<?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>Thu, 24 May 2012 18:45:33 +0000</lastBuildDate> <sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod> <sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency> <generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.2</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 @ 2012-05-24 20:47:10 by W3 Total Cache -->
