Politifact embarasses themselves again.

Discussion in 'Politics' started by Max E., Sep 12, 2012.

  1. Max E.

    Max E.

    The depths of depravity, that politifact is willing to go to this time to deny that the white house apologised for the most recent slayings in the middle east, are so egregious that they actually made a Seinfeld episode once mocking it.

    Apparently its not an apology unless you actually say "I apologize" Pretty funny that politifacts excuse to cover for Obama is so bad, that it was actually a big joke in a sitcom almost 2 decades earlier.

    <iframe width="420" height="315" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/0_QfilVbAd4" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>


    Just when you think Politifact can’t make any more of a mockery of itself than it already has – over and over and over and over again – they wade into the breach today on foreign policy. More specifically, they took issue with Mitt Romney’s statement today that “I think it’s a terrible course for America to stand in apology for our values.”

    Romney was speaking, of course, about Tweets from the Cairo embassy prior to the storming of the embassy that condemned “the continuing efforts by misguided individuals to hurt the religious feelings of Muslims.” After the attacks began, the embassy Tweeted again – this time to double down on that contention. That sounds an awful lot like an apology.

    So, what did Politifact have to say? They interviewed three “apology experts.” Seriously. First, they interviewed Professor John Murphy, of the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, who said it wasn’t an apology because “the statement does not use the word ‘apology’ or ‘apologize’ and does not use any synonym for that word.” Second, they interviewed Lauren Bloom, “an attorney and business consultant who wrote The Art of the Apology.” What did she say? Romney’s “once again allowing his emotional allergy to apology to interfere with his judgment.” Finally, they interviewed Professor Rhoda E. Howard-Hassman, who said the statement was “not an apology.”

    Well, then! If the experts say so, it must not be an apology! Sure, Murphy is a fan of the Occupy movement. Sure, Bloom authors pieces like “10 Reasons Why Obama Will Be Re-Elected.” Sure, Howard-Hassman is a radical liberal who rips on “reactionary conservatism.” But these are non-partisan “apology experts,” dammit!
    Politifact’s a joke. What’s more, they’re a joke that ought to get a check from the Obama campaign.

  2. How do you know they're not getting a check, maybe form Soros?

    we're seeing a continuing pattrn woith these supposed fact checkers. Anythng Romney or Ryan says is subjected to parsing, with no allowance for context or rhetorical emphasis. They even objected to the way Ryan phrased something that was factually correct.

    Bottom line. like the media in general, they are frauds who have forfeited their credibility. That's ironic, since the whole reason for politifact and the other fact checkers was to do the job the media clearly wasn't doing, at least where liberal pols were concerned. So they staff these outfits with liberal ex-journalists and somehow expect a different result.
  3. The difference between Obama & his leftist minions and a real leader.

  4. Lucrum



    Oh I like this one.
  5. Which would make the source of this thread - an article published by breitbart.com - fraudalent and not worthy of mention here.

    So much for the sagacious AAAinthebeltofbourbonway