The AP Assigned 11 Fact Checkers to Palin’s Book
Tags: liberal lies, media bias, Sarah Palin.
Click here to get Caucus of Corruption: The Truth About The New Democratic Majority by Matt Margolis and Mark Noonan.
And what did they find?
…the 11 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”.
I mean, seriously, this is getting absurd – for crying out loud, liberals and MSMers, will you just stop hating Sarah Palin. She’s not an ogre out to destroy all life on earth – she’s just a populist-conservative wife and mother who wants to field-dress liberalism’s dead carcass. She’s also much, much better looking than any liberal chick you’ve got…so, there.
Thank you for visiting Blogs For Victory. If you enjoy our content, please consider making a donation to help us cover the costs of our servers.Mark Noonan is co-author (with Matt Margolis) of Caucus of Corruption: The Truth About The New Democratic Majority. He also blogs at Nevada News and Views. Follow Mark on Twitter.
44 Responses to “The AP Assigned 11 Fact Checkers to Palin’s Book”
Caucus of Corruption
And what else did they find?
Nice try.
So… you’re upset that they didn’t find enough errors in Palin’s book?
Seriously though, one factual error (either a distortion out of ignorance or deceit, neither being good for someone vying to be a public official) is too many.
Serg, why do you stoop to the levels of OO, magnum, and CO? Are you a bigger moron than I thought you were?
Of course you are; you’re a college-aged liberal who probably used a lot of dope to stay awake to cram for your finals.
Our fact checkers don’t even waste their rime on books written by your Marxist idols; all they have to do is count the pages and multiply by ten or so…
I’m sorry, I didn’t realize that quoting more of the original source constituted “stooping” to something.
As to dope, even I know that it makes you space out, and I don’t touch it. I think that, just as a matter of principle, it is both wrong and simply lazy to seek happiness from chemicals. As a result, I don’t do, and never have done, any sort of illegal drug, or nicotine, or alcohol, and I ingest caffeine only in quantities small enough to have no mind-altering effect.
Might I ask who my “Marxist idols” are?
Might I ask who my “Marxist idols” are?
All of the libs running this country into the ground. If you’re as objective as you claim to be, can’t you see what they’re doing?
Or do you think that Obama really cares about the American people? If so, how?
I wonder how many fact checkers the AP assigned to Bill Clinton’s book when it came out? Or any of the bio’s of Obama that have come out? My guess, a lot fewer than 11, because they did not want to find any real errors.
Yes, I do think that Obama cares about the American people. He is, after all, one of them, fact-free protestations to the contrary notwithstanding.
Keef, do you actually know anything about Marx or Marxism? Have you ever heard of the materialist conception of history or the Young Hegelians? I consider myself objective because I look at the actual facts. Obama is not a Marxist. Period. Anyone with even a cursory understanding of Marx would understand that. The very idea of creeping Marxism is a contradiction in terms, because the very core of Marx’s philosophy (and Marxism is nothing but the application of that philosophy to politics) was that every once in a while the old order is violently thrown away and replaced by its opposite, and that this, by its very nature, happens from the bottom up. To suggest that Barack “Goldman Sachs” Obama is secretly planning to gradually implement a sudden grassroots revolution from the top down is complete and utter horsefeathers. To suggest that he is doing so by following mainstream economic advice, by trying to figure out a strategy in Afghanistan that works rather than opting for one that doesn’t, and by not nationalizing the single industry that contributes the least to American society (with the possible exception of reality television) goes beyond mere horsefeathers and into the realm of madness.
“There are elements of truth underlying a narrative that is completely false”…McCain aide
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/11/14/mccain-campaign-emails-co_n_358124.html
—————————–
Do y’all notice that Keefer doesn’t actually refute the claim of inaccuracies found in Palin’s book but, as usual, just resorts to spewing insults. Is he predictable or what?
Sergei,
Don’t you see? For crying out loud, its a matter of frickin’ opinion! They haven’t caught her out in a lie or in even a mild error…they don’t agree with her interpretation of events, and they’re calling anyone being different from them as being in error!
Don’t be stupid – and you have been dumbing yourself down to keep up with Obama and the liberals. Stop it!
Mark,
If you read the entire article which you will fin here:
http://www.nytimes.com/aponline/2009/11/13/us/politics/AP-US-Palin-Book-Fact-Check.html?pagewanted=1&_r=2
you will find that in fact they found at least a dozen errors.
I would disagree with some of the so called errors, but I don’t see anyone on this thread doing even that. Instead, you attack anyone who doesn’t slavishly believe everything Palin says. Talk about dumbing yourself down.
