• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Barrack Obama, liar.

The tag line for that site says it is "exposing the lies of those around the president." Not the president himself.
 
Sorry, guys, if I gave you the impression that I know what's on the linked website. I don't. Not a clue. It's inclusion in my post was just an afterthought. It may have Obama lies. It may not. I don't know and don't care. I didn't read it before I posted the link.

I created this thread only as a counter to Ben's. I thought it should be oobvious.

Obama lies.
 
Dumb All Over said:
Sorry, guys, if I gave you the impression that I know what's on the linked website. I don't. Not a clue. It's inclusion in my post was just an afterthought. It may have Obama lies. It may not. I don't know and don't care. I didn't read it before I posted the link.

I created this thread only as a counter to Ben's. I thought it should be oobvious.

Obama lies.
Click to expand...

darn, i wanted to see your evidence that Obama did not eat dog meat.
 
Upchurch said:
Perhaps a little more balanced? The Obameter
Click to expand...

That site also has a "truth-o-meter," evaluating statements from each candidate:
http://www.politifact.com/personalities/barack-obama/
http://www.politifact.com/personalities/mitt-romney/

Here's the break down for Obama:

True: 23%
Mostly True: 23%
Half-True: 25%
Mostly False: 12%
False: 15%
Pants on Fire: 1%

Romney:

True: 16%
Mostly True: 15%
Half-True: 28%
Mostly False: 15%
False: 17%
Pants on Fire: 9%

I bolded all the ones Obama is better than Romney on. Not sure if it's a good thing to have more or fewer half-truths...

For those of you went to publik skool, there's a 15% gap in statements that politifact rates as "true" or "mostly true" and a 10% gap in statements rated as "false" or "pants on fire".
 
I think it's important to differentiate between "lies" and "unfulfilled promises" and "things I wanted to do but which proved to be politically impossible"and so forth.
Obama wanted to close Gitmo....But the screaming from the Republicans over the thought of moving any of the prisoners to "American soil" was both hysterical and deafening.
 
Cain said:
That site also has a "truth-o-meter," evaluating statements from each candidate:
http://www.politifact.com/personalities/barack-obama/
http://www.politifact.com/personalities/mitt-romney/

Here's the break down for Obama:

True: 23%
Mostly True: 23%
Half-True: 25%
Mostly False: 12%
False: 15%
Pants on Fire: 1%...
Click to expand...


Unfortunately there's a problem with using PolitiFact as a source on how often someone lies.

A year ago, in a thread about Michelle Bachmann, the subject of Bachmann's frequent less-than-factual statements came up. To which several people responded, essentially, Obama lies frequently too. Here's one:

Bri said:
Obama lies plenty:

http://www.politifact.com/personalities/barack-obama/...
Click to expand...


People were asked to provide specific examples of these lies rather than simply a link. So as evidence in support of this claim Bri posted a list of Obama statements PolitiFact had rated False and Pants-On-Fire. The problem with this list is it included such things as:

Obama says preventive care saves money.


That's rated as False.

Now, I can understand reasonable people disagreeing on whether preventive care saves money, and if so how much. But there's a difference between something which reasonable people can argue over and something which is flat-out false.

Calling Barack Obama a liar because he says preventive care saves money is nonsense. But unless you restrict the PolitiFact listings strictly to Pants-On-Fire ratings, that's what winds up happening.
 
I'm not surprised, which is why I did say "Politifact rates as..."

While I am a bit perplexed as to why they would classify preventive care as more expensive, I wonder how many errors or questionable judgement calls you found.

When doing this kind of count up, there are other biases: the President's statements attract more attention, and he probably comments a greater variety of issues and topics, so making two different mistakes harms him (on this metric) more than repeating the same falsehood a half-dozen times (after which one really should know better).
 
Nova Land said:
Unfortunately there's a problem with using PolitiFact as a source on how often someone lies.

A year ago, in a thread about Michelle Bachmann, the subject of Bachmann's frequent less-than-factual statements came up. To which several people responded, essentially, Obama lies frequently too. Here's one:




People were asked to provide specific examples of these lies rather than simply a link. So as evidence in support of this claim Bri posted a list of Obama statements PolitiFact had rated False and Pants-On-Fire. The problem with this list is it included such things as:

Obama says preventive care saves money.


That's rated as False.

Now, I can understand reasonable people disagreeing on whether preventive care saves money, and if so how much. But there's a difference between something which reasonable people can argue over and something which is flat-out false.

Calling Barack Obama a liar because he says preventive care saves money is nonsense. But unless you restrict the PolitiFact listings strictly to Pants-On-Fire ratings, that's what winds up happening.
Click to expand...

There is a difference between a statement which is untrue and a lie--outside of the "pants on fire" rating, I would EXPECT less speculation on whether the speaker is lying in favor of an evaluation of the statement's accuracy.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom