# The War on Fact-Checkers: New GOP Strategy? **URL:** \ **Category:** Politics & Elections\ **Created:** [August 31, 2012, 12:38pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-war-on-fact-checkers-new-gop-strategy/633246 "2012-08-31T12:38:20Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 2
**Author:** ![Richard\_Parker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/35a633/32.png) [@Richard\_Parker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Richard_Parker)\ **Post date:** [August 31, 2012, 8:36pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-war-on-fact-checkers-new-gop-strategy/633246/21 "2012-08-31T20:36:56Z")
I’m not sure why you’re so unclear about what I’m saying. She chose 27 months. Why those months? Politifact assumes that she started from the depth of the job losses, and carries that assumption over to the other analysis. But if she chose 27 months for another reason, then Politifact’s analysis is wrong. The reason for her choice is the implicit premise. And I laid out an equally plausible one that would yield more favorable results. ---
**Author:** ![Evil\_Captor](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/f17d59/32.png) [@Evil\_Captor](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Evil_Captor)\ **Post date:** [August 31, 2012, 10:13pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-war-on-fact-checkers-new-gop-strategy/633246/22 "2012-08-31T22:13:20Z")
Well the Republican campaign to convert the mainstream media into slobbering useless tools has been a grand success to date. By calling the mainstream media “liberal” they have over time bullyied the mainstream media into accepting any counterclaim to a democratic claim as equally weighty regardless of its nature, thus achieving “balanced and objective” journalism. Even if one claim is a blatant falsehood or misrepresentation (see: Swiftboating, and many other similar episodes over the last ten years) both claims get reported as having equal weight. So why should the conservatives/Republicans not go after fact checkers, if they keep injecting an unwelcome note of truth and accuracy into political debates? The conservatives/Republicans have got everything to gain and nothing to lose. ---
**Author:** ![drewtwo99](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/d07c76/32.png) [@drewtwo99](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/drewtwo99)\ **Post date:** [August 31, 2012, 11:37pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-war-on-fact-checkers-new-gop-strategy/633246/23 "2012-08-31T23:37:43Z")
When the media can’t even call out their blatant lies for being seen as “liberally biased”, then we know that they have won. Oh wait, that has already happened. Liberally biased media my ass. Ryan didn’t mischaracterize the truth. Ryan didn’t stretch the facts. He didn’t make a false claim, speak in prevarications, or twist the truth. HE LIED. And the media is loathe to say so. The headlines after the RNC, in any rational world, would be, “Paul Ryan’s speech filled with verifiable lies” ---
**Author:** ![Randvek](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/a6a055/32.png) [@Randvek](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Randvek)\ **Post date:** [August 31, 2012, 11:54pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-war-on-fact-checkers-new-gop-strategy/633246/24 "2012-08-31T23:54:29Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > On these boards, only Politifact gets dumped as too conservative, though. imho, the quality of Politifact articles varies so widely that they cannot be considered a reliable source; it can be difficult to tell their great articles from their terrible ones, and a lot of the time it just comes down to reader bias. You posted earlier that the “Truth-o-Meter” reading often bears no resemblance to what is actually written in the article. I agree with this completely, though I think you chose your examples poorly. ---
**Author:** ![Lamar\_Mundane](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/85f322/32.png) [@Lamar\_Mundane](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Lamar_Mundane)\ **Post date:** [September 1, 2012, 12:51am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-war-on-fact-checkers-new-gop-strategy/633246/25 "2012-09-01T00:51:39Z")
> [@drewtwo99](#): > > When the media can’t even call out their blatant lies for being seen as “liberally biased”, then we know that they have won. Oh wait, that has already happened. Liberally biased media my ass. > > Ryan didn’t mischaracterize the truth. Ryan didn’t stretch the facts. He didn’t make a false claim, speak in prevarications, or twist the truth. HE LIED. And the media is loathe to say so. > > The headlines after the RNC, in any rational world, would be, “Paul Ryan’s speech filled with verifiable lies” Actually, the media is doing a much better job this time around. They seem to have drawn a line in the sand and are defending it. They keep hammering the Republicans for the obvious lies. If they weren’t, there would be no need for these embarrassing attacks on the “fact checkers” by the Republicans. ---
