Interesting Site

[rayboyusmc]

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.

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

http://factcheck.org/

 

[Steerpike]

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.

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

http://factcheck.org/

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

 

[RetiredGySgt]

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.

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

http://factcheck.org/

The difference between Rush and Mathews being one is an entertainer and the other pretends to be a unbiased reporter.

 

[midcan5]

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/

 

[rayboyusmc]

The difference between Rush and Mathews being one is an entertainer and the other pretends to be a unbiased reporter.

I wonder if they know which one they are. Oops, the drool should be Novak.

 

[midcan5]

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/

 

[rayboyusmc]

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.

 

[William Joyce]

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.

 

[mattskramer]

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.

 

[ronpaul2008]

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.

Did Bill Clinton pass up a chance to kill Osama bin Laden?

Probably not, and it would not have mattered anyway as there was no evidence at the time that bin Laden had committed any crimes against American citizens.

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.

Have tax cuts always resulted in higher tax revenues and more economic growth as many tax cut proponents claim?

No. In fact, economists say tax cuts do not spark enough growth to pay for themselves.

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.