Re:  Obama Factcheck.Org (Off Topic)

2008-9-19 14:45:00

In response to Message Number 36765 made by JohnC to The Keys Of Knowledge spiritual discussion group on 09/17/08, JJ Dewey responded in Message Number 36768 on the same date with the following:

I often find these fact checking sites are either biased or inaccurate. I checked just one thing at the web site which was the supposed inaccurate accusation by McCain that Obama supported sex education for kindergarten kids.

Here is what the web site says:

"A McCain campaign ad claims Obama's 'one accomplishment' was a bill to teach sex ed to kindergarten kids. Don't believe it."

On the other hand here is what Senate Bill 99 (that he [Obama] voted Yes on) actually says:

"Each class or course in comprehensive sex education in any of grades K through 12 shall include instruction on the prevention of sexually transmitted infections, including the prevention, transmission and spread of HIV."

Sounds like the McCain accusation was accurate after all, except it may be argued that Obama had other accomplishments though I can't vouch for them.

For more information go to:

In response to the above, John C then wrote:

"How unbiased is the article that you quoted from? Is the 'National Review' known to be an unbiased source? According to Wiki:  'It is usually considered the center of intellectual activity for the American Conservative movement in the twentieth century.'"

To the above, JJ responded with:

I first heard this quote on a news program. The quote did not originate from The National Review but from State Bill 99 of the Illinois General Assembly, and is archived at the government's web page at:

No one has disputed this -- Left or Right.

If the National Review, Daily Kos, or any other source is not accurate then one should point out the inaccuracies rather than dismiss it because it is biased. Some of the most biased sources still have accurate references. When I was a Mormon, I often did research in anti-Mormon literature because they often came up with accurate source material that was useful.

It does not taint or change a quote if the Left or Right uses it. It is what it is.

Some seem to have the idea that if a quote is used by a biased source then this taints the meaning of the quote. It doesn't matter if the devil himself uses a quote the meaning is still what the meaning is.

Now, if we let others interpret quotes for us and tell us what to think that is another matter, but I do not let anyone tell me what to think of a quote; for if it is controversial, I will go to the source myself.