Next Time You Leftards Use Politifact as a Fact Check, We’re Going to Mock You Silly

[bigrebnc1775]

There's nothing new it's a known fact Democrats have always wanted to take all guns

If that were true, then why the sudden shock when Beto agrees with you?

It's a historical fact dems have always wanted to take guns away especially from blacks.It's not some surprising news.

It's historically been a claim that gun nuts and right wingers have made, but there has never been any proof to back up that claim. Again, It was your unrelenting efforts that convinced Beto to consider if it might be worthwhile to do that.

Democrats have historically wanted to confiscate guns That's a fact junior.

And at the other end of the spectrum, we have Republicans who fight for the rights of school shooters to carry even bigger weapons and larger magazines.
I think we should be somewhere in the middle.

There you go spewing more lies normal for the left.

 

[Faun]

Tell us where YOU go to check facts.

I go to a variety of sites. I certainly don't go to a fake fact checker whose only purpose is to give cover to leftist memes, news, figures etc.

So which are the rightwing factcheckers?

 

[bigrebnc1775]

Why, because they find that Rump is a liar, cheat, has no scruple, no real moral fabric? And they find the same thing with you Rumple Followers that try and cover for him? Sounds to me like they are dead on usually.

Do you honestly think anyone is looking to the media or the party of Hillary Clinton for scruples and morality? Seriously, fuck off.

Your lack of morality and scruples is noted. We already know you are voting for Rump even if Jesus Christ were running against him.

Rump....That's where your head is.

Rump before he got into office
View attachment 279895

Rump after he got into office
View attachment 279897

Rump in Nov 2020
View attachment 279898

Rump on Jan 21, 2021
View attachment 279899

That's cute lol

 

[Leo123]

Why, because they find that Rump is a liar, cheat, has no scruple, no real moral fabric? And they find the same thing with you Rumple Followers that try and cover for him? Sounds to me like they are dead on usually.

Do you honestly think anyone is looking to the media or the party of Hillary Clinton for scruples and morality? Seriously, fuck off.

Your lack of morality and scruples is noted. We already know you are voting for Rump even if Jesus Christ were running against him.

Rump....That's where your head is.

Rump before he got into office
View attachment 279895

Rump after he got into office
View attachment 279897

Rump in Nov 2020
View attachment 279898

Rump on Jan 21, 2021
View attachment 279899

That's cute lol

Daryl likes him some rump.

 

[Wapasha]

Democrats have historically wanted to confiscate guns That's a fact junior.

The dems invented the euphemistic term 'assault weapon" just to hide the fact that they want to confiscate all shotguns, pistols, rifles, you name it.

I'm not really sure how many of them actually want to confiscate guns. Like many of the things dems make campaign issues out of, they see guns as just another vehicle to divide the nation and agitate voters, in order to gain votes and win elections.

Whatever issue Democrat politicians can invent to make themselves look like the only ones who can keep the barbarians at the gates, they will run with.

Whether it's climate change, health care, education, your work place, getting rid of all the pointy objects in your home, or the news you watch, or entertainment you engage in, you name it. We are all going to freaking die.... unless we turn over complete and utter control over everything to the dems, then, and only then, can they make us all safe, healthy and secure from ourselves, and the outside world.

Well make up your mind. You just said Democrats want to take your guns, but then said you don't really know that. RWNJs have been accusing Democrats of coming for their guns for years with no reason to believe that is true

I said I wonder how many are serious, and how many just use issues like this as just a tool to get elected in their districts.

 

[Meathead]

Do you honestly think anyone is looking to the media or the party of Hillary Clinton for scruples and morality? Seriously, fuck off.

Your lack of morality and scruples is noted. We already know you are voting for Rump even if Jesus Christ were running against him.

Rump....That's where your head is.

Rump before he got into office
View attachment 279895

Rump after he got into office
View attachment 279897

Rump in Nov 2020
View attachment 279898

Rump on Jan 21, 2021
View attachment 279899

That's cute lol

Daryl likes him some rump.

