.

Who Is Going to "Fact Check" The Supposed Fact Checkers?

After Paul Ryan's speech many supposed Fact Checkers came printed articles critical of Paul Ryan. Several were so dishonest that is raises the question who is Fact Checking them.

We need a Fact Checker for the Liberal Fact checkers. After the Paul Ryan speech someone set out to accuse Paul Ryan of lying with their dishonest supposed fact checking. I will take a look at four statements that were rated false.

The worst example so called fact checking was a fact check was claiming President Obama was not responsible for the credit downgrade. This is not surprising as the left and Obama refuse to be responsible for anything. The fact checkers argued that the downgrade happened because of Republicans in congress threatening to shutdown the government if Obama would not cut spending. This would be like believing your credit rating is hurt because your wife would not let you get another credit card and just max out the one you have. The truth is Obama wanted a clean debt ceiling increase which would be worse for our credit rating than the deal that was struck resulting in a downgrade. S&P said the downgrade "reflects our opinion that the fiscal consolidation plan that Congress and the administration recently agreed to falls short of what, in our view, would be necessary to stabilize the government's medium-term debt dynamics." (1) In short the deal did not cut enough in the medium term. Before this deal was struck Obama rejected an offer from the GOP basically caving to his desire for more revenues and instead moved the goalposts to ensure a larger conflict. He thought he would win politically if the government was shut down. While Obama wanted to do nothing, the GOP passed Cut Cap & Balance which would have avoided the downgrade. Clearly the downgrade is all on Obama and it demonstrates his inability to lead. We can rate this fact check as Pants on Fire wrong.

Then we have the statement about the Janesville GM plant. The statement was 100% correct. He quoted Obama. Paul Ryan did not say Obama was responsible for the closing of that plant. His point was it is an example false hope offered by Obama as he campaigned in 2008. Fact checkers focused on the fact that the plant closed in December 23, 2008 before Obama took office, which is irrelevant to the point. This false hope continued for years as there were rumors of a possible re-opening of the plant. This fact check is also completely false. (2)

Paul Ryan made a comment critical of the failed Stimulus. The supposed Fact checkers complained Paul Ryan helped some Wisconsin companies get stimulus money. This is again irrelevant information. Once the bill becomes law, Paul Ryan should try to help his constituents get what benefits they can from the law even if he disagreed with the law. I may disagree with a tax deduction, but I am still going to take it if I can. Again Paul Ryan was correct and the fact checkers had this wrong.

Paul Ryan was critical of Obama for rejecting the Simpson-Bowles commission recommendations. The fact checkers argued this was unfair because Paul Ryan voted against the plan. This ignores that Paul Ryan offered another plan that corrected the major failure of that plan, which was not dealing with healthcare the major driver of our debt. (2) Obama meanwhile has created budgets that ignore our major issues. Then after pressure from some in his own party he came out with a framework that falls way short of being a serious solution.(3) Fine, if you don’t like your own commission’s plan, but President Obama should have proposed a serious alternative, especially after Paul Ryan came out with his plan.

I guess my point is that we cannot trust any of these fact checking sites as they are not honest. We need to explore these issues on our own. Politicians often say things that are stretching the truth or outright lies. These items however are not examples of either.  Each statement above was correct for the point Ryan was making.

 

1)     http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424053111903366504576490841235575386.html

2)      http://video.foxnews.com/v/1815240580001/paul-ryan-speaks-out-after-rnc-speech

3)  http://news.yahoo.com/blogs/ticket/erskine-bowles-praises-paul-ryan-budget-plan-video-003642883.html

This post is contributed by a community member. The views expressed in this blog are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of Patch Media Corporation. Everyone is welcome to submit a post to Patch. If you'd like to post a blog, go here to get started.

Rees Roberts September 02, 2012 at 05:24 PM
Randy: Good for you. Notice Hoffa, whoever he is, didn't comment on my observations how much he takes during the day sputtering. This is my last comment in this thread too. Way too nice outside not to enjoy it. Cheers
James R Hoffa September 02, 2012 at 05:33 PM
@Randy1949 - I'd agree with you about the importance of the June closure announcement had it not been 1) for the October statement by Obama, as you've provided no logical analysis negating the veracity of that statement; 2) the influence that Obama actually did exert over the companies during the bailout, as supported by all the facts, despite Obama's denial of such; and 3) for the fact that GM could in fact change its mind about plant closures, as was demonstrated on multiple occasions throughout the bailout process. Even John Wilson's fact check supports the conclusion that Obama LIED about not having any influence over GM and Chrysler during the bailout. And Hoffa raised a valid analysis about the need for the cars czar if no influence existed. If you can't support your contentions with a logical analysis, then one must wonder if you really believe in such a contention yourself!
James R Hoffa September 02, 2012 at 05:52 PM
http://www.ijreview.com/2012/09/14667-unaired-unedited-paul-ryan-responds-to-democrats-charge-he-lied-during-rnc-speech/
The Anti-Alinsky September 04, 2012 at 01:24 PM
Hoffa, that's Bernie's typical MO. Babble incoherent "facts", cite something from politi-fact or moveon.org , then draw some bizarre conclusion at the end.
The Anti-Alinsky September 04, 2012 at 01:54 PM
The problem is Bernie, what do you consider "hoarding"? Give anyone, including "the rich" a dollar and what can they do with it? 1) spend it (stimulates economy), invest it (stimulates economy), or hid it under a pillow. How many of "the rich" are hiding money under a pillow? NONE! Conservative are smart enough to know that the best way to make money, is to invest money. Investment creates wealth and puts money in the hands of people that have gone out and earned it, from the investor, to the small business owner selling a goods or services to the investor, to the laborer providing the work. There is no "hoarding" going on. Investors are being very cautious and making sure their investments are secure in these volatile times. What we need to do is get people back to work, and not at a cost of 109,777.78 per job!

Boards

More »
Got a question? Something on your mind? Talk to your community, directly.
Note Article
Just a short thought to get the word out quickly about anything in your neighborhood.
Share something with your neighbors.What's on your mind?What's on your mind?Make an announcement, speak your mind, or sell somethingPost something
See more »