Liberals are absolutely frightened to death by Palin BECAUSE, she represents middle America moreso than any liberal, she was a proven and effective governor, she is not of the elite Washington insider group, she is a Christian, she is pro life, she articulates her positions well, she can sway legislation by a mere mention on facebook, and she is drop dead beautiful.
Palin threatens every conventional thought liberals have in their little minds, therefore they will incessantly attack her over everything. Pay no attention to them, their outbursts are irrational.
As usual, casper completely misses the point. It’s not “slavish” to defend an attack on a person based on nitpicking–it is fair.
Froggie says that even one error is important—I wonder if he voted for the guy who claimed he had campaigned in 57 of the 58 states, or his running mate who claimed that FDR went on TV after the ‘29 stock market crash to talk to the American people.
There are mistakes, and there are lies. Of mistakes, some are significant and some are petty, and some merely questions of perspective.
But the point of the thread is that Palin has been the subject of a massive Leftist blitz designed to smear and defame her, to destroy her personally and politically, and to remove her from the public stage where she poses such a threat to Democrat power plays.
When she was chosen as the VP candidate, “news” agencies swarmed into Alaska looking for dirt on her. She was slimed, her family was slimed, her husband and children were considered fair game by the attack dogs of the Democratic Party. The shameless attacks on her and her family prety much define the Democrat tactic of the Politics of Personal Destruction.
The woman running for the NUMBER TWO position on the Republican ticket was subjected to a vastly greater degree of scrutiny than the Dem candidate for the top job. It’s been a disgusting example of dirty politics at work, and the AP “fact checkers” are part of this. I sure didn’t see them following Joe Biden around and reporting on his bizarre comments, or trying to get Barry to reveal his school or medical records or passport records or even to authorize the hospital where he says he was born (either one of them, for that matter…) to release the records of his mother’s stay there back in 1961.
Amazona says:
November 15th, 2009 at 11:50 am
—————————-
Don’t you think, Amazona, that when she accepted to run as McCain’s VP, she knew how dirty American politics can get. Take a look at some of the rhetoric that she, herself, mouthed during the campaign.
Palin can dish it out but it is apparent she can’t take it.
CO
Palin can dish it out but it is apparent she can’t take it.
BULL SHIITE
To suggest that he is doing so by following mainstream economic advice, by trying to figure out a strategy in Afghanistan that works rather than opting for one that doesn’t
As I said before, Sergio, you blindly worship the Narcissist in Chief. What “mainstream economic advice,” you moron? And good try on Afghanistan, dumb*ss. He has a strategy he’s afraid to use because he doesn’t want to anger his base. His general in charge has asked for more troops, and President Dumbass is doing exactly what he, and you kooks, blasted President Bush for doing. He’s ignoring his experts on the ground.
You’re a lemming, Sergio, just like the other lemmings here–CO, magnum, KFC, casper, et.al.
And I don’t know why you kooks are all spun up about Palin; according to you, she’s no threat, and you want her to run.
What a bunch of brain-dead morons…
Amazona
IF the media had done their job and reported 1/10000 th of the dirt on zer0 that they could have, the empty suit would have been in the dirty cloths basket the first day of his announcement to run.
He is as dirty as they come….worse than klinton (as if that is possible)
Keef
And I don’t know why you kooks are all spun up about Palin; according to you, she’s no threat, and you want her to run.
HEY you are right, now that is funny…….
as they say …me thinkith thou protest to much! LOL
CO, you are trying to reframe the debate, as well as to excuse the vicious personal attacks on the woman and her family.
Palin kept her commentary well within the boundaries of political discourse. She did not attack Obama personally, so come off it.
From the “lipstick on a pig” comment to the attacks on Briston for being pregnant to the claims that Willow had become pregnant at the age of 12 and her mother had adopted the baby to slurs on the older son to ridicule of the Down syndrome baby to jokes about raping a young teenaged girl—-the tactics of the RRL were despicable, and all you can say about them was that she deserved it and this is just what she should have expected.
Pretty much what I would expect from a kneepad Lib………
Amazona,
Which of the 12 items, fact checked in the article I linked to, do you consider personal attacks? There are a couple I would disagree with, but because they are personal attacks.
casper, I find you and your silly posts so inconsequential that I simply ignore most of them. Your querulous and feeble “gotchas” are so tiresome.
Come up with a clearly thought out and stated political philosophy and link your comments to that philosophy, defending or criticizing based on that philosophy, and I might take you a little more seriously.
Till then you are just a fluttery little wannabe on the fringes, thinking that putting words on a screen makes you a political thinker.
