Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Unmitigated Garbage from FactCheck.org on Obama’s Second Amendment Record
Patterico's Pontifications ^ | 9/23/2008 | Patterico

Posted on 09/23/2008 1:19:05 PM PDT by mojito

Xrlq points us to this ridiculous FactCheck.org piece on Obama and gun rights. I am by now completely disenchanted with FactCheck.org and virtually every other “fact checking” site out there, and this piece does nothing to dispel my depression.

The summary version: FactCheck ridicules the NRA in this piece. But the NRA is careful to say: look at Obama’s record and not his rhetoric. And at least two of the NRA claims are backed up by references to Obama’s record. Yet FactCheck.org goes on to minimize or completely ignore Obama’s record on these points, choosing instead to concentrate on citations to Obama’s later campaign rhetoric.

1) FactCheck.org declares “false” the NRA’s claim that Obama plans to ban the possession, manufacture, and sale of handguns. But it emerges that this claim is directly based on Obama’s “yes” answer to a the following question in a questionnaire: “Do you support legislation to ban the manufacture, sale and possession of handguns?”

FactCheck.org simply faults the NRA for not noting Obama’s later attempts to explain away this answer. But FactCheck.org doesn’t address the fact that Obama falsely denied even seeing the questionnaire, only to have it later emerge that an amended version had his handwriting on it.

2) FactCheck.org calls “supported” the NRA’s claim that Obama would appoint judges who share his views on the Second Amendment. As part of their evidence, FactCheck.org tells us that Obama didn’t contest the Heller decision, which upheld an individual right to bear arms. But FactCheck.org doesn’t mention that Obama’s campaign had initially said of the D.C.’s total ban on handguns in the home: “Obama believes the D.C. handgun law is constitutional.”

(Excerpt) Read more at patterico.com ...


TOPICS: Constitution/Conservatism; Extended News; Politics/Elections
KEYWORDS: 2008; 2008electionbias; 2ndamendment; annenberg; bang; banglist; clingingtoguns; factcheck; factcheckbias; factcheckdotorg; guncontrol; gunvote; issues; nra; obama; obamaayers; obamabiden; secondamendment
Read the whole thing.
1 posted on 09/23/2008 1:19:05 PM PDT by mojito
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: mojito

I think Patterico is suffering from the effects of an “Insta-lanche”. I can’t get to his site.


2 posted on 09/23/2008 1:27:01 PM PDT by gridlock (The Democrats have attacked Motherhood. Now, if they attack Baseball and Apple Pie, we got it made!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: mojito
FactCheck is an MSM site set up to debunk the truth for the Democrats. Its garbage. Pure garbage.

"Show me just what Mohammed brought that was new, and there you will find things only evil and inhuman, such as his command to spread by the sword the faith he preached." - Manuel II Palelologus

3 posted on 09/23/2008 1:32:03 PM PDT by goldstategop (In Memory Of A Dearly Beloved Friend Who Lives In My Heart Forever)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: mojito

Isn’t Fact Check owned by the Annenberg Foundation? We all know who worked for Anneberg — Obama!


4 posted on 09/23/2008 1:32:39 PM PDT by PhiKapMom ( BOOMER SOONER -- VOTE FOR McCAIN/PALIN2008! LetsGetThisRight.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: mojito
FactCheck is Annenberg, a liberal foundation. They've always been full of crap. They consistenly call outright lies by 0bama as "twists" or "distortions" or "misrepresentations" or ignore them completely, while calling McCains ads "false."

Give no credibility to stealth "fact" organizations like this.

5 posted on 09/23/2008 1:33:11 PM PDT by FredZarguna (Don't tase me, Pa!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: mojito

The full name of www.FactCheck.org is the Annenberg Political Fact Check, which is a part of the Annenberg Public Policy Center.

Obama first big break was when he was selected by Bill Ayers to head up the Chicago Annenberg Challenge, which is part of the Annenberg Public Policy Center.

Barack Obama is, figuratively speaking, the Annenberg Candidate. Is there any particular reason one should think FactCheck.org would be impartial when dealing with their own candidate?


6 posted on 09/23/2008 1:36:19 PM PDT by gridlock (The Democrats have attacked Motherhood. Now, if they attack Baseball and Apple Pie, we got it made!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: mojito

One man’s facts are another man’s blue sombrero.

I truly believe, with all my heart, that Obama will not take our guns away.

