"Evaluating McCain and Obama on travel issues"

[sky12065]

Like today a article and meeting with the San Francisco Newspaper Board has him in his own Audio saying he would "bankrupt the coal industry" and necessarily send electric rates Soaring! I mean what that about, it doesn't sound like anything I would want to support. Put that on top of endless other things covered up by the media and I am concerned that all we have is a terrific talker and his real thoughts are not made public. That can't be a good thing.. I love rail and I don't care much for McCain, in fact I don't like either.. But Obama is getting more scary by the sound bite.. Thats why there aren't any out there. Think about it!

I haven't actually seen that interview, but somehow I suspect that once again words have been taken out of context.

What you might want to do is to start with Fact Check.org a not-for-profit that takes no funding from either political party and vets the ads, slogans, and other campaign info, and then points out the lies and the real facts. And they take great pride in slaming both candidates for mis-information.

It might help you make up your mind if you cut out the rhetoric.

Before you buy into the notion that FactCheck.org is completely unbias, check out http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/FactCheck. You be surprised some of the names that poped-up in connection with Fact Check when I checked it out; namely Barak Obama and Bill Ayres! Just another coincidence??? :huh:

Well I for one wouldn't trust Wikipedia for anything. After all anyone, be it Republican, Democrat, Independent, or other can edit any article and say anything that they want.

If you can site another source, then I might be more impressed. But Wikipedia while often helpful for many things, would not be a source to trust in this case.

Alan, thank you for pointing out about Wikipedia. I never knew that the site was that open to making changes! Searching to find another source is next to impossible though unless you had a staff to undertake the time consuming project.

I did do som searching though and found that there are thousands of websites that have the potential to meet the "other source" requirements, however most are blogs that claim FastCheck.org is bias to the left. I'm not about to give any credit to any of those any more that I would defend them.

What I did find is Fast Check's claim on their website that they are not the same Fast Check organization that Obama & Ayres were associated with. I do give that credit because my previous checking indicated that at some point the site address of fastcheck.org changed and was pointed to one of George Soro's website for a while. That alone made the connection more creditable. Then around 2003 or so, it was again changed to the current organization that now ownes the site and makes the claim of not being associated with Obama & Ayres.

So at this point I will give as much credibility to FastCheck.org as I will now give to Wikipedia.... that being, take what they say with a grain of salt!

 

[ALC Rail Writer]

Like today a article and meeting with the San Francisco Newspaper Board has him in his own Audio saying he would "bankrupt the coal industry" and necessarily send electric rates Soaring! I mean what that about, it doesn't sound like anything I would want to support. Put that on top of endless other things covered up by the media and I am concerned that all we have is a terrific talker and his real thoughts are not made public. That can't be a good thing.. I love rail and I don't care much for McCain, in fact I don't like either.. But Obama is getting more scary by the sound bite.. Thats why there aren't any out there. Think about it!

I haven't actually seen that interview, but somehow I suspect that once again words have been taken out of context.

What you might want to do is to start with Fact Check.org a not-for-profit that takes no funding from either political party and vets the ads, slogans, and other campaign info, and then points out the lies and the real facts. And they take great pride in slaming both candidates for mis-information.

It might help you make up your mind if you cut out the rhetoric.

Before you buy into the notion that FactCheck.org is completely unbias, check out http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/FactCheck. You be surprised some of the names that poped-up in connection with Fact Check when I checked it out; namely Barak Obama and Bill Ayres! Just another coincidence??? :huh:

Well I for one wouldn't trust Wikipedia for anything. After all anyone, be it Republican, Democrat, Independent, or other can edit any article and say anything that they want.

If you can site another source, then I might be more impressed. But Wikipedia while often helpful for many things, would not be a source to trust in this case.

Alan, thank you for pointing out about Wikipedia. I never knew that the site was that open to making changes! Searching to find another source is next to impossible though unless you had a staff to undertake the time consuming project.

I did do som searching though and found that there are thousands of websites that have the potential to meet the "other source" requirements, however most are blogs that claim FastCheck.org is bias to the left. I'm not about to give any credit to any of those any more that I would defend them.

What I did find is Fast Check's claim on their website that they are not the same Fast Check organization that Obama & Ayres were associated with. I do give that credit because my previous checking indicated that at some point the site address of fastcheck.org changed and was pointed to one of George Soro's website for a while. That alone made the connection more creditable. Then around 2003 or so, it was again changed to the current organization that now ownes the site and makes the claim of not being associated with Obama & Ayres.

