1. On a national level, most people now know PolitiFact is nothing but another Obama-shilling mainstream media joke -- an entity so in the tank for the White House it ruled as mostly true that "Barack Obama has lowest spending record of any recent president:"
sing inflation-adjusted dollars, Obama had the second-lowest increase -- in fact, he actually presided over a decrease once inflation is taken into account.
Yes, you read that correctly. According to PolitiFact, when indexed for inflation, Obama reduced spending.
PolitiFact's motto appears to be: The bigger the lie the more people will believe it. Hm. Sounds familiar. But how else can you palace guard for a failed president?
But PolitiFact isn't just a national cancer on all of us. This reprehensible outfit also "fact-checks" in a number of individual states, including the crucial swing states of Florida, Wisconsin, Ohio, New Hampshire, and Virginia.
Unfortunately, my lack of superpowers makes it impossible for me to monitor the left-wing propaganda PolitiFact is surely spewing in each individual state. Thankfully, though, the Republican Party of Virginia has had enough and late yesterday hit back at PolitiFact Virginia with both barrels:
For quite some time we've had growing concerns regarding PolitiFact Virginia's approach towards Republicans in general, and in specific, "separating fact from fiction" against Republican candidates, officials and committees.
On February 16th of this year, the Republican Party of Virginia had a meeting with the Editor and Publisher of the Richmond Times-Dispatch regarding the paper's PolitiFact Virginia unit. In late April - two months later - we had a subsequent conference call to follow up on our original meeting.
Since the original meeting - nearly five months ago - PolitiFact Virginia has meted-out 36 rulings, not including recent "Ad Watch" articles. Of those rulings, 26 targeted Republican candidates, elected officials, our State Party, the U.S. Chamber of Commerce and American Crossroads. At the same time, PolitiFact Virginia handed down only 10 rulings on Democrats and one 3rd party organization.
That might not sound like both barrels, but included in the press release is this 87-page document which goes into great detail to refute a number of PolitiFact's lies, some of them nearly as absurd as PolitiFact's mostly true ruling that "Obama has the lowest spending record of any recent president."
This pushback is crucial and hopefully this is just the beginning. Whether it's on a national or local level, Republicans must treat the media as what it truly is: an adversary.
There is no downside anymore in pushing back and going on offense against the corrupt media. New Media is here to stay and not fighting back against the likes of PolitiFact is no different than not fighting back against the DNC.
VA Pushes Back Against PolitiFact, Shows Other States the Way
Wow, and here we have quotes from Breitbart.com. Can you find more partisan sites than this, oh great con liar.
2. PolitiFact's decree is part of a larger journalistic trend that seeks to recast all political debates as matters of lies, misinformation and "facts," rather than differences of world view or principles. PolitiFact wants to define for everyone else what qualifies as a "fact," though in political debates the facts are often legitimately in dispute.
Review & Outlook: PolitiFiction - WSJ.com
So, again attacking a fact checking organization. This time useing an op ed by the Wall Street Journal, which is run and owned by the same person who owns and runs FOX.
3. Sites like PolitiFact and Factcheck.org are designed to verify political claims and hold politicians accountable. But critics say fact-checking entities are themselves biased. The Weekly Standard's Mark Hemingway and Glenn Kessler of the Washington Post discuss fact-checking in American politics.
CONAN: Mark Hemingway, in a piece titled "Lies, Damned Lies and Fact Checking," you concluded that the fact-checker is less often a referee than a fan with a rooting interest. How did you arrive at that?
HEMINGWAY: Well, there's a number of reasons why I arrived at that conclusion. One of the facts I pointed out in the piece was that the University of Minnesota School of Public Affairs had actually done a survey of PolitiFact, and they evaluated all 500 statements that PolitiFact had rated from January of 2010 to January of 2011.
And they found that of the 98 statements that PolitiFact had rated false, 74 of them were by Republicans. Now, I can think of a number of reasons why you might cite one party over the other more, in terms of, you know, who was telling the truth and who wasn't. But doing that at a rate of three to one strikes me as awfully suspicious, particularly when, if you delve into the specifics of the statements that they cited, there's all kinds of problematic things contained there, whereas they are, you know, like you're mentioned, they're often fact-checking opinions and providing counter-arguments to, you know, stated opinions.
Political Fact-Checking Under Fire : NPR Wow. You toss in NPR. Except, of course, it is a repreat of a debate about fact check orgs, with Mark Hemmingway, in the WEEKLY STANDARD. Wow, you can find more partisan sites. Lets see if you ever actually use a non partisan site, shall we, oh lying con.
4. It is yet another action of executive arrogance by this president, Cruz added. President Obama, if he disagreed with requiring welfare recipients to work or to seek work, he could have gone to Congress, he could have proposed new legislation, he could have tried to make the case to the American people. Instead of pursuing such a course, Cruz continued, Obama simply decreed it by executive order, an action that he called a pattern of this administration.
President Obama apparently believes that Bill Clinton was way too conservative, Cruz said, and that the Obama administration is and should be far, far to the left of the Clinton administration.
Romney Camp: Obama Has Gutted Welfare Reform - By Katrina Trinko - The Corner - National Review Online OOPS. National Review AGAIN. Can you believe it. So, lets keep looking.
a. Rector has already debunked the Administrations claims that it did not gut welfare reform and that Republican governors. tried to do the same thing in 2005. Now, he is taking apart the Administrations defense of its new waiver policy piece-by-piece in a new series of papers. "This standard is vague, first of all, since states do not actually need to fulfill it but merely demonstrate clear progress toward that goal no later than one year after they are exempted from the old TANF work standards. Nonetheless, at first glance, this goal looks fairly impressive.
President Obamas HHS will exempt states from the federal work requirements if they increase by 20 percent the number of TANF cases that lose eligibility due to increases in earnings, a measure called employment exits. There are four reasons why a 20 percent increase in the number of employment exits, although it sounds impressive, is a very weak or counterproductive measure of success in welfare reform."
Morning Bell: Media "Fact Checkers" Promote Obama's Gutting of Welfare Reform
And here we have, Morning Bell, in THE FOUNDRY, part of the Heritage network. About as far right as you can get. Great non partisan sourse, oh con liar.
Now, don't you appreciate that I've saved you from embarrassing yourself further! Embarassed? Actually, I am not at all. And I am sure you are not either. Because you are a con tool. Simply doing what con tools do. Posting con dogma. From con sites. So, what is new.
What is really interesting is that famous communist era tactic of attacking any organization that clears up the lies you tell. Attacking fact check orgs is a rediculous tactic. And really juvinile to those interested in truth, which you have amply proven, YOU ARE NOT.
You're welcome.
And stop living on those Liberal sites....see how deleterious they are to your intellectual health?
I just pointed out your con sites. I do not use partisan sites. Find it is hard on my integrity. But, You DO. Your entire post is based on statements from partisan sites. Where is your integrity???
And, since you haven't found any oh-so-Liberal "lies,"....the term turns back on you, doesn't it. Not at all, oh con liar. Only a partisan person who intends to lie, uses totally partisan sites. All con sites. To normal people you are a joke. You do all you can to tear down organizations that question the statements your sites make. Maybe soon, all sites will follow the con dogma, and there will be no impartial sites. Your attempts to denegrate the fact check orgs is a total sad joke.
