Trying to sort the wheat from the chaff, the steak from the sizzle, the truth from the truthiness in this presidential campaign season?

FactCheck.org and PolitiFact.com can help voters trying mightily to be part of an informed electorate. Both Web sites scrutinize candidates' comments -- as well as charges made against them -- and ferret out the truth.

For example, in this past weekend's brouhaha in which Sen. Barack Obama claimed in mailers sent to Ohio voters that Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton believes the North American Free Trade Agreement was a "boon" to the economy, both sites ruled Mr. Obama's assertion untrue.

"...Those are not her words and Obama was wrong to put quote marks around them. In fact, she's been described by a biographer as privately opposing NAFTA in the White House," according to FactCheck.com.

PolitiFact.com looked into the issue months ago when it initially surfaced in a speech and ruled Mr. Obama's claim as false on its Truth-o-Meter.

"In June 2007, she said NAFTA had some positive effects 'but unfortunately it had a lot of downside.' And at a debate in December 2007, she announced her intention to review and reform NAFTA if she were elected," according to PolitiFact.com. "Obama implies Clinton views NAFTA as an unqualified success, but more importantly, he attributes words to her that only appear in a newspaper summary of the issues. We judge his statement to be False."

FactCheck.org, which started in 2003, is based in Washington and is a project of the Annenberg Public Policy Center of the University of Pennsylvania.

"We have certainly found problems with statements of most of the candidates," says Viveca Novak, deputy director of FactCheck.org.

The site's eight-member staff keeps an eye on what's being said in debates, television ads, stump speeches, direct mail and other information voters receive.

PolitiFact.com, which began in August 2007 and has a core staff of six, is the creation of The St. Petersburg Times of Florida and Congressional Quarterly of Washington.

Inspired by FactCheck.org, the folks at PolitiFact.com thought they, too, could bring dependable political information and some added fun to the political party with the Truth-o-Meter, says Bill Adair, PolitiFact.com's editor and The St. Petersburg Times' Washington bureau chief.

The Truth-O-Meter rates a statement as: true, mostly true, half true, barely true, false or pants-on-fire false. The pants-on-fire rating is reserved for those statements that not only are inaccurate, but make ridiculous claims.

The Truth-O-Meter on a chain e-mail's assertion that Mr. Obama is Muslim -- a claim that is completely, pants-on-fire false -- has been the site's most popular story.

"We wanted to make it easier on readers, so they didn't have to read a long article to read the truth," Mr. Adair says. "With the Truth-O-Meter, people could see at a glance if something is true or half true or whatever."

PolitiFact.com visitors then can read more on a topic if they choose, with a click of the mouse.

"This is the way journalism -- political journalism -- needs to be practiced," Mr. Adair says. "There's so much chaos in the campaign, it makes sense for the news media to sort it out for people."