IS FACTCHECK.ORG BIASED TOWARD THE DEMOCRATS?

There are numerous references on the internet that suggest they are. For example, on the issue of health care, they refute the rumor that ObamCare “"Exempts" House and Senate members”. LINK Their rebuttal is that “No. Their coverage may not be as good as before, in fact." The Washington Times LINK gives a different opinion:

“The new health care law exempts the president from having to participate in it. Leadership and committee staffers in the House and Senate who wrote the bill are exempted as well. A weasel-worded definition of "staff" includes only the members' personal staff in the new system; the committee staff that drafted the legislation opted themselves out. Because they were more familiar with the contents of the law than anyone in the country, it says a lot that they carved out their own special loophole. Anyway, the law is intended to affect "ordinary Americans," according to Vice President Joe Biden (who - being a heartbeat away from the presidency - also is not covered), not Washington insiders.”

Aside from from looking at the discrepancies in FactCheck's reported facts, it is worthwhile to examine the history of the organization. Brooks Jackson, left CNN LINK and joined the Annenberg Public Policy Center in 2003 and launched FactCheck.org in December of that year. Link Funding was received from the "Annenberg family foundation and one other Annenberg foundation". The Annenberg Foundation also funded the The Chicago Annenberg Challenge (CAC). LINK

Bill Ayers, an associate of President Obama, was part of a terrorist group that bombed the Pentagon and other governmental buildings. His only regret was that maybe he did not do enough. He never went to prison because of a technical loophole regarding improper surveillance of his activities. Eventually, he became an education professor at the University of Illinois in Chicago. He not only founded the terrorist Weather Underground organization but the Chicago Annenberg Challenge (CAC) was his brainchild. LINK.

CAC adopted the Ayers philosophy and stressed student radical political activism over achievement testing. In his books he recommended that teachers should be teaching opposition to American racism and oppression. Ayers obviously thought that societal changes could best be accomplished through the control of education. At least he did not tell the teachers to go out and bomb someone. Possibly with the years passing by he mellowed somewhat. But that doesn't mean he gave up his violent radical ideas. It probably means that he knows if he carries out another act of extreme violence he will go to prison. I'm sure the police officials involved will not make the same surveillance mistake twice. He was quoted as saying "I'm a radical, Leftist, small "c" communist." His educational philosophies were adopted by CAC. "The CAC's operations were closed in 2001, and subsumed into those of the Annenberg Institute for Social Reform". LINK As the Wall Street Journal put it: LINK

"CAC translated Mr. Ayers's radicalism into practice. Instead of funding schools directly, it required schools to affiliate with "external partners," which actually got the money. Proposals from groups focused on math/science achievement were turned down. Instead CAC disbursed money through various far-left community organizers, such as the Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now (or Acorn)".

Small wonder that Democratic Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi wanted to include millions of dollars in the stimulus bill for ACORN. It is supposed to be a non-profit organization but as is well known, they totally support the Democratic Party. Their members will even go so far as to generate fictitious votes for the Democrats if required. They are under investigation in this regard. LINK

What did FactCheck say about Bill Ayers during the McCain Obama campaign? LINK

"Even the description of Ayers as a "terrorist" is a matter of interpretation. Setting off bombs can fairly be described as terrorism even when they are intended to cause only property damage, which is what Ayers has admitted doing in his youth. But for nearly three decades since, Ayers has lived the relatively quiet life of an educator. It would be correct to call him a "former terrorist," and an "unapologetic" one at that. But if McCain means the word "terrorist" to invoke images of 9/11, he's being misleading; Ayers is no Osama bin Laden now, and never was."

It sounds to me as if FactCheck is softpedalling the representation of Bill Ayers. Intentions do not trump actions. Does this suggest bias? It may be that Brooks Jackson's time at CNN introduced some liberal bias into his thinking about facts. Is FactCheck biased in their reporting of the facts? I leave it to the reader to decide.