**Author:** ![Leaper](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/4bbf92/32.png) [@Leaper](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Leaper)\ **Post date:** [September 1, 2012, 1:17am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-war-on-fact-checkers-new-gop-strategy/633246/26 "2012-09-01T01:17:51Z")
> [@drewtwo99](#): > > When the media can’t even call out their blatant lies for being seen as “liberally biased”, then we know that they have won. Oh wait, that has already happened. Liberally biased media my ass. > > Ryan didn’t mischaracterize the truth. Ryan didn’t stretch the facts. He didn’t make a false claim, speak in prevarications, or twist the truth. HE LIED. And the media is loathe to say so. > > The headlines after the RNC, in any rational world, would be, “Paul Ryan’s speech filled with verifiable lies” Yeah, but even with Ryan’s speech, conservative bloggers are already talking about how, for example, that plant technically WAS closed under Obama, and how he sorta kinda DID say something that could be construed as a promise, etc. etc. So they STILL see “liberal bias,” because they are SURE that Ryan didn’t tell a single lie. ---
**Author:** ![kaylasdad99](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/kaylasdad99/32/3398_2.png) [@kaylasdad99](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/kaylasdad99)\ **Post date:** [September 1, 2012, 2:43am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-war-on-fact-checkers-new-gop-strategy/633246/27 "2012-09-01T02:43:35Z")
> [@Enderw24](#): > > I get that I’m both preaching to the choir, shouting against the river, and a few other mixed metaphors here, but I’m going to say it anyway. > > There’s one, and only one, way to disprove a fact-checker. It’s not to say “they’re a leftist site.” It’s not to say “they come in with known biases.” It is this: present alternate facts which disprove the fact-checker’s assertions. If you cannot do this, you cannot complain about the fact checker. But reading is _H-A-A-A-A-A-A-A-R-R-R-R-D_! It’s much less of a PITA to just accept the designation of “fact-checker” as a pejorative. ---
**Author:** ![yorick73](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/y/b5a626/32.png) [@yorick73](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/yorick73)\ **Post date:** [September 1, 2012, 6:06am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-war-on-fact-checkers-new-gop-strategy/633246/28 "2012-09-01T06:06:27Z")
> [@Frylock](#): > > In fairness, when I looked at the headlines for all of the articles written by the Fox News employee who wrote the one you’re referring to, it seemed apparent she must be one of Fox’s resident liberals. All of her articles are critical of the GOP. I guess the “Opinion” tab on top of the story didn’t tip you off? This is not a news story…which should be obvious. ---
**Author:** ![BrainGlutton](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/82dd89/32.png) [@BrainGlutton](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BrainGlutton)\ **Post date:** [September 1, 2012, 6:40am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-war-on-fact-checkers-new-gop-strategy/633246/29 "2012-09-01T06:40:47Z")
> [@Jack\_Batty](#): > > Actual quote from Newt Gingrich on Morning Joe a couple of days ago: “Liberals lie better than conservatives tell the truth.” > > I’m not exactly sure what he was getting at, since I started yelling and throwing food at my TeeVee at that point, but it seems apropos to this thread. Well, it is certainly the case that conservatives do not tell the truth well. I guess that’s what he meant. ---
**Author:** ![BrainGlutton](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/82dd89/32.png) [@BrainGlutton](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BrainGlutton)\ **Post date:** [September 1, 2012, 6:59am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-war-on-fact-checkers-new-gop-strategy/633246/30 "2012-09-01T06:59:53Z")
> [@bup](#): > > On other boards, I have encountered Republicans who dismiss [FactCheck.org](http://FactCheck.org), Politifact, and any other fact-checking source as liberal bias. [Even Snopes.](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?t=651652) ---
