Interesting Site

Discussion in 'Current Events' started by rayboyusmc, Jan 18, 2008.

  1. rayboyusmc
    Offline

    rayboyusmc Senior Member

    Joined:
    Jan 2, 2008
    Messages:
    4,015
    Thanks Received:
    338
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    Florida
    Ratings:
    +338
    Anyone else use this site as a fact check? If so, what is your opinion.

    I would love to win the lottery and be able to set up something like this where you could print what actually happens and show the proof for it. Right or wrong, I would rather know the actual facts than just frigging opinions.

    Too much bull crap today that passes for news or information. Two good examples: Chris (loudmouth) Matthews and Rush (I got rich slamming the liberals) Limbaugh.:eusa_liar:

    It is too easy to soundbite information and have a whole bunch of US believe the crap.

    http://factcheck.org/
     
  2. Steerpike
    Offline

    Steerpike VIP Member

    Joined:
    Dec 17, 2007
    Messages:
    1,847
    Thanks Received:
    182
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Ratings:
    +182

    It's a pretty good site. They'll point out misleading information put by either party.
     
  3. RetiredGySgt
    Offline

    RetiredGySgt Platinum Member

    Joined:
    May 6, 2007
    Messages:
    39,575
    Thanks Received:
    5,902
    Trophy Points:
    1,140
    Location:
    North Carolina
    Ratings:
    +8,992
    The difference between Rush and Mathews being one is an entertainer and the other pretends to be a unbiased reporter.
     
  4. midcan5
    Offline

    midcan5 liberal / progressive

    Joined:
    Jun 4, 2007
    Messages:
    10,794
    Thanks Received:
    2,367
    Trophy Points:
    245
    Location:
    Philly, PA
    Ratings:
    +3,306
    I kinda like Chris Matthews, philly boy. You can actually set up a site pretty cheap, blogging is free even. Trouble is getting accurate information from the piles and piles of info that is out there. Fatcheck is another local institution, U of P, usually good stuff but only so much time. Check out these too.

    http://www.issues2000.org/default.htm
    http://www.truthout.org/index.htm
    http://www.project-syndicate.org/
    http://www.snopes.com/
    http://www.publicintegrity.org/default.aspx

    check right panel - this site in interesting
    http://rhetorica.net/
     
  5. rayboyusmc
    Offline

    rayboyusmc Senior Member

    Joined:
    Jan 2, 2008
    Messages:
    4,015
    Thanks Received:
    338
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    Florida
    Ratings:
    +338
    I wonder if they know which one they are.:eusa_drool: Oops, the drool should be Novak.
     
  6. midcan5
    Offline

    midcan5 liberal / progressive

    Joined:
    Jun 4, 2007
    Messages:
    10,794
    Thanks Received:
    2,367
    Trophy Points:
    245
    Location:
    Philly, PA
    Ratings:
    +3,306
    Back to solid factual information, Spinsanity was an excellent site but the effort to do this sort of work requires more than just dedication.

    http://www.spinsanity.org/
     
  7. rayboyusmc
    Offline

    rayboyusmc Senior Member

    Joined:
    Jan 2, 2008
    Messages:
    4,015
    Thanks Received:
    338
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    Florida
    Ratings:
    +338
    Several of the sites I visit, have to go on line and try to get funds to keep them going.

    But the fact that they are able to do this is another blessing of the internet.

    If they ever try to take that away from US, there will be a revolt.
     
  8. William Joyce
    Offline

    William Joyce Chemotherapy for PC

    Joined:
    Jan 23, 2004
    Messages:
    9,693
    Thanks Received:
    1,135
    Trophy Points:
    190
    Location:
    Caucasiastan
    Ratings:
    +1,349
    It's about gaining credibility. People (used) to trust the BBC. Wikipedia is so-so, since anyone can edit it. Snopes.com is OK, but slants a little left. I'll check out your site.
     
  9. mattskramer
    Offline

    mattskramer Senior Member

    Joined:
    Apr 11, 2004
    Messages:
    5,852
    Thanks Received:
    359
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    Texas
    Ratings:
    +359
    I’m familiar with it. It is a great resource. Of course liberals will say that it has a conservative bias and conservatives will say that it has a liberal bias.
     
  10. ronpaul2008
    Offline

    ronpaul2008 Member

    Joined:
    Dec 2, 2007
    Messages:
    80
    Thanks Received:
    14
    Trophy Points:
    6
    Ratings:
    +14
    I just went there and my opinion of it is very low. Their slogan is 'You ask the questions and we research the answers'. The first two question answers I find are.

    First off, 'probably not' is not a factual answer. There are people in the Sudanese government and in American government who say this offer was made. If this is not the case and this site is reasearched it give some facts or reasons why they determined 'probably not'. Second they then go into a defense offering reasoning why even if bin Laden was offered Clinton could have justifiably turned the offer down. If the offer was not made why resort to a defense? And just because there was not hard evidence on bin Laden does not mean he needed to be turned down. He was a suspect in many crimes and there was probable cause if not hard evidence, so an arrest was not out of the question.

    This is simply incorrect. By using the term 'No, ecomomists say', they not claiming to refer to some economists. It would not make sense to give a definitive 'No' answer and back it up with 'some economists support this view'. They are obviously trying to say that all economists support this view. This is a complete lie, any economist worth his salt will tell you the more taxes the worse the economy is. I think this site is a fraud. Its a political activist site masqerading as unbiased facts.
     

Share This Page