Replies

I came to FR because that’s what it was.

Now the fact-checkers often get trolled. When you have a reputation of solid fact-checking the regime knows to put plants there, to spoil the place. I don’t know how you get around it.

Often the bad guys find a way to “buy” (with sticks and/or carrots) the reputation of a host while infiltrating it with lying hacks - like Saddam Hussein did with CNN.

Soros, Axelrod, and Rahm Emanuel threatened the “conservative” media in October of 2008 to get them to avoid Obama’s eligibility/documentation problem and his Muslim leanings. They allowed Fox (for instance) to keep reporting on non-critical, non-actionable things so that conservatives would still feel good about the place and it would keep its credibility with conservatives, so that conservatives could be steered away from the topics that could have exposed the regime and those who criminally put Obama into our White House.

It was very effective. By threatening the premier “conservative” site and getting it to either ignore or (eventually) mock the truth-tellers on those issues as if they were “too extreme” and an “embarrassment to conservatism”, they got all the wannabe’s to do likewise, as if truth is a popularity contest. An evidentiary epistemology was the casualty, and now Americans largely have to choose between one viewpoint’s propaganda or another’s, rather than simply hearing genuine evidence. The society as a whole has what the Bible calls “itching ears” - ears that only the hear what they want to hear. So there are two camps that believe what they want to, truth be damned, and never the two shall meet.

When HotAir censored the evidence regarding Obama’s documentation issues I came to FR because it was the one place where in-depth analysis could happen. Amazing investigators. A lot of them have left now and I miss them.

There are still many good investigators here. It’s just harder to do real collaborative investigation because the threads get hi-jacked by regime operatives.