Did a 1922 Article Warn of Oceans Warming?
One of the key issues in the global warming debate is whether modern scientists have sufficient data and tools to determine that current warming trends are indicative of long-term climatic changes rather than relatively short-term weather pattern variability.  A text widely shared online seemingly provides an example of the pitfalls of mistaking the latter for the former, purportedly reproducing a 1922 newspaper article warning that the Arctic ocean was experiencing a radical change in climatic conditions which was warming its waters, melting ice, and disrupting wildlife: The Arctic ocean is warming up, icebergs are growing scarcer and in some places the seals are finding the water too hot, according to a report to the Commerce Department yesterday from Consulafft, at Bergen, Norway. Reports from fishermen, seal hunters and explorers all point to a radical change in climate conditions and hitherto unheard-of temperatures in the Arctic zone. Exploration expeditions report that scarcely any ice has been met as far north as 81 degrees 29 minutes. Soundings to a depth of 3,100 meters showed the gulf stream still very warm. Great masses of ice have been replaced by moraines of earth and stones, the report continued, while at many points well known glaciers have entirely disappeared. Very few seals and no white fish are found in the eastern Arctic, while vast shoals of herring and smelts which have never before ventured so far north, are being encountered in the old seal fishing grounds.  I apologize, I neglected to mention that this report was from November 2, 1922.  As reported by the AP and published in The Washington Post  88 years ago! The text in the above example is a genuine transcription of a 1922 newspaper article, an Associated Press account which appeared on page 2 of the Washington Post on 2 November of that year: That article in turn was based on information relayed by the American consul in Norway to the U.S. State Department in October 1922 and published in the Monthly Weather Review: Monthly Weather Review The Arctic seems to be warming up. Reports from fisherman, seal hunters, and explorers who sail the seas about Spitzbergen and the eastern Arctic, all point to a radical change in climatic conditions, and hitherto underheard-of high temperatures in that part of the earth's surface. In August, 1922, the Norwegian Department of Commerce sent an expedition to Spitzbergen and Bear Island under the leadership of Dr. Adolf Hoel, lecturer on geology at the University of Christiania. Its purpose was to survey and chart the lands adjacent to the Norwegian mines on those islands, take soundings of the adjacent waters, and make other oceanographic investigations. Ice conditions were exceptional. In fact, so little ice has never before been noted. The expedition all but established a record, sailing as far north as 81 29' in ice-free water. This is the farthest north ever reached with modern oceanographic apparatus. The character of the waters of the great polar basin has heretofore been practically unknown. Dr. Hoel reports that he made a section of the Gulf Stream at  81 north latitude and took soundings to a depth of 3,100 meters. These show the Gulf Stream very warm, and it could be traced as a surface current till beyond the 81st parallel. The warmth of the waters makes it probable that the favorable ice conditions will continue for some time. In connection with Dr. Hoel's report, it is of interest to note the unusually warm summer in Arctic Norway and the observations of Capt. Martin Ingebrigsten, who has sailed the eastern Arctic for 54 years past. He says that he first noted warmer conditions in 1918, that since that time it has steadily gotten warmer, and that to-day the Arctic of that region is not recognizable as the same region of 1868 to 1917. Many old landmarks are so changed as to be unrecognizable. Where formerly great masses of ice were found, there are now often moraines, accumulations of earth and stones. At many points where glaciers formerly extended far into the sea they have entirely disappeared. As interesting as this nearly century-old article might be from a modern perspective, however, it isn't substantive evidence either for or against the concept of anthropogenic global warming.  As documented elsewhere, the warming phenomena observed in 1922 proved to be indicative only of a local event in Spitzbergen, not a trend applicable to the Arctic as a whole. elsewhere Associated Press.  "Arctic Ocean Getting Warm; Seals Vanish and Icebergs Melt."
  The Washington Post.   2 November 1922  (p. 2).