So at this point I will give as much credibility to FastCheck.org as I will now give to Wikipedia.... that being, take what they say with a grain of salt!

Take everything with a grain of salt!

If you only rely on once source for your media or facts, you're making a dumb choice.

I prefer CNN, but I watch MSNBC as well as the blogosphere both conservative and liberal (Rove & Co. is one of my favorite reads...)... As well as late night faux-news for fun!

I think that gives me the best possible knowledge of the candidates.

 

[sky12065]

Before you buy into the notion that FactCheck.org is completely unbias, check out http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/FactCheck. You be surprised some of the names that poped-up in connection with Fact Check when I checked it out; namely Barak Obama and Bill Ayres! Just another coincidence??? :huh:

Well I for one wouldn't trust Wikipedia for anything. After all anyone, be it Republican, Democrat, Independent, or other can edit any article and say anything that they want.

If you can site another source, then I might be more impressed. But Wikipedia while often helpful for many things, would not be a source to trust in this case.

And after loading that page, I see no mention of Bill Ayres on that page.

I do note a mention of Obama on that page, but then I also note that the chairwomen of the foundation has endorsed John McCain for President.

What I do know is that FactCheck has gone after both candidates with equal vigor.

Ayers wasn't directly on the site, it was found in a linked reference to http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chicago_Annenberg_Challenge. Remember that I simply said "You be surprised some of the names that poped-up in connection with Fact Check" and nothing more should be read or assumed into it!

 

[sky12065]

Like today a article and meeting with the San Francisco Newspaper Board has him in his own Audio saying he would "bankrupt the coal industry" and necessarily send electric rates Soaring! I mean what that about, it doesn't sound like anything I would want to support. Put that on top of endless other things covered up by the media and I am concerned that all we have is a terrific talker and his real thoughts are not made public. That can't be a good thing.. I love rail and I don't care much for McCain, in fact I don't like either.. But Obama is getting more scary by the sound bite.. Thats why there aren't any out there. Think about it!

I haven't actually seen that interview, but somehow I suspect that once again words have been taken out of context.

What you might want to do is to start with Fact Check.org a not-for-profit that takes no funding from either political party and vets the ads, slogans, and other campaign info, and then points out the lies and the real facts. And they take great pride in slaming both candidates for mis-information.

It might help you make up your mind if you cut out the rhetoric.

Before you buy into the notion that FactCheck.org is completely unbias, check out http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/FactCheck. You be surprised some of the names that poped-up in connection with Fact Check when I checked it out; namely Barak Obama and Bill Ayres! Just another coincidence??? :huh:

Well I for one wouldn't trust Wikipedia for anything. After all anyone, be it Republican, Democrat, Independent, or other can edit any article and say anything that they want.

If you can site another source, then I might be more impressed. But Wikipedia while often helpful for many things, would not be a source to trust in this case.

Alan, thank you for pointing out about Wikipedia. I never knew that the site was that open to making changes! Searching to find another source is next to impossible though unless you had a staff to undertake the time consuming project.

I did do som searching though and found that there are thousands of websites that have the potential to meet the "other source" requirements, however most are blogs that claim FastCheck.org is bias to the left. I'm not about to give any credit to any of those any more that I would defend them.

What I did find is Fast Check's claim on their website that they are not the same Fast Check organization that Obama & Ayres were associated with. I do give that credit because my previous checking indicated that at some point the site address of fastcheck.org changed and was pointed to one of George Soro's website for a while. That alone made the connection more creditable. Then around 2003 or so, it was again changed to the current organization that now ownes the site and makes the claim of not being associated with Obama & Ayres.

So at this point I will give as much credibility to FastCheck.org as I will now give to Wikipedia.... that being, take what they say with a grain of salt!

Take everything with a grain of salt!

If you only rely on once source for your media or facts, you're making a dumb choice.

I prefer CNN, but I watch MSNBC as well as the blogosphere both conservative and liberal (Rove & Co. is one of my favorite reads...)... As well as late night faux-news for fun!

I think that gives me the best possible knowledge of the candidates.

I respectfully disagree! Unless you watch CNN, MSNBC and FOX News you have no chance for knowing who gives you the best, most balanced and most complete knowledge of the candidates! I personally believe that I know which one does and their ratings overwhelmingly verifies that for me! But as I've indicated, you or anyone needs to watch ALL 3 with an open mind and then judge for yourself who does and does it most consistantly! But of course, it's probably too late for that now!

