SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Politics : Formerly About Advanced Micro Devices -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?


To: Brumar89 who wrote (529406)11/16/2009 12:55:09 PM
From: Brumar89  Respond to of 1575539
 
Eleven "fact-checkers" came up with 6 nit-picking non-errors. The one thing they've shown is Palin matters and the liberal media is desparately threatened by her. No matter how much they may deny that, their actions prove it.

"With the very prominent exception of Barack Obama, she’s the sensation in American politics this decade. And a person who can make news just by opening her mouth is a person to be reckoned with, a person who is not going away, a person who is going to play a role in American politics for a long time." - John Poeheretz


Rogue's Eleven [Mark Steyn]

If you wonder why American newspapering is dying, consider this sign-off:

AP writers Matt Apuzzo, Sharon Theimer, Tom Raum, Rita Beamish, Beth Fouhy, H. Josef Hebert, Justin D. Pritchard, Garance Burke, Dan Joling and Lewis Shaine contributed to this report.

Wow. That's ten "AP writers" plus Calvin Woodward, the AP writer whose twinkling pen honed the above contributions into the turgid sludge of the actual report. That's eleven writers for a 695-word report. What on? Obamacare ? The Iranian nuke program? The upcoming trial of Khalid Sheikh Mohammed?

No, the Associated Press assigned eleven writers to "fact-check" Sarah Palin's new book, and in return the eleven fact-checkers triumphantly unearthed six errors. That's 1.8333333 writers for each error. What earth-shattering misstatements did they uncover for this impressive investment? Stand well back:

PALIN: Says she made frugality a point when traveling on state business as Alaska governor, asking "only" for reasonably priced rooms and not "often" going for the "high-end, robe-and-slippers" hotels.
THE FACTS: Although she usually opted for less-pricey hotels while governor, Palin and daughter Bristol stayed five days and four nights at the $707.29-per-night Essex House luxury hotel (robes and slippers come standard) . . .

That looks like AP paid 1.8333333 fact-checkers to agree with Mrs. Palin: She says she didn't "often" go for "high-end" hotels; they say she "usually opted for less-pricey hotels." That's gonna make one must-see edition of Point/Counterpoint.

Or is AP arguing "four nights" counts as "often"? Is that the point? AP assigned eleven reporters to demonstrate that four is a large number?

Over at Powerline, John Hinderaker and his vast team of researchers (17 Minneapolis-area Somali jihadists, 29 ACORN-accredited child-sex slaves, and 43 unemployed Columbia School of Journalism graduates) fact-check AP's fact-checkers.

Coming next:
PALIN: How many AP fact-checkers does it take to change a lightbulb?
FACT: Palin has gone seriously "rogue" in her facts here. AP fact-checkers are prevented per union regulations from changing lightbulbs.
AP writers Matt Apuzzo, Sharon Theimer, Tom Raum, Rita Beamish, Beth Fouhy, H. Josef Hebert, Justin D. Pritchard, Garance Burke, Dan Joling and Lewis Shaine contributed to this joke.
We'll be here all week.

corner.nationalreview.com

Fact-Check This

November 13, 2009 Posted by John at 10:16 PM

The Associated Press got an advance copy of Sarah Palin's book, Going Rogue, and assigned eleven reporters, apparently, to try to find errors in it. The eleven collaborated on an article titled "FACT CHECK: Palin's book goes rogue on some facts." In fact, though, the AP's catalogue of alleged errors--six in total--is thin at best.

The AP starts with this one:
PALIN: Says she made frugality a point when traveling on state business as Alaska governor, asking "only" for reasonably priced rooms and not "often" going for the "high-end, robe-and-slippers" hotels.
THE FACTS: Although she usually opted for less-pricey hotels while governor, Palin and daughter Bristol stayed five days and four nights at the $707.29-per-night Essex House luxury hotel (robes and slippers come standard) for a five-hour women's leadership conference in New York in October 2007. With air fare, the cost to Alaska was well over $3,000.

This is frankly pathetic. Palin says she didn't "often" stay at high-end hotels, and the AP counters by saying she did, once. Yes, that's why she said "not often" rather than "never." What is indisputable is that Palin sold the Governor's private jet and flew commercial, thereby saving the taxpayers a large amount of money and qualifying her as a frugal traveler.

The rest are about as lame. Here is another:
PALIN: Rails against taxpayer-financed bailouts, which she attributes to Obama. She recounts telling daughter Bristol that to succeed in business, "you'll have to be brave enough to fail."
THE FACTS: Palin is blurring Obama's stimulus plan--a $787 billion package of tax cuts, state aid, social programs and government contracts--and the federal bailout that President George W. Bush signed.
Palin's views on bailouts appeared to evolve as John McCain's vice presidential running mate. In September 2008, she said "taxpayers cannot be looked to" to bail out Wall Street.
The next month, she praised McCain for being "instrumental in bringing folks together" to pass the $700 billion bailout. After that, she said "it is a time of crisis and government did have to step in."

The AP doesn't quote Palin, so it's hard to say whether she "blurs" the bailouts or not. But by the AP's own account, Palin has consistently opposed bailouts, except that during the Presidential campaign, she loyally supported McCain's position on the initial TARP program. That's what a Vice-Presidential candidate is supposed to do, and this is not a "fact-check."