[Collected on the Internet, 2001] To anyone with love and respect for life: In New York there is a Japanese who sells bonsai-kittens". Sounds like fun huh? NOT! These animals are squeezed into a bottle. Their urine and feces are removed through probes. They feed them with a kind of tube. They feed them chemicals to keep their bones soft and flexible so the kittens grow into the shape of the bottle. The animals will stay their as long as they live. They can't walk or move or wash themselves. Bonsai-kittens are becoming a fashion in New York and Asia. See this horror at: https://www.bonsaikitten.com https://www.bonsaikitten.com Please sign this email in protest against these tortures. If you receive an email with over 500 names, please send a copy to: anacheca@hotmail.com. From there this protest will be sent to USA and Mexican animal protection organizations.  [Collected on the Internet, 2002] FOR EVERYONE WHO LOVES ANIMALS A site that we were able to shut last year has returned. We  have to try to shut it down again! A Japanese man in New York breeds and sells kittens that are called  BONSAI CATS. That would sound cute, if it weren't kittens that were put in to little bottles after being given a muscle relaxant and then locked up for the rest of their lives!! The cats are fed through a straw and have a small tube for their faeces. The skeleton of the cat will take on the form of the bottle as the kitten grows. The cats never get the opportunity to move. They are used as original and exclusive souvenirs. These are the latest trends in New York, China, Indonesia and New Zealand. If you think you can handle it, view https://www.bonsaikitten.com and have a look at the methods being used to put these little kittens into bottles. This petition needs 500 names, so please put your one name on it!!! Copy the text into a new email and put your name on the bottom, then send it to everyone you know. If you notice that there are 500 names on the list, please send it to: anacheca@hotmail.com Bonsai kittens are not real. Nobody is making bonsai kittens. Nobody is selling equipment to help people make bonsai kittens.  Nobody is instructing people in the "lost Eastern art of sealing kittens inside rectilinear jars."   When it was running (the site is no longer active), the Bonsai Kitten web site was a joke, not an actual promotion for the making of bonsai kittens. Investigations by law enforcement agencies, including the FBI, determined no real cats were harmed in the creation of the pictures used on the Bonsai Kitten web site. Signing a petition to shut down the Bonsai Kitten web site will not prevent any kittens from being harmed, because no kittens were harmed in the first place.  It was all a joke, one which some say was in terribly poor taste. If that was your reaction, take comfort in the knowledge that many others thought the same. How could you have known the Bonsai Kitten site was a satire despite its lack of "This is a joke!" banners emblazoned across it? Satire doesn't always announce itself as such (some feel that would ruin its humor), so in cases like this, one dusts off the common sense and aims it at the problem: The process described is impossible: animals so treated would die long before they could be "molded."  The web site offers no way to purchase the materials advertised.  A real commercial enterprise wouldn't build consumer interest through a flashy web site then fail to offer anything for sale.  (The site does include a page of "Helpful Tools & Supplies" but provides no form through which they can be ordered.)   The "Bonsai Kitten" site displays no actual pictures of the finished product.  There are plenty of pictures of kittens in jars which can comfortably accommodate them (cats are quite elastic and can fit into very small spaces without discomfort), but there are no photographs of molded kittens on display. The cruel.com web site offers an article entitled "Happiness is a Rectilinear Kitten," its comprehensive history of the furor and media coverage generated by the Bonsai Kitten web site throughout its first year of existence. history Emery, Theo.  "Animal Lovers Not Laughing About Joke Internet Site 'Bonsai Kitten.'"
  Associated Press.  22 February 2001. 

 Hoffmann, Bill.  "Furor Over 'Bonsai Kitten' Site."
  New York Post.  12 February 2001.

 Jacobson, Jennifer.  "Created at MIT, A 'Bonsai Kitten' Web Site Stirs Animal Lovers' Passions."
  The Chronicle of Higher Education.  21 February 2001.
 Kornblum, Janet.  "Bonsai Kitten Site Brings an Animal-Rights Roar."
  USA Today.  20 February 2001  (p. D3). In early January 2023, we received reader mail that asked if it was true that a Florida man was arrested after allegedly throwing a Christmas tree at his wife. Attached to one reader's email was a screenshot of a headline that read, "Florida man arrested, allegedly struck wife with Christmas tree." We found that this was a real headline publishedby ABC6 News on WATE.com, as well as other local news websites. The article cited reporting fromFox 35 Orlando, which was originally printed on Dec. 13, 2022. WATE.com Fox 35 Orlando According to the story, 52-year-old Richard Atchison had allegedly thrown a Christmas tree at his wife after drinking alcohol.The arrest occurred on the night of Dec. 12 in the city of Fruitland Park. We confirmed via the Lake County Sheriff's Department website that Atchison was arrested at 7:16 p.m. local time on suspicion of false imprisonment, violation of injunction, and battery. According to the records, this was Atchison's second time arrested on suspicion of battery. He was released the following day. website By email, the Lake County Sheriff's Office provided us with the arrest affidavit, written by Officer K. Richetti. It read as follows: The defendant stated the victim slammed a utensil into hot food which in turn splashed the right side of his face. The defendant advised he "lost his temper" and stated he was leaving, packed clothes, and walked out to his truck. The defendant then decided to return to the residence, as he had been drinking and told the victim to leave instead. The defendant stated the argument was verbal only and no physical contact was made that evening. I then spoke with the victim, who advised she was making dinner when the defendant became angry with her for asking for help. They engaged in a verbal argument, at which point she put a spoon in the sink, accidentally, splashing the defendant and escalating his temper. The defendant began packing his things and went out to