Fact checking Clinton's speech

[krc1995]

I don't know if I really think any speech is truthful, but here is an article from the Washington Post detailing some of President Clinton's Wed speech.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/fact-checker/post/fact-checking-bill-clintons-speech-and-other-democrats-at-the-convention-in-charlotte/2012/09/06/55b9df68-f7e1-11e1-8b93-c4f4ab1c8d13_blog.html

[JJ Husker]

It will be interesting to see if the usual suspects, so beside themselves over Ryan's speech, will attack these lies and false claims by the democrats with the same amount of furor and outrage. I'm guessing I'll be disappointed.

 

BTW, did I tell you how I'm going to afford my new $1.5M mansion? I won't have to raise my revenue (even though I intend to raise it by about $2M) rather I intend to save the $1.5M by not buying $1.5M worth of cars and the like. This could be fun. I guess I didn't realize you could afford new things by simply not buying other things that you didn't intend to buy or have the money for. I'm starting to like Obamamath, anything is possible.

[BigRedBuster]

I honestly don't understand why people even watch these events. It is a contest to see who can jack up their base more by telling the most outlandish stories.

 

I used to watch these every single election. I thought it was a must see to decide who to vote for. BUT, I realized that it is all a farce.

 

This year, the only thing I watched was Michelle Obama's speech only because my wife decided she wanted to watch the Dem convention. Who knows why?

 

I wanted to puke. It was constantly about how poor they were in their early years and how they didn't have anything nice...bla bla bla....give me a friggen break. You both went to very nice high schools and then eventually ended up at Harvard Law School. And, you are complaining that your student loans are more than your mortgage? Then, they pan through the crowd and everyone is on the edge of their seats almost in tears at the profound words coming out of her mouth. What a joke.

 

I'm sure Clinton's and Obama's were the same thing. Glad my daughters had volleyball games last night so my wife wouldn't want to watch.

[carlfense]

It will be interesting to see if the usual suspects, so beside themselves over Ryan's speech, will attack these lies and false claims by the democrats with the same amount of furor and outrage. I'm guessing I'll be disappointed.

As long as you're looking to be disappointed . . . you might notice the absence of people defending Clinton's lies, and Deval's lies.

 

Also, if you're wondering, I posted this: http://www.huskerboa...ick-fact-check/ No one is defending those lies.

 

If I recall correctly . . . there are dozens of posts defending Ryan's lies. People repeatedly defend the lies of a Republican and then wonder why others don't call out the lies of a Democrat? Sometimes that partisan bias is where you least expect it.

[carlfense]

factcheck.org's take:

Former President Bill Clinton’s stem-winding nomination speech was a fact-checker’s nightmare: lots of effort required to run down his many statistics and factual claims, producing little for us to write about. Republicans will find plenty of Clinton’s scorching opinions objectionable. But with few exceptions, we found his stats checked out.

http://factcheck.org/2012/09/our-clinton-nightmare/

[zoogs]

BTW, did I tell you how I'm going to afford my new $1.5M mansion? I won't have to raise my revenue (even though I intend to raise it by about $2M) rather I intend to save the $1.5M by not buying $1.5M worth of cars and the like. This could be fun. I guess I didn't realize you could afford new things by simply not buying other things that you didn't intend to buy or have the money for. I'm starting to like Obamamath, anything is possible.

 

Yes -- but did I tell you about how I am not going to buy a $1.5M mansion? I have the fiscal responsibility to buy a $1.0M mansion instead. And I will do this by literally not spending a single penny on anything else for the rest of my life. Food is for the wasteful.

[NUance]

Meh, it's just convention talk. We need to get those fact checkers working on something important. Like this: aTm stadium

[JJ Husker]

It will be interesting to see if the usual suspects, so beside themselves over Ryan's speech, will attack these lies and false claims by the democrats with the same amount of furor and outrage. I'm guessing I'll be disappointed.

As long as you're looking to be disappointed . . . you might notice the absence of people defending Clinton's lies, and Deval's lies.

 

Also, if you're wondering, I posted this: http://www.huskerboa...ick-fact-check/ No one is defending those lies.

 

If I recall correctly . . . there are dozens of posts defending Ryan's lies. People repeatedly defend the lies of a Republican and then wonder why others don't call out the lies of a Democrat? Sometimes that partisan bias is where you least expect it.

 

You might have to link some supporting evidence of these dozens of posts and the repeated defending. I know I did not defend one single lie and after reviewing the 2 topics on Ryan's speech, I could not find more than one poster partially defending a claim of a lie which, in my opinion, was more of each side spinning it in their favor and not a blatant falsehood. However, I did see plenty of accusations and claims of lies being made by Ryan. I won't name names but you should be very familiar with the most prolific offender I noticed in those 2 topics. Not defending lies when they come from the dems and loudly calling them out when repubs do it is not really equitable. Claiming dozens defended the lies and repeatedly defended them might be a bigger whopper than either Ryan or Clinton engaged in.