 

[ALC Rail Writer]

Like today a article and meeting with the San Francisco Newspaper Board has him in his own Audio saying he would "bankrupt the coal industry" and necessarily send electric rates Soaring! I mean what that about, it doesn't sound like anything I would want to support. Put that on top of endless other things covered up by the media and I am concerned that all we have is a terrific talker and his real thoughts are not made public. That can't be a good thing.. I love rail and I don't care much for McCain, in fact I don't like either.. But Obama is getting more scary by the sound bite.. Thats why there aren't any out there. Think about it!

I haven't actually seen that interview, but somehow I suspect that once again words have been taken out of context.

What you might want to do is to start with Fact Check.org a not-for-profit that takes no funding from either political party and vets the ads, slogans, and other campaign info, and then points out the lies and the real facts. And they take great pride in slaming both candidates for mis-information.

It might help you make up your mind if you cut out the rhetoric.

Before you buy into the notion that FactCheck.org is completely unbias, check out http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/FactCheck. You be surprised some of the names that poped-up in connection with Fact Check when I checked it out; namely Barak Obama and Bill Ayres! Just another coincidence??? :huh:

Well I for one wouldn't trust Wikipedia for anything. After all anyone, be it Republican, Democrat, Independent, or other can edit any article and say anything that they want.

If you can site another source, then I might be more impressed. But Wikipedia while often helpful for many things, would not be a source to trust in this case.

Alan, thank you for pointing out about Wikipedia. I never knew that the site was that open to making changes! Searching to find another source is next to impossible though unless you had a staff to undertake the time consuming project.

I did do som searching though and found that there are thousands of websites that have the potential to meet the "other source" requirements, however most are blogs that claim FastCheck.org is bias to the left. I'm not about to give any credit to any of those any more that I would defend them.

What I did find is Fast Check's claim on their website that they are not the same Fast Check organization that Obama & Ayres were associated with. I do give that credit because my previous checking indicated that at some point the site address of fastcheck.org changed and was pointed to one of George Soro's website for a while. That alone made the connection more creditable. Then around 2003 or so, it was again changed to the current organization that now ownes the site and makes the claim of not being associated with Obama & Ayres.

So at this point I will give as much credibility to FastCheck.org as I will now give to Wikipedia.... that being, take what they say with a grain of salt!

Take everything with a grain of salt!

If you only rely on once source for your media or facts, you're making a dumb choice.

I prefer CNN, but I watch MSNBC as well as the blogosphere both conservative and liberal (Rove & Co. is one of my favorite reads...)... As well as late night faux-news for fun!

I think that gives me the best possible knowledge of the candidates.

I respectfully disagree! Unless you watch CNN, MSNBC and FOX News you have no chance for knowing who gives you the best, most balanced and most complete knowledge of the candidates! I personally believe that I know which one does and their ratings overwhelmingly verifies that for me! But as I've indicated, you or anyone needs to watch ALL 3 with an open mind and then judge for yourself who does and does it most consistantly! But of course, it's probably too late for that now!

I disagree- why get your info from only major media TV networks...

Try blogs- newspapers, AP, Reuters online. Throw it all together.

 

[WhoozOn1st]

Note that sky lives out on the far right wing, along with entirely discredited views and policies.

 

[sky12065]

Like today a article and meeting with the San Francisco Newspaper Board has him in his own Audio saying he would "bankrupt the coal industry" and necessarily send electric rates Soaring! I mean what that about, it doesn't sound like anything I would want to support. Put that on top of endless other things covered up by the media and I am concerned that all we have is a terrific talker and his real thoughts are not made public. That can't be a good thing.. I love rail and I don't care much for McCain, in fact I don't like either.. But Obama is getting more scary by the sound bite.. Thats why there aren't any out there. Think about it!

I haven't actually seen that interview, but somehow I suspect that once again words have been taken out of context.

What you might want to do is to start with Fact Check.org a not-for-profit that takes no funding from either political party and vets the ads, slogans, and other campaign info, and then points out the lies and the real facts. And they take great pride in slaming both candidates for mis-information.

It might help you make up your mind if you cut out the rhetoric.

Before you buy into the notion that FactCheck.org is completely unbias, check out http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/FactCheck. You be surprised some of the names that poped-up in connection with Fact Check when I checked it out; namely Barak Obama and Bill Ayres! Just another coincidence??? :huh:

Well I for one wouldn't trust Wikipedia for anything. After all anyone, be it Republican, Democrat, Independent, or other can edit any article and say anything that they want.

