<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Fact-Checking the Fact-Checker</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.sundriesshack.com/2008/09/19/fact-checking-the-fact-checker/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.sundriesshack.com/2008/09/19/fact-checking-the-fact-checker/</link>
	<description>Delivering the Best of the New Media Since 2004.</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sat, 28 Jan 2012 20:08:42 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: spoots</title>
		<link>http://www.sundriesshack.com/2008/09/19/fact-checking-the-fact-checker/comment-page-1/#comment-669211</link>
		<dc:creator>spoots</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 21 Sep 2008 07:51:45 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.sundriesshack.com/?p=5764#comment-669211</guid>
		<description>I meant McC (for McCain), not McM, sorry. </description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I meant McC (for McCain), not McM, sorry.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: spoots</title>
		<link>http://www.sundriesshack.com/2008/09/19/fact-checking-the-fact-checker/comment-page-1/#comment-669210</link>
		<dc:creator>spoots</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 21 Sep 2008 07:50:26 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.sundriesshack.com/?p=5764#comment-669210</guid>
		<description>J: &quot;you even misquote that&quot; 
I misquoted nothing.  Please show exactly where you believe I misquoted anything. 
 
&quot;Fact is, John McCain&#8217;s ad did not call Franklin Raines a &#8220;close adviser&#8221; of Barack Obama.&quot; 
I know that!  McCain&#039;s ad does not use the 2 words &quot;close advisor&quot; together, and no one is arguiung that it did.  It did, however, clearly imply that that they were close, which they are obviously not.   
 
Compare and contrast the 2 following sentences to get at the heart of your (probably willful) misunderstanding: 
1) FC says that McM&#039;s ad calls R a &quot;close advisor&quot; to O. 
2) FC says that McM&#039;s ad calls R a close advisor to O. 
See, one &quot;close advisor&quot; is in quotes and the other is not.  You are defending only against #1, but not against #2. </description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>J: &quot;you even misquote that&quot;</p>
<p>I misquoted nothing.  Please show exactly where you believe I misquoted anything.</p>
<p>&quot;Fact is, John McCain&rsquo;s ad did not call Franklin Raines a &ldquo;close adviser&rdquo; of Barack Obama.&quot;</p>
<p>I know that!  McCain&#039;s ad does not use the 2 words &quot;close advisor&quot; together, and no one is arguiung that it did.  It did, however, clearly imply that that they were close, which they are obviously not.  </p>
<p>Compare and contrast the 2 following sentences to get at the heart of your (probably willful) misunderstanding:</p>
<p>1) FC says that McM&#039;s ad calls R a &quot;close advisor&quot; to O.</p>
<p>2) FC says that McM&#039;s ad calls R a close advisor to O.</p>
<p>See, one &quot;close advisor&quot; is in quotes and the other is not.  You are defending only against #1, but not against #2.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Jimmie</title>
		<link>http://www.sundriesshack.com/2008/09/19/fact-checking-the-fact-checker/comment-page-1/#comment-669131</link>
		<dc:creator>Jimmie</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 20 Sep 2008 11:01:46 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.sundriesshack.com/?p=5764#comment-669131</guid>
		<description>spoots, there&#039;s a transcript right in front of you and you even misquote that. Are you sure you&#039;re not reading my blog translated in a couple different languages? 
 
Fact is, John McCain&#039;s ad did not call Franklin Raines a &quot;close adviser&quot; of Barack Obama. Fact is that any error in the McCain ad can be laid entirely at the feet of the Washington Post at this point. 
 
