FactCheck.org: Nonpartisan?

UPDATE, August 8, 2009: FactCheck.org: Partisan, Obama Apologist
__________________

In my opinion, FactCheck.org is dropping the ball.

I don't think the group is being true to its mission.

We are a nonpartisan, nonprofit "consumer advocate" for voters that aims to reduce the level of deception and confusion in U.S. politics. We monitor the factual accuracy of what is said by major U.S. political players in the form of TV ads, debates, speeches, interviews and news releases. Our goal is to apply the best practices of both journalism and scholarship, and to increase public knowledge and understanding.

I'm afraid that goal isn't being achieved lately.

I've detected a significant pro-Obama slant.

I'm not talking about FactCheck debunking false claims made about Obama and his administration.

That's what they should be doing. What they shouldn't be doing is cheerleading for the administration and making excuses for it, doing damage control.

Obama has plenty of hacks to do that. He doesn't need FactCheck's assistance.

Here's an example:

Q: Did Michelle Obama and her daughters use taxpayer money to take a European vacation?

A: The first lady, her mother and her children did stay in Europe for a private vacation after the president completed an overseas trip on official business. However, no taxpayer money was used for the first family’s personal expenses.

That's deceptive.

The key phrase in the answer is "the first family’s personal expenses."

That deflects from the actual question: "Did Michelle Obama and her daughters use taxpayer money to take a European vacation?"

Yes, they did use taxpayer money. Of course they did.

I don't know why FactCheck would allow the short answer to the question about the use of taxpayer funds for the Obamas' European vacation to be NO.

It's inaccurate.

In the full answer, the details about taxpayers picking up the tab for security is mentioned.

Oddly, the full answer cites Dick Cheney for still receiving Secret Service protection.

According to the Congressional Research Service, the Secret Service is charged with protecting not only current presidents, vice presidents and their families, but also former presidents, children of former presidents under the age of 16, visiting heads of foreign states and other distinguished foreign visitors, and major presidential and vice presidential candidates. The same even goes for former vice presidents: Former Vice President Dick Cheney recently requested an additional six months of secret service protection – a request which was granted by President Obama.

Singling out the "evil" Dick Cheney and noting that the gracious Obama granted his request for protection is clearly an instance of FactCheck pimping Obama.

Nonpartisan?

Not in this case.

This piece was written by Andrew Karter, Intern, FactCheck.org.

I think some FactChecking on Karter is in order.

Karter's profile:

Andrew is a research intern for the summer of 2009. He is originally from Washington, D.C., and is a communication and public service major at the University of Pennsylvania, class of 2010. He previously interned at both the Montgomery County, Maryland district attorney’s office and “The Colbert Report,” and he was a research assistant for the Annenberg Public Policy Center in Philadelphia.

The Colbert Report.

Now I understand.

Bottom line: FactCheck risks losing credibility by allowing liberal bias to seep into its postings.