Posted on 05/12/2015 2:53:50 PM PDT by Sean_Anthony
This entire phony genre of journalism is now well beyond embarrassing.
Do you know what a fact is? That’s easy. Of course you do. Fact is an objective truth not subject to interpretation or dispute. Water is liquid if it’s above 32 degrees Fahrenheit. That’s a fact. Thursday comes after Wednesday. That’s a fact. The address of the White House is 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue.
People who deal in actual facts can recognize that an assertion is either fact-based or its not. It’s really not that complicated. That’s for normal people who understand what a fact is. But there are other kinds of people, those who don’t know what a fact is because they are apparently not intelligent enough to understand such a straightforward concept. Ironically, and tragically, many of these people have found work doing something that calls itself - but patently is not - “fact checking.”
(Excerpt) Read more at canadafreepress.com ...
I’ve noticed that facts are now “Everyone agrees that....”.
Or as Hillary pronounces as a fact, "There are those who would say..."
And that is a FACT!
While I agree that they’re inept morons, I think they know exactly what they’re doing — providing “credibility” for their fellow leftists in smearing anyone to the right of Chairman Mao.
I saw something from Politifact about the Clinton Foundation accusations. Of course, it was “false”.
The part that everyone (on Facebook) seemed to be lost on - does Politifact have the foundations accounting books? How on earth can they possibly know?
...the zombies failed to recognize it was proof of bias, they just accepted it as “fact”. Scarey.
Like http://www.politifact.com/ ?....slightly biased...
Since there’s no actual excerpt in the excerpt, here’s the underlying link:
http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/updated-politifact-strikes-again/article/2564295
Updated: Politifact strikes again
By Ashe Schow | May 11, 2015 | 3:09 pm
Because the domain name attacking Carly Fiorina mentioned 30,000 laid-off workers first,...
The website carlyfiorina.org claims that Fiorina laid off 30,000 Hewlett-Packard employees and said she wished she had laid them off faster.
Despite this being a completely untrue statement, Politifact rated it as “half true” because 30,000 people were indeed laid off from HP.
Of course, this is not how truth works. The person who purchased the Fiorina domain claimed that the 2016 presidential candidate was referring to the 30,000 laid-off employees when she said: “I would have done them all faster.” The Politifact researcher even acknowledges that this is not true — Fiorina was not referring to 30,000 people laid off when she said she would have “done them all faster.” And that means there is nothing true about the statement at all.
InformationWeek, Oct. 16, 2006 — “When we combined the R&D budgets of HP and Compaq, we didn’t have to have two R&D teams working on industry standard servers, for instance. We could have one. That’s why the merger was such a great idea. We could decrease the cost structure by billions and billions of dollars. In the course of my time there, we laid off over 30,000 people. That’s why I understand where the anger came from.”
http://fortune.com/2011/08/21/why-carlys-big-bet-is-failing-fortune-classics-2005/
Fortune, October 2005 — “Fiorina summarily fired — within hours — the head of enterprise sales, Peter Blackmore, and two of his senior executives. The speed and visibility of the move caused the tech industry to view the firings as an unnecessarily cruel public hanging, and criticism of Fiorina flared. She argues back, saying that a hanging it wasn’t and that in truth these people were treated, in the usual HP manner, with ‘respect, candor, and compassion.’ But she also says that some of the European problems had been ripening for a time and that these three very senior executives clearly ‘dropped the ball.’ She believes in accountability, she says, so the men are gone... Fiorina does not agree, naturally, that there’s been a brain drain. In fact, she believes that one lesson she’s learned while running HP is that she should have moved more quickly in ejecting certain people. Smartened up now, she says, ‘I would have done them all faster. Every person that I’ve asked to leave, whether it’s been clear publicly or not, I would have done faster.’ “
Not always. It depends on pressure.
http://www1.lsbu.ac.uk/water/water_phase_diagram.html
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.