Quote:
Originally Posted by PaulS
It really has nothing to do with the use of the word. It is that he has stated he talked to Westmoreland - who was not even at the event and thus would not have offered him a "scholarship". Most importantly there is a process to get into WP. A congressman/senator would have had to nominate him, then there are many other requirements he would have had to be tested for (weight, eye sight, fitness, height, academic achievement, etc.). You won't get admitted until you qualify/pass all those things. None of that took place.
This is not yellow journalism - it is good journalism.
|
"It really has nothing to do with the use of the word"
That is a fair thing to say, and I agree. But many are focusing on the use of the work "scholarship" as evidence that he lied. In light of the fact that West Point uses that word, that accusation is insane.
Carson has never claimed that he applied. Never once that I can tell. If someone at West Point said to Carson "we'd love to have you, if you apply, you'll get accepted", and Carson describes that as being "offered a scholarship", is that really a dishonest statement?. He could have been more precise, but THAT'S a big deal? Really?
"This is not yellow journalism "
What's yellow journalism, is Politico claiming, in huge headlines, that Carson's camp admitted to fabricating the story. Carson's camp denies that anyone said that to Politico, and Politico removed that claim. Tell me that's not yellow journalism? Why woud Politico claim that Carson's team admitted the fabrication, then remove that claim, and not evenm apologize? You claim that's not yellow journalism? What was Politico's basis for stating that Carson's camp admitted the lie to them?