I’m pretty sure he will have soldiers, FBI and BATFE agents do the dirty work.


7 posted on 09/23/2008 1:37:03 PM PDT by Rinnwald (On our side? Six hundred million screaming Chinamen)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: FredZarguna

Remember that in 1995, Obama headed Annenberg. So we have a site run by a foundation formerly led by the very subject of inquiry!!!


8 posted on 09/23/2008 1:39:44 PM PDT by Lexinom
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: gridlock

He does seem to be having trouble at the moment, but I’m sure the link is good.


9 posted on 09/23/2008 1:40:19 PM PDT by mojito
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: mojito
FactCheck bashing in 3... 2... oops, too late.

No one here minds when FactCheck calls Obama out. No one ever says, "FactCheck debunked Obama's latest talking point? Don't believe them!!!!"

...but when they support Obama or call McCain out... it's all lies.

Don't believe me? Check out the warm reception FackCheck got for exposing Obama's falsehoods on Social Security:

Scaring Seniors (Fact Check debunking Obama Social Security Ad)

I must say, this is certainly the most entertaining election in my lifetime.
10 posted on 09/23/2008 1:41:41 PM PDT by Mr. Know It All (Quicumque vult salvus esse, ante omnia opus est, ut teneat catholicam fidem)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Lexinom
He headed an "educational project" called the Annenberg Challenge which was funded by Annenberg. Anneberg would never have allowed a nameless tyro just out of school to manage its affairs.
11 posted on 09/23/2008 1:43:52 PM PDT by FredZarguna (Don't tase me, Pa!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: Mr. Know It All
Sorry, but I've never wavered in saying Annenberg's FactCheck is crap.

Nice try, but ... FAIL.

12 posted on 09/23/2008 1:46:17 PM PDT by FredZarguna (Don't tase me, Pa!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: Mr. Know It All
FactCheck is lying about Obama and the Second Amendment. Obama is a gun grabber of the worst kind.

Evidently you're a gun grabber as well because I can't see any other reason that one would defend FactCheck here by citing something they got right.

13 posted on 09/23/2008 1:46:41 PM PDT by jwalsh07 (MSM Lied, Journalism Died. RIP 2008)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: mojito

I am by now completely disenchanted with FactCheck.org and virtually every other “fact checking” site out there

I think all the fact checkers are hard left, or leaning left, if you were going to speread disinformation what better way than to set up a dozen websites agreeing with you all touting their independence and truth, when you control them all, so all fact checks come back to your point of view.

Like how NPR keeps coming up with these little policy groups and giving them airtime- see, it’s not OUR information, it came from Another Little Policy Group With A Cryptic Acronymic Name Foundation (ALPGWACANF) from Maryland.


14 posted on 09/23/2008 1:56:20 PM PDT by Ender Wiggin
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Mr. Know It All
How does their getting it right on Obama's Social Security ad falsehoods have anything to do with their getting it completely wrong with regard to the 2nd Amendment issues?

There are some pretty specific instances here of their 'fudging' the truth; in the SS ad, there was no place to hide.

15 posted on 09/23/2008 1:59:26 PM PDT by Bob
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: mojito

I eventually got through.


16 posted on 09/23/2008 2:00:59 PM PDT by gridlock (The Democrats have attacked Motherhood. Now, if they attack Baseball and Apple Pie, we got it made!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: Bob

“How does their getting it right on Obama’s Social Security ad falsehoods have anything to do with their getting it completely wrong with regard to the 2nd Amendment issues?”

I just think it’s funny how FactCheck wavers from being a beacon of light to being the Great Satan, pretty much overnight.


17 posted on 09/23/2008 2:30:08 PM PDT by Mr. Know It All (Quicumque vult salvus esse, ante omnia opus est, ut teneat catholicam fidem)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: goldstategop

Like your sig.

Here’s another little gem for you re; Obama:

Allah’s Apostle {Muhammad} said, ‘Some eloquent speech is as effective as magic.’


18 posted on 09/23/2008 2:38:42 PM PDT by patriot08
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: mojito
factcheck.org = rpc.com = moveon.org = obama.com

The AP calls rpc.com nonpartisan. That is a load.

Of course, the AP calls it's self nonpartisan and that is an even bigger load.

According to AP, Obama didn't call Sarah a pig. But when you use someone as the butt of a joke in a prepared speech and try to deny it, then he called her a pig.

The AP isn't as biased as the NY Times, but they would like to be.