his vehicle. The defendant then returned stating she should be the one to leave. The victim attempted to leave out the front door, but the defendant used both hands and pushed the victim in her shoulder area away from the door, to which she stumbled. The victim then went into the living room and sat with her friend. The defendant picked up the Christmas tree in the corner of the room and threw it towards the kitchen, where it broke in half. The defendant then took the Christmas tree and threw it at the victim, subsequently striking her. The victim went into her bedroom and closed the door, in an attempt to separate herself from the defendant. At this time, the defendant kicked the bedroom door attempting to enter. The victim again tried to leave through the front door, but the defendant was blocking the exit and was yelling at her when law enforcement arrived. It should be noted that the front door is the only door to exit located within the residence. I observed no visible redness or injuries on the defendant. I observed slight redness to the victim's left and right arms, but no other visible injuries. I observed a partial black shoe print on the lower center half of the bedroom door. According to the rest of the affidavit, a witness corroborated the victim's story, including the part about Atchison throwing the Christmas tree. FOX 35 News Staff. "Florida Man Accused of Hitting Wife with Christmas Tree after Asked to Help with Dinner." FOX 35 Orlando, 13 Dec. 2022, https://www.fox35orlando.com/news/florida-man-accused-of-attacking-wife-with-christmas-tree-when-asked-to-help-with-making-dinner. "Richard Daniel Atchison." Lake County Sheriff's Office, 12 Dec. 2022, https://www.lcso.org/inmates/mugshot_booking_detail.php?bookingnumber=22008209. Richetti, Officer K.Arrest Affidavit/First Appearance Form for Richard Daniel Atchison. Lake County Sheriff's Office, 12 Dec. 2022. Sloan, Kaycee. "Florida Man Arrested, Allegedly Struck Wife with Christmas Tree." WATE 6 On Your Side, 15 Dec. 2022, https://www.wate.com/news/florida-man-arrested-allegedly-struck-wife-with-christmas-tree/. Its been nearlyeight years since George W. Bush was president, but Democrats still plan to run against him. Certainly, thats what Democratic National Committee chairwoman Debbie Wasserman Schultz promised on the eve of the first Democratic presidential debate. There are so many people who are focused on making sure we can look at the fact that, when we had a conservative Republican president, we were losing 750,000 jobs a month, Wasserman Schultz said on CNNsState of the UnionOct. 11, 2015. Weve come through that -- 67 straight months of job growth in the private sector. People are no longer losing their homes. Thats the contrast well talk about. The DNC press office told us that Wasserman Schultz was thinking of President George W. Bush, and that the time period she had in mind were the last few months of his presidency, November through January. President Barack Obama took office on Jan. 20, 2009, so its reasonable to count that month as part of the Bush legacy. We pulled up theBureau of Labor Statisticsnumbers and Wasserman Schultz is on solid ground. Month Jobs (000s) Loss Nov 135,469 -765 Dec 134,773 -696 Jan 133,977 -796 Average -752 Source: U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, Current Employment Statistics Benchmark comparison The number is particularly high because Wasserman Schultz chose the three worst months of the Bush presidency. If she had chosen a longer period, say the last full year, the losses would have averaged about 365,000 per month. The losses would shrink even more if you look at longer period of time. Wasserman Schultz didnt mention that the economy continued to shed jobs at or above the 700,000 mark for the first two months of Obamas presidency before the trend began to ease. This chart from theBureau of Labor Statisticsgives a more complete jobs picture. The Great Recession saw employment declines of historic proportions.Government analystscompared the relative losses from 2007 to 2009 to past downturns. The bottom purple line on their chart tracks jobs in the Great Recession which officially began December 2007. Of course, Wasserman Schultzs statement implies that conservative Republican policies alone brought about a massive loss of jobs and the reality is more complicated. Some analysts believe that a portion of the blame goes back to policies that enjoyed Democratic support, including changes in financial regulation passed during the Clinton administration. But Wasserman Schultz did not make that claim specifically. Our ruling Wasserman Schultz said that under a conservative Republican president the country was losing 750,000 jobs a month. Wasserman Schultz was speaking of President George W. Bush and at the end of his term, the monthly job losses averaged about 750,000 jobs. The average would of course be less if she had included Bushs final 12 months -- or a period longer than that. There is an element of cherry-picking here, but the overall point holds up. We rate the claim Mostly True. In December 2022, a FedEx email scam was going around that claimed to be a "package delivery notification" from the company, which said, "Your package is held in our warehouse." The scam was being sent around at the same time that people across the world were ordering and receiving packages for gift-giving holidays. We previously looked at similar scams for UPS, the U.S. Postal Service (USPS), and other package delivery companies. In fact, one of our previous stories about a FedEx package delivery email scam was published a decade ago. Needless to say, scammers have been doing this for a long time. UPS U.S. Postal Service (USPS) published According to a copy of the FedEx email scam that we reviewed, the message came from admin@america-groups.xyz. This was not an official FedEx email address.  The message read as follows: Your package delivery Notification ID#0164278468-735 'Fedex' admin@america-groups.xyz via walisdom.biz Important Message for (name)Your package delivery Notification FedEx  Order 29194773US Your package is held in our warehouse You have (1) package waiting for you in our warehouse, ready for delivery. Use your order number to track and receive your package! TRACK YOUR PACKAGE Order numberOrder 29194773US DeliveryExpected delivery: 1 - 2 days The tracking number was real, but the package associated with it had already been delivered in April 2022. The scammers sent the email in the hope that people might click the link, not look up the tracking number. We investigated the link in the email and found that it was a phishing scam, meaning that the scammers were looking to obtain personal information and financial data. The link in the scam email led to the URL, storage.googleapis.com/pemotion/tixrin.html, which was followed by a long string of additional code that likely was for the scammers' own tracking purposes. Upon clicking on the URL, we were led to mooltay.com, then redirected toponnel.com, a website that displayed an "Express" logo without the word "Federal" in front of it.  