Trajan
conscientia mille testes
So, after reading several 'fact check' sites for several months, it appears to me that they are basically mitigation factories, all of them. No matter what side of the fence they fall on.
Some issues that they insist on fact checking cannot be fact checked imho, ala opinions are opinions, speeches on plans opaquely described can be cut to fit anyone's view so whats the point? I don't have a big issue with them introducing background or past history but they use it to massage and mitigate what should be a pretty straight forward empirical standard.
So I would prefer to attempt to 'fact check' statements that are not open to or allow as little ideological reinterpretation as possible either way, you can use almost any source when applying that yardstick, examples;
Obama, and the bankruptcy charge-
Transcript-
I disagree with that. I said they need - these companies need to go through a managed bankruptcy. And in that process, they can get government help and government guarantees, but they need to go through bankruptcy to get rid of excess cost and the debt burden that they'd - they'd built up.
And fortunately...
(CROSSTALK)
OBAMA: Governor Romney, that's not what you said...
(CROSSTALK)
OBAMA: Governor Romney, you did not...
ROMNEY: You can take a look at the op-ed...
(CROSSTALK)
OBAMA: You did not say that you would provide government help.
ROMNEY: I said that we would provide guarantees, and - and that was what was able to allow these companies to go through bankruptcy, to come out of bankruptcy. Under no circumstances would I do anything other than to help this industry get on its feet. And the idea that has been suggested that I would liquidate the industry, of course not. Of course not.
(CROSSTALK)
OBAMA: Let's check the record.
Now, to the NY Times, Romney said ;
Snip-
The American auto industry is vital to our national interest as an employer and as a hub for manufacturing. A managed bankruptcy may be the only path to the fundamental restructuring the industry needs. It would permit the companies to shed excess labor, pension and real estate costs. The federal government should provide guarantees for post-bankruptcy financing and assure car buyers that their warranties are not at risk.
In a managed bankruptcy, the federal government would propel newly competitive and viable automakers, rather than seal their fate with a bailout check.
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/11/19/opinion/19romney.html?_r=0
Obamas claim is not truthful, at all period.
Next-
Transcript;
ROMNEY: I'm sorry, you actually - there was a - there was an effort on the part of the president to have a status of forces agreement, and I concurred in that, and said that we should have some number of troops that stayed on. That was something I concurred with...
(Crosstalk)
ROMNEY: ...that your posture. That was my posture as well. You thought it should have been 5,000 troops...
(CROSSTALK)
ROMNEY: ... no troops through whatsoever.
OBAMA: This was just a few weeks ago that you indicated that we should still have troops in Iraq.
OBAMA: You've got to be clear, both to our allies and our enemies, about where you stand and what you mean. You just gave a speech a few weeks ago in which you said we should still have troops in Iraq. That is not a recipe for making sure that we are taking advantage of the opportunities and meeting the challenges of the Middle East.
The Obama admin. did indeed negotiate to extend the SOFA ( Status of Forces Agreement) and, in Joes parlance; bet your ass we did , its a big fucking deal ( I am paraphrasing )
Now, to the NY Times (or if you prefer check FP online);
Convening a videoconference on Oct. 6, 2010, Mr. Biden and top American officials reviewed the options. The vice president favored a plan that would keep Mr. Maliki as prime minister, but which involved installing his main rival, Mr. Allawi, leader of the Iraqiya bloc, near the top of the pyramid. To make way for Mr. Allawi, Mr. Biden suggested that Mr. Talabani, an ethnic Kurd, be shifted from the presidency and given another position. Lets make him foreign minister, Mr. Biden said, according to the notes of the meeting.
Mr. Biden also predicted that the Americans could work out a deal with a government led by Mr. Maliki. Maliki wants us to stick around because he does not see a future in Iraq otherwise, Mr. Biden said. Ill bet you my vice presidency Maliki will extend the SOFA, he added, referring to the Status of Forces Agreement the Obama administration hoped to negotiate.
More at
http://www.nytimes.com/2012/09/23/w...html?pagewanted=2&ref=statusofforcesagreement
and
How the Obama administration bungled the Iraq withdrawal negotiations | The Cable
Obamas claim is not truthful, at all period.
And a palate cleanser
Sam Feist @SamFeistCNN
More of CNN post debate Poll: Can Obama handle job of Cmdr. in Chief? Yes: 63%. Can Romney? Yes: 60%. A draw on that Q.
NumbersMuncher @NumbersMuncher
PPP post-debate INDYs only key stat: "More/less likely to vote after debate" - Obama 32 more/48 less. Romney 47 more/35 less.
