Republicans Rate 3 Times More "False" Ratings Than Democrats (Politifact)

The GOP poster child for dishonesty (and bat shittery). Image from
source, Raw Story.

Politifact may have sullied its reputation--in the eyes of Rachel Maddow and her viewers at least--but they're not usually criticized for being left-leaning. But get ready for charges that they are, since they came to the unsurprising conclusion that Republicans are more dishonest than Democrats. Three times as dishonest, in fact. Politifact.

[Excerpt]

Republicans get three times more ‘false’ ratings from PolitiFact than Democrats

An analysis of PolitiFact ratings suggests Republicans are significantly less credible than Democrats.
The Center for Media and Public Affairs at George Mason University found Republican’s had made three times as many false statements as Democrats this year. . .

Read more at: Raw Story

Romney Ads Are Driving Me Crazy

Have you watched very much television lately? Do you live in a swing state? If you're like me (my swing state is Nevada), you've been deluged, buried, shat upon by political advertisements, the majority of which are negative. But there's a difference this year, and I don't just mean the increased amount of ads made possible by Citizens United.

The difference is the level of unapologetic lying. And no--as far as I can tell--both sides don't do it. I know this because President Obama has on a couple of occasions changed the content of his ads when critics pointed out issues with their veracity. That's what usually happens in politics. Whether Team Obama deliberately lied, and was caught, or if they were simply wrong, I'll not argue. But they have corrected themselves. On the Mitt Romney side, I've seen quite the opposite. [Story continues below]



For example, Romney's first ad, a clip of Obama quoting John McCain was taken out of context to sound as though Obama was expressing his own thoughts. It's plain, it's clear, it's a lie. But it's still up, and the campaign said the result was "exactly what we want." Since then, Romney's ads have followed that template: say something untrue or out of context (I'll give the benefit of the doubt, and say unintentionally), then when called on it, soldier on anyway, undeterred, with no correction.

When I was at the dentist on Friday (see the results in my Facebook photo in the left column!), the Olympics were on the set. On every commercial break, there were at least four political ads, usually one by Romney, one by Obama, and two from the allegedly unaffiliated Romney SuperPACs. If it isn't three-to-one, it's close, with the occasional interest group-funded anti-Shelley Berkley ad. Sometimes, there's room for little else, and the same anti-Obama ad plays twice in a row.

The SuperPAC ads play like Lyndon Johnson's "Daisy" ad, with an ominous, oh-so-concerned voiceover, dramatic scary music, black-and-white quick cuts of grainy pictures, headlines, whatever. It's the same thing we all know, just A WHOLE LOT MORE!!!

But, leave it to ol' Willard to again take an out-of-context quote (one that doesn't even make sense as a point Obama would try to make), and run with it. It's the "you didn't build that" line, in an otherwise uncontroversial speech, about how we're all in this together. It was cribbed from Elizabeth Warren (who tells it better, though the President may have just had a inelegant patch in his speech that day), and about nothing more than realizing that no matter how successful you are, you had help. When you make a bundle in America, you needed America to do it. Populist stuff.

Romney's team cobbled together the President's "gaffe" (in quotes, because it really wasn't one), and has one ad in particular that is running every commercial break in Nevada. In it, they take the line and present it dishonestly. Then a grey-haired man in a green t-shirt gets all indignant and butt-hurt that the Prez is attacking him, attacking small business. Doesn't Obama realize that he and his dad built this company with his bare hands, blood and ball-sweat? Yeah, and a whole bunch of government help, it turns out!

So, the premise of the ad (that Obama meant business people didn't build their own businesses) is wrong, hinging on one barely suspect pronoun, "that." The dude in the ad is--I want to say "fraud," but let's be charitable--not completely honest.  And yet, the ad runs endlessly with no correction, no clarification. This tactic is new at the presidential level, as far as I know.

