On Thu, Mar 25, 2010 at 2:54 PM, Sam <[email protected]> wrote:
> Forth link in google:
> http://spectator.org/archives/2009/05/28/polifacts-fixers
>
> I guess not everyone thinks it's fair and balan

That's hilarious. The guy is supposed to be showing how politifact
isn't a good judge of truth and he starts off by criticizing their
tone instead and finishes the article off by rambling on about the
editorials in the paper that have nothing to do with the politifact
column.

He was defending a statement saying "ACORN could be eligible for up to
$8.5 billion in federal funding" which is true in precisely the same
fashion that "Tomorrow, Al Queda might renounce violence".  Yes, if
you take the argument completely out of context and parse it in the
most favorable light, the statement is not precisely incorrect.
However, when you look at it with any context and realize the
assumptions that would have to be made for it to be true in the
context of the statement, they are laughably absurd. And that is
precisely what Politifact pointed out.

Judah

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~|
Want to reach the ColdFusion community with something they want? Let them know 
on the House of Fusion mailing lists
Archive: 
http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-community/message.cfm/messageid:314068
Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-community/subscribe.cfm
Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-community/unsubscribe.cfm

Reply via email to