And do work on reading comprehension. I never said a single one of whatever you linked to constituted a personal attack. Rather, I listed some of the many personal attacks. Duh.
at least she would NEVER do this……
How low will he go? Obama gives Japan’s Emperor Akihito a wow bow (Updated with video, pic)
November 14, 2009 | 3:38 am
http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/washington/2009/11/obama-emperor-akihito-japan.html
Check this out…fact chrcking the “fact checkers”.
http://www.conservatives4palin.com/2009/11/fact-checking-fact-checkers.html
Bowing and violating US Code
Officer Training | 11/15/09
Posted on Sunday, November 15, 2009 11:58:02 AM by pabianice
When I went through Navy Aviation Officer Candidate School we were given classes on military etiquette. One lesson dealt with meeting foreign dignitaries and royalty. In a film and then with text we were instructed that US law “forbids any officer of the United States from bowing before royalty. Instead, if in uniform and covered, the officer salutes. If not in uniform, the officer shakes hands or simply stands at attention.”
This lesson was very clear and I have no information to indicate that the rules have changed. The president, like every US military officer, is an Officer of the United States. Aside from the general embarrassment that Obama has become at home and abroad, he apparently is also violating the law with his bowing and scraping before foreign royalty.
Does anyone have the actual US law that covers this?
Amazona,
“casper, I find you and your silly posts so inconsequential that I simply ignore most of them. Your querulous and feeble “gotchas” are so tiresome.”
Frankly I wish you would ignore me. The only time I respond to you any more is when you respond to something I said.
“Come up with a clearly thought out and stated political philosophy and link your comments to that philosophy, defending or criticizing based on that philosophy, and I might take you a little more seriously.”
Since you are a birther that “believes” Obama is building a civilian security force, I can’t take you seriously at all.
“Till then you are just a fluttery little wannabe on the fringes, thinking that putting words on a screen makes you a political thinker.”
And that’s different from you how?
“And do work on reading comprehension. I never said a single one of whatever you linked to constituted a personal attack. Rather, I listed some of the many personal attacks. Duh.”
Since the thread is on the fact checking, I assumed you were staying on topic. My mistake.
casper, why do you call people “birther’s?”
Is this akin to OO calling people “southern socials?”
You’re falling off to the left, more and more. What a shame; just like OO, you used to be a bit liekable. Sadly, this is no longer the case.
Why don’t you take your “got’cha’s” elsewhere?
casper, a “birther” is someone who believes Obama was born in Kenya—or at least outside the United States. As I have repeatedly stated that I do not share this belief, I have to wonder why you insist on misstating the fact. Is it an inability to process information accurately, or simply lying?
Also, I never ever EVER said that I think “Obama is building a civilian security force”. Again, as we went over this so often, even you should have been able to get it.
I quoted him accurately and completely, citing a statement he made, in its entirety, about a belief he said he had that we needed such a force. You had a lot of trouble with that, pretzeling around with the stereotypical whine of “out of context” and ’splaining what he really MEANT in spite of what he really SAID. It was a very bizarre exchange, one which I dropped because it was getting so embarrassing to see you being so resolutely obtuse. And wrong. It was sad to see you so incapable of understanding the very simple words Obama used—either not being able to process what he said, or being too invested in your silly argument to be able to get past your indefensible position.
But do not misquote me. Do not attribute beliefs to me if I have not stated them myself, and particularly if I have denied having them.
You can be as intellectually feeble and dishonest as you want to be, but do not simply lie about what I have said, or invent beliefs and attribute them to me.
Since the thread is on fact checking in Palin’s book and not on personal attacks made on her, I assumed your silly little challenge to find personal attacks in the supposed errors in her book to be a reference to my previous post listing some of the personal attacks on her.
Yes, it IS your mistake, just the latest in a long line.
You have made it abundantly clear that you not only do not HAVE a coherent political philosophy, the very concept of one seems to baffle you. So no wonder you have no idea of the difference between stating such a philosophy, as I often do, and then basing political commentary on that philosophy, and your feeble efforts to just toss out a comment here and there.
Why do you take the positions you seem to take? I say “seem to” because even that is pretty vague, apparently just little oppositional twitches in response to something a conservative has said. But why? What do you believe in? Individual freedoms? Collectivism? Free markets? Economic justice? The Constitution? Mao? All you do is snipe, so I have no reason to take you seriously.
And your most recent listing of lies, misstatements, and admission of your inability to grasp the difference between stating a position and simply darting in to insert a bitchy gotcha seems to support that opinion.
keef, “birther” is just one of those mindless little catchphrases the RRL invents, like “wingnut”, for the ignorant to pick up and toss around. It’s like an intellectual short cut to what they like to pretend is the Higher Intellectual Ground.
