Politifact: Lie of the Year - Republicans voted to end Medicare. Left is outraged, but FactCheck & Washington Post agree.

  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Dec 24, 2011 8:09 PM GMT
    http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/article/2011/dec/20/lie-year-democrats-claims-republicans-voted-end-me/
    Republicans muscled a budget through the House of Representatives in April that they said would take an important step toward reducing the federal deficit. Introduced by U.S. Rep. Paul Ryan of Wisconsin, the plan kept Medicare intact for people 55 or older, but dramatically changed the program for everyone else by privatizing it and providing government subsidies.
    ...
    PolitiFact debunked the Medicare charge in nine separate fact-checks rated False or Pants on Fire, most often in attacks leveled against Republican House members.

    Now, PolitiFact has chosen the Democrats’ claim as the 2011 Lie of the Year.

    OH THE OUTRAGE!!!
    http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/article/2011/dec/23/lie-year-2011-mailbag/
    http://krugman.blogs.nytimes.com/2011/12/20/politifact-r-i-p/

    Politifact Response to the Outrage
    http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/article/2011/dec/22/fact-checking-echo-chamber-nation/
    We've read the critiques and see nothing that changes our findings. We stand by our story and our conclusion that the claim was the most significant falsehood of 2011. We made no judgments on the merits of the Ryan plan; we just said that the characterization by the Democrats was false.

    Our competitors FactCheck.org and the Washington Post's FactChecker had also said the Medicare claim was false — and this week both picked it for their biggest-falsehoods-of-the-year lists.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jan 04, 2012 5:19 PM GMT
    Saw a reference to this - can't say I am surprised some of the original participants pushing the voting here didn't post what ended up as being the Lie of the Year for Politifact.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jan 04, 2012 5:21 PM GMT
    It took you three weeks to find this?

    It's sad because I had long looked to Politifact as an arbiter of truth and in the pursuit of "balance", they made a mockery of themselves.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jan 04, 2012 5:27 PM GMT
    Christian73 saidIt took you three weeks to find this?

    It's sad because I had long looked to Politifact as an arbiter of truth and in the pursuit of "balance", they made a mockery of themselves.


    This is pretty much your modus operandi. If you can't attack the facts, you attack the messenger. It's sad really - but more indicative of your increasing desperation.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jan 04, 2012 5:36 PM GMT
    riddler78 said
    Christian73 saidIt took you three weeks to find this?

    It's sad because I had long looked to Politifact as an arbiter of truth and in the pursuit of "balance", they made a mockery of themselves.


    This is pretty much your modus operandi. If you can't attack the facts, you attack the messenger. It's sad really - but more indicative of your increasing desperation.


    I could attack the "facts" but enough ink has been spilled over this issue, which John already linked to, so why bother?
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jan 04, 2012 5:39 PM GMT
    Christian73 said
    riddler78 said
    Christian73 saidIt took you three weeks to find this?

    It's sad because I had long looked to Politifact as an arbiter of truth and in the pursuit of "balance", they made a mockery of themselves.


    This is pretty much your modus operandi. If you can't attack the facts, you attack the messenger. It's sad really - but more indicative of your increasing desperation.


    I could attack the "facts" but enough ink has been spilled over this issue, which John already linked to, so why bother?

    The fact is all three organizations: Politifact, Washington Post, and FactCheck all agree. So you could attack that, but you would be as credible as the mouth of Debbie Wasserman Schultz.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jan 04, 2012 6:29 PM GMT
    socalfitness said
    Christian73 said
    riddler78 said
    Christian73 saidIt took you three weeks to find this?

    It's sad because I had long looked to Politifact as an arbiter of truth and in the pursuit of "balance", they made a mockery of themselves.


    This is pretty much your modus operandi. If you can't attack the facts, you attack the messenger. It's sad really - but more indicative of your increasing desperation.


    I could attack the "facts" but enough ink has been spilled over this issue, which John already linked to, so why bother?

    The fact is all three organizations: Politifact, Washington Post, and FactCheck all agree. So you could attack that, but you would be as credible as the mouth of Debbie Wasserman Schultz.


    All three are obsessed with the idea of "balance" and based their entire idea that Paul Ryan wasn't advocating eliminating Medicare on the fact that it would still be called "Medicare", despite it no longer bearing any resemblance to the program as it exists today.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jan 04, 2012 6:37 PM GMT
    Christian73 said
    socalfitness said
    Christian73 said
    riddler78 said
    Christian73 saidIt took you three weeks to find this?