[Excerpt]


Guy Who Thinks Small Business Loans Aren’t ‘Government Help’ Also Can’t Tell Cusses From Threats

So it turns out that the business owner in that dumb Romney ad about the fake “You didn’t build that” line, and who it turns out actually did rely on government loans and contracts for some of his business, now haz a sad because some people have been calling and emailing his business to say mean things about him. Jack Gilchrist, owner of a metal fabrication company in Hudson, New Hampshire, appeared in the ad, above, whining about being “demonized” by the President for being successful, which of course rather badly misses the point. . .

Read more at: Wonkette

FOX "News" Lies Again

There are some certainties in this world. Celebrities will do stupid things. Mitt Romney will flip-flop. And FOX "News" will flagrantly, obviously lie. They lie in countless ways, and I've documented many of them over the years. This is just the latest. Can't be letting the economy look like it's improving now, can we?

Notice that today's 8.6% is higher than March's 8.8%.
Image from source, Media Matters

[Excerpt]


Today In Dishonest Fox News Charts

It looks like Fox is trying to mislead its viewers on the unemployment rate. Again.
On Monday, Fox News displayed a chart illustrating changes to the unemployment rate during 2011. . .

Read more at source: Media Matters

Drudge Report Uses PhotoShopped Franken Picture

Using PhotoShopped images in news reports is generally frowned upon, unless the image is stated to be a fake, or it is so well known to be, that it is understood. FOX "News" has used edited pictures to make political opponents--meaning Democrats--look bad. Defenders of FOX then would point to Countdown with Keith Olbermann's use of obvious caricatured photos, to say "I know you are, but what am I?"

But there is one photo floating around the Internets for several years of Al Franken in an unflattering--to say the least--pose. And it is rarely if ever pointed out that the photo is a fake. The photo is bizarre, and has no satirical context that would make it funny. It's a shot of soon-to-be Senator Franken in an adult diaper, with rabbit ears on his head. This is further proof that conservatives have decidedly odd senses of humor. It also points to the dishonesty of several right-wing blog and "news" sources, like The Drudge Report.

The top image is a screen capture of today's Drudge. The bottom one is of a story item immediately below that, with the fake Franken image. This image relates in no way to the linked story, and nowhere on Drudge does it indicate that the image is a fake. When you take into account that the average reader of Free Republic believes the image to be real, you can see why this is inherently dishonest. I'm thinking somebody out there needs to 'shop an image of Drudge and widely circulate it. Hmmm, now who do I know that could do that?

If you'd like to see the debunking of the image, go to: ThinkProgress

GOP Sends Out Push Poll (Again)

As I've said before, I used to be a Republican. Actually, like most people, I sort of assumed the party of my upbringing, kind of like how people tend to be the same religion as their parents. And though the scales fell off my eyes, and I left the party years ago, I'm still on their mailing list. Or emailing list, as it stands these days. My last piece of snail mail from the GOP came before the election, with Karl Rove's signature on it. ---shudder---

These days, the GOP is feeling a lot less mighty, and is seemingly adrift. The appointment of Michael Steele as their leader promised big changes. And then things got weird. Steele alternated between chewing and kissing Rush Limbaugh's ass. He tried to get all jiggy with it, and proclaimed that he'd make the party hipper, or hip-hoppier or something. But if the current online "survey" is any indication, there is little change happening here.

Twice before, I've posted GOP questionnaires that were little more than push polls. The new one is more of the same. It is impossible for a now ex-Republican to answer this poll correctly, because to do so presupposes that you agree with the phrasing of the question. And I vehemently disagree with how many of the (loaded) questions are set up. For instance:

1. A recent national poll reported that nearly 25% of Americans want the government to pass more socialism. Do you agree or disagree? Agree/Disagree/Undecided

I've got to say "Undecided" because I do not agree with the GOP's definition of "socialism."

5. Should Republicans unite to block new federal government bureaucracy and red tape that will crush future economic growth? Yes/No/Undecided

Again, it's "Undecided" because I don't have any way to know if these things will really "crush future economic growth."