They only fool themselves, but then their posts prove that they are easily fooled.
I think there is a wide range of opinions on Obama’s birth place, which the RRL, in its efforts to deflect attention away from this touchy subject, is simply portraying as a lunatic fringe thing.
There ARE people who believe Obama was born in Kenya, as there is some evidence that he may have been.
There are people who think he may have been born in Hawaii, as there is some evidence that he may have been.
There are people who have no opinion one way or another, as there is no conclusive proof for either theory.
All of these people are sneeringly lumped together in the dismissive term “birthers” which is really quite silly as I believe all agree that he was born.
There are people who understand that the document produced by Obama handlers has a dual nature—it can be generated by someone born out of the state of Hawaii to Hawaiian residents, to establish Hawaiian ancestry, and it can be sent out as a substitute for an actual certified photocopy of an original long-form birth certificate generated by an independent third party (the hospital or attending physician). People who understand the fact that this document in and of itself is not prima facie proof of actual birth taking place within the state are also dismissed as “birthers”.
There are people who take Obama at his word that he was born in Hawaii, but who think he has a moral and perhaps legal obligation to end all speculation by releasing the original document and the hospital records, as well as other records which, in their absence, allow speculation to continue.
The pejorative term “birther” is also applied to them.
There are people who have no questions about Obama’s legal qualifications for the presidency but simply have an objective intellectual curiousity about the varying records listing him as a citizen of other nations, and/or the question of how he traveled to Pakistan when he was 20 when US citizens were not supposed to go there. Not deep conspiracy theory questions, just curiousity about the various legal formalities necessary to shift citizenship from one nation to another, how these things work. These curious people are also considered “birthers” and therefore crazy, demented, and beneath contempt.
There are people who look at the situation and think that, in today’s mobile population, it would be smart to head off future problems by simply making a law that all candidates have to show birth certificates before being allowed to run for the presidency. These people are also vile and disgusting “birthers”.
In other words, instead of simply acknowledging the body of information that has allowed these various perceptions to continue, and addressing these concerns, the RRL and its lemming followers have chosen to simply ridicule these people, and has invented a term they evidently find scathing and utterly insulting.
I think it’s funny.
Amazona,
I guess the hundreds of words you have written questioning where Obama was born doesn’t mean anything. Then again maybe it does. Like it or not you are a birther. The fact that the label bothers you so much is what’s really funny. Besides, I thought you were going to ignore me.
She said that she said one thing; she actually said another. That’s not opinion.
New Keynsianism is one of the two main schools of economics.
“And good try on Afghanistan, dumb*ss. He has a strategy he’s afraid to use because he doesn’t want to anger his base. His general in charge has asked for more troops, and President Dumbass is doing exactly what he, and you kooks, blasted President Bush for doing. He’s ignoring his experts on the ground.”
Gen. McChrystal is requesting more troops so that he can emulate the Soviet strategy of surrendering 90% of the country and then hoping that the rebel army gets wiped out by a meteor strike. And he does not speak for the experts. When Matthew Hoh resigned, most experts agreed with pretty much all of his analysis except the conclusion.
In any case, you did not address the meat of my post, which is that regardless of whether what Obama is doing is right or wrong, there’s no way to spin it into a sinister plot to take over the universe.
For looking at the facts? For not thinking that if I ignore tough questions, maybe they’ll just go away? For daring to actually debate substance rather than just launch personal attacks?
You need to take a serious look at what you are doing. You are better than this. Much, much better.
casper says:
November 15th, 2009 at 3:28 pm
—————————–
Amazona can have it both ways, casper, and still believe she’s correct.
If you have the fortitude to read Amazona’s pronouncements, you will realize that somewhere along the line she came to the conclusion that she, and she alone, was the supreme expert on every topic.
Anyone having the gall to question her authority is immediately branded as a kook, a RRL or someone not even worthy of her lofty response.
Don’t bother trying to reason with her, it doesn’t work.
canadianobserver,
You are correct and I have no desire to respond to Amazona unless she addresses me or something I said from here on out.
Interesting though, that other than Mark, no one on the right has addressed any of the “facts” addressed by the AP. There are a couple I would think are worth disputing.
I wonder why the following statement was never fact checked?
“White mans greed in a workd of need” – Barak Hussein Obama – Audacity of Hope
Cappy,
None of those NY times fact checks were worth antything of substance and rather nit picky if you ask me. I would be curious to see which ones you think are worth “further review”.