Some issues that they insist on fact checking cannot be fact checked imho, ala opinions are opinions, speeches on plans opaquely described can be cut to fit anyone's view so whats the point? I don't have a big issue with them introducing background or past history but they use it to massage and mitigate what should be a pretty straight forward empirical standard.
So I would prefer to attempt to 'fact check' statements that are not open to or allow as little ideological reinterpretation as possible either way, you can use almost any source when applying that yardstick, examples;
Obama, and the bankruptcy charge-
Transcript-
I disagree with that. I said they need - these companies need to go through a managed bankruptcy. And in that process, they can get government help and government guarantees, but they need to go through bankruptcy to get rid of excess cost and the debt burden that they'd - they'd built up.
And fortunately...
(CROSSTALK)
OBAMA: Governor Romney, that's not what you said...
(CROSSTALK)
OBAMA: Governor Romney, you did not...
ROMNEY: You can take a look at the op-ed...
(CROSSTALK)
OBAMA: You did not say that you would provide government help.
ROMNEY: I said that we would provide guarantees, and - and that was what was able to allow these companies to go through bankruptcy, to come out of bankruptcy. Under no circumstances would I do anything other than to help this industry get on its feet. And the idea that has been suggested that I would liquidate the industry, of course not. Of course not.
(CROSSTALK)
OBAMA: Let's check the record.
Now, to the NY Times, Romney said ;
Snip-
The American auto industry is vital to our national interest as an employer and as a hub for manufacturing. A managed bankruptcy may be the only path to the fundamental restructuring the industry needs. It would permit the companies to shed excess labor, pension and real estate costs. The federal government should provide guarantees for post-bankruptcy financing and assure car buyers that their warranties are not at risk.
In a managed bankruptcy, the federal government would propel newly competitive and viable automakers, rather than seal their fate with a bailout check.
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/11/19/opinion/19romney.html?_r=0
Obamas claim is not truthful, at all period.
Next-
Transcript;
ROMNEY: I'm sorry, you actually - there was a - there was an effort on the part of the president to have a status of forces agreement, and I concurred in that, and said that we should have some number of troops that stayed on. That was something I concurred with...
(Crosstalk)
ROMNEY: ...that your posture. That was my posture as well. You thought it should have been 5,000 troops...
(CROSSTALK)
ROMNEY: ... no troops through whatsoever.
OBAMA: This was just a few weeks ago that you indicated that we should still have troops in Iraq.
OBAMA: You've got to be clear, both to our allies and our enemies, about where you stand and what you mean. You just gave a speech a few weeks ago in which you said we should still have troops in Iraq. That is not a recipe for making sure that we are taking advantage of the opportunities and meeting the challenges of the Middle East.
The Obama admin. did indeed negotiate to extend the SOFA ( Status of Forces Agreement) and, in Joes parlance; bet your ass we did , its a big fucking deal ( I am paraphrasing )
Now, to the NY Times (or if you prefer check FP online);
Convening a videoconference on Oct. 6, 2010, Mr. Biden and top American officials reviewed the options. The vice president favored a plan that would keep Mr. Maliki as prime minister, but which involved installing his main rival, Mr. Allawi, leader of the Iraqiya bloc, near the top of the pyramid. To make way for Mr. Allawi, Mr. Biden suggested that Mr. Talabani, an ethnic Kurd, be shifted from the presidency and given another position. Lets make him foreign minister, Mr. Biden said, according to the notes of the meeting.
Mr. Biden also predicted that the Americans could work out a deal with a government led by Mr. Maliki. Maliki wants us to stick around because he does not see a future in Iraq otherwise, Mr. Biden said. Ill bet you my vice presidency Maliki will extend the SOFA, he added, referring to the Status of Forces Agreement the Obama administration hoped to negotiate.
More at
http://www.nytimes.com/2012/09/23/w...html?pagewanted=2&ref=statusofforcesagreement
and
How the Obama administration bungled the Iraq withdrawal negotiations | The Cable
Obamas claim is not truthful, at all period.
And a palate cleanser
Sam Feist @SamFeistCNN
More of CNN post debate Poll: Can Obama handle job of Cmdr. in Chief? Yes: 63%. Can Romney? Yes: 60%. A draw on that Q.
NumbersMuncher @NumbersMuncher
PPP post-debate INDYs only key stat: "More/less likely to vote after debate" - Obama 32 more/48 less. Romney 47 more/35 less.
