Media Perpetuating Lies For Obama

Discussion in 'Politics' started by pspr, Aug 31, 2012.

  1. pspr


    Journalism: If media "fact checkers" are just impartial guardians of the truth, how come they got their own facts wrong about Paul Ryan's speech, and did so in a way that helped President Obama's re-election effort?

    Case in point was the rush of "fact check" stories claiming Ryan misled when he talked about a shuttered auto plant in his home state.

    Washington Post fact-checker Glenn Kessler posted a piece — "Ryan misleads on GM plant closing in hometown" — saying Ryan "appeared to suggest" that Obama was responsible for the closure of a GM plant in Janesville, Wis.

    "That's not true," Kessler said. "The plant was closed in December 2008, before Obama was sworn in."

    What's not true are Kessler's "facts." Ryan didn't suggest Obama was responsible for shuttering the plant. Instead, he correctly noted that Obama promised during the campaign that the troubled plant "will be here for another hundred years" if his policies were enacted.

    Also, the plant didn't close in December 2008. It was still producing cars until April 2009.

    An AP "fact check" also claimed that "the plant halted production in December 2008" even though the AP itself reported in April 2009 that the plant was only then "closing for good."

    CNN's John King made the same claim about that plant closure. But when CNN looked more carefully at the evidence, it — to its credit — concluded that what Ryan said was "true."

    Media fact-checkers also complained about Ryan's charge that Obama is cutting $716 billion from Medicare to fund ObamaCare. Not true, they said. Medicare's growth is just being slowed.

    But Obama achieves that slower growth by making real cuts in provider payments. And in any case, the media always and everywhere call a reduction in the rate of federal spending growth a "cut." So why suddenly charge Ryan with being misleading for using that same term?

    In any case, Obama himself admitted that he's doing what Ryan says. In a November 2009 interview with ABC News, reporter Jake Tapper said to Obama that "one-third of the funding comes from cuts to Medicare," to which Obama's response was: "Right."

    The rest of Ryan's alleged factual errors aren't errors at all; it's just that the media didn't like how he said it. But since when is it a fact-checker's job to decide how a politician should construct his arguments?

    This isn't to say that journalists shouldn't check facts. Of course they should.

    The problem is that the mainstream press is now abusing the "fact check" label, using it to more aggressively push a liberal agenda without feeling the need to provide any balance whatsoever. And, as the reaction to the Ryan speech shows, they are now blatantly using it to provide air support for Obama.

    Is it any wonder that soon after Ryan's speech ended, the Obama campaign rushed out an ad using the media's "fact check" stories as its source?
  2. pwned!

    suck it trebeck!

  3. Tsing Tao

    Tsing Tao

  4. Obama could not have saved Janesville GM plant. It closed before he took office.:

    February 2008: At a campaign stop in Janesville, Obama says, ”I believe that if our government is there to support you, and give you the assistance you need to re-tool and make this transition, that this plant will be here for another hundred years.” As Politifact writes, “That’s a statement of belief that, with government help, the Janesville plant could remain open — but not a promise to keep it open.”


    The republican mind has many known problems, reading comprehension is one of them.

    And the source, IBD, had declared that Stephen Hawkings would not have survived if he lived in the UK with its govt healthcare system. To which Hawkings held a press conference stating that if it were not for UK healthcare, he would not be alive today!
  5. People misunderstood what Obama "said". Obama wasn't passing around written handout sheets for people to read along with his speech. The written word is easily understood than what his oral meaning could imply.

    Or Obama speaks in such a way to cover his ass when he turns out to be full of shit.
  6. pspr


    Also known as Liberal Doublespeak.
  7. GOP has cute cartoons, I get some every day from my conservative friends. GOP has name calling about Obama. GOP has people screaming from the mountaintops. But, unfortunately, the GOP has Romney and Ryan as well. Too bad for the GOP.

    Romney is a good family man, father and husband. A good businessman. A good guy overall. But, has nothing to help the Country.

    His handlers, Rove and Cheney and crew can't even keep Todd Akin in line, but Romney is just too easy to program. I guess the Rombot 2012 has simple C++ programing language. Yes, I guess I did a name call with Rombot, sorry about that.

    To everyone on both sides. I really, almost, hope that Romney wins so that we can actually see if going back to all the same old crap, deregulation and all, social medieval nonsense, especially for women, works out for him. As a trader, might like to go back to free for alls, no transparency, easy money, but as a person, not so much.
  8. pspr


    The ramblings of a mad selective historian.
  9. I guess I could say something like = as opposed to? But, sadly that's self evident. No debate, discussion, just hatred and one liners. OK, that's your schtick, no big deal.
  10. pspr


    There is no truth in your statements to debate. You are just copying the party line from the democrap lies. And, of course, you probably believe those lies.

    If you don't know what caused the financial meltdown you need to seriously do some reading from honest sources.

    Maybe you should go back and read my opening post a little slower this time so you can understand what is said.
    #10     Aug 31, 2012