On the ponnel.com scam website, we were guided through a series of questions about the supposed package delivery issue. One step falsely claimed that there would be a $1.95 charge to release the nonexistent package from a customs distribution hub.  At the end of the steps, the ponnel.com website redirected to webwinnalists.com, a page that asked for personal information and a credit card number. We strongly advise against giving any of these websites your data. On FedEx.com, one of the scams the company advises that its customers be on the lookout for was, "Unexpected requests for money in return for delivery of a package, often with a sense of urgency." That's exactly what this FedEx email scam for a "package delivery notification" was all about. FedEx.com By email, FedEx shared the following statement with us: FedEx does not send unsolicited text messages or emails to customers requesting money or package or personal information. Unfortunately, scammers often invoke the names of trusted brands when attempting to take advantage of the public and FedEx is one of many companies whose brand has been abused in this way. Any suspicious text messages or emails should be deleted without being opened and reported toabuse@fedex.com. For more tips on detecting online scams, visit the FedEx Customer Protection Center athttps://www.fedex.com/us/security/prevent-fraud. abuse@fedex.com https://www.fedex.com/us/security/prevent-fraud This story will be updated if further details come to light. Source: "Recognize & Report Fraud." FedEx.com, https://www.fedex.com/en-us/trust-center/report-fraud.html. Dec. 14, 2022: This story was updated to add a statement from FedEx. On 18 July 2016 the web site Conservative Daily Post published an article reporting that an "illegal alien" had been fired after she declined to serve police officers at an Alabama McDonald's, declaring that we dont serve pigs. article The outrage-provoking article was set against the backdrop of a month of tensions between police officers and community members in July 2016. The shooting deaths of civilians Alton Sterling and Philando Castile led to national protests, and police officers were killed in ambush shootings in Dallas and Baton Rouge. Alton Sterling Philando Castile Dallas Baton Rouge In that period, several rumors of police officers "shunned" or mistreated at restaurants circulated online. A group of policemen in Pennsylvania said they paid the bill of a couple who refused to sit near them, a sheriff in Washington reported that a Chinese restaurant's owners had said law enforcement was not welcome there, and officers in Baton Rouge maintained that a server at Las Palmas restaurant had put mucus in their drinks.  Pennsylvania reported Las Palmas After those claims became virally popular, Conservative Daily Post asserted: Its pretty sad to look around and see how police officers are being treated right now. They put their lives on the line every single day to defend our freedoms within the local community. We are more than thankful for our military, yet we fail to recognize the very people that keep us safe in our homes at night. Police officers dont get paid a lot either. They knowingly walk into possible gunfights almost every day. They do it because they heard the call to serve. They do it because they are true American patriots. Well, there was just another case of disrespect against cops. In Alabama, last week a cashier decided that she didnt want to serve the cops. Maria Englesia pictured above told the officers to get out of here because they didnt serve pigs. This was blatant. McDonalds stepped in as soon as they heard what happened. They immediately fired the woman and issued a formal apology to the police department of Alabama. Social media users accepted that report at face value: @McDonalds #Illegal Alien Denied Cops Service, We Dont Serve Pigs https://t.co/5n3esRSePy #BoycottMcDonalds @McDonalds #Illegal https://t.co/5n3esRSePy #BoycottMcDonalds  Jan Johnson (@JanJohnsonFL) July 18, 2016 July 18, 2016  Illegal Alien McDonald's clerk tells police: "We don't serve your kind" Get the fuck out of my country, you bitch!! https://t.co/3HGU4ml3ow  obamasucksballs (@obamasucksballs) July 19, 2016 https://t.co/3HGU4ml3ow July 19, 2016  Conservative Daily Post claimed McDonald's had fired the employee and apologized, but no mention of any such controversy (by the company or by commenters) was visible on the hamburger chain's Twitter account, nor on McDonald's Facebook page save for one cryptic comment: Twitter  Aside from the single comment, no one appeared to be asking about any incidents involving a Maria Englesia in Alabama.  Had the story been genuine, it would have generated news coverage from other outlets.  Conservative Daily Post's article also waved another very large red flag:  The image doesn't depict a "Maria Englesia" or anyone else recently fired from any McDonald's, anywhere, for any reason. It's a stock photograph dating to at least 2012:  Conservative Daily News doesn't carry any sort of warning or disclaimer advising readers about hosting fabricated content, but this story was clearly untrue. No public apology was tendered by McDonald's over an employee's purported refusal to serve Alabama cops, no news outlets or blogs reported on the incident, and the image of the woman "pictured above" was a stock photograph swiped from Getty. The American corporation has long been a target, especially in online debate, of criticism and condemnation  sometimes well-founded and justified, but at other times irrelevant and wrong-headed.  According to a theory advanced by Academy Award-nominated director Adam McKay, there is a direct link between the modern corporation and 1930's style fascism  one that Merriam-Webster even went so far as to censor from its definition of fascism following a corporate takeover in the 1980s.  