**Author:** ![Shayna](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/shayna/32/17976_2.png) [@Shayna](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Shayna)\ **Post date:** [September 1, 2012, 10:55am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-war-on-fact-checkers-new-gop-strategy/633246/31 "2012-09-01T10:55:09Z")
> [@Richard\_Parker](#): > > For example, I think the pushback on the Janesville plant has been by and large pretty fair, regardless of which side you think is correct. You _do_? So you’re saying that December 23rd, 2008 happened _after_ President Obama was sworn in? [http://i47.tinypic.com/2jg2olt.jpg](http://i47.tinypic.com/2jg2olt.jpg) > [@Richard\_Parker](#): > > I’m not sure why you’re so unclear about what I’m saying. She chose 27 months. Why those months? Politifact assumes that she started from the depth of the job losses, and carries that assumption over to the other analysis. But if she chose 27 months for another reason, then Politifact’s analysis is wrong. The reason for her choice is the implicit premise. And I laid out an equally plausible one that would yield more favorable results. Cutter _was_ wrong. We’ve seen private sector job growth for _29_ months, not 27. And she chose that time period very clearly because she was talking about … wait for it … _that time period_. “Well, I think that worker probably has a good understanding of what’s happened over the past four years in terms of the president coming in and seeing 800,000 jobs lost on the day that the president was being sworn in”: TRUE “… and seeing the president moving pretty quickly to stem the losses, to turn the economy around”: TRUE “… and over the past, you know, 27 months we’ve created 4.5 million private sector jobs.”: TRUE “That’s more jobs than in the Bush recovery.”: TRUE “… in the Reagan recovery.”: Arguably TRUE. Reagan waited an entire _year_ before he even _admitted_ the economy was tanking under his policies and agreed to take any action at all. The job losses we suffered while he fiddled are directly attributable to him, so when we’re talking about which president’s fiscal policies should start counting towards job creation (or loss), Reagan has to be held accountable for what _he_ cost in jobs before he finally got off his ass and did something about it. Barack Obama isn’t responsible for the irresponsible policies that caused the massive job losses he walked into; he’s only responsible for what _his_ policies affected. > [@drewtwo99](#): > > When the media can’t even call out their blatant lies for being seen as “liberally biased”, then we know that they have won. Oh wait, that has already happened. Liberally biased media my ass. > > Ryan didn’t mischaracterize the truth. Ryan didn’t stretch the facts. He didn’t make a false claim, speak in prevarications, or twist the truth. HE LIED. And the media is loathe to say so. > > The headlines after the RNC, in any rational world, would be, “Paul Ryan’s speech filled with verifiable lies” There’s been some improvement this election season, though not as much as there should be. Dave Weigel, [Slate.com](http://Slate.com): “incredible string of false or misleading statements” [Paul Ryan’s speech included an incredible string of false or misleading statements.](http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/the_breakfast_table/features/2012/_2012_republican_national_convention/paul_ryan_s_speech_included_an_incredible_string_of_false_or_misleading_statements_.html) Jonathan Cohn, the New Republic: The Most Dishonest Convention Speech … Ever? > **[The Most Dishonest Convention Speech ... Ever?](https://newrepublic.com/article/106730/five-big-misrepresentations-paul-ryans-convention-speech)** > > The most dishonest convention speech ever? At least five times, Ryan twisted truth beyond recognition. Here they are. Michael Tomasky, the Daily Beast: “Paul Ryan pushed American politics into new territory with his convention speech, effectively daring Democrats and the media to call him out on his string of blatant falsehoods” [Michael Tomasky on Paul Ryan’s Convention Speech and His Web of Lies](http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2012/08/30/michael-tomasky-on-paul-ryan-s-convention-speech-and-his-web-of-lies). Jonathan Bernstein, the Washington Post: Paul Ryan fails – the truth [http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/plum-line/post/paul-ryan-fails----the-truth/2012/08/29/bbfe1eac-f254-11e1-b74c-84ed55e0300b\_blog.html](http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/plum-line/post/paul-ryan-fails----the-truth/2012/08/29/bbfe1eac-f254-11e1-b74c-84ed55e0300b_blog.html) AP: FACT CHECK: Convention speakers stray from reality [http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5j-oHGoQbH0RmoY7rNL47-I6BYziA?docId=dc7b2d4bcfab405989965fd9505a1aff](http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5j-oHGoQbH0RmoY7rNL47-I6BYziA?docId=dc7b2d4bcfab405989965fd9505a1aff) Dan Amira, NY Magazine: Paul Ryan Bets on the Ignorance of America [http://nymag.com/daily/intel/2012/08/paul-ryan-rnc-speech-lies-fact-check](http://nymag.com/daily/intel/2012/08/paul-ryan-rnc-speech-lies-fact-check). Fox News contributor, Sally Kohn: “Ryan’s speech was an apparent attempt to set the world record for the greatest number of blatant lies and misrepresentations slipped into a single political speech.” [http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2012/08/30/paul-ryans-speech-in-three-words/#ixzz252BejeYA](http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2012/08/30/paul-ryans-speech-in-three-words/#ixzz252BejeYA) Washington Post Editorial Board: Mr. Ryan’s misleading speech [http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/mr-ryans-speech-effective-maybe-but-definitely-misleading/2012/08/30/a9b4e690-f227-11e1-adc6-87dfa8eff430\_story.html?hpid=z4](http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/mr-ryans-speech-effective-maybe-but-definitely-misleading/2012/08/30/a9b4e690-f227-11e1-adc6-87dfa8eff430_story.html?hpid=z4) > **[FactCheck.org](https://www.factcheck.org/)** “Paul Ryan’s acceptance speech at the Republican convention contained several false claims and misleading statements.” [Ryan's VP Spin - FactCheck.org](http://factcheck.org/2012/08/ryans-vp-spin/) [factcheck.org/](http://factcheck.org/)… Andrew Sullivan, the Daily Beast: The lies and lies of Paul Ryan [http://andrewsullivan.thedailybeast.com/2012/08/the-lies-of-paul-ryan.html](http://andrewsullivan.thedailybeast.com/2012/08/the-lies-of-paul-ryan.html) James Downie, Washington Post: Paul Ryan’s breathtakingly dishonest speech [http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/post-partisan/post/paul-ryans-dishonest-speech/2012/08/30/16bb62d8-f24f-11e1-adc6-87dfa8eff430\_blog.html](http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/post-partisan/post/paul-ryans-dishonest-speech/2012/08/30/16bb62d8-f24f-11e1-adc6-87dfa8eff430_blog.html) James Fallow, Atlantic Paul Ryan and the post truth convention > **[Paul Ryan and the Post-Truth Convention Speech](https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2012/08/paul-ryan-and-the-post-truth-convention-speech/261775/)** > > A well-received, and deeply dishonest, presentation Robert Schlesinger, US News [http://www.usnews.com/opinion/blogs/robert-schlesinger/2012/08/29/paul-ryan-repeats-auto-bailout-medicare-lies](http://www.usnews.com/opinion/blogs/robert-schlesinger/2012/08/29/paul-ryan-repeats-auto-bailout-medicare-lies) Juan Cole: Top Ten Repeated Paul Ryan Lies > **[Top Ten Repeated Paul Ryan Lies](https://www.juancole.com/2012/08/top-ten-repeated-paul-ryan-lies.html)** > > This year's Republican campaign may be the most dishonest in history. A couple of weeks ago I listed 10 major falsehoods and gaffes of Republican VP candidate Paul Ryan. He repeated several of them in his Tampa speech, and added a few more. In honest... The Guardian: Paul Ryan’s speech: a round-up of his most audacious untruths   > **[Paul Ryan's speech: a round-up of his most audacious untruths](https://www.theguardian.com/world/2012/aug/30/paul-ryans-speech-audacious-untruths)** > > Mitt Romney's running mate made a series of attacks against Obama, from Medicare to GM. But did he get his facts straight? Charles Pierce, Esquire: Paul Ryan Is the Newest New Nixon, a Moocher Belied > **[Charles P. Pierce on Paul Ryan's Convention Speech](https://www.esquire.com/news-politics/politics/a15571/paul-ryan-convention-speech-12188956/)** > > He is the newest new Nixon and, don't kid yourselves: He's a lot better at it than the old one was. Josh Barro, Bloomberg Paul Ryan’s Hypocritical Attack on Barack Obama [http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2012-08-30/paul-ryan-s-hypocritical-attack-on-barack-obama.html](http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2012-08-30/paul-ryan-s-hypocritical-attack-on-barack-obama.html) William Saletan, [Slate.com](http://Slate.com) Why I’m breaking up with Paul Ryan [Paul Ryan’s