Originally Posted By SingleParkPassholder <a href="http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080904/ap_on_el_pr/cvn_fact_check" target="_blank">http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/200...ct_check</a>
Originally Posted By dshyates With Kerry's swiftboating the GOP learned that luieing works. So to see Bush's speech writer take liberties with the truth, isn't surprising. But the base, who they are pandering to, doesn't care about truth, they care about winning. And they believe that whipping the base into a renzy is a way to do it.
Originally Posted By Dabob2 Yeah, I noticed a few of those whoppers too, but that article details them nicely.
Originally Posted By utahjosh <Don't confuse the faithful with the facts, SPP.> What a mean and condescending comment.
Originally Posted By ecdc >>What a mean and condescending comment.<< No, it was a comment on conservatives' penchant for making the facts whatever they like, this election. Go check out Jon Stewart's video from last night to show just how hypocritical they are. We've heard about what a great job Palin did. But her speech belied several facts. People are worked up into a frenzy over her, minus the facts. You can think it's mean and condescending all you like. It's actually just the truth.
Originally Posted By utahjosh <No, it was a comment on conservatives' penchant for making the facts whatever they like, this election. Go check out Jon Stewart's video from last night to show just how hypocritical they are.> You were much more general than that, pretty much saying anyone decided to vote republican is stupid and can't handle the facts. But I do understand where you are coming from, but you'll get a lot farther without snarky comments. I wish Palin would have left the snarky comments out of her speech, too. Let's actually talk issues without calling the other side idiots. By the way, I just read that article and the so-called rebuttles to here speech were not very strong if you ask me. For example, the article says that "In her two years as governor, Alaska has requested nearly $750 million in special federal spending, by far the largest per-capita request in the nation" I bet Alaska is "by far" the largest per-capita ANYTHING. That may be a FACT, but it's not really relevant unless I see it against other numbers. The article makes it sound much worse than it probably is.
Originally Posted By utahjosh And Huckabee's joke about getting more votes than Bides was just that. A Joke. Even the Chicago Trib caught that one: "Huckabee joked: "She got more votes running for mayor of Wasilla, Alaska, than Joe Biden got running for President of the United States."" <a href="http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/nationworld/chi-080904-palin-speech,0,3625429.story?track=rss" target="_blank">http://www.chicagotribune.com/...rack=rss</a>
Originally Posted By ecdc You're reading way too much into my comments, Josh. I'm sorry if you were offended by them, really. But the phrase "don't confuse me with the facts" or "don't confuse them with the facts" is a common one. All I intended to do was use a well-known phrase to comment on the GOP's love of "truthiness" - if it feels right, and if I believe it, it must be true. You'll note I didn't call anyone an idiot. But perhaps it was a bit snarky, and I didn't mean for it to be. So again, my apologies.
Originally Posted By Dabob2 Okay, Josh, and how about: The fact that she's trying to say she was always against the Bridge to Nowhere, when that's demonstrably not true; The fact that Obama does have legislation and working with Republicans (like Richard Lugar) to his credit, when Palin lied and said he did not; The fact that Obama's tax plan offers MORE relief for the average American than McCain's, and she mischaracterized it and said he just wanted to raise various taxes, without context, which is intentionally misleading at best; The fact (not mentioned in that article) that Palin left her little town nearly 20 million dollars in debt, about $3,000 per resident. <a href="http://thinkprogress.org/wonkroom/2008/09/03/wasilla-in-debt/" target="_blank">http://thinkprogress.org/wonkr...in-debt/</a> (For a little reality check on how much of a "fiscal conservative" she REALLY is): "During her term in office, Palin cut property taxes and other small taxes on business. But as the Anchorage Daily News points out, “She wasn’t doing this by shrinking government.” During her tenure, the budget of Wasilla (population 5,469 in 2000) “apart from capital projects and debt, rose from $3.9 million in fiscal 1996 to $5.8 million.” Palin also successfully pushed through a sales tax increase in Wasilla, which went to fund a $15 million sports complex. However, a land dispute over the sight of the complex led to “years of legal wrangling” and cost Wasilla almost $1.7 million, “a lot more than the roughly $125,000 the city would have paid in 1998 if it had closed a deal to buy the property outright.” Wasilla is still facing budget shortfalls from the case today."
Originally Posted By utahjosh <The fact that she's trying to say she was always against the Bridge to Nowhere, when that's demonstrably not true;> She didn't say she was ALWAYS against it. You are inferring that, and then saying the words you put in her mouth were lies. The different tax plans and issues and results can be stretched and skewered and manipulated by both sides. I'm not even going to try to get to the bottom of that one.
Originally Posted By utahjosh But I do agree that there should be no place for lies in politics. (Sounds like a joke, unfortunately). If Palin and buddies lied, I'm disappointed. I even dislike stretching truths. It seems more like each side makes everything sound just how they want without really "lying." But if Palin and buddies did it, this article did it too.
Originally Posted By ecdc >>The different tax plans and issues and results can be stretched and skewered and manipulated by both sides. I'm not even going to try to get to the bottom of that one.<< Josh, it seems pretty straight forward to me. I find that the "well, the facts can be twisted any which way" response doesn't usually fly. It's typically the response when there's no other defense left of that which someone likes.
Originally Posted By Dabob2 <She didn't say she was ALWAYS against it. You are inferring that, and then saying the words you put in her mouth were lies.> No Josh, when she says in her rollout (and again last night) that "I said thanks but no thanks to that bridge to nowhere" that implies that she always opposed it. I'm not inferring anything she isn't implying, and implying very strongly. Consider: what does she WANT people to believe when she says that? That she once supported it, even praised it to locals and decried the fact that it was even being called the "bridge to nowhere" in 2006, and only LATER came to oppose it? Or that she always opposed it. Obviously the latter, as the former (though true) doesn't make her look too good. My parents always told me that a half-truth was just as bad as a lie, and if they caught me telling one the punishment would be the same. They were right.
Originally Posted By gadzuux She actively campaigned on her support for the 'bridge to nowhere'. Now she's knocking Obama for saying one thing to the voters of scranton and another thing to the voters of san francisco. So she has one set of talking points for alaska voters, and yet says exactly the opposite when speaking to the national electorate. Perhaps she thought no one would notice, but then she's new at this. GOP hypocrisy remains intact.
Originally Posted By Mr X ***For example, the article says that "In her two years as governor, Alaska has requested nearly $750 million in special federal spending, by far the largest per-capita request in the nation" I bet Alaska is "by far" the largest per-capita ANYTHING. That may be a FACT, but it's not really relevant unless I see it against other numbers. The article makes it sound much worse than it probably is.*** How so? And, if you don't have any facts to counter this claim, how can you assume the article "makes it sound worse"? Just the fact that you have to use the word "probably" tells me that you are simply guessing.
Originally Posted By Mr X ***But if Palin and buddies did it, this article did it too.*** No, it didn't. Why are you assuming so?