In April 2018, McKay's words were turned into a widely-shared online meme published by the Facebook page "Americans Against Fascism": meme Benito Mussolini created the word "fascism." He defined it as "the merging of the state and the corporation." He also said a more accurate word would be "corporatism." This was the definition in Webster's up until 1987 when a corporation bought Webster's and changed it to exclude any mention of corporations."  Adam McKay.    The quote is taken word for word from a 2010 op-ed written by McKay for the Huffington Post, in which he offered a scathing criticism of large corporations and the recent Citizens United decision in the U.S. Supreme Court. (He accused four of the court's justices of treason.) op-ed McKay's account is riddled with errors. For one thing, the definition of fascism commonly attributed to Mussolini is "the merging of the state and corporate power," not "the corporation," as McKay presents it. Second, it's not clear that Mussolini  or even his ghostwriter, the philosopher Giovanni Gentile  ever actually gave this precise definition of fascism.  not clear Most importantly, though, the meme's central point revolves around a common misunderstanding of what "corporatism" was in Mussolini's fascism and a conflation with the modern capitalist "corporation," most likely borne out of the similarity between the words. Corporatism ("corporativismo" in Italian) was one of the cornerstone principles in Mussolini's fascism, and had to do with the way society and the economy would be organized, with state power at the head of a system of guilds or corporations ("corporazione") representing each major industry.  In his Dictionary of Political Thought, Roger Scruton describes corporatism in this way: this way The economy was divided into associations (called syndicates) of workers, employers and the professions; only one syndicate was allowed in each branch of industry, and all officials were either fascist politicians or else loyal to the fascist cause. According to law the syndicates were autonomous, but in fact they were run by the state. The corporations united the syndicates in a given industry, but made no pretence at autonomy from the state. This ultimate power and pervasive influence of the state (led by one man, of course) was famously summed up by Mussolini in a speech in 1927, in which he declared: "everything in the state, nothing against the State, nothing outside the state."  declared In the Doctrine of Fascism, in 1932, Mussolini (with the help of Gentile) wrote: wrote Fascism desires the State to be strong and organic, based on broad foundations of popular support. The Fascist State lays claim to rule in the economic field no less than in others; it makes its action felt throughout the length and breadth of the country by means of its corporative, social, and educational institutions, and all the political, economic, and spiritual forces of the nation, organized in their respective associations, circulate within the State. In other words, corporatism in Mussolini's fascism was not a free-market capitalist system. Far from it. It did not allow for the kind of competition, innovation, market entry, and research and development characteristic of modern capitalism, and it was closely ruled in every way by the state with Mussolini at its head.  Anything that draws a direct link between what are now referred to as corporations (large, powerful private companies operating in a modern free-market capitalist system) and Mussolini's corporatism, is founded on a misunderstanding  most likely caused by the similarity between the words.  As for the claim that Webster's dictionary censored its definition of fascism when it was taken over by a public relations-sensitive corporation in 1987: Merriam-Webster has in fact been owned by Encyclopedia Brittanica Incorporated since 1964, and has operated as Merriam-Webster Incorporated since 1982; that claim is inaccurate. owned Bier, Daniel. "Fake Quote Files: Benito Mussolini on Fascism and Corporatism."
The Skeptical Libertarian. 7 February 2013. Berlet, Chip. "Mussolini on the Corporate State."
 Political Research Associates. January 2005. Scruton, Roger. "The Palgrave Macmillan Dictionary of Political Thought."
 Palgrave Macmillan. 3rd Edition 2007. Mussolini, Benito; Gentile, Giovanni. "The Doctrine of Fascism."
 Fascism: Doctrine and Institutions/World Future Fund. 1935. Fox News host Bill O'Reilly andDaily Showhost Jon Stewart traded wisecracks -- and a few insults -- in O'Reilly'sNo Spin Zoneon Feb. 3, 2010.O'Reilly told Stewart that it was frightening that theDaily Showhost had been called an important cultural arbiter. O'Reilly said that his audience is primarily stoner slackers who love Obama, but that a lot of people don't think you're smart.Stewart shot back that O'Reilly was now the voice of sanity at Fox, which he likened to being the thinnest kid at fat camp.At times, they got serious. One topic was Stewart's belief that Republicans seem intent on opposing everything President Barack Obama puts on the table -- even if he presents an opportunity to compromise.But the president won't give the GOP anything, O'Reilly said.Stewart pointed to Obama's stimulus plan as an example. The bill was opposed by Republicans even though it included tax cuts, which typically appeal to their small government sensibilities. [Obama] has given [Republicans] many different angles, Stewart said. For instance, even in the stimulus plan, a full third of that was tax cuts. ... Just like at the State of the Union when he said we cut taxes for 95 percent of middle-class Americans, and everybody clapped, and the Republicans just sat there like this. Tax cuts, that sounds vaguely familiar. Is Stewart right that tax cuts account for a third of the stimulus plan? The stimulus bill, formally known as the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act, is meant to create jobs and boost the economy. It cost $787 billion, including $499 billion to fund new roads, hire teachers and generally keep people employed, and about $288 billion in tax breaks to individuals and businesses. Among other things, the mix of tax cuts includes a refundable credit of up to $400 per individual and $800 for married couples; a temporary increase of the earned income tax credit for disadvantaged families; and an extension of a program that allows businesses to recover the costs of capital expenditures faster than usual.Simple math shows that Stewart is in the ballpark with his claim: $288 billion is a little more than 36 percent of the bill's overall cost. So, tax cuts -- at