Medicare flip-flop is a betrayal of conservatism.](http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/frame_game/2012/08/paul_ryan_s_medicare_flip_flop_is_a_betrayal_of_conservatism_.html) John Nichols, [CBSnews.com](http://CBSnews.com) They love the lies Paul Ryan tells [http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-215\_162-57503785/they-love-the-lies-paul-ryan-tells/](http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-215_162-57503785/they-love-the-lies-paul-ryan-tells/) Rekha Basu, Des Moines Register: Half the truth often is a full lie for Paul Ryan > **[The Des Moines Register - Des Moines, Iowa, News and Sports](https://www.desmoinesregister.com/)** > > The Des Moines Register is the number one source for Des Moines and Iowa breaking, politics, business, agriculture, Iowa sports and entertainment news. Henry Blodget, Business Insider Paul Ryan’s Speech Proves The New Political Truth: It’s Fine To Lie > **[Paul Ryan's Speech Proves The New Political Truth: It's Fine To Lie](https://www.businessinsider.com/paul-ryans-speech-proves-the-new-political-truth-its-fine-to-lie-2012-8#)** > > Paul Ryan's speech raises eyebrows, suggesting a new political norm where lying is acceptable. The Week The media coverage of Paul Ryan’s speech: 15 euphemisms for ‘lying’ > **[The media coverage of Paul Ryan's speech: 15 euphemisms for 'lying'](https://theweek.com/articles/472744/media-coverage-paul-ryans-speech-15-euphemisms-lying)** > > Journalists are going to awkward lengths to avoid the L-word when reviewing Ryan's address — even though the veep candidate told several brazen whoppers Jean Williams, [Examiner.com](http://Examiner.com) RNC audience thrilled by Paul Ryan’s self-serving and deceitful speech [StockBot by Examiner.com - Stock Examiner bot by Examiner.com](http://www.examiner.com/article/rnc-audience-thrilled-by-paul-ryan-s-self-serving-) and-deceitful-speech If you read nothing else from that list, William Saletan’s Slate piece is a Must Read. But first read his post from 2 weeks ago, “Why I Love Paul Ryan.” \*"He’s what a Republican should be: an honest, open-minded, solution-oriented fiscal conservative. "A wonderful thing has happened for this country. Paul Ryan will be the Republican nominee for vice president. “Ryan is a real fiscal conservative. He isn’t just another Tea-Party ideologue spouting dogma about less government and the magic of free enterprise. He has actually crunched the numbers and laid out long-term budget proposals. My liberal friends point out that Ryan’s plan leaves many details unclear. That’s true. But show me another Republican who has addressed the nation’s fiscal problems as candidly and precisely as Ryan has. He’s got the least detailed budget proposal out there, except for all the others. …”\* It’s truly remarkable what an honest set of ears will admit to actually hearing, as opposed to those with their fingers in their ears, saying “lalalalalaliberalliarsIcan’thearyoulalalala.” > [@Leaper](#): > > Yeah, but even with Ryan’s speech, conservative bloggers are already talking about how, for example, that plant technically WAS closed under Obama, and how he sorta kinda DID say something that could be construed as a promise, etc. etc. > > So they STILL see “liberal bias,” because they are SURE that Ryan didn’t tell a single lie. They’re idiots. December 23rd, 2008 came before January 20th, 2009. Period. ---
**Author:** ![Iggy](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/iggy/32/3364_2.png) [@Iggy](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Iggy)\ **Post date:** [September 1, 2012, 2:10pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-war-on-fact-checkers-new-gop-strategy/633246/32 "2012-09-01T14:10:13Z")
> [@Shayna](#): > > You _do_? So you’re saying that December 23rd, 2008 happened _after_ President Obama was sworn in?.. The GM plant in Janesville produced SUVs and light trucks. One shift was cut in June 2008. Many workers lost their jobs. Production of SUVs ended in December 2008. Most of the remaining workers lost their jobs. > [@](#): > > [Cite](http://gazettextra.com/news/2009/dec/20/benefits-will-end-2010-many-ex-autoworkers/)The automaker cut one of its two shifts of sport-utility vehicle production in Janesville in June 2008. It then announced all SUV production would end, and Janesville’s final Tahoe rolled off the line Dec. 23. Production of light trucks ended in April 2009. The few remaining workers lost their jobs. > [@](#): > > Sunday, April 19, 2009 [GM plant to close this week](http://gazettextra.com/weblogs/latest-news/2009/apr/19/gm-plant-close-week/) > As