If you can site another source, then I might be more impressed. But Wikipedia while often helpful for many things, would not be a source to trust in this case.

Alan, thank you for pointing out about Wikipedia. I never knew that the site was that open to making changes! Searching to find another source is next to impossible though unless you had a staff to undertake the time consuming project.

I did do som searching though and found that there are thousands of websites that have the potential to meet the "other source" requirements, however most are blogs that claim FastCheck.org is bias to the left. I'm not about to give any credit to any of those any more that I would defend them.

What I did find is Fast Check's claim on their website that they are not the same Fast Check organization that Obama & Ayres were associated with. I do give that credit because my previous checking indicated that at some point the site address of fastcheck.org changed and was pointed to one of George Soro's website for a while. That alone made the connection more creditable. Then around 2003 or so, it was again changed to the current organization that now ownes the site and makes the claim of not being associated with Obama & Ayres.

So at this point I will give as much credibility to FastCheck.org as I will now give to Wikipedia.... that being, take what they say with a grain of salt!

Take everything with a grain of salt!

If you only rely on once source for your media or facts, you're making a dumb choice.

I prefer CNN, but I watch MSNBC as well as the blogosphere both conservative and liberal (Rove & Co. is one of my favorite reads...)... As well as late night faux-news for fun!

I think that gives me the best possible knowledge of the candidates.

I respectfully disagree! Unless you watch CNN, MSNBC and FOX News you have no chance for knowing who gives you the best, most balanced and most complete knowledge of the candidates! I personally believe that I know which one does and their ratings overwhelmingly verifies that for me! But as I've indicated, you or anyone needs to watch ALL 3 with an open mind and then judge for yourself who does and does it most consistantly! But of course, it's probably too late for that now!

I disagree- why get your info from only major media TV networks...

Try blogs- newspapers, AP, Reuters online. Throw it all together.

Because you were only mentioning cable news networks. Otherwise, I don't disagree with you!

On Edit: Whoops, I do disagree with blogs! With politics I consider them gargage cans filled with either/both left or right garbage!

 

[ALC Rail Writer]

Like today a article and meeting with the San Francisco Newspaper Board has him in his own Audio saying he would "bankrupt the coal industry" and necessarily send electric rates Soaring! I mean what that about, it doesn't sound like anything I would want to support. Put that on top of endless other things covered up by the media and I am concerned that all we have is a terrific talker and his real thoughts are not made public. That can't be a good thing.. I love rail and I don't care much for McCain, in fact I don't like either.. But Obama is getting more scary by the sound bite.. Thats why there aren't any out there. Think about it!

I haven't actually seen that interview, but somehow I suspect that once again words have been taken out of context.

What you might want to do is to start with Fact Check.org a not-for-profit that takes no funding from either political party and vets the ads, slogans, and other campaign info, and then points out the lies and the real facts. And they take great pride in slaming both candidates for mis-information.

It might help you make up your mind if you cut out the rhetoric.

Before you buy into the notion that FactCheck.org is completely unbias, check out http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/FactCheck. You be surprised some of the names that poped-up in connection with Fact Check when I checked it out; namely Barak Obama and Bill Ayres! Just another coincidence??? :huh:

Well I for one wouldn't trust Wikipedia for anything. After all anyone, be it Republican, Democrat, Independent, or other can edit any article and say anything that they want.

If you can site another source, then I might be more impressed. But Wikipedia while often helpful for many things, would not be a source to trust in this case.

Alan, thank you for pointing out about Wikipedia. I never knew that the site was that open to making changes! Searching to find another source is next to impossible though unless you had a staff to undertake the time consuming project.

I did do som searching though and found that there are thousands of websites that have the potential to meet the "other source" requirements, however most are blogs that claim FastCheck.org is bias to the left. I'm not about to give any credit to any of those any more that I would defend them.

What I did find is Fast Check's claim on their website that they are not the same Fast Check organization that Obama & Ayres were associated with. I do give that credit because my previous checking indicated that at some point the site address of fastcheck.org changed and was pointed to one of George Soro's website for a while. That alone made the connection more creditable. Then around 2003 or so, it was again changed to the current organization that now ownes the site and makes the claim of not being associated with Obama & Ayres.

So at this point I will give as much credibility to FastCheck.org as I will now give to Wikipedia.... that being, take what they say with a grain of salt!