least the way they've been defined by the Obama administration -- make up for slightly more than one-third of the bill.But calculating the cost of the true tax cuts in the stimulus is a bit more complicated. In July 2009, we checked Obama's claim that, at the time,the stimulus had delivered $43 billion in tax breaks. According to the Treasury Department, about $8 billion of that figure came from extending a fix to the Alternative Minimum Tax. Originally, the AMT was targeted at very wealthy people, but over the years it spread to include some middle-income taxpayers as well. Congress passes yearly fixes to prevent those middle income taxpayers from having to pay the AMT.All told, the AMT fix in the stimulus will cost about $70 billion over 10 years, according to a bill summary published by the Senate Finance Committee. But many tax experts say the AMT fix should not be considered a tax cut. They say that, by extending the AMT fix every year, the government is basically maintaining the status quo.Back in July, we spoke with a number of tax experts about the issue who all agreed that including the fix as part of the stimulus tax cuts is a stretch.Dan Mitchell, a senior fellow at the free-market Cato Institute, explained it this way:AMT is something those people never expect to pay, he said. It's kind of like saying that, if I didn't rob you on the way home from work today, I gave you money.The Tax Policy Center, a joint venture between the Urban Institute and the Brookings Institution, gave the AMT extension a D-minus in its Tax Stimulus Report Card because the provision would provide virtually no economic stimulus. Because the patch is perennially extended, it would have no effect on behavior in 2009. Almost 80 percent of the benefits would go to the richest 20 percent of households, who would be least likely to spend the additional funds and stimulate demand.So, our tax experts are skeptical that the $70 billion AMT fix should be included in the stimulus bill's tax relief. That would bring down the cost of the tax cuts to about $218 billion. That means about 28 percent of the bill could be described as tax cuts, a little less than the one-third cited by Stewart.So we find Stewart's claim to be Mostly True. Thanks to 150 years of fictionalization in dime novels, Hollywood films, and television shows, that hallowed time and place in American history known as the Old West is as much a figment of the national imagination as it was a historical reality. So deep a wellspring of myth and legend is it, in fact, that people are still making up stories about the Old West today on that most modern of misinformation sources, the Internet.  novels films shows Consider the origin of the expression "a shot of whiskey." In 2016, a social media meme shared via Facebook popularized a long-established folk etymology holding that the phrase originated in frontier saloons with cowboys trading bullets for drinks: meme Although the meme is of recent origin, Internet mentions of this alleged historical fact date to at least 2003. Significantly, however, we were unable to trace it back any further than that, nor could we find any credible support for the general claim that it was common to use ammunition as a substitute for hard currency in frontier drinking establishments. 2003 Was the price of a single .45 six-gun cartridge equivalent to that of a shot of whiskey in the Old West, as claimed? It doesn't appear so. The 1891 edition of Chicago hardware dealer Hibbard, Spencer, Bartlett & Co.'s General Catalog lists Smith & Wesson .45 cartridges at a price of $25 per thousand, or 2-1/2 cents per cartridge. For the price of a shot of whiskey, we consulted Kelly J. Dixon's 2005 book Boomtown Saloons: Archaeology and History in Virginia City, which notes that the average cost of a measure of any drink was around two bits, or 25 cents (although the cost later dropped as competition increased when more Americans moved west). Using those figures as our base prices, one shot of whiskey would have cost the equivalent of 10 cartridges. Even allowing for price variations according to time and place, it appears highly doubtful a one-to-one correspondence between the price of a cartridge and the cost of a drink ever existed in the Old West. lists We also looked into the etymology of the noun shot, which has a long and interesting history as well as many shades of meaning. It derives from the Old English verb scotan (later scot), meaning "to shoot," or "let loose a projectile." etymology shot The earliest known usage of "shot" in the sense of "a measure of liquor" appeared in the autobiography of the Rev. Oliver Heywood (1630-1702), in which we find the phrase "their vain way of drinking shots." Unfortunately for the trading-cartridges-for-shots theory, the usage predates the time period of the Old West (which, by convention, was roughly 1850 to 1900) by some 150 years.  autobiography Interestingly enough, the term "shot" was also at one time synonymous with "a charge to be paid" (and, in a more specific usage, "a bill or one's share of it, especially in a pub or bar"), according to the Oxford English Dictionary. Again, however, those meanings predate the Old West era, in this case going all the way back to 15th-century England, hundreds of years before saloons and cowpokes dotted the western frontier of the United States. according Despite their sharing the same derivation, it's unclear precisely how these three disparate senses of the word came to be associated with one another. A theory advanced on the Etymology Online web site suggests that the expression "throw down" (as in "throw down one's money") may link them: Meaning "discharge of a bow, missile," also is from related Old English gesceot. Extended to other projectiles in Middle English, and to sports (hockey, basketball, etc.) 1868. Another original meaning, "payment" (perhaps literally "money thrown down") is preserved in scot-free. "Throwing down" might also have led to the meaning "a drink," first attested 1670s, the more precise meaning "small drink of straight liquor" by 1928 (shot glass by 1955). scot-free Finally, when we used Google's Ngram Viewer to chart how frequently the exact phrase "shot of whiskey" appeared in published sources from the year 1800 on, we found that it didn't actually become common until the mid-20th century, by which time all that was left of the Old West were fading memories, rusting artifacts, and folklore. chart Martin, Katherine Connor.  "What Is the Origin of the Term 'Scot-Free.'"
