Posts Tagged ‘debate’

I mentioned last week that many of the “fact”-checking sites are proving more and more to be exceptionally biased in which facts they report (or don’t report). Senior Research Fellow at the University of Maryland John Lott has written an excellent article on this all-out effort by the MSM (main stream media) and supposedly objective “fact” check sites to skew their selection and interpretation of election year data to favor the Democratic ticket.

In addition to that is the stunning and willful refusal of the MSM to report the impact and message of McCain’s huge speech on the economy yesterday in New Mexico. Constantly criticized (even by me) for not outlining more vigorously his ticket’s economic plans, McCain is ignored and slighted when he does do so. This article shows that even what was reported intentionally omitted the most significant part of his speech which focused on the economy.

Going back to Lott, he said in his article:

Where is the outrage over Biden not understanding what vice presidents do? For Biden, his inability to correctly say what vice presidents do was surely his “gotcha” moment.

Yet, this mistake during the debate was hardly unique. Biden got a lot of things wrong in the debate that are going unnoticed by the fact-check media. Take just a few:

Lott goes on the name several instances. This coincides with another piece (“Biden mangles the Constitution”) written last week about Biden’s inept interpretation (and apparent ignorance) of the Constitution’s description of the role of the vice president. While chiding Palin about Cheney being the “worst VP in history,” aspiring VP Biden obviously doesn’t even know what his own job description will be. 

To be fair, he admitted during the debate that should he ever assume the highest office in the land, it would be “a national tragedy of historic proportions…” (Yes, I know that’s out of context, but it’s still funny).

If you haven’t called your legislators yet to voice opposition to the bailout, do it NOW! Don’t give up just because you’re tired and think they won’t listen.

…

---

The Baseball Crank began a 3-part series yesterday called “The Integrity Gap” and as a first installment has a long piece on Sarah Palin. Part 2 will be about Obama, and Part 3 will be about the senior members on the ticket, Biden and McCain. Interesting way to structure things.

 

However, if you have time time, you simply must sit down and read Part 1. It’s a well-researched piece about Palin and her career. If integrity is a significant issue – and I believe it’s one of the only one that matters, you may find your vote changing.

Without integrity, how can anyone be assured that all the rhetoric, promises and roadmaps will lead to anywhere? Without integrity and moral tenacity, how can the American public know that a President and Vice President won’t spin and dodge their way into a White House that flips so much it ought to be known as a Huddle House?

For what it’s worth, I thought Palin did exceedingly well last night. I wish she’d jumped on Biden’s 14 misrepresentations/lies. However, Palin misstated herself several times as well, though not as patently misleading as Biden did. If you go to FactCheck.org, you’ll see them basically saying that both candidates were equally deceptive. However, even FactCheck.org has been questioned in recent weeks and unfortunately may be guilty of bias itself. Arrgh. Who’s going to Fact-Check the Fact-Checkers? It all comes down to interpretation and the worldview you bring to the table.

When these “fact-checking” sites aren’t botching the facts, they can sometimes be found dressing up opinion as fact. (Source)

Biden came across as being more factual because he threw out numbers, stats, years, etc. However, most of those have been “Fact-Checked” today and come up as misleading. Palin stuck to her guns and presented a positive, hopeful face for change with broad, government-reducing idealogy. 

However, I think the McCain ticket needs to re-articulate itself as to what its plans are for reducing government, waste, corruption, etc. I know it is published and promoted, but apparently not to the extent that it is getting to the American people. Surveys still show that folks have no idea what the McCain strategy is. That’s probably because the MSM is a multi-billion $ ad campaign for Obama. McCain has had to resort to YouTube and the blogosphere to communicate his message effectively.

As for the integrity issue, even Clinton supporter and former Special Counsel to the White House for President Clinton Lanny Davis said this in August 2008:

 “You know, I would consider voting for McCain on character and on the kind of human being he is because I have great – I know him – I have great admiration for him. I would sleep well at night if John McCain is President. But on the issues, Barack Obama is for the issues that I care about.” (ABC Radio’s “The Sean Hannity Show,” 8/25/08)

Does it have to come down to character vs. issues? I don’t think so. After hearing Biden extoll some of the issues of his ticket last night in the debate – global warming (which he said is 100% caused by mans’ activity – can we say naive?), same-sex couple rights, punishing successful people (he calls them “the rich”) with higher taxes (since when is it wrong to be successful?! And don’t the rich create MORE jobs, businesses, and pour more money into our economy?), I just don’t know that there are any issues that they support that could possibly lure me to their ticket.

And by the way, if you’re receiving all your political information from the TV or newspaper… don’t. You’ll be sure to get Obamified. At least get on some political blogs – both conservative and liberal – and read well. Tell me what you notice in tone, spirit, and insight and information in those sites.

Here are three I read almost daily. The first two are conservative, and the third is more liberal:

• The Townhall – I usually read Hugh Hewitt’s material
• Powerline – Latest entry: Biden Mangles the Constitution in Debate
• Daily Kos

What blogs or sites do you read for news and informed insight?