Free Dating -- A Fraudulent "Fact Check" Site Funded By Biased Political Group

posted 8/27/2012 11:14:20 AM |
7 kudosgive kudos what's this?
    report abuse

If you wanted to use a devious method to deceive people who are trying to differentiate between truth and lies on the Internet how would you do it? If you were extremely devious and had no conscience, you might set up a Web site with some official and unbiased sounding name that claims to be the encyclopedia of truth to be used as a tool for anyone who has the same biased view and wants to make believe to "back it up" with what they would like you to think is "indisputable fact."

That is exactly what Web sites like are. They are biased, politically motivated propaganda Web sites, manned and funded by biased political organizations who set up the sites for the sole purpose of deviously "backing up" the political arguments of those who hold the same views that they do. It's kind of like you have a friend who is in on your lie, and you use him to back up your story and don't tell anyone else he is your friend.

Just because they use a name that implies unbiased assessments, doesn't mean that they provide them. You can call your Web site anything you want. I can set up a web site called or or and post any kind of biased political propaganda I want on it. The name means nothing. And in the case of sites like, the name is intentionally misleading and deceptive. But it isn't the only so called "fact check" site that is a fraud. There are others.

Think about it. Would you rely on any particular Web site to get the "truth?" Anyone honest would tell you that you should NOT rely solely on them to get your facts. You should get them by considering many different and sources, with different points of view and opinions and arrive at what you believe to be the truth by using your own God given senses. Only con artists purport to be the de facto source of truth.

If you look behind the scenes at these phony "fact check" sites, you find that they are funded by organizations with political biases. You must always ask yourself. Who is writing about this so-called "truth." Who funds the site and pays their expenses. What are the origins and history of the funders and who are they associated with. In the case of they receive their funding from the liberal Annenberg Foundation.

The Annenberg Foundation was originally founded by Walter J. Annenberg, a conservative who supported Ronald Reagan. However, when Walter Annenberg died, his family took over the management of the foundation and it took a turn to the far left and has ties to radical left individuals such as Bill Ayers and his friend and fellow left wing radical collegue Barack Obama. How is associated with these people:

To start, Ayers was the key founder of the Chicago Annenberg Challenge, which was a Chicago public school reform project from 1995 to 2001. Upon its start in 1995, Obama was appointed Board Chairman and President of the Chicago Annenberg Challenge. Geesh, that alone connects all three. Well, it branches out even more from there.

Ayers co-chaired the organization’s Collaborative, which set the education policies of the Challenge. Oddly enough, Obama was the one who was authorized to delegate to the Collaborative in regards to its programs and projects. In addition to that, Obama often times had to seek advice and assistance from the Ayer’s led Collaborative in regards to the programmatic aspects of grant proposals. Ayers even sat on the same board as Obama as an “ex officio member”. They both also sat together on the board of the CAC’s Governance Committee. Obama and Ayers were two parts of a group of four who were instructed to draft the bylaws that would govern the CAC. Keep in mind that the “A” in CAC is for Annenberg, the owners of The funding for Ayer’s projects and those of his cronies was approved by Board Chair, Barack Obama.

And by the way, you can find confirmation of the above from many different sources. This is just one. The left leaning bias of the Annenberg foundation has been well established and recognized for many years.

Don't believe ANYONE who tells you they have the "facts," and that you shouldn't listen to anyone else. Honest people encourage you to listen to many points of view and decide for yourself. They don't try to prevent you from hearing other points of view. That's the kind of thing that happens in totalitarian societies. A dictator tells you not to listen to anything except the state sponsored sources of information. Only one version of "the truth" is allowed, the dictators "truth." They try to shut off access to anything except the propaganda sources controlled by the dictator and soon the false "truth" is the only "truth" that anyone can hear.

Always consult different sources and make your own decisions. Only a con man tries to get you to ignore other sources and only listen to what they have to say. Don't allow these devious people to shut off your mind and fill it with their one sided propaganda. Don't allow them to prevent you from listening to other people's versions of the truth. Anyone who tries to do that is a fake. And most importantly, don't take what any so called "fact check" Web site has to say as "truth." When you drill down to the who actually owns this type of site, you will invariably find connections to the political left. Creating these sites is a tactic the political left likes to use to fool people with gullible minds. Don't be gullible. Consult many sources, with differing points of view, and make up your own mind. Anyone who encourages you not to do that or to rely solely on a so called "fact check" site is a fraud.

Copy & paste to friend: (Click inside box; Ctrl + C to copy; Ctrl + V to paste)

   read more blogs!