He comes off like more of a catcher than a pitcher.

 

[Mac1958]

As long as news accounts found in the internet search are citing actual facts, linking unaltered quotes, in their proper context, or video from public statements, why does it matter if it's Alex Jones or the NYT, or any other source??

It matters because it's terrifically easy to slant and distort a story, even if you're using "facts". You can easily avoid, ignore and mangle any number of "facts", you can take them out of context, you can do all kinds of things.

A "major" press organization can't get away with that nearly as easy as can a small, niche site that caters to ideological purists who only want "facts" that they like.

That's not to say that major media doesn't do it to a degree too; but the niche sites do it AGGRESSIVELY and CONSISTENTLY, on both ends.

I don't want a cherry-picked article, and I don't know why so many are so willing to play along.
.

Which is why I said "citing actual facts, linking unaltered quotes, in their proper context, or video"

From my own personal experiences, I have watched live events, where a person made specific comments. Then when I want to cite those specific comments here, it's near impossible to find an internet site that accurately quotes in print, or shows an unaltered video for the specific comments I am trying to refer to in a post.

So sometimes after I have searched all over, and the specific quotes or video that I'm looking for, can only be found on some off the wall site, or worse yet, a controversial site that one side of the isle or the other hates. Then when I post the link, I'm ridiculed for trying to promote the site, when all I want is the video, or the quotes.

Sometimes, I might find all the video and quotes on a site the left hates, and they will complain about it, and disregard the video and quotes as fake, even though the site, which I used that was linking those quotes and videos from the NYT, WaPo, Politico, MSNBC, etc...

The point is, why does the left trash my link, because I found all the pertinent quotes and videos on Fox News, if the story cites a bunch of news orgs that are trusted by the left?

People need to get over their partisan bias, stop whining so much, and just debate like adults.

I don't disagree, and this really is a mess. The fact is, a partisan is going to look for any excuse to dismiss news, information and opinion that they don't like. That's one of the many behaviors and tactics shared by both ends of the spectrum.

However -- and I admit that I lean Left and can't claim objectivity -- some of the right wing sources used to make or prove points are clearly biased and barely trying to hide it. Breitbart? Alex Jones? They may have value to their readers, but using them as source material is just silly.

Personally, I no longer believe out-of-hand any single source at this point, and I sure as hell check more than one source if I'm going to make a claim or prove a point.

Look, there's bullshit coming from "news" sources, there's bullshit coming from partisans, and it's tough as hell to take anything or anyone seriously. I'm not sure how the hell a republic is supposed to function like this.
.

 

[BULLDOG]

Democrats have historically wanted to confiscate guns That's a fact junior.

The dems invented the euphemistic term 'assault weapon" just to hide the fact that they want to confiscate all shotguns, pistols, rifles, you name it.

I'm not really sure how many of them actually want to confiscate guns. Like many of the things dems make campaign issues out of, they see guns as just another vehicle to divide the nation and agitate voters, in order to gain votes and win elections.

Whatever issue Democrat politicians can invent to make themselves look like the only ones who can keep the barbarians at the gates, they will run with.

Whether it's climate change, health care, education, your work place, getting rid of all the pointy objects in your home, or the news you watch, or entertainment you engage in, you name it. We are all going to freaking die.... unless we turn over complete and utter control over everything to the dems, then, and only then, can they make us all safe, healthy and secure from ourselves, and the outside world.

Well make up your mind. You just said Democrats want to take your guns, but then said you don't really know that. RWNJs have been accusing Democrats of coming for their guns for years with no reason to believe that is true

Dems historically have tried to take guns from people that's a fact.

That is the rhetoric. Looks like it might come true if you keep up your childish bullshit. I suspect you will be one of the first crazies to have them confiscated.

It's not rhetoric it's a history that you are a part of your party's history.

Yes, that has historically been your rhetoric.

 

[BULLDOG]

Democrats have historically wanted to confiscate guns That's a fact junior.

The dems invented the euphemistic term 'assault weapon" just to hide the fact that they want to confiscate all shotguns, pistols, rifles, you name it.

I'm not really sure how many of them actually want to confiscate guns. Like many of the things dems make campaign issues out of, they see guns as just another vehicle to divide the nation and agitate voters, in order to gain votes and win elections.

Whatever issue Democrat politicians can invent to make themselves look like the only ones who can keep the barbarians at the gates, they will run with.

Whether it's climate change, health care, education, your work place, getting rid of all the pointy objects in your home, or the news you watch, or entertainment you engage in, you name it. We are all going to freaking die.... unless we turn over complete and utter control over everything to the dems, then, and only then, can they make us all safe, healthy and secure from ourselves, and the outside world.

Well make up your mind. You just said Democrats want to take your guns, but then said you don't really know that. RWNJs have been accusing Democrats of coming for their guns for years with no reason to believe that is true

I said I wonder how many are serious, and how many just use issues like this as just a tool to get elected in their districts.

Right. You said the Democratic party is definitely coming for your guns, but then you said that you don't know if the Democratic party is coming for your guns. You sound very confused.

 

[Eric Arthur Blair]

Why, because they find that Rump is a liar, cheat, has no scruple, no real moral fabric? And they find the same thing with you Rumple Followers that try and cover for him? Sounds to me like they are dead on usually.

I explained why, moron. Try reading if you can, which it appears you can't anyway.

 

[Erinwltr]

Looking at the sites gives us plenty of information to sort through but still that`s not a "fact check".

I don't know what to tell you. Snopes, Politifact, etc. disingenuously portray themselves as disinterested straight down the middle purveyor of facts. That's not exactly true.

What are " straight down the middle purveyor of facts. That's not exactly true."

Just name two. I will if you do. Name two. This will be fun, if you let it. Come on now....

 

[Erinwltr]

That was before the gun nut's constant accusations convinced him it might be worthwhile to do that. Congratulations, your constant whining about something that didn't exist at the time has produced results.

This guy's as big a liar as some of the stains here.

Nope. Mikey. Nopey Dopey.
I think you are in LOVE with Beto. You just can't help yourself. Beto is already in your dreams. Beto Beatniks Wet Dreams in mikeys Wet Pink Pantiez.

 

[Eric Arthur Blair]

What are " straight down the middle purveyor of facts. That's not exactly true."

Just name two. I will if you do. Name two. This will be fun, if you let it. Come on now....

Two what? Two sites pretending to be disinterested determiner of facts who, in fact, have partisan agendas? I named the two primary sites from the very post you comment on.

You are making yourself look like an illiterate dope. Was that your intention?

 

[Erinwltr]

What are " straight down the middle purveyor of facts. That's not exactly true."

Just name two. I will if you do. Name two. This will be fun, if you let it. Come on now....

Two what? Two sites pretending to be disinterested determiner of facts who, in fact, have partisan agendas? I named the two primary sites from the very post you comment on.

You are making yourself look like an illiterate dope. Was that your intention?

Two sources that you use to verify the veracity of your facts and news. This isn't that hard. But I get it. You believe that you are the purveyor of "The Truth" and everyone else that disagrees with you is in the wrong. You get to criticize and call folks names without impunity. What a flaming joke.
Another USMB poster on drive by scrolling. Don't waste your time folks.

 

[miketx]

What are " straight down the middle purveyor of facts. That's not exactly true."

Just name two. I will if you do. Name two. This will be fun, if you let it. Come on now....

Two what? Two sites pretending to be disinterested determiner of facts who, in fact, have partisan agendas? I named the two primary sites from the very post you comment on.

You are making yourself look like an illiterate dope. Was that your intention?