I did LOVE however when the NY Times admitted that employment is 10.2% and expected to get worse, disputing Palins claim of a worse recession under Reagan. That is tantamount to saying that Obama’s stimulus plan is a HUGE failure. Did you not pick you on that? Or are you still blaming everything on Bush after a year?
Interesting though, that other than Mark, no one on the right has addressed any of the “facts” addressed by the AP. There are a couple I would think are worth disputing.
Cap,
You missed neocon1’s link at 1:34PM. It’s a very thorough debunking of AP’s factchecking.
Ever notice how the media never fact checks liberal books? Probably because, for the most part, there is no reason to, since no one reads them. Looking at Amazon’s top sellers in politics, the majority are by Conservatives.
Cap,
You missed neocon1’s link at 1:34PM. It’s a very thorough debunking of AP’s factchecking.
Which means, casspass, that it is not necessary for the rest of us to back-and-forth with you pukes.
Serg, I appreciate your compliment, I guess, but I’m not here to debate anything with you trolls. There’s nothing I can offer that will sway you, nor you me. I’m here to tell you, and all the other troll pukes, that I absolutely despise today’s liberals, and the warped crap that they stand for. I don’t have any liberal friends, and, other than at work, where I have no choice, I don’t associate with libs. They make me want to puke…
Not taking casper seriously is not the same as ignoring him. And his ongoing insistence that I have printed “hundreds of words…questioning where Obama was born..” is proof positive that the poor old geezer just can’t read what is on the page.
……which comes as no surprise.
I have written “hundreds of words” commenting on the fact that the supposed proof offered by Obama handlers is actually inconclusive, and analyzed the reasons why, but in those same comments have always said that I thought Obama was probably born in Hawaii. Guess geezerhood means not being able to handle complex ideas like that—to the caspers of the world, it’s either/or—you either chug that koolaid or you deny everything, and nuance is just too confusing.
Except for the nuances of Obama’s simplest and clearest statements, which evidently contain untold layers of nuance visible only to casper as he tries so valiantly to claim Barry’s words didn’t really mean what they say.
There is nothing wrong with being terminally befuddled and peevish, but to think of this level of incoherence and cluelessness functioning as a teacher is kind of distressing.
But then, it’s middle school, the kids are young and resilient, and the real teachers will have time to fix what casper screws up.
I repeat, “birther” is just one of those ignorant little catchphrases the RRL likes to come up with because they know their mindless base needs the simplest and easiest words possible. They know the words can be meaningless (“wingnut”) as long as they are short and snappy and easy to remember. casper is proof of the validity of this assessment of their base.
RRL = Rabidly Radical Left, or, alternatively, Rabidly Radical Liberal.
There is nothing to dispute – the “fact checkers” are taking statements of opinion and saying “statements of opinion we disagree with are incorrect statements”. It’d be like me saying a liberal has made an error in his book because he states he thinks abortion is a good thing – I think that is a wrong opinion, but its not an “error” in the sense that the AP is trying to make out about Palin’s book.
You liberals get dumber by the minute…
The book tour starts this week, and I look forward to it! I’m most looking forward to meeting many of you, shaking your hands, and telling you,”Thanks for loving America.” I’ll give you a scoop here and tell you what’s on the book’s Dedication Page – it’s dedicated to you – Patriots – who love the U.S.A. as much as I do…Sarah Palin
http://www.facebook.com/note.php?note_id=174541533434&comments
If you don’t love Sarah and won’t be buying her book, can you still be a patriot who loves America or is your patriotism automatically negated?
Amazona,
I love the way you ignore me.
“I repeat, “birther” is just one of those ignorant little catchphrases the RRL likes to come up with because they know their mindless base needs the simplest and easiest words possible.”
And yet it fits you so well. Thank god you work with cows instead of people.
I say “not taking casper seriously is not the same thing as ignoring him” (which anyone who can read and process inforamtion would understand to mean I don’t claim to ignore him but just don’t take the poor geezer seriously) and he responds with a comment on how poorly I ignore him.
It would be funny if it were not so sad.
And I comment that only the mindless use the term “birther” and his response os that my description of him “fits (me) so well”. ????????
Again, sad……….
But remember, uber-Lib casper is not an anomaly in conservative Casper Wyoming because his students jes’ looooove him.
Sad………….
…………………….
Excellent point, Mark. But the trolls here have repeatedly illustrated that they don’t understand the difference bewtween fact and opinion. They consider their opinions to be fact, and they lump Fox’s news in with its opinion hosts oblivious to the differences.
This comes back to the observation made so often here—that the far left is emotion-based. They voted for Obama based on emotion, they support him based on emotion, they object to Palin based on emotion, and they give those emotions the weight of objective fact.
It’s a Lib thing……….