  Oxford Dictionaries.  15 April 2015. Simmons, Brian M.  "Dime Novels: The Rise of the American Hero."
  Baylor University.  13 August 2013. Smith, Gavin D.  A-Z of Whisky.
  Castle Douglas, Scotland: Neil Wilson Publishing, 2011.  ISBN 9781906476199  p. 250. Etymology Online.  "Shot."
  Accessed 13 October 2017. World Wide Words.  "Shot."
Accessed 13 October 2017. Wearing pink shirts and holding up signs, people gathered outside the Statehouse in Trenton recently as Democratic legislators led a rally to increase womens health care funding in the face of opposition from Gov. Chris Christie.When Assemblyman Herb Conaway Jr. (D-Burlington/Camden) addressed the crowd on June 20, he claimed Christie also has been cutting health care funding for another group: people with AIDS.This governor has cut funding repeatedly for people who have AIDS, who need drugs to save their life, said Conaway, a physician specializing in internal medicine. People who have AIDS today can live out their life...almost as long as anybody else if they get the drugs they need and this governor, time and time again, has cut that.PolitiFact New Jersey confirmed that the Christie administration had cut or proposed to cut state funding for AIDS and HIV services, but in two cases, other funding sources would allow the same number of individuals receiving those services to be served.When we asked Conaways chief of staff, Ethan Hasbrouck, to back up the statement, he pointed to two funding cuts in the governors proposed budget for fiscal year 2012 as well as a change made last year in eligibility for the AIDS Drug Distribution Program.Although a final budget for fiscal year 2012 was approved at the end of June, this Truth-O-Meter item focuses on the proposed budget at the time of Conaways statement. We later called Hasbrouck twice and sent him multiple emails to set up an interview with Conaway about our findings, but we never heard back.Lets review those three items one at a time.Hasbrouck said the fiscal year 2011 budget lowered the income eligibility for the AIDS Drug Distribution Program. That disqualified about 960 people from the program, saving $7.9 million.But the state later set up a new drug benefits program to assist those individuals who would no longer be eligible under the AIDS Drug Distribution Program. That new program was funded through additional rebates from pharmaceutical companies and a new federal grant program.The state increased AIDS Drug Distribution Program funding last year for people who met the new income eligibility, but reduced spending in other categories of HIV services, according to Dawn Thomas, a spokeswoman for the state Department of Health and Senior Services.Now, lets turn to the cuts in the originally proposed fiscal year 2012 budget.Hasbrouck correctly states that the governors proposed budget would have cut $4.7 million for special-care nursing facilities, including Broadway House in Newark, the states only long-term care facility for people living with HIV and AIDS.The second proposed cut cited by Hasbrouck was $3.7 million from the AIDS Drug Distribution Program.Although that state funding was proposed to be cut, the mix of funding sources would enable the same amount of participants to receive access to medications through both the AIDS Drug Distribution Program and the other drug benefits program, according to Thomas.But remember this: two of the funding cuts cited by Hasbrouck were only proposals at the time of the assemblymans statement.Heres how the final budget for fiscal year 2012 affects AIDS and HIV funding:The income eligibility for the AIDS Drug Distribution Program was restored to its previous level, but state funding for the program has been further reduced for a total cut of about $10.7 million, Thomas wrote in an email. Other funding sources will allow the same number of participants to be served, she wrote.The budget reduces overall funding for nursing facilities, but there is no longer a specific cut to special-care nursing facilities like Broadway House, Thomas wrote. The impact on those special-care facilities remains unclear, she wrote.Lets review:Conaway claimed at a Statehouse rally that Christie has repeatedly cut AIDS funding. His chief of staff pointed to three pieces of evidence, one from the budget approved last year and two from the proposed budget for fiscal year 2012.A spokeswoman for the state Department of Health and Senior Services confirmed cuts to AIDS and HIV funding in both budgets.But last year, a new program was created to assist people impacted by the eligibility change. This year, state funding was proposed to be cut, but other funding sources were to maintain services for participants. Conaway correctly stated that Christie has cut state funding for AIDS and HIV programs, but at least when it comes to pharmaceutical assistance, people continued to receive medicine for their AIDS and HIV treatment. We rate his statement Mostly True. To comment on this ruling, go toNJ.com. On 30 July 2017, the conservative Truth Division web site reported that the United States' national debt had fallen to a "surprising" extent in the seven months since the inauguration of President Donald Trump: Truth Division President Donald Trump and his administration are undoing the governments rampant spending that occurred under former President Obamas watch.  According the U.S. Treasurys direct record, a surprising amount of money has been saved over the course of seven months. On January 20th, the day Trump was inaugurated, the total debt was $19,947,304,555,212.49. On July 30th, seven short months later, its at $19,844,938,940,351.37. Overall the debt has decreased by $102,365,614,861.12. We have checked these numbers and set them in context, and found that the national debt did indeed fall by $102 billion between 20 January and the end of July 2017. This decline is also historically remarkable, in both absolute and percentage terms. This six-month fall in the national debt is also significant when measured against the size of the overall economy. National debt  the basics  The national debt is, in brief, the total value of what the federal government owes, and is made up of accumulated annual deficits (when the government spends more than it receives in taxes and other income). It is made up of "public debt" and "intragovernmental holdings." Public debt is, essentially, debt held by sources outside the central government. Intragovernmental holdings are debts between agencies within the federal government, in the form of government trust funds, such as Social Security trust funds.  