Comedy Central did this back in the early 1990s when they would cover State of the Union speeches. They would have subtitles showing the reality compared to the rhetoric.
Overall it's a good idea, but the Washington Post lacks credibility and is ultimately part of the corporate "establishment" media.
Someone needs to make an actual lie-detecting sort of video analysis device that takes visual cues that are shown to indicate a person's willful lying, such as eye movement and infrared measurement of nose temperature. Facts can be deftly interpreted by a skilled politician to make a fact-checking database arguable, but some reading of a person that actually measures his/her intention to mislead... that'd be interesting.
Ultimately this will just result in politicians saying less than they already do. Contrary to @3, people in politics don't lie much more than us regular folks do, though when they do, they do it with a whole lot more conviction. The whole art of politics is about saying as little as possible for as long as possible. Think about how hard it was for you to get McKenna to admit to just about any policy position. Think about how little Romney committed to outside of the debates. With each election's debates getting less and less worthwhile, it wouldn't be surprising to see this technology completely obsolete in 2020, when even a question about what specific actions the candidate would take to prevent Florida from being submerged by rising ocean levels will produce only a 9 minute long story about how delicious his grandmother's fresh squeezed orange juice was.
(Joke explainer: The WP company makes ALL its profit from Kaplan, not from the newspaper.)
Overall it's a good idea, but the Washington Post lacks credibility and is ultimately part of the corporate "establishment" media.
They should run the last 4 years of SLOG posts through this thing...better put on earmuffs when the buzzer starts going!