Showing posts with label fact checking. Show all posts
Showing posts with label fact checking. Show all posts

Saturday, August 7, 2010

Sarah Palin: Democrat Pants Still on Fire

*
Sarah Palin continues to battle President Obama, the Democrat-controlled Congress and the liberal “fact-checkers” at the St. Petersburg Times. On Facebook late Friday night, Gov. Palin promised to keep holding the president, Congress and lamestream media accountable on their intentions concerning the Bush tax cuts, which are scheduled to expire at the end of this year:
Pants on Fire, Still

A $3.8 trillion tax increase is coming down the pike, folks. America’s tax cuts which can incentivize small businesses to expand and hire more people (thus fulfilling the mission to grow more private sector jobs), or even just to keep our doors open, will expire in four months. That expiration equates to an increase on your tax bill, starting at midnight, December 31.

I’ll keep calling out President Obama and the Democrats until they tell the American people what the plan is to save the incentives – to not allow the mom and pops’ tax cuts to expire. Granted, liberals (including stubborn “fact-checkers” who claim I’m lying about the soon-to-be tax cut expiration) are trying to clobber me for holding them accountable and prodding them toward revealing their intentions (because they’ve had 18 months to publicly propose a plan to stave off the $3.8 trillion tax increase that will soon slam us, but have revealed no plan). If they have a bill to extend the 2001 and 2003 tax cuts, let’s see it. Time for them to put up or shut up.

But you don’t have to take my word for it. Take the word of the “fact-checkers” at PolitiFact, who, before moving the goal posts in their second dissembling “fact-check” on the Democrats’ tax hikes, wrote in their original “fact-check”:
There are no formal congressional proposals yet to keep the Bush tax cuts in place, so we don’t have precise estimates from official sources like the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office. Still, there’s a good bit of consensus on what the tax increases would look like, both if lower rates expired only for high earners and also for all incomes.
As Ed Morrissey noted:
And there’s a big problem with this argument, which is that “consensus” means nothing without passing a bill, and especially not without proposing one first. Thanks to Democrats in 2001 and 2003, those bills cutting the tax rates have hard-and-fast sunset provisions that create an expiration date absent of any other action. We are now less than four months away from that expiration date after seven years of seeing it coming, after more than 3 years of Democratic control of Congress, and after eighteen months of the Obama administration. Democrats don’t even have a proposal on the table yet, and the legislative calendar is rapidly shrinking to take action before the expiration date hits. Without action, we will see a $3.8 trillion tax hike across the entire spectrum of earners.
So much for “consensus” without action. PolitiFact is curiously stating that in his 2011 budget, the President mentioned some “plan” to do something about not raising taxes on all Americans. Um, don’t know about you, but I don’t find this general, vague promise of some “plan” all that reassuring. The Left also “plans” to do something about our out of control deficits and high unemployment, and the President “planned” for his nearly trillion dollar stimulus to keep unemployment under 8%. We’ve seen how successful that “plan” worked out. The President’s budget “plan” hasn’t worked out so well either. As the economist Bruce Bartlett explained at the time, the President’s budget – including the tax promise – was never much more than a vague statement of intent. Practically speaking, it was dead on arrival. Even Bartlett couldn’t have known how dead, though, because in the end Congress didn’t even succeed in passing a budget, let alone in taking a decision on the 2001 and 2003 tax cuts.

Bottom line: until we see a formal proposal – an actual bill before Congress – then get ready for that $3.8 trillion hit.

(By the way, the Left sure gets wee-wee’d up when they’re called on something like this, eh? And here I am, thousands of miles away from DC out on a commercial fishing boat, working my butt off for my own business, merely asking the Democrat politicos and their liberal friends in the media: “What’s the plan, man?”, and they seem to feel threatened by my question. So, I’ll go back to setting my hooks and watching the halibut take the bait, and when I come back into the boat’s cabin in a few hours, I’ll log back on here to read their reply. I’ll have succeeded if they’re forced to finally reveal to Americans how they plan to increase taxes, and what they intend to do with our money. In the meantime, I’m catching fish.)

- Sarah Palin, in Homer, Alaska
- JP

Thursday, August 5, 2010

Sarah Palin exposes 'fact-checker' site's lies (Updated)

*
On Facebook, Gov. Sarah Palin exposes a so-called "fact-checking" website as just another disingenuous, in-the-tank-for-Obama, lamestream media fraud:
Fact-checking the Fact-checkers on the $3.8 Trillion Obama Tax Hike

esterday, PolitiFact.com fact-checked my statement about the coming $3.8 trillion Obama tax hike – the largest tax increase in history. They did such a bad job of it, however, that I feel compelled to fact-check the fact-checkers.

First of all, they claim that there are Democrat proposals which would “keep the tax cuts for individuals who make less than $200,000 and couples who make less than $250,000.”

Unfortunately for PolitiFact, no such proposal exists. They admit as much, by the way, when they state that “There are no formal congressional proposals yet to keep the Bush tax cuts in place, so we don’t have precise estimates from official sources like the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office.” That doesn’t stop them, though, from claiming I “confuse the issue” by “using numbers that assume all the tax cuts are going away. That is not the Democratic plan nor is it President Obama’s plan.”

Plan? What plan? There is no plan. All we have is smoke and mirrors based on an old Obama campaign pledge that if elected, he would exempt families making less than $250,000 a year from “any form of tax increases.” But this pledge was already watered before he was even elected. First vice-presidential candidate Joe Biden lowered it to $150,000. Then campaign surrogate Gov. Bill Richardson lowered it even further to $120,000.

A few months after the inauguration, even that last promise disappeared in a puff of smoke. When asked to reaffirm the White House’s commitment to the campaign promise of no tax increases for families earning less than $250,000, Obama’s spin doctor David Axelrod declared the President had “no interest in drawing lines in the sand.”

The truth is that as of today, Democrats haven’t taken any action to extend any part of the 2001 and 2003 tax cuts for any income group – and in this case doing nothing equals hitting American taxpayers with a massive $3.8 trillion tax increase.

What we do know for certain is that the White House is more than willing to raise taxes on families with incomes of less than $250,000. Democrat Senator Max Baucus admitted as much during the debate about Obamacare when he stated that “One other point that I think it’s very important to make is that it is true that in certain cases, the taxes will go up for some Americans who might be making less than $200,000.”

PolitiFact doesn’t dispute the $3.8 trillion estimate of the cost of repeal of the 2001 and 2003 tax cuts. It admits that “Palin’s estimate of $3.8 trillion over 10 years is within a reasonable range, if you’re talking about all taxpayers.” And yet somehow it continues to argue that I’m wrong, based on a proposal it admits doesn’t exist which in turn is based on a phantom campaign pledge which Democrats have already broken anyway. I call that a “Pants on Fire” statement.

To prevent PolitiFact from making similar mistakes in future, it would be helpful if the White House and the Democratic Congressional leadership finally mustered the courage to table their plans to let the 2001 and 2003 tax cuts expire. Mr. President, publish your proposals, and we’ll duke it out. You can argue in favor of a multi-trillion dollar tax hike in an age of economic uncertainty and mass unemployment, and we’ll argue for fiscal sanity combined with serious spending cuts. I for one look forward to such a debate.

In the meantime I suggest the St. Petersburg Times hire a few extra staff to fact-check its fact-checkers. It might help it prevent being caught with its “pants on fire” again in the future.

- Sarah Palin
When the leftist-controlled, lamestream media uses words like "fact" and "truth" in the names of their websites, intensified scrutiny of its propaganda is called for.

Update: Captain Ed weighs in:
Politifact blew this one. They misleadingly claimed that Palin was discussing a specific plan, when none exists anyway, and which she was not, in fact, debating. They used the nonexistent plan to claim that she was mischaracterizing it, which is an impressive feat of sophistry. What Palin was doing was warning people of a massive tax hike that Democrats so far have passively led the US to the brink of realizing — and which will shortly become reality unless Congress takes action quickly to avoid.

When Democrats produce an actual plan, we’ll be glad to debate it. Until then, the only item on the table is the comprehensive expiration of the cuts, which will produce the effect Palin accurately described.
- JP

Thursday, July 29, 2010

Quote of the Day (July 29, 2010)

*
Doug Powers at The Powers That Be:
"Sarah Palin’s got a new lib-tickling book coming out in November, so I hope the AP fact checkers relaxed after Going Rogue was released, because break time is almost over."
- JP

Friday, November 13, 2009

Quote of the Day (November 13, 2009)

*
Weasel Zippers*:
"I don't recall the AP fact checking Dreams of my Father"
*Severe language alert

- JP

Tuesday, October 6, 2009

Fact checking CNN's fact checking

If anyone has any remaining doubts whether CNN is totally tanked for Obama, consider that the cable news network felt the need to defend the president with a "fact check" segment analyzing a Saturday Night Live skit which lampooned Obama:



Notice how CNN points out which elements of the skit which, in the reporter's opinion, don't accurately reflect on the president's record, while it praises Tina Fey's portrayal of Sarah Palin as "spot on." Fact-checking CNN's fact-checking, Sarah Palin never said "I can see Russia from my backyard," as Fey's punchline has led many to believe. The former Alaska governor actually said that you can see Russia from Alaska, which is a fact of geography.

But CNN never worried that people who get their news from television comedy programs might be mislead by the humor technique of exaggeration until the object of its affection was the one who was in the line of funny fire. George Bush "misunderestimated"? No problem. Sarah Palin can see Russia from her house? Spot on. But Obama is a president of little accomplishment? Suddenly it's the Battle of Britain. Urgent! Call out the fact checkers! Defend The One at all costs!

CNN is the double standard bearer of cable news.

h/t: Freedom's Lighthouse

- JP