[carlfense]

You might have to link some supporting evidence of these dozens of posts and the repeated defending. I know I did not defend one single lie . . .

I never said that you defended the lies. Apologies if that is how you read it.

 

. . . and after reviewing the 2 topics on Ryan's speech, I could not find more than one poster partially defending a claim of a lie which, in my opinion, was more of each side spinning it in their favor and not a blatant falsehood.

http://www.huskerboa...ng-distracting/

http://www.huskerboa...ans-rnc-speech/

If you’d like to read it closely, here they are.

 

After actually going back and checking, you're correct. It's not dozens of posts defending lies. Probably about a dozen. (I just skimmed the thread.)

 

Not defending lies when they come from the dems and loudly calling them out when repubs do it is not really equitable.

I did more than not defend the lies of Democrats . . . I actively pointed them out. No one bothered to defend them . . . so the thread died.

 

In fact, iirc, I said that the lies of one side does not excuse the lies of the other and that we should hold them accountable.

 

Claiming dozens defended the lies and repeatedly defended them might be a bigger whopper than either Ryan or Clinton engaged in.

If you'll read my comment carefully you'll note that I did not say that dozens of people defended the lies. You're either mistaken or you’re choosing to willfully misrepresent the facts. If you’d like to talk whoppers . . . well . . .

[walksalone]

During one of the videos, I saw the douchebag mentioning how, if he had the resolve to go after Bin Laden like Obama did?

 

I was thinking, so back in the 90's when you had a chance to kill him, you didn't have the stones, but now it's ok? wtf

[knapplc]

Never liked Clinton as president. Don't much care for him now. Not going to be surprised one bit if his speech had factual inaccuracies.

[krc1995]

It will be interesting to see if the usual suspects, so beside themselves over Ryan's speech, will attack these lies and false claims by the democrats with the same amount of furor and outrage. I'm guessing I'll be disappointed.

 

BTW, did I tell you how I'm going to afford my new $1.5M mansion? I won't have to raise my revenue (even though I intend to raise it by about $2M) rather I intend to save the $1.5M by not buying $1.5M worth of cars and the like. This could be fun. I guess I didn't realize you could afford new things by simply not buying other things that you didn't intend to buy or have the money for. I'm starting to like Obamamath, anything is possible.

I don't think anyone will attack Clinton's speech because everyone knows he lies anyway. Why bogg down a gifted oratator with so something so mundane as the facts? I actually liked him as a president and I really don't care that he is a known liar. That's why I wish Newt was the republican nominee. He has the same Clinton swagger

[JJ Husker]

You might have to link some supporting evidence of these dozens of posts and the repeated defending. I know I did not defend one single lie . . .

I never said that you defended the lies. Apologies if that is how you read it.

 

. . . and after reviewing the 2 topics on Ryan's speech, I could not find more than one poster partially defending a claim of a lie which, in my opinion, was more of each side spinning it in their favor and not a blatant falsehood.

http://www.huskerboa...ng-distracting/

http://www.huskerboa...ans-rnc-speech/

If you’d like to read it closely, here they are.

 

After actually going back and checking, you're correct. It's not dozens of posts defending lies. Probably about a dozen. (I just skimmed the thread.)

 

Not defending lies when they come from the dems and loudly calling them out when repubs do it is not really equitable.

I did more than not defend the lies of Democrats . . . I actively pointed them out. No one bothered to defend them . . . so the thread died.

 

In fact, iirc, I said that the lies of one side does not excuse the lies of the other and that we should hold them accountable.

 

Claiming dozens defended the lies and repeatedly defended them might be a bigger whopper than either Ryan or Clinton engaged in.

If you'll read my comment carefully you'll note that I did not say that dozens of people defended the lies. You're either mistaken or you’re choosing to willfully misrepresent the facts. If you’d like to talk whoppers . . . well . . .

carl- I didn't think you intended to say it was me defending lies so no worries.

 

However, simply counting posts from those you know to be on the other side of an issue does not count the same as a post defending a lie. You linked the 2 topics I reviewed initially (and I reviewed them again) and there is barely one post that could be construed as defending a lie. Just because there were about 12 posts from others leaning republican or counter to your point of view does not mean they were defending lies. I am not willfully trying to misrepresent anything and I don't think you are either. If you'll read my comment carefully you'll note that I did not claim that you said dozens of people defended the lies. We both said dozens without specifying people or posts. I just think you got a little carried away in saying lies were being defended. I think if you re-read all the posts you will have to agree that barely 1 or 2 posts could be construed as possibly defending a lie.

[carlfense]

We both said dozens without specifying people or posts.

 

 

If I recall correctly . . . there are dozens of posts defending Ryan's lies.

[strigori]

I do find it interesting that this thread has completely derailed from talking Clinton's speech, which did have some exaggerations, but not much that would hit a 'liar, liar, pants on fire' rating that Ryan's hit, to debating the Ryan speech thread. I guess people must be of a similar mind.