Politifact starts rating NH GOP Debate.

From the NH debate.

http://www.politifact.com/

More ratings will follow.

So far...

Perry: 1 Pants on Fire

Romney: 2 False and 1 Pants on Fire.

Santorum: 1 Mostly False

Gingrich: 1 Mostly True

Huntsman: 1 False and 1 Half True

You can read Gingrich's "Mostly True" rating here, and it was quite generous.

http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2012/jan/08/newt-gingrich/newt-gingrich-says-epa-didnt-know-why-it-cited-new/

Newt Gingrich says that EPA didn't know why it cited a New Hampshire dump

But as it turns out the dump site wasn't even cited at all. How that rates "mostly true" is beyond me.

Originally posted by USArmyParatrooper
From the NH debate.

http://www.politifact.com/

More ratings will follow.

So far...

Perry: 1 Pants on Fire

Romney: 2 False and 1 Pants on Fire.

Santorum: 1 Mostly False

Gingrich: 1 Mostly True

Huntsman: 1 False and 1 Half True

You can read Gingrich's "Mostly True" rating here, and it was quite generous.

http://www.p ...[text shortened]... ns out the dump site wasn't even cited at all. How that rates "mostly true" is beyond me.

How you think politifact is a credible source is beyond me.

Originally posted by utherpendragon
How you think politifact is a credible source is beyond me.

Why would you be surpirsed when you know the source of the source? 😛

Originally posted by utherpendragon
How you think politifact is a credible source is beyond me.

Because they call out both sides for their factual inaccuracies. There are a number of independent fact checkers out there like Snopes, factcheck.org and politifact.

Do tell, which ones do you think are credible? Let me guess. Any source that doesn't universally side with the Republicans and slam Dems is part of the grand liberal conspiracy.

Originally posted by utherpendragon
How you think politifact is a credible source is beyond me.

They've been slammed by both conservatives and liberals. Either they screw up all the way around, or they're doing very well.

Originally posted by utherpendragon
How you think politifact is a credible source is beyond me.

This is evidence enough of bipartisanship for me:

http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/article/2011/dec/20/lie-year-democrats-claims-republicans-voted-end-me/

Originally posted by wittywonka
This is evidence enough of bipartisanship for me:

http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/article/2011/dec/20/lie-year-democrats-claims-republicans-voted-end-me/

Exactly. Fox News an affiliates waged the most successful example of psychological warfare I've ever seen. The "liberal media" mantra was so successfully crammed down the throats of the American people that anything and everything that doesn't exclusively cheer lead Republicans and slam Democrats is part of the liberal media conspiracy.

Your example is very telling, because there's no way that should have been the so-called "lie of the year."

The Republicans wanted to completely remove the existing Medicare replace it with a coupon for private insurance. But because they call the new and totally different program "Medicare" it's not true they voted to end it??

If we remove the police department and give each citizen a voucher to buy private security, did we not end the police department?

Buy yeah, "liberal" bias. Sure. I think they went with that because last year it was "Death Panels" and so they had to pick a Democrat this year.

Originally posted by USArmyParatrooper
Exactly. Fox News an affiliates waged the most successful example of psychological warfare I've ever seen. The "liberal media" mantra was so successfully crammed down the throats of the American people that anything and everything that doesn't exclusively cheer lead Republicans and slam Democrats is part of the liberal media conspiracy.

Your ex ause last year it was "Death Panels" and so they had to pick a Democrat this year.

A coupon for private insurance has a very similar effect to Medicare. The idea that the GOP wanted to "end Medicare" comes with the clear implication that the government was not going to continue to fund healthcare for the elderly. Their ads were mostly taking aim at this preposterous claim. Therefore, the Dem claim was a hysterical lie and richly deserved "lie of the year."

As for politifact, we went through this once before. I spent a lot of time and energy making the case on this board that they were a little biased in favor of the left.

Thread 134149

Be that as it may, I still consider it a good site and is mostly reliable.

Originally posted by sh76
A coupon for private insurance has a very similar effect to Medicare. The idea that the GOP wanted to "end Medicare" comes with the clear implication that the government was not going to continue to fund healthcare for the elderly. Their ads were mostly taking aim at this preposterous claim. Therefore, the Dem claim was a hysterical lie and richly deserved "lie 149[/threadid]

Be that as it may, I still consider it a good site and is mostly reliable.