Blogs by DiamondRain:
Is This The Kind Of America That You Want Your Children To Inherit?
Nancy Pelosi Made Up to $5 Million In Offshore Investments Last Year
Obama Condemns anti-Muslim Video But Won't Say A Word About anti-Christian Work
Barack Hussein Obama Defiles The United States Flag For Money And Political Gain
Barack Hussein Obama In His Own Words (in case you still haven't figured it out)
% Of Americans In "Lower Class" Surged To New Record Since Obama Took Office
Obama Administration Warned Of 9/11 Terror Attacks But Did Nothing To Stop Them
I Can't Stop Laughing!
Dems Cancel Obama's Big Event At Dem. Conference Due To Lack Of Attendance
Obamaconomy Sets New Record: More People Went On Disability Than Found Jobs
Blacks Vow To Sit Out Election Over Obama's Support For Gay Marriage & Neglect
If Obama Ever Shakes Your Hand, You Better Count Your Fingers -- A Fraudulent "Fact Check" Site Funded By Biased Political Group
2016:Obama's America The Smash Hit Movie Breaks All Time Box Office Records
Obama's Record Energy Prices: The Biggest Middle Class Tax Increase In History
Obama Secretly Takes Money From Bain Capital & Appoints Bain Execs To His Staff
Obama's Brother Lives In Poverty And Sewage: Multi-Millionaire Obama Won't Help
"2016" The Documentary Movie That Obama And The Media Don't Want You To See
Where Are The Jobs Mr. President?
Obama Calls Paul Ryan's Medicare Plan "An entirely legitimate proposal"
Gas Prices Rise To Double The Price On The Day Obama Took Office
The Democrat's War On Bain Capital And How It Backfired In Their Face
The One Promise That Obama Kept
Who Pays For Obamacare? You Do - Higher Taxes & Premiums, Job & Economic Loss
Obama Guts Clinton Administration Welfare Reform And Work Requirements


Aug 27 @ 12:18PM  
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
FactCheck URL
Commercial? no
Available language(s) English is a non-partisan,[1] nonprofit[2] website that describes itself as a "'consumer advocate' for voters that aims to reduce the level of deception and confusion in U.S. politics."[3] It is a project of the Annenberg Public Policy Center of the Annenberg School for Communication at the University of Pennsylvania, and is funded primarily by the Annenberg Foundation.[3] FactCheck has won three Webby Awards in the Politics category, in 2008, 2010 and 2011.[4]

Most of its content consists of rebuttals to what it considers inaccurate, misleading, or false claims by politicians. FactCheck has also targeted misleading claims from various partisan groups.

Aug 27 @ 3:06PM  
What do you expect they are going to call themselves? Partisan left wing liars?

This is what these lefties do. It's the same tactics Hitler and Stalin used with their propaganda. They create one fake source that endorses another fake source. They try to overwhelm you with so much propaganda that you won't believe anything else because you hear their "truth" 24/7/365... so that means it must be true right? This is classic Marxist propaganda tactics. They have their bullshit all over the net.

But when you get to the bottom of these sites, you find out they are all funded by left wing political organizations.

This is their tactics. Flood the media with propaganda and demonize anyone who disagrees.

THINK FOR YOURSELF PEOPLE. Inform yourself. Don't take my word for it and don't take some Web site's word for it. Inform yourself and use your own mind to determine what is true. An informed citizen in the left's worst enemy.

Aug 27 @ 4:08PM  
This is a warning to all who wish to post on my blogs.

From now on if you cannot confine your comments to the topic, and refrain from making any kind of personal comments about other members, your posts will be deleted. If you persist you will be banned from making comments on my blogs.

Also note, I am only going to apply this rule to certain people. Others will be exempt although all comments remain or are deleted at my pleasure on my blog.

Aug 27 @ 4:50PM  
If you were extremely devious and had no conscience, you might set up a Web site with some official and unbiased sounding name that claims to be the encyclopedia of truth to be used as a tool for anyone who has the same biased view and wants to make believe to "back it up" with what they would like you to think is "indisputable fact."

dude,,,,,,,,it's called "Fox News" duh

let's face it,,any site that is not going to agree with your position on something,,you are going to label as "biased' whether it is or not,,,,,,and most of the policy's and philosophies from the right are so ridiculous and asinine that no amount of facts are ever going to penetrate your dogmatic thinking,,,so this is really a moot point

you will never accept any facts............that is the bastion of the left,,,so that's why sites like that work for the left because they are reality based and the ones for the right have to incorporate mystical books and magic beings that live in castles in the sky and no amount of fact checking is ever going to help,,,now is it???

did you catch the science guy today???? he was trying,,,,once again,,to tell facts to the right,,,,,,,,,,but you know it will just be a waste of time,,but here take a look anyways

Bill Nye the science guy on Evolution


Aug 27 @ 4:51PM  
FactCheck has won three Webby Awards in the Politics category, in 2008, 2010 and 2011.[4]

Both Yasser Arifat (The head of a Muslim terrorist organization who intentionally murdered thousands of innocent men women and children) and Barack Obama (just before he sent 33,000 troops into Afghanistan) won a Nobel Peace Prize.

