FactCheck.org on Swift Boat Vets for Truth

[trof]

Go read their analysis on the Swift Boat slime and read their conclusion.
http://www.factcheck.org/article.aspx?docID=231

"At this point, 35 years later and half a world away, we see no way to resolve which of these versions of reality is closer to the truth."

Then send them an e-mail at [e-mail]

I said:

"Republican-funded Group Attacks Kerry's War Record"

"At this point, 35 years later and half a world away, we see no way to resolve which of these versions of reality is closer to the truth."

http://www.factcheck.org/article.aspx?docID=231

Let's see...a radically partisan group's unsubstantiated hearsay attacks on a political opponent, versus official, documented U.S. Navy records and sworn eye-witnesses. Yeah, that's a tough one. A real puzzler.

Sorry, I just don't understand your line of reasoning here.

What WERE you thinking?

Massey Lambard

Foley, AL

[LittleApple81]

1. I don't know what happened with it, but Gillespie said on C-Span

(3-4 weeks ago?) That factcheck is a Republican website. There were several threads about this on DU for a while, and then they died out. I don't remember what conclusion was reached at that point. But something like this makes me a little suspicious...

[blondeatlast]

2. I've always heard back from them before, but they haven't respondid to

my e-mail on this subject, as follows:

"At this point, 35 years later and half a world away, we see no way to
resolve which of these versions of reality is closer to the truth."

Then what, exactly, is your purpose? I have given FactCheck the benefit of
the doubt in the past, but no longer. There are other, far more long-lived
and apparently less biased, organizations performing the same function.

Ed Gillespie's slip-up, even if it was a mistake, is just too
telling--particuarly your contention that the response PROVES you aren't
biased. It does nothing of the sort, it just proves that you are just as
capable of covering your own posterior region as anyone.

I shall get my facts from other sources--Snopes may not be elegant, but she
does a fine job of doing what you want to do, but have failed.

This isn't the first time I have pointed out some sneaky bias, but it will
be the last. I am unsubscribing.

[ayeshahaqqiqa]

6. In my letter, I said

I'd take the word of a man from Huntsville AR above any of their so-called facts. One of Kerry's crew is from this town, which is about thirty miles from where I live.

[Stephanie]

3. FactCheck.org is an RNC front, isn't it?

I don't think they're legit

[Bernardo de La Paz]

4. No

Just because you disagree with them this time, or even a few times, doesn't make them an RNC front. And there is not a red under every bed either.

[blondeatlast]

10. Ed Gillespie said he "believed they were with them."

He oughta know.

[trof]

11. I wrote factcheck and asked them

Got a reply from the editor that Gillespie couldn't be more wrong.
That's what they say, anyway.
I always thought they were pretty objective until this swift boat article.
Hopefully just a glitch?
Just doesn't make sense.

[Bernardo de La Paz]

12. Reference please?

[blondeatlast]

13. "and we show we're nonpartisan."

It should be self-evident, Brooks.

http://www.factcheck.org/MiscReports.aspx?docid=229

[Stephanie]

18. The fact that they have that letter from Ed Gillespie

proclaiming that they are non-partisan is hilarious.

[City Lights]

27. Yes, it is.

gillespie has a gee dub moment of truth, gets caught, writes a flip-flop letter denying his earlier statement, and some here want to give him the benefit of the doubt. I don't get it. :shrug:

[City Lights]

14. They're funded by the Annenberg Foundation.

Annenberg trustees donate heavily to repukes.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=132&topic_id=615414#615449

edited for typo

[LittleApple81]

15. Here is the DU thread where this was discussed AT LENGTH

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=104&topic_id=2015200

[Lex]

21. This thread contains the VIDEO clip link where Ed Gillespie says

.
that factcheck.org is RNC.

[Lex]

19. Someone here at DU snagged the TV clip where Gillespie

said that factcheck.org is an RNC outfit.

Gillespie was on CSPAN at the time.

And there may not be a red under every bed, but I'd say that Ed Gillespie saying such a thing does give one pause for concern, don't you?

[LittleApple81]

22. see post 15 on this thread. It has the video in one of the posts inside

the thread.

[Bernardo de La Paz]

23. Please don't play Gillespie's Game

At worst it is FUD: Fear, Uncertainty and Doubt. Don't get sucked into that.

It was probably confusion on his part. He wrote a letter saying that "factcheck.org is clearly a non-partisan organization with no affiliation whatsoever to the RNC".

Maintain focus. Don't get distracted and spin wheels.

[Lex]

25. Sorry, but I choose *not* to ignore the man behind the curtain.

The RNC is full of dirty tricksters and I will not be one of the gullible.

Best to keep one's eyes wide open and not put a lot of stock in Gillespie's waving around of a quaint letter.

[Bernardo de La Paz]

26. Yes Tricksters, but factcheck.org is not one of them. Don't be distracted

Yes Tricksters, but factcheck.org is not one of them. Don't be distracted.

Focus on debunking real trickery like not-so-swift boat trickery, or most especially, voter roll trickery and voting machine trickery.

[childslibrarian]

5. I just wrote them

If Chris Matthews could figure out the truth on Crossfire, why couldn't they?

[LostInAnomie]

7. I read it the other night

It is pretty critical of the swift boat ad. That one section you posted is out of context I think.

[trof]

8. It is their own stated CONCLUSION.

And it makes no sense, given the evidence they themselves put out.

[blondeatlast]

9. Not at all out of context, I had been subscribing. nt

[CityZen-X]

16. Send A Message To Bu$h*t's Pal (Perry)

Send a message to Bush*t's pal Bob Perry, the person who provided the funds for the Bu$h*tboat propaganda.
I did with this concluding sentence, Das Boot has been blown out of the water,TRAITOR!

http://perryhomes.com/contact.asp

[Cocoa]

17. I think this reveals FactCheck's actual mission

it is to take the edges off the biggest Bush lies, with confusing articles and with a phony "balance" that suggests that both sides are equally dishonest.

Take their coverage of Bush's WMD lies. They don't cover the lies. Instead, they defend Bush with sematics.

Look at this headline, it says it all: "Bush's "16 Words" on Iraq & Uranium: He May Have Been Wrong But He Wasn't Lying"

[otohara]

20. Sounds Like Something "Parade Magazine" Would Write

in their stupid questions/answer section.

[blondeatlast]

24. EXACTLY. Perfectly stated! nt

[lolly]

28. "Parade" an O'Reilly Fan Mag

O'Reilly is one of the editors of Parade.

I suspect he's taken over much of the "fact checking" on Walter Scott's Personality Parade since Scott died.

"Parade," like Fox News, hides its partisianship behind shrill protestations of being a straight shooter.

It also features Mr.I-Really-Did-Win-an-Award O'Reilly on its cover once or twice a year.

So, yeah. This is the same modus operandi

[otohara]

29. No Shit?

well no wonder I can't stand that rag mag -