I believe the sentence I copied and pasted from the site listed above sums up about 97% of any information given by any candidate in any political race.
When we asked for backup for the claim, the campaign cited national employment figures spanning four years. We found that though the numbers are accurate, their reading of them isn’t.
hhhhhhmmmmmmmmmm twisting information so it seems more ominous than it really is just so a candidate or political party looks bad (run on sentence intended) ? How dare they, I mean they are supposed to be honest political parties. That alone is a wonderful joke.
You know, ever since I found PolitiFact, I've been a frequent visitor. What I really like about them is they share the information they dig up and explain their reasoning in arriving at their ratings on the "truth-o-meter." That allows you to evaluate the information on your own. There have been times when I've disagreed but I always feel like I disagreed with knowledge instead of just a hunch or a feeling. And I surely like letting them do the bulk of my homework for me.
Yes, everyone tells whoppers in office or in seeking office. But look at the comparisons of the two candidates and how often the balance of what they've said is on the truth side. And look at the number of Pant's on Fires Romney has! Over 10% of the statements he's rated as bald faced lies. That's not figuring on the ones that were rated mostly false and false (41.6%).
Compare that to our president's comments. His Pants on Fire ratings are 1.3%. Overall falsehoods 14.5%. Yes, that's more than I want but when I consider that probably anyone is going to lie, sometimes, admittedly, by being misinformed, I'll go with the one who lies to me the least. BTW, I don't see being misinformed as a strength or something to be accepted lightly.
I am not receiving notices about posts I am following or posting too, so I missed this till today. I find the information you posted very interesting. Also very usual. A candidate will say anything, prompting included, by the 'official team', but as president it is less likely the person has to be as creative, even in an election year. I found Obama's rating interesting, to be frank I am surprised his false statement rating is so high. I do understand what you are saying, using the excuse 'I didn't know, or was given incorrect information is not an excuse at all. Instead it is usually a gross lack of collecting correct information (my two cents) or twisting it beyond recognition. I go back to the few sentences I posted above from the original article in your link. Information is not only misread, it is intentionally misread and then the newest version is thrown out for the latest public outcry, even if it is proven as false several hours later.
If only the people of this country we live in would stop paying so much attention to the gossip side of other's lives, things would be so much more credible and acceptable. You said it best, the public is a product of their own making, and the candidates run on what motivates the public. Senators who are supposed to be hiking on a sabbatical and instead off to another country to see the love of their life (of course not their spouse) becomes more credible than the work the person did or did not do while in office. To this day I still don't care what he was doing, my concern includes what funds he used for his trips and his overall performance in office. People will be people, even if they think they are above reproach. I would hope if I ever find myself in a position where I choose between what is right and money or power I will consider all the facts before making a decision even if the money is wiggling in front of my nose, (I could really use it to get that face lift and fat farm visit I have been threatening for years). But like everyone else, I am human, who knows. Corruption is a part of our life and is not going to stop,but I worry about selling to the highest bidder and what lengths the elected officials will reach for, just for personal gain or proposed personal gain.
Believe it or not I am a Ron Paul fan, have been for several years now, unfortunately he will probably never have enough backing to get further than a few articles and his name somewhat known. Thanks for the tip, I have been reading PolitiFact since reading your link. As you stated, I have not agreed with all the information, but it does provide an easy way to weigh out what is out there. As the election race heats up I will gravitate away from the television and the news, the stories are ridiculous and the mud slinging is down right annoying. You know what I dislike the most? (perhaps I have written this before) No wonder we are laughed at by other countries; no loyalty, scandals, laughable candidates just to name a few reasons. We are not the force once reckoned with, and the general public is fooling themselves if they think we are.
Well, the guy on the intercontinental "hike" with his lover was the governor of South Carolina. Not that it really matters except SC has been such a source of embarrassing amusement over the past few years. And the senators need to be judged for their own sins, anyway.
I did respect the governor's wife's response. No display at the podium being humiliated while she stood by her man. Screw you, I'm outta here. Gotta admire that.
I respect Ron Paul and think I'd enjoy having lunch with him. I do believe he's the most honest and consistent politician of our day. It's sad that the little man with the weird ideas is the marker but there we have it. I cannot abide his policies, though. I used to be a Libertarian (not in the actual party but in general philosophy) but it doesn't work IMO. But I like the ideas behind itl in a perfect world it would be enough. But the world ain't perfect.
As for PolitiFact, I don't have any reason to disagree with their facts. But I do reserve the right to draw my own conclusions from them.
For example, one of Obama's "Pants on Fire" ratings was because he called having department heads review their rules was "unprecedented" as it had been ordered by other presidents. What they didn't ask is if Obama had some reason to think his process was unprecedented. It also isn't of the same importance as fabricating numbers out of thin air. I would have labeled it false and moved on.
There have been others, that's the one that jumps off the page for me. To me, it seemed trivial.
If I'm ever offered power or money, I hope I'll let my morals dictate my actions. I just hope I someday have the chance to see.
Thanks for the Ron Paul info, I looked it up after reading your post on the two others. I agree there have been more than a few interesting happenings down south. I did know who it was, just refrained from bringing who . Like you, I respected the wife and not because I am female because there is very little class in politics these days, I believe her reactions/actions were awesome.
I also lean toward the Libertarian or the philosophy behind it, but like you, I also realize it is impossible to enact. Sad, I really think it would work. Perhaps it is the enjoyment of fairy tales even at my age.
Interesting thoughts on our current pres, I am going to have to look into that further, for no other reason than once I find a part of something out, I have to know more. I agree though, it is trivial, one of my main annoyances with the political scene. What should be important is not, and what is so far from important makes the world go round.
I hope you do receive your chance, but you have to promise to share your final choice.