Don't buy the "awards" propaganda either. It's one leftist organization giving an award to another leftist organization. It's the same gimmick as having one leftist reviewer give the thumbs up to a phony leftist fact check site.

Always beware of believing something because of an endorsement. Endorsements, testimonials, awards, fact checks, etc. are regularly used tools of deception to prevent you from doing your own research and just relying on someone else's word. These are favorite tools of con men.

Always do your research and be sure to hear both sides of a story before deciding what to believe. And always remember that just because something calls what it says a "fact" or touts that it got an "award" or that some "reviewer" sanctioned them doesn't mean a thing. One liar endorsing another liar does not equal truth. Do your homework.

Oct 4 @ 10:36PM  
Okay, you say that they are liars, but they seem pretty legit to me and they list all of their references. Do you have any examples of when they have been wrong? That would help your argument more rather than just claiming that they are wrong.

Oct 5 @ 7:29PM  
I'm not going to bother to find the the specific articles for you. I'll leave that up to whomever reads this to decide. I have seen cite AP articles and use their content simply as "truth" or "fact".

Do I really need to explain to you how biased the AP is? And how biased it would be to rely solely on their articles as fact? That isn't a small dose of bias, that is EXTREMELY BIASED.

Oct 5 @ 7:30PM  
onetimepost said:
I'm not going to bother to find the the specific articles for you. I'll leave that up to whomever reads this to decide. I have seen cite AP articles and use their content simply as "truth" or "fact".

Do I really need to explain to you how biased the AP is? And how biased it would be to rely solely on their articles as fact? That isn't a small dose of bias, that is EXTREMELY BIASED.

Oct 5 @ 9:10PM  
Sock puppet having a conversation with him/her self

Oct 5 @ 11:56PM  
There are other sites besides factcheck. If one is persistent enough, they will find the "facts" and not the bias'. And in all can any of us take any of them serious when we are always seeing "left leaning liberal media" or "right leaning Fox News" comments?

I see it this way....want both sides of the story? Just sit around here long enough and let others do the work for you. Sorry DR...couldn't resist.

Seriously, if one wants to know what are facts and what aren't, do your own research, don't rely on blogs about biased!!!!!! Like today for example, I'm hearing the unemployment rate dropped to 7.8%. Sure, sounds good. But, I have to wonder.....just how much of that drop is a result of benefits running out, how much is a result of those looking for work who just gave up. Like I said, the number looks good, but there's that old saying about "looks can be deceiving".

Anyway....for the record, I've seen factcheck debunk some liberal lies about Romney also,'s a matter of opinion if one wants to accuse the site of being biased.

Oct 13 @ 9:52AM  

Hi there. You must be a little new to the internet. A "double post", as it is commonly referred to, happens when the same comment is posted twice, usually by mistake. In this case, I made a mistake. I'm not used to comments having to be approved by moderators and I thought it just didn't go through the first time.

Had you actually read my posts, you would see that they are the same exact thing. But that really is the whole problem isn't it? You not being even willing to consider that your side might be wrong.

And I really don't have to say anymore than that to appeal to any logical people who might be reading these, because you pointing to a part of a website we are criticizing for lack of authenticity as proof of its authenticity speaks volumes about your own logical prowess.

Oct 13 @ 9:56AM  
Anyway....for the record, I've seen factcheck debunk some liberal lies about Romney also,'s a matter of opinion if one wants to accuse the site of being biased.

Whoa they debunked one liberal lie, they must be non-biased.

Again, I stopped reading after they starting using AP articles as fact. That sh!t doesn't fly with me. Places claiming to be "pure fact" have such great responsibility that it is totally unacceptable to do that even one time.

Oct 13 @ 10:15AM  
Everyone seems to think Snopes is the be -- all, end -- all of "facts". But they are left leaning too so I don't go by what they way.

Oct 13 @ 10:24AM  
Spammin' again???
Don't you ever have an original thought??

Oct 13 @ 2:49PM  
Don't fall for that trick.

Of course these so called fact check sites don't want to make it obvious that they are slanted to the far left. I said they are devious, not stupid.

So they lace the leftist propaganda with a few exceptions to fool people who can't see the big picture.

No sophisticated propaganda operation makes it obvious that there agenda is completely one sided. That's for amateurs.

These sites are all about the "big lie" that the left uses to give the masses false information and then "back it up" with there own operatives operating under false pretenses.

Of course what do they say to dismiss my case? That I am paranoid, of course.

But I remind you that just because you are paranoid doesn't mean they're not out to get you.