first announced in February, production at the General Motors plant in Janesville will end this week, a GM official said. > > GM spokesman Christopher Lee confirmed operations at the southern Wisconsin plant will cease Thursday. > > About 1,200 employees were let go just before Christmas when GM ended SUV production at the plant. Some 100 workers were retained to finish an order of small- to medium-duty trucks for Isuzu Motors. The Janesville plant is still owned by GM as a standby plant. Obama was elected in November 2008 and took office in January 2009. Those are the facts. Not so hard, is it? Longer than a soundbite, but a short summary. What did Obama say about the Janesville plant, and when? You could look to see what his words were. That can be fact checked objectively. > [@](#): > > [Cite](http://www.nationalreview.com/planet-gore/314545/janesville-ryan-vs-obama-henry-payne) > “(But) I believe that if our government is there to support you, and give you the assistance you need to re-tool and make this transition, that this (General Motors) plant will be here for another hundred years," said Barack Obama in February, 2008. Obama was a candidate for president at the time. What did Ryan say that Obama said about the plant? Again that could be fact checked objectively. > [@](#): > > [Cite](http://twitchy.com/2012/08/30/obama-lied-about-janesville-gm-auto-plant-not-ryan/) > From Ryan’s powerful RNC speech: > > President Barack Obama, came to office during an economic crisis, as he has reminded us a time or two. Those are very tough days. And any fair measure of his record has to take that into account. My own state voted for President Obama. When he talked about change, many people liked the sound of it. > > \*\*Especially in Janesville where we were about to lose a major factory. A lot of guys I went to high school with worked at that G.M. plant. Right there at that plant, candidate Obama said, “I believe that if our government is there to support you, this plant will be here for another 100 years.” > > That’s what he said in 2008. Well, as it turned out, that plant didn’t last another year. It is locked up and empty to this day.\*\* And that’s how it is in so many towns where the recovery that was promised is no where in sight. Right now, 23 million men and women are struggling to find work. 23 million people unemployed or underemployed. Nearly one in six Americans is in poverty. Millions of young Americans have graduated from college during the Obama presidency, ready to use their gifts and get moving in life. That was in August 2012 at the RNC. Ryan was accepting the nomination of his party to be a VP candidate at the time. I don’t read those statements as Obama promising to save the Janesville plant. As a presidential candidate he expressed that, with government’s help, he sees long term prospects for the Janesville plant. But neither do I read Ryan’s statement as claiming Obama closed the plant or promised to save the plant. He said that Obama came to office in tough economic times and the recovery has been slow with many Americans out of work, including those who formerly worked at the Janseville plant. A somewhat balanced view, IMHO, of the whole affair: [NBC News’s Mark Murray More Nuanced On Janesville GM Plant Closing Than MSNBC Crowd, But Still Misleads Viewers](http://newsbusters.org/blogs/ken-shepherd/2012/08/30/nbc-newss-mark-murray-more-nuanced-janesville-gm-plant-closing-msnbc-c) ---
**Author:** ![Iggy](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/iggy/32/3364_2.png) [@Iggy](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Iggy)\ **Post date:** [September 1, 2012, 2:24pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-war-on-fact-checkers-new-gop-strategy/633246/33 "2012-09-01T14:24:51Z")
And how does this relate to the “fact checker” issue? Ezra Klein, who MSNBC calls on to “fact check”\*, got it wrong. He claimed: > [@](#): > > [Cite with screencap of Ezra Klein’s tweet](http://twitchy.com/2012/08/30/fact-checker-ezra-klein-doubles-down-on-janesville-gm-auto-plant-lie/) > The plant shut down in June 2008… While production slowed in June 2008, hundreds of GM workers were still building SUVs until December 2008. \*[Klein fact checks welfare work requirement](http://video.msnbc.msn.com/msnbc/48821074#48821074) video link ---
**Author:** ![Shayna](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/shayna/32/17976_2.png) [@Shayna](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Shayna)\ **Post date:** [September 1, 2012, 5:00pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-war-on-fact-checkers-new-gop-strategy/633246/34 "2012-09-01T17:00:29Z")
> [@Iggy](#): > > The GM plant in Janesville produced SUVs and light trucks. > > One shift was cut in June 2008. Many workers lost their jobs. > > Production of SUVs ended in December 2008. Most of the remaining workers lost their jobs. > > Production of light trucks ended in April 2009. The few remaining workers lost their jobs. > > The Janesville plant is still owned by GM as a standby plant. > > Obama was elected in November 2008 and took office in January 2009. > > Those are the facts. Not so hard, is it? Longer than a soundbite, but a short summary. > What did Obama say about the Janesville plant, and when? You could look to see what his words were. That can be fact checked objectively. > > Obama was a candidate for president at the time. > > What did Ryan say that Obama said about the plant? Again that could be fact checked objectively. > > That was in August 2012 at the RNC. Ryan was accepting the nomination of his party to be a VP candidate at the time. > > I don’t read those statements as Obama promising to save the Janesville plant. As a presidential candidate he expressed that, with government’s help, he sees long term prospects for the Janesville plant. > > But neither do I read Ryan’s statement as claiming Obama closed the plant **or promised to save the plant**. He said that Obama came to office in tough economic times and the recovery has been slow with many Americans out of work, including those who formerly worked at the Janseville plant. > A somewhat balanced view, IMHO, of the whole affair: > [NBC News’s Mark Murray More Nuanced On Janesville GM Plant Closing Than MSNBC Crowd, But Still Misleads Viewers](http://newsbusters.org/blogs/ken-shepherd/2012/08/30/nbc-newss-mark-murray-more-nuanced-janesville-gm-plant-closing-msnbc-c) Are you shitting me, dude? 1.) I don’t need a timeline. The plant effectively WENT OUT OF BUSINESS on December 23rd, 2008 and a skeleton crew stayed behind to FINISH a single order for a customer that hadn’t yet been filled. You don’t get to parse the word “closed” to pretend that Barack Obama had anything to do with that. 2.) How about you highlight the part of Ryan’s speech where he, you know, said what you claim he doesn’t say. “And that’s how it is in so many towns **where the recovery that was promised** is no where in sight.” The man did not **promise** recovery **anywhere** and he _certainly_ didn’t **promise** it in Janesville, the place he was **using as an example of this so-called broken promise that was NEVER promised**. Paul Ryan LIED. Accept it. ---
**Author:** ![Iggy](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/iggy/32/3364_2.png) [@Iggy](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Iggy)\ **Post date:** [September 1, 2012, 5:28pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-war-on-fact-checkers-new-gop-strategy/633246/35 "2012-09-01T17:28:38Z")
That is _exactly_ my point. Shift cut in June 2008. SUV production ended December 2008. Light truck assembly ended April 2009. The facts speak for themselves. **Shayna** wants to parse what the word “closed” means to fit a particular political agenda. A fact checker should, IMHO, just state the facts and leave it at that. The reader can dress up the facts with whatever interpretation he/she likes from there. Do I think Obama _could have_ changed the course of what happened to the Janesville plant by April 2009? In my opinion, no way. I don’t think he had a damn thing to do with the layoffs and shutdown at the Janesville Assembly Plant. ---
**Author:** ![bup](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/6bbea6/32.png) [@bup](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/bup)\ **Post date:** [September 5, 2012, 3:13am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-war-on-fact-checkers-new-gop-strategy/633246/36 "2012-09-05T03:13:33Z")
Oh my God. It really is a coordinated GOP strategy. It really has come to this. Attack the fact checkers. [WSJ opinion piece.](http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10000872396390444301704577631470493495792.html?mod=djemBestOfTheWeb_h#articleTabs%3Darticle) [Buzzfeed opinion piece.](http://www.buzzfeed.com/bensmith/pants-on-fire-politics) [Daily Caller Piece.](http://dailycaller.com/2012/09/02/credulous-fact-checkers-fall-for-20-scam/) All talk about the Washington Post one being bad, therefore fact-checkers are bad. ---