Two sources that you use to verify the veracity of your facts and news. This isn't that hard. But I get it. You believe that you are the purveyor of "The Truth" and everyone else that disagrees with you is in the wrong. You get to criticize and call folks names without impunity. What a flaming joke.
Another USMB poster on drive by scrolling. Don't waste your time folks.

See how easy the filth lie?

 

[Wapasha]

Right. You said the Democratic party is definitely coming for your guns, but then you said that you don't know if the Democratic party is coming for your guns. You sound very confused.

Are you just trying to argue for argument's sake?

I said I wondered how many of these dems running for office actually believe in taking away our guns, and how many of them are just spewing that kind of rhetoric, just because they feel it's expected of them, if they want to appease their voters.

In other words, how many politicians are saying stuff they don't really believe in, just to get elected. Is that clearing it up for you? I feel like i just beat a dead horse for you.

 

[Wapasha]

I don't disagree, and this really is a mess. The fact is, a partisan is going to look for any excuse to dismiss news, information and opinion that they don't like. That's one of the many behaviors and tactics shared by both ends of the spectrum.

However -- and I admit that I lean Left and can't claim objectivity -- some of the right wing sources used to make or prove points are clearly biased and barely trying to hide it. Breitbart? Alex Jones? They may have value to their readers, but using them as source material is just silly.

Personally, I no longer believe out-of-hand any single source at this point, and I sure as hell check more than one source if I'm going to make a claim or prove a point.

Look, there's bullshit coming from "news" sources, there's bullshit coming from partisans, and it's tough as hell to take anything or anyone seriously. I'm not sure how the hell a republic is supposed to function like this.

Believe me, just because a news site seems to lean in the same political direction as me, does not mean I cannot see it when their reporting is biased. I don't want the echo chamber, I want the facts and the truth. I want the relevant paragraphs before and after the nut of the discussion, because in those paragraphs will usually be where the proper context resides.

Case in point, the infamous, and chaotic press gaggle in the summer of 2017, concerning the "very fine people" in Charlottesville, Va. It was like pulling teeth to find the transcript of that presser.

This is why it's so maddening at times when I cannot find a news site that just reports what was said, without leaving out the part which adds context and meaning. Instead it's like they all cite the same few snippets of quotes that everyone else is using, because they are trying to color the news, and push their own narrative of what happened.

 

[Mac1958]

I don't disagree, and this really is a mess. The fact is, a partisan is going to look for any excuse to dismiss news, information and opinion that they don't like. That's one of the many behaviors and tactics shared by both ends of the spectrum.

However -- and I admit that I lean Left and can't claim objectivity -- some of the right wing sources used to make or prove points are clearly biased and barely trying to hide it. Breitbart? Alex Jones? They may have value to their readers, but using them as source material is just silly.

Personally, I no longer believe out-of-hand any single source at this point, and I sure as hell check more than one source if I'm going to make a claim or prove a point.

Look, there's bullshit coming from "news" sources, there's bullshit coming from partisans, and it's tough as hell to take anything or anyone seriously. I'm not sure how the hell a republic is supposed to function like this.

Believe me, just because a news site seems to lean in the same political direction as me, does not mean I cannot see it when their reporting is biased. I don't want the echo chamber, I want the facts and the truth. I want the relevant paragraphs before and after the nut of the discussion, because in those paragraphs will usually be where the proper context resides.

Case in point, the infamous, and chaotic press gaggle in the summer of 2017, concerning the "very fine people" in Charlottesville, Va. It was like pulling teeth to find the transcript of that presser.

This is why it's so maddening at times when I cannot find a news site that just reports what was said, without leaving out the part which adds context and meaning. Instead it's like they all cite the same few snippets of quotes that everyone else is using, because they are trying to color the news, and push their own narrative of what happened.

I couldn't agree more. I was in the business for 18 years in a former life, and the very foundation of the press has changed.

If you had asked me what my job was, I'd have said something like, "to accurate and completely report what happened." Go ahead and ask one of them now what their job is. There's at least a 50% chance they'll say "to find and report the truth".

Well, what the hell is "the truth"? It's whatever matches their personal beliefs, and they feel zero obligation to report that which does not. Then, they'll reach a conclusion FOR you, instead of serving up only facts and letting YOU decide.

Add to that the fact that there are now zillion "news" sites and channels all competing for a slice of the pie, and you simply can't assume you're getting the whole story from ANY of them.
.

 

[Wapasha]

I don't disagree, and this really is a mess. The fact is, a partisan is going to look for any excuse to dismiss news, information and opinion that they don't like. That's one of the many behaviors and tactics shared by both ends of the spectrum.

However -- and I admit that I lean Left and can't claim objectivity -- some of the right wing sources used to make or prove points are clearly biased and barely trying to hide it. Breitbart? Alex Jones? They may have value to their readers, but using them as source material is just silly.

Personally, I no longer believe out-of-hand any single source at this point, and I sure as hell check more than one source if I'm going to make a claim or prove a point.

Look, there's bullshit coming from "news" sources, there's bullshit coming from partisans, and it's tough as hell to take anything or anyone seriously. I'm not sure how the hell a republic is supposed to function like this.

Believe me, just because a news site seems to lean in the same political direction as me, does not mean I cannot see it when their reporting is biased. I don't want the echo chamber, I want the facts and the truth. I want the relevant paragraphs before and after the nut of the discussion, because in those paragraphs will usually be where the proper context resides.

Case in point, the infamous, and chaotic press gaggle in the summer of 2017, concerning the "very fine people" in Charlottesville, Va. It was like pulling teeth to find the transcript of that presser.

This is why it's so maddening at times when I cannot find a news site that just reports what was said, without leaving out the part which adds context and meaning. Instead it's like they all cite the same few snippets of quotes that everyone else is using, because they are trying to color the news, and push their own narrative of what happened.

I couldn't agree more. I was in the business for 18 years in a former life, and the very foundation of the press has changed.

If you had asked me what my job was, I'd have said something like, "to accurate and completely report what happened." Go ahead and ask one of them now what their job is. There's at least a 50% chance they'll say "to find and report the truth".

Well, what the hell is "the truth"? It's whatever matches their personal beliefs, and they feel zero obligation to report that which does not.

Add to that the fact that there are now zillion "news" sites and channels all competing for a slice of the pie, and you simply can't assume you're getting the whole story from ANY of them.

To your last point:

"Add to that the fact that there are now zillion "news" sites and channels all competing for a slice of the pie, and you simply can't assume you're getting the whole story from ANY of them."

You'd think with so many sites out there claiming to bring us the "news," that they would want to break out of the echo chamber and just present the news. Instead, it's like most all of these sites just want to belong to a clique, so they just bang the same drum as everyone else.

I can very easily make my points and win arguments just by presenting facts and the truth.

If people have to leave out facts and context, and present slanted and biased narratives, because the truth would be contrary to their agenda, then they are living a lie.

If your argument cannot stand up to the truth and the light of day, then don't engage in it. and yet for many people in news and politics, thier personal integrity and honor are meaningless to them.

 

[BULLDOG]

Right. You said the Democratic party is definitely coming for your guns, but then you said that you don't know if the Democratic party is coming for your guns. You sound very confused.

Are you just trying to argue for argument's sake?

I said I wondered how many of these dems running for office actually believe in taking away our guns, and how many of them are just spewing that kind of rhetoric, just because they feel it's expected of them, if they want to appease their voters.

In other words, how many politicians are saying stuff they don't really believe in, just to get elected. Is that clearing it up for you? I feel like i just beat a dead horse for you.

And I was just saying you need to make up your mind. Either the Democratic party is out to take all your guns or they are not. You see to be ambivalent on that subject. .