Use your noggin people. Get the big picture. Learn some history. Study Marx, Lenin, Stalin, Alinsky, Goebbels and Hitler. Then you will understand the "big lie" propagated by the left. (And don't bother with the "But DR, Hitler was far right" crap as if I never heard that notion. He used the same exact tactics as the other people on this list. And it's the same tactics used by the Obama left in this country today... THE BIG LIE)

Dec 30 @ 1:40AM  
Wow this blog sounds familiar... like word for word familiar. Like some sort of propaganda written specifically to distribute across multiple blog sites familiar. Like it's written a group who's job it is to write things to dispute reputable news organizations or something so idiots have something to reference when someone points to a article.

Oh! that's exactly what it is! Because this blog post exists word for word on all these sites!


Dec 30 @ 1:50AM  
^^^ DR loves repeating himself, he even repeats the same comment on different blogs here.

Dec 30 @ 2:36AM  
I am the author of this post.

If it appears anywhere else then either I posted it there or it was plagiarized by someone else.

It wouldn't be the first time that has happened as apparently many people are impressed by my writing skills and like to steal my material.

Dec 30 @ 2:43AM  
And by the way. I don't know if any of those articles are the same as mine or not. But I did notice that all the ones I saw listed are all dated after this blog.

If they are copies of mine then that's pretty darn flattering.

I don't think I posted any of those and I don't remember posting this anywhere else.

Dec 30 @ 9:23AM  
There is a bias in all of us. We really want to believe what we believe and convince others to believe also. There have been times when I read something contrary to what I believed and wanted to dismiss it out of hand. I know the urge. It's human. Over the years I've come to believe there is no one truth. It's a matter of perspective and biological predisposition. As I was tempted to discard evidence I didn't like, I'm sure others feel the same way. I believe I've come to the place in life where I can be objective. I went from strong conservative to moderate because I couln't believe any longer that our right leaning politicians were always right. A bias I had was discarded and I began to see facts even if they were liberal facts. I check snopes, factcheck, and find them more objective than almost any other sites. The fact that you see factcheck as left wing just points up your own bias. You can believe some things that are counter to the conservative view of the world. Somehow a healthy balance must be struck or you just become a party bot who will never be believed. There are several like that on this site. It doesn't make them bad people or unsincere. It just makes them biased.

Dec 30 @ 10:34AM  
That kind of reminds me of the "Ministry of Truth in orwell's book, 1984.

Their job was to make up politically expedient lies.

The main change since Orwell wrote the book is the media in which the lies are presented.

Jan 22 @ 3:46PM  
Seems Sternfan69 has swallowed Nye's nonsense. He has introduced not one piece of evidence to support his view and shows he wants to shut down debate on an issue is far from resolved. The chilling affect on science by people like Nye is palpable. Remember Galileo? These folks are like the Catholic Church of his day. They persecute all their detractors.

The fact is that much of science, mathematics, and probability works against Nye's ideas. WIthout a priori assumptions, it is a circular reasoning exercise.

I went to Rensselaer, an elite scientific university. The average SAT Math Score was 715 so we are talking some pretty smart kids. One of the professors offered $1,000 to any student who could prove the earth was more than 6,000 years old. People scoffed but no one could win the money because it is not provable. We all have the same evidence but it how one interprets it. Nye castigates those he has been unable intellectually to refute. IN addition to lectures given by people who agree with Nye, I have been to lectures on white holes, general relativity and time dilation given by people from the young earth movement and one cannot simply dismiss them as stupid. In fact the RATE (Radio Isotopes and the Age of the Earth) project at Mt. St. Helens was very interesting. Conventional dating methods showed deposits that we KNEW to be a year old were really over a million years old. Some humility is in order and the shouting from Nye should take a backseat to civility and openmindedness.

Jan 22 @ 5:38PM  
Anything on the net is suspect. I wrote a comic history of a Family and their home, that is now in the library of Congress now, listed as a fact. You can look it up on the net.

There are propaganda sites, revisionist historic sites, and plain old liars.

I have one check that I trust. I call it "the old reality check". I ask myself if the people, motivations, deeds and facts sound real, based on the real experiences I have observed in the past 65 years. Do real people act that way? Is real life this way?

Is this congruent with live as I have observed it ?

Jan 22 @ 5:48PM  
What I enjoyed about this blog is the self confirming nature of the posts that disapproved of it.

The fact that all the lefties hate this blog is confirmation that it is accurate.

Why would anyone hate a message about not trusting fact check sites and relying instead on your God given abilities to seek information from many sources and judge for yourself? Clearly the only people who would criticize that message are people who are in on the scam and don't want to see it exposed. And clearly, as evident from the source of the criticism, its only people on the left who are in on that criticism.

By criticizing that message they confirm that the political left is the main sponsor and beneficiary of this kind of false propaganda and devious deception.

PS: I know a lot of people who went to RPI.
mission statement | testimonials | safety warning | report abuse | safe list | privacy | legal | advertise | link to us

© Copyright 2000-2016 Online Singles, LLC.