Take everything with a grain of salt!

If you only rely on once source for your media or facts, you're making a dumb choice.

I prefer CNN, but I watch MSNBC as well as the blogosphere both conservative and liberal (Rove & Co. is one of my favorite reads...)... As well as late night faux-news for fun!

I think that gives me the best possible knowledge of the candidates.

I respectfully disagree! Unless you watch CNN, MSNBC and FOX News you have no chance for knowing who gives you the best, most balanced and most complete knowledge of the candidates! I personally believe that I know which one does and their ratings overwhelmingly verifies that for me! But as I've indicated, you or anyone needs to watch ALL 3 with an open mind and then judge for yourself who does and does it most consistantly! But of course, it's probably too late for that now!

I disagree- why get your info from only major media TV networks...

Try blogs- newspapers, AP, Reuters online. Throw it all together.

Because you were only mentioning cable news networks. Otherwise, I don't disagree with you!

For your benefit, I bolded what in my original post was not major cable news networks.

 

[sky12065]

Like today a article and meeting with the San Francisco Newspaper Board has him in his own Audio saying he would "bankrupt the coal industry" and necessarily send electric rates Soaring! I mean what that about, it doesn't sound like anything I would want to support. Put that on top of endless other things covered up by the media and I am concerned that all we have is a terrific talker and his real thoughts are not made public. That can't be a good thing.. I love rail and I don't care much for McCain, in fact I don't like either.. But Obama is getting more scary by the sound bite.. Thats why there aren't any out there. Think about it!

I haven't actually seen that interview, but somehow I suspect that once again words have been taken out of context.

What you might want to do is to start with Fact Check.org a not-for-profit that takes no funding from either political party and vets the ads, slogans, and other campaign info, and then points out the lies and the real facts. And they take great pride in slaming both candidates for mis-information.

It might help you make up your mind if you cut out the rhetoric.

Before you buy into the notion that FactCheck.org is completely unbias, check out http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/FactCheck. You be surprised some of the names that poped-up in connection with Fact Check when I checked it out; namely Barak Obama and Bill Ayres! Just another coincidence??? :huh:

Well I for one wouldn't trust Wikipedia for anything. After all anyone, be it Republican, Democrat, Independent, or other can edit any article and say anything that they want.

If you can site another source, then I might be more impressed. But Wikipedia while often helpful for many things, would not be a source to trust in this case.

Alan, thank you for pointing out about Wikipedia. I never knew that the site was that open to making changes! Searching to find another source is next to impossible though unless you had a staff to undertake the time consuming project.

I did do som searching though and found that there are thousands of websites that have the potential to meet the "other source" requirements, however most are blogs that claim FastCheck.org is bias to the left. I'm not about to give any credit to any of those any more that I would defend them.

What I did find is Fast Check's claim on their website that they are not the same Fast Check organization that Obama & Ayres were associated with. I do give that credit because my previous checking indicated that at some point the site address of fastcheck.org changed and was pointed to one of George Soro's website for a while. That alone made the connection more creditable. Then around 2003 or so, it was again changed to the current organization that now ownes the site and makes the claim of not being associated with Obama & Ayres.

So at this point I will give as much credibility to FastCheck.org as I will now give to Wikipedia.... that being, take what they say with a grain of salt!

Take everything with a grain of salt!

If you only rely on once source for your media or facts, you're making a dumb choice.

I prefer CNN, but I watch MSNBC as well as the blogosphere both conservative and liberal (Rove & Co. is one of my favorite reads...)... As well as late night faux-news for fun!

I think that gives me the best possible knowledge of the candidates.

I respectfully disagree! Unless you watch CNN, MSNBC and FOX News you have no chance for knowing who gives you the best, most balanced and most complete knowledge of the candidates! I personally believe that I know which one does and their ratings overwhelmingly verifies that for me! But as I've indicated, you or anyone needs to watch ALL 3 with an open mind and then judge for yourself who does and does it most consistantly! But of course, it's probably too late for that now!

I disagree- why get your info from only major media TV networks...

Try blogs- newspapers, AP, Reuters online. Throw it all together.

Because you were only mentioning cable news networks. Otherwise, I don't disagree with you!

For your benefit, I bolded what in my original post was not major cable news networks.

You win... my bad! :blush:

 

[Joel N. Weber II]

I sometimes find that going to news.google.com and reading the versions of the stories published by major British media outlets on the web provides an interesting perspective on events occuring in the USA.