National debt  the numbers According to figures published by the Treasury Department's Bureau of Fiscal Services on the TreasuryDirect web site, the national debt was $19.84 trillion on 27 July 2017 (not 30 July, as stated by Truth Division. On 20 January, it was $19.95 trillion. TreasuryDirect That shows a fall of $102.37 billion, or 0.51 percent, over a period of 131 business days. To set that in context, we analyzed national debt data stretching back to 12 July 1993, and examined every 131-day period in the last 24 years. You can download a spreadsheet containing all the relevant data here. here Debt-to-GDP ratio The national debt, however, is best viewed with reference to the overall economy. If two countries have about the same national debt, the one with the smaller economy will likely be more constrained in its spending, whereas the larger economy  despite having the same level of debt  will be less affected in terms of economic and fiscal policy. A good way of checking this is to compare the size of the debt to the size of the economy, measured as GDP (gross domestic product). GDP is the combined market value of all goods and services produced in a given jurisdiction (in this case, the United States). This comparison between the size of the national debt and the size of the economy is known as the debt-to-GDP ratio.  While the Treasury Department publishes the national debt for every business day, GDP is only published on a quarterly basis (once every three months). In order to compare the debt-to-GDP ratio on 27 July with the same figure on Inauguration Day, we have to get a little bit creative.  For example, we know that the United States GDP was $18.9 trillion at the end of December 2016 (the end of the fourth quarter), according to figures published by the Bureau of Economic Analysis.  Bureau of Economic Analysis We also know that the national debt on 30 December 2016 was $19.98 trillion, so the estimated debt-to-GDP ratio on that date was 105.67 percent. In other words, the debts of the United States federal government were 5.67 percent bigger than the size of the Unites States economy (when measured by GDP). At the end of the first quarter of 2017 (the end of March), GDP was $19.06 trillion. And we know that on 31 March, the national debt was $19.85 trillion, meaning the debt-to-GDP ratio was 104.14 percent  a healthier number than at the end of December. But to estimate GDP for all the days in between 30 December and 31 March (including 20 January, Inauguration Day) we have to cheat a little bit. You can read more about our methodology by downloading this spreadsheet, but here's what our estimates revealed: Causes The Truth Division, a conservative, openly pro-Trump web site, clearly attributes this decline in the national debt to the president, claiming he and his administration are "undoing the government's rampant spending" and "keeping his promises regarding fiscal responsibility". However, the article does not cite any examples of actions taken by Donald Trump which would support this conclusion.  Jared Bernstein, a senior fellow at the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities and former economic adviser to Vice President Joe Biden, dismissed any claims that President Trump is responsible:  Trump hasn't legislated anything that would have any impact on the fiscal accounts, so it simply doesn't make sense on the face it.  Instead, Bernstein told us, the cause of the drop in the debt is simple  the federal debt ceiling that has been in place since March 2017. If you look at a plot of the total debt right now, it's holding steady at the limit, because to go over the limit is unconstitutional. So you either have to engage in extraordinary measures or eventually default, and the latter is unimaginable so right now Treasury is engaged in the former. That is, they are delaying or suspending various payments that need to be made, particularly within some of their intra-governmental accounts... By those measures, they can hold the national debt where it is for a certain amount of time.  Eventually, Bernstein says, the debt ceiling will have to be lifted, and the payments that had been delayed will cause the national debt to increase once again.  That pattern can be seen in this chart, which shows the national debt from January 2011 up to the end of July 2017. There are four flat lines showing four periods during which the debt ceiling was frozen: from May to August 2011; May to October 2013; March to October 2015; and the ongoing period since March 2017.  2011 2013 2015   Conclusion The Truth Division article accurately describes the extent to which the national debt fell between the inauguration of Donald Trump in January 2017 and the end of July of the same year. And it rightly describes this fall as "surprising", since it ranks among the very largest 131-day declines in the national debt since July 1993, both in absolute and percentage terms.  Similarly, the decline in both components of the national debt  public debt and intragovernmental holdings  was highly significant between 20 January and 27 July 2017, both in absolute and percentage terms, and as we have shown, the national debt has fallen by an estimated 2.25 percent since Inauguration Day  even when measured against the size of the overall Unites States economy. Whether or not any actions or decisions made by Donald Trump have caused or contributed to these historically remarkable declines in the debt is a question that goes beyond the scope of this particular fact check. Unfortunately, the  national debt resumed its upward march in August 2017 and by mid-August 2018 stood at about $21.3 trillion (up $1.4 trillion since Inauguration Day), so the early 2017 drop has not proved to be a long-term trend. national debt A spreadsheet containing all the data relevant to this article can be downloaded here. here Bureau of Fiscal Services.  "Frequently Asked Questions About the Public Debt".
 TreasuryDirect.gov.  1 April 2016.