a paycheck.

    It is not as though they say anything of substance, or add anything to the national debate. Just the same tired picking of imaginary nits, such as the Perry/salt issue, or repetition of the day’s talking points. We are the hornets nest and they are the kid with a slingshot, seeing what he can get away with without being stung.

  • Gary Cooper

    Or when you really want to see a liberal squeal when a policy decision or the public is against what his opinion happens to be.

  • E Pluribus Unum

    Whether or not he technically committed treason, I know that he betrayed the USA in a way that cost the lives of American soldiers, each one of whom was a better man than him.

    This is the character of the one nitpicking Perry’s book.

  • thelastrepublicanin78704

    The PolitifactTexas folks don’t have much going on until the legislative session in January. I’ll wager that they buy the book and comb through every statement like the salt one (ie: Perry says Texas has no income tax, but the federal government levies one that we have to pay. We rate Perry’s statement “barely true”).

    Perry has set up a website to rate excerpts and have open discussion on the book. Don’t be surprised if the “fact-checkers” go after blog comments on http://www.fedupthebook.com too! Truly laughable

  • rohanpatel

    “and that the members of the Supreme Court serve as the ?Grand Ayatollah?s? of the Constitution”

    You really expect Milbank to try to rebut this statement, Erick? There are some statements so heinous – they are not worth responding to. The above that the members of the Supreme Court serve as the ?Grand Ayatollah?s? of the Constitution” is one of them.

  • chipbennett

    I’ve read through this guys comments. I’m now fairly certain he’s just a moby.

    This same person, outraged that Erick would refer to Supreme Court justices as “Grand Ayatollahs” of the Constitution, just called SoCons who believe in the societal benefits of the nuclear heterosexual family as “Taliban“.

  • The_Gadfly