Saying someone wants to end Medicare when they propose a program that would end Medicare is the "lie of the year"? Whether a coupon for private insurance "has a very similar effect" or not (it doesn't) it isn't the assured single payer system for the elderly that Medicare is. The claim is hardly "preposterous" or an "hysterical lie".

Ezra Klein succinctly sums it up:

Currently, Medicare is a government-run insurer that pays the health-care costs of all senior citizens. Under Ryan's plan, senior citizens would be given vouchers that they could use toward private insurance. Poor seniors would get more-generous vouchers, and rich seniors would get less-generous vouchers. The way Ryan saves money is by holding the growth of the vouchers beneath the growth of health-care costs, so as care costs more and more, the vouchers cover less and less.

http://voices.washingtonpost.com/ezra-klein/2010/08/paul_ryans_plan_would_end_medi.html

Originally posted by USArmyParatrooper
Exactly. Fox News an affiliates waged the most successful example of psychological warfare I've ever seen. The "liberal media" mantra was so successfully crammed down the throats of the American people that anything and everything that doesn't exclusively cheer lead Republicans and slam Democrats is part of the liberal media conspiracy.

You say that like it's a bad thing 🙂

Originally posted by no1marauder
Saying someone wants to end Medicare when they propose a program that would end Medicare is the "lie of the year"? Whether a coupon for private insurance "has a very similar effect" or not (it doesn't) it isn't the assured single payer system for the elderly that Medicare is. The claim is hardly "preposterous" or an "hysterical lie".

Ezra tp://voices.washingtonpost.com/ezra-klein/2010/08/paul_ryans_plan_would_end_medi.html

The barely masked implication "wants to end Medicare" is that Republicans want to push granny off the cliff. The truth is that Republicans and Democrats both have elderly parents, and will one day be old themselves. Under Obama care, it is clear that some care will be denied elderly patients.

The argument is not whether Granny gets care, but how to best provide it, while containing costs. Loaded statements like "wants to end Medicare" are the big lie, designed to obfuscate the truth that there are insufficient resources to provide everything that everyone wants related to health care, and that eventually all of us are going to die.

What Ryan's plan does is put the consumer of services back into the picture, which is the only way of containing costs.

Originally posted by normbenign
The barely masked implication "wants to end Medicare" is that Republicans want to push granny off the cliff. The truth is that Republicans and Democrats both have elderly parents, and will one day be old themselves. Under Obama care, it is clear that some care will be denied elderly patients.

The argument is not whether Granny gets care, but how to ...[text shortened]... that everyone wants related to health care, and that eventually all of us are going to die.

😴😴

The statement remains factually accurate and not a lie. What people do with the implications are their own affair.

Originally posted by no1marauder
😴😴

The statement remains factually accurate and not a lie. What people do with the implications are their own affair.

Both parties want to conceal the fact that some manner of rationing is required by whatever plan is adopted.

Whether is it by "death panels", or by inability to pay it will happen. The nature of who makes the decision is key, and which method offers some hope for eventually reducing costs.

Both sides of this debate tend to be less than truthful, if by implication or omission, or by flat out assertion.

Originally posted by normbenign
Both parties want to conceal the fact that some manner of rationing is required by whatever plan is adopted.

Whether is it by "death panels", or by inability to pay it will happen. The nature of who makes the decision is key, and which method offers some hope for eventually reducing costs.

Both sides of this debate tend to be less than truthful, if by implication or omission, or by flat out assertion.

I don't disagree with any of that. But still saying that Ryan's plan meant to "end Medicare" is factually correct and not a lie.

Originally posted by no1marauder
I don't disagree with any of that. But still saying that Ryan's plan meant to "end Medicare" is factually correct and not a lie.

Then we disagree only in semantics. For as long as I can remember politicians call each other disingenuous instead of liars.

Can the soft-peddling, politically correct speak. Smack him with your glove and take it to a beach in New Jersey. A lie is a lie, whether by implication, direct assertion, or obfuscation.

At the end of the day, Medicare can't be sustained as is, and neither can Social Security. As long as anyone proposing real change, is said to want "to end it", the fixes get pushed further down the road, and become increasingly difficult if not impossible.