Kevin Graham wrote:So their only evidence that these fact checkers are biased is that they reveal more lies coming from the Right than the Left.
Of course, most rational thinkers would see this as a red flag and a textbook example of circular reasoning. Maybe, just maybe, this has something to do with the fact that the Right lies more than the Left?
Noooooooo, perish the thought.
The real gorilla in the room here is that the Democratic party, and the Left generally, due to the actual nature of their core beliefs and policy goals, have to virtually lie to exist as a viable political force in American life. The national Democratic party, and especially its leadership, don't dare speak clearly and honesty about their real ideological commitments, policy goals, or core philosophy, except to the extreme leftist choir that is their political and cultural base. Sure, Republicans sometimes lie (some Republicans lie), but contemporary Democrats, like all socialists, communists and progressives before them, have to live in a continual state of deception with respect to most people outside their highly charged and politicized in-group world of revolution, outcome based utopian futures, egalitarian leveling, and "hope and change." Indeed, I suspect that groups like Factcheck.org and Politifact exist precisely to diffuse just that perception among large segments of the population who are not anywhere near as far to the Left as the average Democrat politician or activist, nor have the sense of the politicization of virtually all aspects of human life that drives the Left and the Democratic party.
But it is funny that someone like bcspace and droopy would have the audacity to complain about bias, given their preferred choices and gluttonous consumption of pseudo-News blogs and Right Wing "think tanks."
Heritage? Hoover (at Stanford), Hudson? AEI? Claremont? Acton? Cato? Von Mesis Institute? NR? Commentary? American Spectator? ICI? Thomas Sowell? Walter Williams? Frontpagemag.com?
Yeah, serious intellectuals, scholars, academics, and investigative journalists. All "pseudo." And this coming from a man who takes the
Worker's World, Media Matters, and the
Huffington Post, CNN, NBC, CBS, and ABC seriously (perhaps Kevin hasn't descended far enough that he actually takes the NYT seriously, but I doubt even this is beyond the realm of possibility).