Rubio also voted against Sonia Sotomayor, Obama’s Supreme Court nominee who is of Puerto Rican descent, and more recently blocked the confirmation of another Puerto Rican, Marie Carmen Aponte, as ambassador to El Salvador.

Rubio was not a senator at the time the Sotomayor vote was cast.

Reuters also asserts:

He also voted against Obama’s healthcare overhaul, which is popular among many low-income Hispanics.

Rubio was and is against it but could not have voted for it at the time because he had not been elected. Obamacare passed in March 21, 2010. Rubio was elected on November 2, 2010 and assumed office on January 3, 2011.

Reuters has thus far only made a minor correction to Rubio’s home mortgage:

(This story corrects to say he failed to pay principal 2008 home payments; changes 2nd mortgage to home equity line of credit)

We ask that Reuters make a full, above the fold correction of its eight errors.

He has argued against same-sex marriage arguing that could open the door to other unacceptable relations, equating homosexuality with bestiality or pedophilia.

Simply reading or listening to Santorum’s quote would prevent anyone from making so grand a logical leap:

“Every society in the history of man has upheld the institution of marriage as a bond between a man and a woman. Why? Because society is based on one thing: that society is based on the future of the society. And that’s what? Children. Monogamous relationships. In every society, the definition of marriage has not ever to my knowledge included homosexuality. That’s not to pick on homosexuality. It’s not, you know, man on child, man on dog, or whatever the case may be. It is one thing. And when you destroy that you have a dramatic impact on the quality–”

Now, does it sound to YOU as though Santorum was categorizing homosexual-male-sex as “man on dog”? Negative. To anyone with basic reading comprehension skills, it is clear Santorum was actually cautioning that he is not equating gay marriage with other prohibited-marriage categories such as “man on child” (individuals marrying minors) and “man on dog” (individuals marrying animals).  Regardless of one’s views on gay marriage, or Santorum’s own, he did not, in any way, slam male-on-male sex as “man on dog.”  It seems those who actively read that visual picture into Santorum’s comments need to get their heads out of the gutter and, ironically, stop revealing their own homophobia in even making the connection.

At that point, Santorum was interrupted by the interviewer who apparently joked that he/she was not expecting to hear a U.S. Senator use the term “man on dog.”

We ask that Al Jazeera correct their piece to truthfully reflect Santorum’s actual remark.

In an article published last week, Rachel Coward of the Columbia Missourian falsely claimed that Andrew Breitbart edited videos of a controversial labor studies course at the University of Missouri in which lecturers instructed students in violent tactics, indoctrinated them with revisionist left-wing economic history, and encouraged them to join the Communist Party, among other inappropriate conduct.

Here are the facts.

A highlight video of clips from 31 hours of classroom instruction (which has since been removed from YouTube) was published at Big Government on April 25, 2011. Neither Andrew Breitbart nor anyone employed by Breitbart.com edited the videos–a fact long since established by Insurgent Visuals, which claimed full responsibility for the highlight reel.

Coward claimed:

Conservative blogger Andrew Breitbart manipulated classroom videos to make the instructors seem as though they supported violence in labor-management relations, according to an article by Inside Higher Ed.

Coward cites an inaccurate article at Inside Higher Ed that was itself the subject of a correction request last May.

Moreover, the instructors of the course did, in fact, support violence and intimidation in labor-management relations. As student Phil Christofanelli recalled:

In our lesson on bargaining we learned that we should use fear and intimidation–which Prof. Giljam falsely described as “mundane” and “non-threatening”–to play on the emotions of management.  We were told that we should frighten a man to the point where he is so afraid for his life that he wears body armor at work.  And all the while we were learning these profound academic insights, Prof. Ancel was heard in the background laughing, just tickled pink at the idea of terrifying management by making one’s union appear more militant than its workers actually want it to be….

Of course, the professors now point to the few caveats they applied, as above. Still, as I have demonstrated, at various junctures throughout the course, Prof. Giljum proudly endorsed industrial sabotage, the destruction of property, the use of fear and intimidation, and limited violence, “strategically played out.”  Prof. Ancel, was delighted when Prof. Giljum told these stories, and shared similar, second-hand anecdotes or histories.

Coward reports that the University of Missouri has issued a new policy that requires students to obtain permission before sharing classroom videos. However, she ignored the fact that the professors in the labor studies course had already encouraged students to share course materials. As Christofanelli noted:

In fact, Prof. Ancel said: “All labor education materials are uncopyrighted and to be shared.  We do not believe for the most part in intellectual property rights.  That’s one of the principles of labor education: we share.”

We request that the Columbia Missourian publish a retraction for this false claim.

On Tuesday, December 27, FishbowlDC’s Peter Ogburn wrote the following in reference to the Daily Caller’s Michelle Fields’ hour-long appearance with Brian Lamb on C-Span: [emphasis added]

As the interview winds down, Lamb asks where Michelle would like to see her career go. She says she would like to be “in the media. As a journalist. Maybe an anchor.” Let’s not get carried away, Michelle. Reality can be a dear friend sometimes. Lamb asks if America is ready for an anchor who gives opinions and Michelle doubles down on her journalistic philosophy. “I think people want opinions.  People want someone to tell them what to think.”

A look at the actual interview proves that this is not what Ms. Fields said. In fact, it’s quite obvious that what she said and meant was the complete opposite:

I think people want to see–they want opinions. Well–look at the Occupy Wall Street video that I did. I felt that I wasn’t being biased whatsoever. I showed–didn’t agree with my opinions, but I showed it. And I got so much negative attention from it. People were upset that I had done that. So I think people want biased journalism. They want something–they want someone to tell them what they think.

We kindly request that FishbowlDC correct the record.

Conservative blogger Andrew Breitbart’s Big Government website obtained a leaked copy and edited hours of classroom lectures to suggest that she and a classroom colleague advocated union violence.

Neither Breitbart, nor Big Government, nor any of the Breitbart editors edited the footage in question.

In fact, Insurgent Visuals claimed publicly that they edited the classroom videos after they were posted online and leaked.

We ask the Associated Press to correct the record.

We’ve published countless video from a multitude of sources which completely disproves this lie. The NAACP couldn’t keep their story straight initially. When it was proven that the “spitting” incident was a lie, Congressman Cleaver immediately walked back his story. From Big Government:

3.  Rep. Emanuel Cleaver DID claim HE was spat on, but then after he and everyone else in the world reviewed the video and saw that errant spittle from a man screaming “Kill the Bill!” is what hit Rep Cleaver, he walked back the charge.

Rep. Pelosi needs to issue an immediate apology to the thousands of Americans she just slandered, again, and ABC needs to follow-up with the correct story and not allow this lie to stand.

Related:

Media Lying About Racist Attacks on Black Reps By Tea Party Protesters…VIDEO PROOF

A Couple Questions for Rep. Andre Carson

Andre Carson’s True Colors

In fact, SB 5 explicitly provides–as existing law does not–for collective bargaining on personal safety equipment. Here are the two most relevant excerpts:

…

After the panel, a reporter explained to Schultz that SB 5 allows for firefighters and police to bargaining collectively on personal safety equipment, to which Schultz replied, “I don’t think it does.”

Now that Mr. Schultz has had the opportunity to familiarize himself with the text of the bill, we respectfully ask him to correct the record.

In an Associated Press article published last night, Becky Bohrer writes the following: [emphasis ours]

[Governor Sarah Palin's attorney] John Tiemessen, in a letter to the publisher of Crown Publishing Group Monday, cites an email that author Joe McGinniss allegedly sent a blogger in January seeking substantiation for several rumors that have surrounded Palin’s family. That email was posted online last week by Andrew Breitbart.

The email in question was not “allegedly sent.” Both Joe McGinniss and the party the email was sent to, Jesse Griffin, are on the record verifying the email.

We call on the AP to retract or correct this error.

Let’s review.

BLUMENTHAL QUOTE:

” … who has said that he would impose loyalty oaths for any Muslim who wanted to serve in the federal government. Completely unAmerican.”

ACTUAL CAIN QUOTE:

” … I would ask certain questions, John. And it’s not a litmus test. It is simply trying to make sure that we have people committed to the Constitution first in order to for them to work effectively in the administration.”

BLUMENTHAL QUOTE:

” … he said that mosques should not be built in American communities …”

CAIN:

Wallace: So you’re saying any community, if they want to ban a mosque?

Cain: Yes, they have the right to do that.

BLUMENTHAL:

“And he is the former CEO of a pizza company called Godfather’s Pizza. That’s his, you know, that’s where he comes from. It’s a pizza, I remember as a kid, it gave everyone diarrhea and made everyone sick.”

Retracto can say that he before has enjoyed a slice of Godfather Pizza and there were no unfortunate side effects.

We request that Max Blumenthal retract his false remarks.

They also published an account on their website.

They were wrong. Kyle specifically detailed how the revenue would come from liquidating government property and use fees.

We ask for Reuters to retract their Tweet and clarify their subsequent reporting.