8. Should we do everything we can to block Democrats who are trying to shut down conservative talk radio with the so-called "fairness doctrine"? Yes/No/Undecided

I don't agree that the Fairness Doctrine would shut down talk radio, nor do I believe the issue has any traction. "Undecided" again.

10. Should Republicans unite in opposition to judicial nominees who bring a personal, left-wing agenda on social issues to their jobs as judges? Yes/No/Undecided

An honest question should be, "Should Americans unite in opposition to judicial nominees who bring a personal, partisan agenda on social issues to their jobs as judges?" But that's not what they asked.

1. If Barack Obama tries to gut the USA PATRIOT Act and other important laws that promote the safety and security of all Americans, should Republicans in Congress fight back? Yes/No/Undecided

Here, you've got to play along with the vivid word "gut," and also concede that Obama would eliminate important laws to purposefully endanger Americans. "Undecided."

Anyway, it goes on like that. It's inherently dishonest, and statistically useless. I filled it out just the same, and filled out the comments section with a rip on this whole survey. You can do the same here: GOP Survey.

FOX "Business" Channel Already Distorting

Image from source, ValleyWag

Is anybody surprised that the new FOX "Business" Channel is already distorting their reporting? Did anyone think it wouldn't? I have no first-hand knowledge since our cable company does not carry FBC. But in this instance, I'm willing to not give them the benefit of the doubt. . .

[Excerpt]

Fox says retail lobbyist "didn't disclose" identity.

. . .Fox Business Network interviewed an "online shopper" named Peter Perweiler who turned out to be the marketing director for the National Retail Federation. The NRF says it organized a media event so reporters could interview "real" shoppers. Silicon Alley Insider got one explanation from the NRF. We got another, very different explanation, from Fox News. . .

Read the rest at: ValleyWag

CNN Catches Up to Greenlee Gazette

CNN has finally shown up to the party... they caught wind of the story regarding the planted questions in Hillary Clinton's campaign audience. Better late than never.

Someone must've told CNN this was a costume party... they came dressed as idiots...

Read all about it here... as if you didn't know already...

EDITOR'S NOTE: The Monkey is much too modest. While Greenlee Gazette provided him the forum, he did the work, and deserves the credit. Way to go, Monkey!

Christian Coalition's "Weekly Review" (Annotated)

I've written before about the weekly update letters that the Christian Coalition regularly sends to my email box. Since they will not remove my name, they must want me to blog about their letter, right? So, here are some of the nuggets from their "Washington Weekly Review" with my notes.

"Democrat Congress"

REPLY: My, how Karl Rovian/Frank Luntzian of you! "Democratic Congress" sounds too nice, doesn't it? Too bad that "Democratic Party" is the actual name of the party with the majority in Congress.

"Democrat Congress -- with 11% Approval Rating --"

REPLY: This 11% approval rating is completely bogus, as you can see here. The lowest rating I can find is 18% from Gallup in August. This also implies that the low approval rating is aimed at only Democrats. Who's to say? Maybe a big slice of the populace doesn't like the Republican Congress members? Also, scroll down in that list of polls. Take a look at the approval ratings from the last Congress. Not that different, is it?

"Democrat Congress -- with 11% Approval Rating -- Passes Free Health Care Benefits for Middle-income Families (up to $80,000)"

REPLY: Ah, yes, those amazingly well-off "up to $80,000" families. My household consists of two people, earning a combined income of more than that amount. We have no children and one cat. We are comfortable, but nowhere near "upper middle class" as Rush Limbaugh defined these $80,000-ers last week. I can't imagine if we had two or three kids. We'd need the help.

". . .Which President Bush Promptly Vetoed Because Bill is Fiscally Irresponsible"

REPLY: Well, how the HELL would HE know? Here's a chart, cribbed from Bloggernista.com. Tell me this president knows dookie about fiscal responsibility:



Holy crap!

As you can see, the Christian Coalition is a little less than straightforward in its appeals to its followers. What they've written above is misleading, and downright dishonest. And that was just their opening salvo! To take apart the entire "Update" would take me several posts. I may do a sequel later, but this is enough of their tripe for now.