19 posted on 09/23/2008 2:38:59 PM PDT by Phlap (REDNECK@LIBARTS.EDU)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Mr. Know It All
I just think it’s funny how FactCheck wavers from being a beacon of light to being the Great Satan, pretty much overnight.

When they're right, they're right. When they're wrong, they're wrong. I've never considered them to be either of those extremes.

20 posted on 09/23/2008 2:42:06 PM PDT by Bob
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: Mr. Know It All

“If this is true, then the place she should have gone was an emergency room — not to an airport to fly 8(?) hours back to Alaska. This is one of the “factoids” that doesn’t add up.

Full disclosure: I’m not voting for McCain, I’m voting for Barr, so I’m just playing Devil’s advocate here. “


Since you are a Bob Barr voter and someone that was trying to feed the Palin baby rumors, you might not appear to be a good judge of facts to some people.


21 posted on 09/23/2008 2:50:49 PM PDT by ansel12 (There will be more than one "October surprise" this time. Count on it.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: FredZarguna

Okay, yes. It was the Chicago Annenberg Challenge.


22 posted on 09/23/2008 3:06:24 PM PDT by Lexinom
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: ansel12

“someone that was trying to feed the Palin baby rumors”

Um, I was trying to explain to someone how anyone could possibly find those rumors credible. When you promote an argument you don’t believe in, it’s called “Devil’s Advocate.” Look it up.


23 posted on 09/23/2008 3:17:18 PM PDT by Mr. Know It All (Quicumque vult salvus esse, ante omnia opus est, ut teneat catholicam fidem)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: Bob

“When they’re right, they’re right. When they’re wrong, they’re wrong. I’ve never considered them to be either of those extremes.”

Exactly.


24 posted on 09/23/2008 3:18:28 PM PDT by Mr. Know It All (Quicumque vult salvus esse, ante omnia opus est, ut teneat catholicam fidem)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: Mr. Know It All

“Devil’s Advocate.”

You have a consistent posting history of your playing “devil’s advocate” as you call it.


25 posted on 09/23/2008 6:01:24 PM PDT by ansel12 (There will be more than one "October surprise" this time. Count on it.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: mojito

Factcheck is run by the Annenberg group, the same bunch who gave Obama and Ayers millions of dollars to f*ck with the poor chumps of Chicago.


26 posted on 09/23/2008 7:21:43 PM PDT by hinckley buzzard
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ansel12
You have a consistent posting history of your playing “devil’s advocate” as you call it.
I'm not sure about that, but if I do, it's because I usually don't post just to agree with people. If someone has already posted what I would have said, what's the point? Sometimes people say something particularly well and I make a point of expressing that.

I believe that there are certain things one should believe. Among these things are that life is created by God and is sacred. Also, I believe that the U.S. Constitution is one of mankind's greatest achievements and should be cherished and protected. A lot of people here share these (and other) beliefs that I have.

Some people (not all) also seem to think that you shouldn't question these beliefs. For example, they don't think that you should even ask if God created life or whether it is sacred. I disagree. I think you can ask if you want to because I have an answer. The short answer is, "Yes and yes," and I also have a long answer for people who want more detail.

One of the things that we ought to keep in mind is that there's an election going on. Most of the people here have made up our minds, but there are some people with questions. I have to agree with the poster who asked earlier if "undecided" voters frustrate others -- they frustrate me for sure. But they're not going to vote for a conservative candidate if we just call them idiots for having questions about things that we are unwavering on. We need to give them answers.

If I bring up a "opposing view" it's because I'm genuinely looking for answers. I do this here not because it makes me popular, but because it never ceases to result in an educating response. My name, "Mr. Know it All" is supposed to be ironic.

Does that make sense to you?
27 posted on 09/23/2008 9:31:18 PM PDT by Mr. Know It All (Quicumque vult salvus esse, ante omnia opus est, ut teneat catholicam fidem)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: Mr. Know It All

No, spreading rumors against conservatives and posting nonsense just to be negative is more troll like than honorable opposition.


28 posted on 09/23/2008 9:40:02 PM PDT by ansel12 (There will be more than one "October surprise" this time. Count on it.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: ansel12

I wasn’t spreading rumors.


29 posted on 09/23/2008 10:04:42 PM PDT by Mr. Know It All (Quicumque vult salvus esse, ante omnia opus est, ut teneat catholicam fidem)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson