Politifact's Truth-O-Meter

**Da Skinna** · August 11, 2009, 05:03 PM

Found a nifty website that has all of Obama's promises on a scale of what he's maintained, working on, compromised, or lied about and there's also a truth-o-meter.

http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/

What do you think of this site? Democratically good?

**nopasties** · August 11, 2009, 08:37 PM

It is keeping track of promises but the site is obviously left leaning

**danzig** · August 12, 2009, 12:31 AM

Hard to say without a comparison to past presidents of which the site doesnt appear to offer anything on Bush or Clinton before him. Besides not sure what such a thing would mean anyway, if someone promises alot of things and half of them are stuff people really dont care about or like and he fulfills every one of them but not the other half that people DID care about then his living up to his promises imo is meaningless.

*edit* the one amusing thing about the site is on the major liars thing its pretty much 50/50 on republican/democrats.

**Da Skinna** · August 12, 2009, 12:39 AM

Well it's a start to keeping tabs on accountability.

**PoleCat** · August 12, 2009, 12:42 AM

Politi-fact is neither left nor right leaning. I find they skewer politicians on an equal basis - if they lie or distort the truth then Politi-fact lists it. It's not my favorite site but it is usually fair.

I prefer FactCheck.org myself. They tend to list all the facts related to the subject and rarely jump to conclusions....

**danzig** · August 12, 2009, 01:06 AM

Originally Posted by PoleCat

Politi-fact is neither left nor right leaning. I find they skewer politicians on an equal basis - if they lie or distort the truth then Politi-fact lists it. It's not my favorite site but it is usually fair.

I prefer FactCheck.org myself. They tend to list all the facts related to the subject and rarely jump to conclusions....

Im not disputing that I just wonder how it is useful, if elected President I reform healthcare, stop dogs from pooping on your law, a few coupon for a scoop of ice cream once a month and help the Cubs win the world series. If I came thru on 3 of those (and hint not the 1st one) I can claim I keep my promises most of the time.

Case in point on the site one of the lies listed is : "RNC version of a Hillary Clinton valentine: "Roses are red, violets are blue, I'll raise your taxes and there is nothing you can do." The lie part is there is nothing you can do but that part is actually satire of the commercial, the fact that taxes would go up under hillary by letting the tax cut expire was found to be true as the site acknowledges. Another "lie" is Joe Biden saying the President is brain dead...well no doh it isnt true but Biden didnt mean it as a factual statement but his view on the president regardless of how stupid it was. Just seems rather pointless. I can lie and tell my wife she looks good in a dress and then I can lie to her about where I was last night to excuse an affair...not all lies are equal.

**PoleCat** · August 12, 2009, 10:30 AM

Originally Posted by danzig

Im not disputing that I just wonder how it is useful, if elected President I reform healthcare, stop dogs from pooping on your law, a few coupon for a scoop of ice cream once a month and help the Cubs win the world series. If I came thru on 3 of those (and hint not the 1st one) I can claim I keep my promises most of the time....(cut for length)

Yeah I agree that Politifact can be a bit too cute in some of their analysis but if you filter that out it's not too bad a site compared to a lot of the other garbage out there.

**Nouvelle Vague** · August 12, 2009, 01:40 AM

Any site that suggests that Sarah Palin's pants are on fire has got to be good.

**~~removeduser_487563287433~~** · August 12, 2009, 01:47 AM

Originally Posted by Da Skinna

Found a nifty website that has all of Obama's promises on a scale of what he's maintained, working on, compromised, or lied about and there's also a truth-o-meter.

http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/

What do you think of this site? Democratically good?

Depends entirely on whether the author is impartial.

**Admiral Piett** · August 12, 2009, 05:44 AM

Factcheck.org is incredibly biased compared to this site. I've seen it use outright insults based on little sources to back up their judgment. This is especially true with Ron Paul. They claim that Ron Paul is a conspiracy theorist and that the NAFTA superhighway is a myth. Obviously, they cannot get their facts straight because a superhighway is the in the process of being built using high I-35 from Mexico up to Oklahoma, and governor Rick Perry intends to help pay and encourage this highway's usage by implimenting a toll road system on all highways near and around it.

The entire article on Ron Paul on factcheck is centered around what they consider erroneous statements about defense spending and his anti-NAFTA leanings (which Ron Paul slammed down someone claiming he believed in a conspiracy theory in a live debate) - without a single reference to any of his other far more important comments about lending firms and classical liberal economic policy and his arguments about a foreign policy reversal.The same is true with Bob Barr and Mike Gravel. That site picks and choose who to attack and who to analyze objectively.

This politifact site is far more balanced.

