View Full Version : SOTU Fact Check

Gayle in MD
01-29-2008, 02:45 AM

01-29-2008, 06:05 AM
Sweetheart ... you really should read the links you post before you post them.

If you did you wouldn't be embarrassed for linking to a pack of lies.

From your link, their FIRST piece of data ... I would assume their crown jewel ... we find:
Bush said: “Over the past 7 years, we have increased funding for veterans by more than 95 percent. As we increase funding, we must also reform our veterans system to meet the needs of a new war and a new generation.”

FACT — 1.8 MILLION VETERANS LACK HEALTH INSURANCE: “The new study, published in the American Journal of Public Health, estimated that in 2004 nearly 1.8 million veterans were uninsured and unable to get care in veterans’ facilities.” [New York Times, 11/9/07] <hr /></blockquote>
now, that doesn't even address the claim Bush made one way or the other, so from the start it isn't exposing a lie.

However, to make it's "POINT" it links to a NYT article which explains how they arrived at their grossly inflated claim:
Most of the uninsured veterans were working-class people who were too poor to afford private insurance but not poor enough to qualify for care under a priority system administered by the Veterans Affairs Department. Some were unable to get care because there was no V.A. facility nearby, or the nearest facility had a long waiting list, or they could not afford the co-payments required of some veterans ... Unfortunately, in recent years enrollment of higher-income, nondisabled veterans shot up so fast that long waiting lists developed and budgets failed to keep pace, forcing a freeze on enrollments in this category.<hr /></blockquote>
So, who are these 1,800,000?

-Those who don't want to drive for low cost care.
-Those who won't pay the deductible.
-Those with dishonorable/undesirable discharges.
-Those who don't want to wait through the line created by people who CAN afford health insurance getting it free from the VA because Bush raised spending ... which is what the article was supposed to disprove!

Please, you are licking so deep inside the jar that you are accusing Bush of doing what you wanted him to do! /ccboard/images/graemlins/grin.gif

If this wasn't so critical it would be hilarious.

Everybody join in now ...

... and a one ...

.. and a two...



01-29-2008, 06:10 AM
On lie #2 they again shift the accusation to something he never claimed, and then link to an article showing that what he did say was true ... and how it was what the left had wanted him to do, until he did it. Now it's bad that he did it. If he stopped, I bet it would be good again. [ QUOTE ]
Bush said: “And our Emergency Plan for AIDS Relief is treating 1.4 million people [in Africa]. We can bring healing and hope to many more. So I ask you to maintain the principles that have changed behavior and made this program a success.”

FACT — BUSH’S AIDS POLICIES DIVERT FUNDS TO FAILED ABSTINENCE-ONLY PROGRAMS: Bush’s policy states that one-third of money allocated for HIV prevention overseas go to abstinence-only programs. “In fact, a full two-thirds of the money for the prevention of the sexual spread of HIV goes to abstinence.” [American Prospect, 7/10/07] <hr /></blockquote>


01-29-2008, 06:25 AM
Well, after a cursory fact check ... they don't have any, at least none that support their accusations.

But then, their accusations don't even support what they claim to be.

If you would have read it you would have known this, but again we have the naked evidence that your interests lie in what promotes partisan politics, class warfare, and division amongst the people.

The search for "TRUTH" was no motivation at all in this thread was it Gayle?

What happened is that you went searching for ANYTHING that would support what you wanted to hear.



01-29-2008, 06:30 AM
Your "FACT CHECKERS" were in fact THE CENTER FOR AMERICAN PROGRESS (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Center_For_American_Progress) wasn't it Gayle.

It is operated by John Podesta, Clinton's former chief of staff isn't it sweetheart.

George Soros funded it also, didn't he.

It was all a leftwing moonbat group campaigning for Hillary as a stealth group wasn't it. Yeah, it's OK though. I've known from the start you were a Soros puppet.

I know what he thinks.

Just for once I'd like to see you research something ... outside of moonbat blogs ... and tell us what you actually think and not what a convicted criminal such as Soros tells you that you think.

Join us in the light Gayle. You won't turn to dust, I promise.


01-29-2008, 06:44 AM
Oh, did I mention they were the moonbat source for your idea that the MSM is a VRWC!

They support the "FAIRNESS DOCTRINE" which is very 1984ish in it's name because it calls for banning political dissent on public airwaves, except those situations where it's moonbat leftist malarkey.

But, then, the "FAIRNESS DOCTRINE" is needed for a fascist group such as Il Duce Soros and his cabal to gain power.

When fascism comes to America it will done in the name of "FAIRNESS" and the American left will line the streets to cheer it on just as they did in 1933.


01-29-2008, 06:45 AM
Join us in the light Gayle. You won't turn to dust, I promise.

Disclaimer: The light to which he is referring is NOT the same light that I am a part of, nor has it ever been.

Thank you. Yours truly, Hondo.

01-29-2008, 06:47 AM
God, I love the smell of the burning corpses of liberal myths in the morning!


01-29-2008, 06:47 AM
Ain't that the truth! /ccboard/images/graemlins/grin.gif


01-29-2008, 09:46 AM
Lww I love checking the Bush Crime Family for my info. A site few Right Wingers go to.####

01-29-2008, 11:13 AM
Link it.


01-29-2008, 03:17 PM
And now 8 replies to your post....must be your biggest fan !!!
Who TF needs to reply 8 times to make a point...or does he even have a point?
I'm writing a software app for him to save him some typing.
he just has to fill in the blanks:
................fascist...................moonbat. ............strawman...
sedition...................peace.................. .haterade............
but you knew that.........

01-29-2008, 06:55 PM
That's what's called analysis Sorosboy.

Here's how it works.

You take a claim made by someone.

Then you check to see if it's true.

I did that for the the first three claims.

None of them were true.

I was hoping your light bulb might blink on.

Lord know you lack the ambition to verify anything on your own.