**Author:** ![adaher](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/dec6dc/32.png) [@adaher](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/adaher)\ **Post date:** [September 5, 2012, 10:08am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-war-on-fact-checkers-new-gop-strategy/633246/37 "2012-09-05T10:08:15Z")
Politifact’s got problems. Their analyses aren’t bad, but their ratings don’t make any sense. Take the most recent one: > **[PolitiFact - Did Mitt Romney's Massachusetts rank 47th in job creation?](https://www.politifact.com/factchecks/2012/sep/04/deval-patrick/did-mitt-romneys-massachusetts-rank-47th-job-creat/)** > > Repeating a favorite talking point, speakers at the Democratic National Convention in Charlotte, N.C., took aim at Mitt “By the time (Mitt Romney) left office, Massachusetts was 47th in the nation in job creation.” They rate this statement half true. It’s not half true. It’s false. Massachusetts was in the middle of the pack in job creation when Romney left office. Something Politifact acknowledges: > **[PolitiFact - Mitt Romney campaign says job growth in Massachusetts...](https://www.politifact.com/factchecks/2012/jun/05/eric-fehrnstrom/mitt-romney-campaign-says-job-growth-massachusetts/)** > > Both presidential campaigns are using job statistics to attack each other. President Barack Obama and his allies have sp But then also rates “half true” since they believe Romney isn’t responsible for job growth. These ratings are random, and fact checkers should not be engaging in this kind of analysis. they should be analyzing whether claims are true or not, not whether they are “fair”. “True” and “false” can be decided objectively. “Fair” and “Unfair” cannot be. That’s where the biases come into play. ---
**Author:** ![Frylock](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/ce7236/32.png) [@Frylock](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Frylock)\ **Post date:** [September 5, 2012, 11:12am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-war-on-fact-checkers-new-gop-strategy/633246/38 "2012-09-05T11:12:28Z")
> [@bup](#): > > Oh my God. It really is a coordinated GOP strategy. It really has come to this. Attack the fact checkers. > > [WSJ opinion piece.](http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10000872396390444301704577631470493495792.html?mod=djemBestOfTheWeb_h#articleTabs%3Darticle) > > [Buzzfeed opinion piece.](http://www.buzzfeed.com/bensmith/pants-on-fire-politics) > > [Daily Caller Piece.](http://dailycaller.com/2012/09/02/credulous-fact-checkers-fall-for-20-scam/) > > All talk about the Washington Post one being bad, therefore fact-checkers are bad. Wow. Those links are confusing complexity with political debateability. It’s really not debateable that Romney’s ad concerning Obama’s waivers contains several important and central falsehoods. That’s a fact. The problem is, it turns out to be a fact which it takes some complex thinking to understand. And the op-eds linked above play with that complexity to make it look more debateable. Very sad! On the other hand, I really don’t like how the fact checkers “rate” falsehoods. Just detail the falsehoods. The “ratings” are so plainly subjective they just end up giving the people rated an excuse to call the fact-checkers political. ---
**Author:** ![Frylock](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/ce7236/32.png) [@Frylock](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Frylock)\ **Post date:** [September 5, 2012, 11:14am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-war-on-fact-checkers-new-gop-strategy/633246/39 "2012-09-05T11:14:26Z")
Oh shit, I just posted almost exactly the same thoughts as **adaher**. I take it back! I take it back! 😉 ---
**Author:** ![Evil\_Captor](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/f17d59/32.png) [@Evil\_Captor](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Evil_Captor)\ **Post date:** [September 5, 2012, 1:16pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-war-on-fact-checkers-new-gop-strategy/633246/40 "2012-09-05T13:16:52Z")
I really can’t blame the Repubicans for going after the fact checkers, they’ve played the media so successfully over the last few decades that it’s only reasonable to assume anything is possible. The problem, I think, is that they want to reach the undecideds. They lie so much that their base has learned to doublethink, but the undecideds might still be persuaded by pesky facts. So, an attack on fact checkers. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-war-on-fact-checkers-new-gop-strategy/633246.md?page=1) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-war-on-fact-checkers-new-gop-strategy/633246.md?page=3)