**danzig** · August 12, 2009, 06:13 AM

The conspiracy part is not the highway but Paul's claim that is going to lead to North American union between US/Canada/Mexico, its a frigging highway one that has been scaled back in size too so making the leap from highway to three countries merging is indeed a conspiracy. Sorry to Paul fans but anytime he is right is balanced by the fact the is often a looney.

**Admiral Piett** · August 12, 2009, 06:51 AM

Originally Posted by danzig

The conspiracy part is not the highway but Paul's claim that is going to lead to North American union between US/Canada/Mexico, its a frigging highway one that has been scaled back in size too so making the leap from highway to three countries merging is indeed a conspiracy. Sorry to Paul fans but anytime he is right is balanced by the fact the is often a looney.

Like Paul himself said when he personally addressed the issue. "I do not believe in some mastermind situation where people are secretly plotting to form such a union and such a currency. This is something that is out in the open that you can read and interpret for yourself." To add to that, the fact there is greater pressure for global currencies doesn't make such a union such a far-fetched idea. The economic summits have consistently brought up having various currencies backing up one another so if one economy or currencies hits drops, the others will be help keep it afloat while having the backing of the others so that everyone is not dragged down with the sinking ship.

What Ron Paul is talking about is what is really voted on in Texas and how we've already spent money on it.

**danzig** · August 12, 2009, 01:12 PM

Originally Posted by Future Filmmaker

Like Paul himself said when he personally addressed the issue. "I do not believe in some mastermind situation where people are secretly plotting to form such a union and such a currency. This is something that is out in the open that you can read and interpret for yourself." To add to that, the fact there is greater pressure for global currencies doesn't make such a union such a far-fetched idea. The economic summits have consistently brought up having various currencies backing up one another so if one economy or currencies hits drops, the others will be help keep it afloat while having the backing of the others so that everyone is not dragged down with the sinking ship.

What is far fetched is belief the highway is directly tied into such ideas, we dont live in a vacuum "union" stuff aside there are legitimate reasons why you would want such an infrastructure project it, there IS alot to be gained by it. There are of course reasons to reject it but it being a step towards the mythical NAU is not one of them because there is no facts to back it up, its clear to see why such project stretch across the US from Mexico to Canada might be useful no?

**Gaidin** · August 12, 2009, 10:33 AM

I've always found these sites pretty useless until the end of the term. 6 months in is a damn near useless point to see what kind of promises he's managed to keep. At minimum I wait 18 months given the natural consequences such things have on midterm elections.

**Каие** · August 12, 2009, 12:06 PM

A good site. Saves the trouble of doing your own research, but as with all those kinds of sites, it means you have to trust someone else's analysis and research skills, as well as their sources. Then again, you can just verify anything on there.

**Da Skinna** · August 12, 2009, 01:19 PM

I don't know why the elites would want to inflame their respective populations by creating a North American Union... they profit too much from the status quo as it is.

**danzig** · August 12, 2009, 01:23 PM

Originally Posted by Da Skinna

I don't know why the elites would want to inflame their respective populations by creating a North American Union... they profit too much from the status quo as it is.

Well thing is even if this was a plan by the "elites" unless they plan on an overthrow of the country and a dictatorship which brings up its own set of issues any NAU idea is DOA since no one in Canada wants it and no one in US wants it and you kinda of need the consent of the population for such ideas, just look at EU attempts to be drawn in closer meet opposition.

**Da Skinna** · August 12, 2009, 01:47 PM

Originally Posted by danzig

Well thing is even if this was a plan by the "elites" unless they plan on an overthrow of the country and a dictatorship which brings up its own set of issues any NAU idea is DOA since no one in Canada wants it and no one in US wants it and you kinda of need the consent of the population for such ideas, just look at EU attempts to be drawn in closer meet opposition.

I don't apply some sinister aspect to the "elites" as you have labeled them to overthrow anything. But as time moves forward and perhaps identities blur (unlikely for a long time) there could be economic benefits furthering each country if involved.

And maybe the first step wouldn't be Union, but furthered economic treaties like NAFTA.

**danzig** · August 12, 2009, 01:54 PM

Originally Posted by Da Skinna

I don't apply some sinister aspect to the "elites" as you have labeled them to overthrow anything. But as time moves forward and perhaps identities blur (unlikely for a long time) there could be economic benefits furthering each country if involved.

And maybe the first step wouldn't be Union, but furthered economic treaties like NAFTA.

Well Im not implying something sinister just saying people fear NAU idea but ignore that the only way it can happen is either the majority of people in all three countries agree in which case what is the big deal or the elites overthrow the goverments of the countries involved. There really isnt any other way to bring it about, I just think people get far too paranoid that there IS something sinister going on by projects like trans corridor highway