Yet another gem from FactCheck, which effectively debunks inaccurate facts cited by politicians to support their views - in this case, the third Democratic debate at Howard University on June 28. Though by and large, most of their factual claims were deemed accurate by FactCheck, I'm amazed at far some of their statements seem to diverge from factual evidence: Richardson said 20 percent of African people have HIV (5.8 percent, according to World Bank); Kucinich claims the military gobbles the largest share of the U.S. budget (in 2006, defense accounted to 23 percent, compared to 46 percent on entitlement programs); Gravel said 70 percent of people in U.S. jails are black (only 40 percent, according to the Justice Department). ... More »

Good review of claims made during the last democratic candidates debate. Candidates did make a few exaggerated claims, which we all enjoy calling them on, but on the whole, most of time the facts and figures were correct, or very close to correct.

I thought Fact Check was about facts only. I found the commentary and conclusions such as, "That is a significant percentage of our spending, but it pales in comparison to the 46.3 percent we are spending on various entitlement programs" to be unclear. What programs are they lumping together when they say entitlement programs? If you are presenting this as a fact check then list the so called entitlement programs. Social Security and Medicare were cited elsewhere and I wanted to argue, yes, but those collecting Social Security paid into it before drawing from it. The war however is being paid for by borrowed money, some of it from Chinese banks. The point Kuchinich was making was that this war of choice, this unnecessary war is ... More »

It is well analyzed and gives more facts than I have seen to date.

It's a good idea to have an immediate reality check of what candidates say during a debate, and I think FactCheck.org has done a credible job here. There is room for debate, for example exactly how one counts funds for "war and military buildup" - FactCheck says this takes up 23.6 percent of the federal budget but I wonder if it includes the "black budget" and various parts of the department of energy engaged in support for the military, as well as veterans' outlays, portions of debt servicing attributable to military spending, etc. To their credit, Fact Check provides a link to a pdf file of the U.S. budget, which I didn't really have time to peruse in detail before writing this review!

Fact checking political claims is good journalism. I would like to FactCheck the FactCheck claim of error on Kucinich's estimate of military spending. Typical budget numbers for the DOD have been claimed not to include veteran benefits, foreign military aid, foreign aid to gain military allies, black funds for secret projects, some intelligence expenses, military items under the Department of Energy, and a few other items. What are they calling "defense spending?" I would probably concede excluding the hidden costs of deaths, maimings, mental disabilities, and environmental damage imposed indirectly as national costs, but not in the budget.

The facts and a fair analysis.

Overall a decent story and fact-checking is a good idea in general, but how can you lump "various entitlement programs" together to come up with a 46.3% figure? Are you including entitlement programs that subsidize oil? Corporate farming? Head Start? Failing to define a politically charged term like entitlement programs is very weak journalism, indeed. Is military spending the largest single category of spending? If so, the statement is correct, statistically.