This one, I simply don't believe:
PALIN: Welcomes last year's Supreme Court decision deciding punitive damages for victims of the nation's largest oil spill tragedy, the Exxon Valdez disaster, stating it had taken 20 years to achieve victory. As governor, she says, she'd had the state argue in favor of the victims, and she says the court's ruling went "in favor of the people."
THE FACTS: That response is at odds with her reaction at the time to the ruling, which resolved the case by reducing punitive damages for victims to $500 million from $2.5 billion. Palin said then she was "extremely disappointed" and it was "tragic" so many fishermen and families put their lives on hold waiting for the decision.

Again, the AP doesn't quote Palin but rather asks us to take their word for the fact that Palin "welcomes" the Supreme Court's Exxon Valdez decision in her book as a "ruling [that] went 'in favor of the people.'" I would bet that the AP is mischaracterizing what Palin says in her book. She criticized the Supreme Court's decision at the time, as did most Alaskans, and cited it as a Supreme Court decision with which she disagreed in the Katie Couric interview. I seriously doubt that she contradicts that position in her book, although I wouldn't doubt that she called the verdict against Exxon (which was slashed by the Supreme Court) as a decision "in favor of the people."

It appears to be a tribute to the factual accuracy of Palin's book that eleven hostile AP reporters can't come up with anything better than this.

It's funny how the press fact-checks some things but not others. Here is just one of thousands of examples one could cite: John Kerry, arguing for the cap-and-tax bill that he co-sponsored with Barbara Boxer (these are two of the least intelligent legislators of modern times, by the way), claimed that "over the last eight years, emissions in the United States of America in greenhouse gases went up four times faster than in the 1990s." This is a typical example of a "fact" that John Kerry just made up. In fact, carbon emissions rose much faster in the 1990s than over the last eight years:

The Institute for Energy Research explains:
According to data from the Energy Information Administration, U.S. carbon dioxide emissions increased by 15.14% between 1990 and 1999, but from 2001 to 2008 carbon dioxide emissions only increased by 1.88%. If Senator Kerry were correct, U.S. carbon dioxide emissions would have increased by 60.5% over the last 8 years, but they only increased by 1.88%. Senator Kerry overestimated [the growth in] U.S. emissions by a factor of 32.

Do you suppose the Associated Press will assign eleven reporters to "fact-check" John Kerry? No, I don't think so, either.


powerlineblog.com

Palin Again

John Podhoretz - 11.13.2009 - 1:44 PM

She’s an idiot. She’s a moron. She’s unqualified. She’s bad. She’s a hick. She’s a know-nothing. She’s a liar. She couldn’t define the Reagan Doctrine. She’s mean to her daughter’s baby daddy….

And nonetheless, Sarah Palin is dominating the news once again in advance of the release of her book. Which is to say, front-page stories, the lead stories on the morning shows, all using tiny tidbits of information about the book and a few clips from Monday’s Oprah. Whatever Sarah Palin is, she is also, as all this makes clear, a huge star. With the very prominent exception of Barack Obama, she’s the sensation in American politics this decade. And a person who can make news just by opening her mouth is a person to be reckoned with, a person who is not going away, a person who is going to play a role in American politics for a long time.

commentarymagazine.com



To: Brumar89 who wrote (529406)11/18/2009 1:19:04 AM
From: tejek  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 1575539
 
AP “FACT”: “As Wasilla mayor, Palin pressed for a special zoning exception so she could sell her family’s $327,000 house, then did not keep a promise to remove a potential fire hazard on the property.

She asked the city council to loosen rules for snow machine races when she and her husband owned a snow machine store, and cast a tie-breaking vote to exempt taxes on aircraft when her father-in-law owned one. But she stepped away from the table in 1997 when the council considered a grant for the Iron Dog snow machine race in which her husband competes.”

THE TRUTH: When the Palins purchased their prior home in Wasilla, it was already in violation of the “special zoning” rule. Such rules have always been only loosely enforced in Alaska. The home wasn’t in violation of any zoning regulation when it was originally built, but subsequent construction around it changed that. The Palins applied for a setback variance in order to sell their home. This is very common in Wasilla and elsewhere. There was nothing at all out of the ordinary about it, and it certainly did not involve any favoritism. The “potential fire hazard” in question was a carport that the Palins offered to tear down, but the new owner wanted it left alone.


When you ask for a change in zoning or anything to do with real estate your own and you're an elected official, you are going to come under very strong scrutiny; to whit, Obama and the land he bought adjacent to his home.

One problem with the analysis above.....and this is from my experience in real estate........when one asks for a zoning change, then its likely the agency that grants the change will also make certain stipulations that must be met before granting the change. Apparently one of them in the Palin case was removing the fire hazard. Just because the new owner didn't care if it was torn down isn't good enough. Either you tear it down, or you must go back and get the stipulation removed. As mayor she should have been sensitive to that point.......she wasn't. It made her look bad. Palin has never been good with details.....and it shows all the time to her detriment.

If I had the time, I imagine I could find additional flaws with the counter arguments provided by conservatives4Palin.