Quote of The Day

[Joecooool]

"We're not going to let our campaign be dictated by fact checkers," - Romney pollster Neil Newhouse.

Romney Pollster: Campaign Won’t Be Dictated By Fact Checkers « CBS Miami

[Chris Fowler]

Better with the whole quote...but that doesn't serve your purpose:

“Fact checkers come to this with their own sets of thoughts and beliefs, and we’re not going to let our campaign be dictated by fact checkers,”

Yes..."fact checkers" have been shown many times to have a liberal bias.

Romney/Ryan won't let their "campaign be dictated by fact checkers."

Obama/Biden won't let their campaign be dictated by facts...

[Joecooool]

Originally Posted by Chris Fowler

Better with the whole quote...but that doesn't serve your purpose:

“Fact checkers come to this with their own sets of thoughts and beliefs, and we’re not going to let our campaign be dictated by fact checkers,”

Yes..."fact checkers" have been shown many times to have a liberal bias.

Romney/Ryan won't let their "campaign be dictated by fact checkers."

Obama/Biden won't let their campaign be dictated by facts...

What "fact checkers have been shown to have a liberal bias? Facts are facts.

[Doug28450]

It depends on what the definition of is, is.

[Loco Vette]

Originally Posted by Joecooool

What "fact checkers have been shown to have a liberal bias? Facts are facts.

And statistics are statistics, but we all know how that is subject to manipulation.

Really? After the uproar you put up over "You didn't build that" being taken "out of context" you have no defense when your side does it.

[Fasglas]

Originally Posted by Loco Vette

And statistics are statistics, but we all know how that is subject to manipulation.

Really? After the uproar you put up over "You didn't build that" being taken "out of context" you have no defense when your side does it.

Out of context? Sorry, the whole WORLD heard that one, clearly.

Leftinistas have no qualms about whining when they're called for being "less than truthful," which seems lately to be just about everything they say.

[Craig]

Originally Posted by Loco Vette

And statistics are statistics, but we all know how that is subject to manipulation.

Really? After the uproar you put up over "You didn't build that" being taken "out of context" you have no defense when your side does it.

It is actually much worse when that whole rant is quoted.

[vetteman9368]

More bs from the resident manure spreader

[Joecooool]

Originally Posted by Craig

It is actually much worse when that whole rant is quoted.

No it isn't and I'm still waiting for examples of fact checkers being liberal.

[Loco Vette]

Originally Posted by Joecooool

No it isn't and I'm still waiting for examples of fact checkers being liberal.

Dammit, I gotta do all the work around here.

Putting the following into Google:

political orientation of "Fact Checkers"

Generates a flood (as you would expect) of results.

The first one generated a subdialog of related links that I am not gonna filter my way through.

The second one opened a site with a slow server. I am not gonna sit here for the remainder of the 3 hours and 15 minutes I have before the alarm goes off waiting for it to load.

The third one is this gem: Another factchecking fiasco : CJR

Which is absolutely priceless because it starts off bashing right wing fact spinners or lack thereof and then goes onto discuss Harry Reid's statement about Romney not paying taxes for a decade, (with analagous fact checking rigor) which on a level of intelligence (if not political consequence) is on par with Akin's rape statement.

Gee that was hard.

However, as addressing the response to the OP, clearly self titled "fact checkers" can sway their results to their own agenda.

[Joecooool]

Originally Posted by Loco Vette

Dammit, I gotta do all the work around here.

Putting the following into Google:

political orientation of "Fact Checkers"

Generates a flood (as you would expect) of results.

The first one generated a subdialog of related links that I am not gonna filter my way through.

The second one opened a site with a slow server. I am not gonna sit here for the remainder of the 3 hours and 15 minutes I have before the alarm goes off waiting for it to load.

The third one is this gem: Another factchecking fiasco : CJR

Which is absolutely priceless because it starts off bashing right wing fact spinners or lack thereof and then goes onto discuss Harry Reid's statement about Romney not paying taxes for a decade, (with analagous fact checking rigor) which on a level of intelligence (if not political consequence) is on par with Akin's rape statement.

Gee that was hard.

However, as addressing the response to the OP, clearly self titled "fact checkers" can sway their results to their own agenda.

That article talks about two reporters from the Huffington Post. I would hardly consider Huffington Post reporters "fact checkers". I believe everyone knows the slant of the Huffington post.

Regardless, your post states that what the reporters said was true.

"Fact Checkers" are not reporters.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fact_checker

[DJ_Critterus]

Originally Posted by Joecooool

No it isn't and I'm still waiting for examples of fact checkers being liberal.

Snopes, anyone?????

[Joecooool]

Originally Posted by DJ_Critterus

Snopes, anyone?????

No.

[Loco Vette]

Originally Posted by Joecooool

That article talks about two reporters from the Huffington Post. I would hardly consider Huffington Post reporters "fact checkers". I believe everyone knows the slant of the Huffington post.

Regardless, your post states that what the reporters said was true.

"Fact Checkers" are not reporters.

Fact checker - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

You maligning the Huffington Post is the funniest thing I have read on this forum since you endorsed the idea that Obama has presided over the slowest deficit growth of any modern President.

That being said, if you want to play games with semantics, provide me some reference to any sort of credentials someone has to possess to be called a "fact checker" and I will be happy to use those criteria in my next search.

Or are you the exalted one who decides whether or not someone is truly a fact checker based on whether they agree with you?

[Sea Six]

Originally Posted by Joecooool

No.

You're actually suggesting that Snopes.com DOESN'T have a liberal bias???

[mrvette]

Snopes is owned and run by out and out communists.....

[G8rDMD]

Originally Posted by Doug28450

It depends on what the definition of is, is.

[Clinton] "I did not have is-ual relations with that woman." [/Clinton]

[Craig]

Originally Posted by Joecooool

No it isn't and I'm still waiting for examples of fact checkers being liberal.

I suppose it isn't if you don't consider being smart and working hard as a contribution to your success. Everything is luck with liberals I guess. And if it's all luck, you shouldn't be allowed to benefit from success. Tell me, since nothing you did contributed to your success, when will you be spreading your wealth around?

[Sea Six]

Originally Posted by Craig

I suppose it isn't if you don't consider being smart and working hard as a contribution to your success. Everything is luck with liberals I guess. And if it's all luck, you shouldn't be allowed to benefit from success. Tell me, since nothing you did contributed to your success, when will you be spreading your wealth around?

Like all liberals, he doesn't want to spread his own wealth around. He wants to spread your wealth around.

[DJ_Critterus]

Originally Posted by G8rDMD

[Clinton] "I did not have is-ual relations with that woman." [/Clinton]

Clinton did have it right when he said a BJ wasn't real sex. Hell, if they were the same they wouldn't have different prices.