PolitiFact Gets the Question of the U.S. Navy’s Size Wrong
Aug 26, 2015 21:40:30 GMT -6
Nugget, 727sky, and 5 more like this
Post by Deleted on Aug 26, 2015 21:40:30 GMT -6
(Title abridged for space)
Now this is interesting. Politifact is normally taken as thorough and careful about their debunking. It seems even they can let opinion and agenda overtake something we might call integrity.
Well that sounds pretty straight forward. Numbers are numbers...?
My first question would be ...why are they arguing that the US has enough ships? Isn't it about numbers to the accuracy of Romney's statement? Where did "Opinio-fact" replace "Politifact"? It seems some of this is being called out these days..and good.
Source
Indeed... Perhaps so on that last point about numbers of ships. Perhaps stripping it to the bone, as President Obama has done, has been terminally stupid...but then, that may be like calling water 'wet' in this case, for Obama kinda defining the term more often than not.
Whatever the case with that tho? I think it is fair to say a debunking site ought to stick to factual issues...or simply not present themselves as fact checkers or debunkers. Opinion has little place there, IMO.
Now this is interesting. Politifact is normally taken as thorough and careful about their debunking. It seems even they can let opinion and agenda overtake something we might call integrity.
For several years now, PolitiFact has been waging war on anyone who points out that America has the smallest Navy it’s had in nearly a century. Mitt Romney pointed out this fact in a presidential debate in 2012 and PolitiFact rated his statement “pants on fire” even though the number of ships in the U.S. Navy dropped below 300 in 2003 and the last time the U.S. Navy had fewer than 300 ships was 1916. It would seem Romney got his facts from no less an authoritative source than the secretary of the navy, who said a few years back, “We have 288 today in the battle fleet: the lowest number since 1916, which – during that time, the intervening years, our responsibilities have grown somewhat.”
Well that sounds pretty straight forward. Numbers are numbers...?
A highlight is when he points out that, in one of its many attempts to promote the argument that the Navy has enough ships (despite the analysis of, among others, the Navy) Politifact suggests that the reason the United States has so few ships is because it and everyone else still adheres to the 1922 Washington Naval Conference.
My first question would be ...why are they arguing that the US has enough ships? Isn't it about numbers to the accuracy of Romney's statement? Where did "Opinio-fact" replace "Politifact"? It seems some of this is being called out these days..and good.
None of this, of course, has to do with factual verification, but that ship seems to have sailed for PolitiFact. But even as an argument, this is risible. Why should we have to choose between 288 of today’s ships or 1,000 of 1945’s? Why wouldn’t it be better, from a point of view of national security, to have significantly more of today’s ships than the dangerously small number currently afloat?
Indeed... Perhaps so on that last point about numbers of ships. Perhaps stripping it to the bone, as President Obama has done, has been terminally stupid...but then, that may be like calling water 'wet' in this case, for Obama kinda defining the term more often than not.
Whatever the case with that tho? I think it is fair to say a debunking site ought to stick to factual issues...or simply not present themselves as fact checkers or debunkers. Opinion has little place there, IMO.
The reality of this is pretty obvious though. It doesn't work.
