LETTER TO THE EDITOR: Obtain the facts before voting

Sep 2, 2012


I would like to suggest that writers and readers have three very good websites where they can obtain "the real story" on what the candidates and their surrogates are claiming. They are: factcheck.org, which is produced by the Annenberg Center on Public Policy at the University of Pennsylvania, a nonpartisan and nonprofit organization; fact-checker at WashingtonPost.com; and the national website for the League of Women Voters at lwv.org.

Much of what is being touted about Medicare is incredibly incorrect, and the incessant negative campaign rhetoric is misleading at best, and some cases outright lies. All of the issues are complicated, to say the least, and few of us have the time or the aptitude to conduct the in-depth research that would enable us to discern the facts and make informed decisions. By checking at two or three reputable nonpartisan organization's websites, it is possible to vet the claims being made.

Susan Robertson
Grand Haven Township



I agree that people have bias and people need to clarify their bia with facts.

However, I will say that all three of the "fact check" sources you mention also have their own bias and leaning. I will let the readers determine their leaning, but most people can see it pretty clearly once they start diving in and reading the materials.


No argumentfrom the left, just accusation. "I have noticed that many of the letters to the editor concerning the upcoming presidential election contain factual errors and serious distortions of candidates' positions and records."

Of course Ms. Robertson would call her position "un-biased".

"Western universities have become Left-wing seminaries. They are to Leftism what a Christian seminary is to Christianity. The biggest difference between them, aside from curriculum, is that Christian seminaries acknowledge their purpose, to produce committed Christians, while universities deny their purpose, to produce committed secular Leftists. They portray themselves as having no political agenda."

"On occasion, college presidents admit they have an agenda other than truth and excellence. For example, one of the founders of progressivism in America, Woodrow Wilson, president of Princeton University before becoming president of the United States, said in a speech in 1914, “I have often said that the use of a university is to make young gentlemen as unlike their fathers as possible.”

"In 1996, in his commencement address to the graduating seniors of Dartmouth College, the then president of the college, James O. Freedman, cited the Wilson quote favorably. And in 2002, in another commencement address, Freedman said that “the purpose of a college education is to question your father’s values.”

"For Wilson, Freedman, and countless other university presidents and professors, the purpose of a college education is to question one’s father’s values, not to seek truth. Fathers represented traditional American values. The university is there to undermine them."

Source: Still the Best Hope: Why the World Needs American Values to Triumph by Dennis Prager


Luditehunter...how distorted a view. I would encourage anyone to read the entire speech by Woodrow Wilson made to the Christian Men's Association in Pittsburgh on 10/24/1914 and decide for themselves what he was talking about. http://www.wallbuilders.com/libi...
I see it as he wanted the sons to be more educated about the world and business than their fathers were, plain and simple. But others like this Mr. Prager who's work you quote may see it in a different light which would be more to his/your way of thinking. Seriously, you can take a partial quote and rip anyone apart by taking it out of context. You have proved the initial point of the letter here well Lu.


I sure got good chuckle out of this letter to the editor. The sources listed as unbiased could not be more biased if they tried even harder. Entirely laughable. Second poster hit the nail on the head. Most people are born with an innate sense that sooner or later bubbles to the top and will allow them to clearly see what needs to be done to heal this country. The spoon feeding of so called "facts" should be seen as an insult to every Americans sensibilities.


The comments about the letter's listing of left-leaning biased sources are all correct, but I especially got a kick out of your letter because it reminded me of an old truism about the similarity between democrat politicians and a septic tank - answer - the big chunks always rise to the top. Thanks


The "un-decided" tend to be un-informed by choice, thus easy targets for heavy advertising.The interviews I've seen of former Obama supporters essentially say 'He failed me' 'He didn't live up to the hope I had for my family'.

They know nothing of the cronyism, the payoff of public sector unions, the Presidents preacher of hate for twenty years and the Leftist's he surrounds himself with. It's all about "what's in it for me". Sad that these, for the most part will decide our future by choosing one party or the other then voting straight ticket, ignoring the down ticket races that have much more direct impact on our lives.


yup, swayed my opinion with your low opinion of people there Lu. That's the way to get them to see your side. Fortunately for us, if they are informed, in any way, they see right through your inane rhetoric to the obstructionism created by your side. Stagnant, septic political comments like yours by the right will not sway voters in your favor, guaranteed. Maybe it's not 'what's in it for me', but 'how can I help those who need it most'. Something the right has no tolerance for. If you are not a rich white male for whom these morons just want to increase your wealth, why would anyone else vote for the rich white men? That is the true 'what's in it for me' party!


Hey! There you go again.....calling names.......making generalizations.......being steretypical......you're helping a lot!! Great job!


Thanks for the info, Susan. Most of the time when I fact-check statements made (usually by the GOP or Tea Party folks - but not always), I find the statements to be distortions, lies, propaganda, misinformation....or all of the above. I guess the idea is to prey on people's emotions, rather than logic or facts. Just last week, Neil Newhouse, Romney's campaign pollster said, "We're not going to let our (Romney) campaign be dictated by fact-checkers". (Lie and Buy your way to power!!) Yeah - I was disgusted by this, too....let's not let the facts get in the way! It's sad - these posters actually believe getting at the truth of the matter is "spoonfeeding" Americans.

Michael Johnson

When you live in a country where major political figures do not have enough honor or dignity to avoid knowingly lying to the American people in a public address, but who also believe facts and truth to be subordinate to "winning," half the battle is already lost. What loses the other half of the battle? When the American populace has the unmitigated gall to defend such lying out of an inability to value truth over partisan ideology. Regardless of party, any citizen of this country who knowingly defends a political candidate who has lied to the American people is unworthy of the protections afforded him or her by this nation.


Post a Comment

Log in to your account to post comments here and on other stories, galleries and polls. Share your thoughts and reply to comments posted by others. Don't have an account on GrandHavenTribune.com? Create a new account today to get started.