    It's sad because I had long looked to Politifact as an arbiter of truth and in the pursuit of "balance", they made a mockery of themselves.


    This is pretty much your modus operandi. If you can't attack the facts, you attack the messenger. It's sad really - but more indicative of your increasing desperation.


    I could attack the "facts" but enough ink has been spilled over this issue, which John already linked to, so why bother?

    The fact is all three organizations: Politifact, Washington Post, and FactCheck all agree. So you could attack that, but you would be as credible as the mouth of Debbie Wasserman Schultz.


    All three are obsessed with the idea of "balance" and based their entire idea that Paul Ryan wasn't advocating eliminating Medicare on the fact that it would still be called "Medicare", despite it no longer bearing any resemblance to the program as it exists today.

    All three organizations were so "obsessed with the idea of 'balance'" they were confused by semantics and improperly considered the Democrat's statement a lie. It is fortunate you are so much more of a clear thinker than the talent at all three organizations.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jan 04, 2012 7:03 PM GMT
    socalfitness said
    Christian73 said
    socalfitness said
    Christian73 said
    riddler78 said
    Christian73 saidIt took you three weeks to find this?

    It's sad because I had long looked to Politifact as an arbiter of truth and in the pursuit of "balance", they made a mockery of themselves.


    This is pretty much your modus operandi. If you can't attack the facts, you attack the messenger. It's sad really - but more indicative of your increasing desperation.


    I could attack the "facts" but enough ink has been spilled over this issue, which John already linked to, so why bother?

    The fact is all three organizations: Politifact, Washington Post, and FactCheck all agree. So you could attack that, but you would be as credible as the mouth of Debbie Wasserman Schultz.


    All three are obsessed with the idea of "balance" and based their entire idea that Paul Ryan wasn't advocating eliminating Medicare on the fact that it would still be called "Medicare", despite it no longer bearing any resemblance to the program as it exists today.

    All three organizations were so "obsessed with the idea of 'balance'" they were confused by semantics and improperly considered the Democrat's statement a lie. It is fortunate you are so much more of a clear thinker than the talent at all three organizations.




    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


    As for Washington post they have a Neo Con agenda and any way to discredit an enemy of the status quo is good with them. As for the other two, I'm not sure, but while this time your supporting them, but when they come down on your people you'll be talking out of the other side of your mouth.

    By the way, your still knocking Debbie Wasserman Schultz which is rather anti semitic on your part and you haven't yet given proof of your accusations found on your derogatory Topic about our Jewish CongressWoman, Debbie Wasserman Shultz. What's your holdup ?
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jan 04, 2012 7:18 PM GMT
    realifedad said
    socalfitness said
    Christian73 said
    socalfitness said
    Christian73 said
    riddler78 said
    Christian73 saidIt took you three weeks to find this?

    It's sad because I had long looked to Politifact as an arbiter of truth and in the pursuit of "balance", they made a mockery of themselves.


    This is pretty much your modus operandi. If you can't attack the facts, you attack the messenger. It's sad really - but more indicative of your increasing desperation.


    I could attack the "facts" but enough ink has been spilled over this issue, which John already linked to, so why bother?

    The fact is all three organizations: Politifact, Washington Post, and FactCheck all agree. So you could attack that, but you would be as credible as the mouth of Debbie Wasserman Schultz.


    All three are obsessed with the idea of "balance" and based their entire idea that Paul Ryan wasn't advocating eliminating Medicare on the fact that it would still be called "Medicare", despite it no longer bearing any resemblance to the program as it exists today.

    All three organizations were so "obsessed with the idea of 'balance'" they were confused by semantics and improperly considered the Democrat's statement a lie. It is fortunate you are so much more of a clear thinker than the talent at all three organizations.




    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


    but while this time your supporting them, but when they come down on your people you'll be talking out of the other side of your mouth.



    With those supernatural powers why haven't you brought peace to the middle east?
    icon_wink.gif

    RLD, It would be a worthy goal in the new year to stop basing your points on your predictions of what others will do in future (fallacy of omniscience.)





  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jan 04, 2012 10:15 PM GMT
    reallifedad, you are so right! I looked at this thread to say the same thing as you. I believe very little that I read in the Post. It is right-wing, anti-labor, and firmly committed to its own prosperity.