Skip to main content

The Republicans wage a war against facts

I'm talking about Republican Congressman Peter King of New York. When he made an appearance on CNN recently, he and host Soledad O'Brien had the following back and forth:

O'Brien: "Never once in that speech, as you know, which I have the speech right here, that was - he never once used the word 'apology.' He never once said 'I'm sorry.'"

King: "Didn't have to. The logical - any logical reading of that speech or the speech he gave in France where he basically said the United States can be too aggressive..."

O'Brien: "Everybody keeps talking about this apology tour and apologies from the President. I'm trying to find the words 'I'm sorry, I apologize' in any of those speeches. Which I have the text of all those speeches in front of me. None of those speeches at all, if you go to factcheck.org which we check in a lot, they all say the same thing. They fact check this and they say this whole theory of apologies..."

King: "I don't care what fact check says."

O'Brien: "There are fact checks. You may not care, but they're a fact checker."

King: "No, Soledad. Any commonsense interpretation of those speeches, the president's apologizing for the American position. That's the apology tour. That's the way it's interpreted in the Middle East. If I go over and say that the U.S. has violated its principles, that the United States has not shown respect for Islam, that's an apology. How else can it be interpreted?"

O'Brien: "I think plenty of people are interpreting it as a nuanced approach to diplomacy is how some people are interpreting it. So I don't think that everybody agrees it's apology."

While Democrats have claimed that Republicans have waged a war against women and rightly so in my opinion, it seems as if they're failing to mention another war that the GOP seems to be waging - one against facts. 

Mitt Romney pollster, Neil Newhouse, recently summed it up best when he said, "We're not going to let our campaign be dictated by fact-checkers."

I read a recent post about how a moderator over at the conservative website RedState was going to ban anyone whom fact-checked statements and included the link(s) and/or quote(s) from that site in the comments section. 

Peter King is now saying, "I don't care what fact check says."

I can't tell you how many times I've read or heard a Republican who has claimed that fact-checking sites have a liberal bias. 

Perhaps late-night talk show host and satirist, Stephen Colbert, was right when he said, "Reality has a liberal bias." Perhaps that's partly because it seems as if many conservatives simply don't care for or believe facts. 


Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Boycotting jukeboxes because of TouchTunes

I love music and enjoy hitting the bar(s) over the weekend, so naturally, when the mood strikes me, I've never been coy about playing some songs on the jukebox. This past Thursday, a friend of mine turned 50, so several friends of her's, including myself, all met up to celebrate the occasion. At around 9:30, a friend of mine and I both chipped in $5 to play some songs on the jukebox. Four hours and 231 skips later, we gave up on hearing the songs we had selected, and went home knowing we had just wasted $5. This wasn't the first time such a thing had happened to me (and many others), and due to that, I'll be boycotting jukeboxes. Why? The scam known as TouchTunes. You see, here's how the plot typically breaks down. A person (or group of people) downloads the TouchTunes app on his/her phone, consumes one too many adult beverages, and due to this, has less care for spending extra money to hear the songs of their choosing right NOW. That's the thing with TouchTun

The difference between "looking" and "checking out"

I may be way off with these numbers, but it's my approximation that at least 75% of individuals whom are involved in a serious relationship feel it's perfectly acceptable to "check out" members of the opposite sex they're not involved with. Meanwhile, approximately 25% either don't feel this is acceptable or aren't sure about the matter. I hadn't thought about this matter for a while, but since I've been dating a woman for about 8 months, the topic has been pondered about some. When reading or hearing others discuss this very issue, I often times hear comments similar to the following: "It's human nature to look." "There's nothing wrong with checking others out. I'm sure he/she does it too!" "It's fine to do it. Just don't tell your boyfriend/girlfriend about it or do it in front of them!" "It's natural to find people attractive." When observing the array of comments, I i

The verdict is in. To no one's surprise, Jonathan Hoenig has been found guilty of being an idiot.

Just recently, when discussing the Michael Brown shooting and whether or not race had anything to do with it, Fox News contributor Jonathan Hoenig said, "You know who talks about race? Racists." One moment while I provide Mr. Hoenig with the well deserved slow-clap. :: slow-claps for two seconds :: So, that was quite the line by Mr. Hoenig, wasn't it? "You know who talks about race? Racists." Well, wasn't he just talking about race? So, by his own words, I guess that makes him a racist. Also, if he wants to be consistent, does this mean that people whom talk about gender are sexists and people whom talk about sexual orientation are homophobes? With that line of thinking, Hoenig would engage in the following back-and-forths: Hoenig: "So, who are you voting for?" A woman: "The Democratic candidate, because he's been adamant about his support for equal rights for women." Hoenig: "You sexist feminist nazi!"