You&#039;re wrong. Again. Don&#039;t you ever get tired? </description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>spoots, there&#039;s a transcript right in front of you and you even misquote that. Are you sure you&#039;re not reading my blog translated in a couple different languages?</p>
<p>Fact is, John McCain&#039;s ad did not call Franklin Raines a &quot;close adviser&quot; of Barack Obama. Fact is that any error in the McCain ad can be laid entirely at the feet of the Washington Post at this point.</p>
<p>You&#039;re wrong. Again. Don&#039;t you ever get tired?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: spoots</title>
		<link>http://www.sundriesshack.com/2008/09/19/fact-checking-the-fact-checker/comment-page-1/#comment-669107</link>
		<dc:creator>spoots</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 20 Sep 2008 07:04:48 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.sundriesshack.com/?p=5764#comment-669107</guid>
		<description>J: &quot;Second, Fact Checker claims that the McCain ad calls Raines a &#8220;close adviser&#8221; of Barack Obama. It doesn&#8217;t.&quot; 
You&#039;re damn it doesn&#039;t.  By which I mean that Fact Checker does not, in fact, ever claim that the McCain ad CALLS Raines, with these exact words, [QUOTE] &quot;a close advisor&quot; [UNQUOTE].  Here is what FC says, right in your link: 
&quot;The McCain campaign is clearly exaggerating wildly in attempting to depict Franklin Raines as a close adviser to Obama...&quot; 
The ad did say that Raines spoke to Obama himself, person to person, which would imply a certain degree of closeness, when in fact it was only one or 2 people involved in O&#039;s campaign-- not O himself-- who called Raines, and he/she/they only called &quot;a couple times&quot; in total. Clearly not **as close** as the ad would have us believe, not by a country mile. 
 
Oh, and that poor older white lady, mugged by the 2 black guys! 
 
&quot;She also conflated &#8220;a couple calls&#8221; to &#8220;seeking his [Obama&#039;s] advice&#8221;.&quot; 
Do you mean &quot;inflated&quot;?  Cuz that&#039;s the wrong usage of &quot;conflate&quot;.  Who was seeking Obama&#039;s advice?!  Are you drunk?  Don&#039;t drink and post! 
 
&quot;You can hardly blame him for trusting the reporting of a professional journalist&quot; 
Of course I can.  You and all of Rush&#039;s Children are always talking about the evils of the MSM.  When you bow down to its infallibility like you&#039;re doing now, you creep me out.  Who are you?  Well, maybe just the drink talking, eh? 
 
&quot;how far the Washington Post has sunk as a reliable news source&quot; 
That&#039;s more like it! Just make up your mind! </description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>J: &quot;Second, Fact Checker claims that the McCain ad calls Raines a &ldquo;close adviser&rdquo; of Barack Obama. It doesn&rsquo;t.&quot;</p>
<p>You&#039;re damn it doesn&#039;t.  By which I mean that Fact Checker does not, in fact, ever claim that the McCain ad CALLS Raines, with these exact words, [QUOTE] &quot;a close advisor&quot; [UNQUOTE].  Here is what FC says, right in your link:</p>
<p>&quot;The McCain campaign is clearly exaggerating wildly in attempting to depict Franklin Raines as a close adviser to Obama&#8230;&quot;</p>
<p>The ad did say that Raines spoke to Obama himself, person to person, which would imply a certain degree of closeness, when in fact it was only one or 2 people involved in O&#039;s campaign&#8211; not O himself&#8211; who called Raines, and he/she/they only called &quot;a couple times&quot; in total. Clearly not **as close** as the ad would have us believe, not by a country mile.</p>
<p>Oh, and that poor older white lady, mugged by the 2 black guys!</p>
<p>&quot;She also conflated &ldquo;a couple calls&rdquo; to &ldquo;seeking his [Obama&#039;s] advice&rdquo;.&quot;</p>
<p>Do you mean &quot;inflated&quot;?  Cuz that&#039;s the wrong usage of &quot;conflate&quot;.  Who was seeking Obama&#039;s advice?!  Are you drunk?  Don&#039;t drink and post!</p>
<p>&quot;You can hardly blame him for trusting the reporting of a professional journalist&quot;</p>
<p>Of course I can.  You and all of Rush&#039;s Children are always talking about the evils of the MSM.  When you bow down to its infallibility like you&#039;re doing now, you creep me out.  Who are you?  Well, maybe just the drink talking, eh?</p>
<p>&quot;how far the Washington Post has sunk as a reliable news source&quot;</p>
<p>That&#039;s more like it! Just make up your mind!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

<!-- Served from: www.sundriesshack.com @ 2012-02-09 21:29:32 by W3 Total Cache -->
