Scott Walker takes on no less than four MSNBC hatchetmen attempting to frame one of Paul Ryan’s speech claims as untrue. The ginned-up controversy is about the closure of a GM plant in Ryan’s Wisconsin neighborhood, which Ryan says Obama stated would be open “for a hundred years” if the government were there to support it (i.e. through bailouts).
Just in case you’re curious, via CNN:
April 23, 2009: The plant’s medium-duty assembly line, which produced an Isuzu line, closes, ending vehicle production at the plant and resulting in the loss of 57 production jobs, according to the Gazette.”
Video evidence below (well worth the watch, if just for amusement value):
[youtube id=2AvAsT_4mmA width="600" height="350"]
“Fact-checking” is all the rage on the left. For the uninitiated, “fact-checking” means taking a factual statement and twisting it to fit a left-wing narrative, and then asserting that one’s narrative is actually the correct one. Most of the so-called “fact-checking” outfits are left-wing front organizations posing as legitimately dispassionate watchdogs of the public interest.
Well, we’re just going to let the debate commence and not pretend to be philosopher-kings above the fray of human emotion and vantage point. That being said, there are certain points of logic that should be identified to at least meet a standard of being rhetorically consistent and there is also the matter of what someone actually said.
It should be added that the term “fact-checking” implies that it is out-of-the-ordinary for a journalist to check statements and information for factual accuracy. Honestly, I always thought that came with the territory. You’re not going to see me bragging about “fact-checking” stories, because that is what writers and editors are supposed to be doing anyway.