Posts tagged ‘McCain Campaign’

October 13, 2008

Conservatives Flock to Reprimand John McCain!! (Really)

A while back I wrote that Conservatives were flocking to reprimand McCain. I was joking then, but not this time.

Did he really think running a nasty campaign was going to work amidst a financial crisis? I guess that’s just more of his sound “judgment” rearing its ugly head again.

October 4, 2008

Fact-Checking the VP Debate

Joe Biden and Sarah Palin Vice Presidential Debate

As with any presidential campaign, lies and half-truths flow freely. The following is from wire.factcheck.org. The guys over there have done a real job of “Keeping them Honest,” throughout the entire Election.

Some highlights:

Killing Afghan Civilians?


Palin said that Obama had accused American troops of doing nothing but killing civilians, a claim she called “reckless” and “untrue.”

Obama did say that troops in Afghanistan were killing civilians. Here’s the whole quote, from a campaign stop in New Hampshire:

The Associated Press fact-checked this one, and found that in fact U.S troops were killing more civilians at the time than insurgents: “As of Aug. 1, the AP count shows that while militants killed 231 civilians in attacks in 2007, Western forces killed 286. Another 20 were killed in crossfire that can’t be attributed to one party.” Afghan President Hamid Karzai had expressed concern about these civilian killings, a concern President Bush said he shared.

Whether Obama said that this was “all we’re doing” is debatable. He said that we need to have enough troops so that we’re “not just air-raiding villages and killing civilians,” but did not say that troops are doing nothing else.

McCain in the Vanguard of Mortgage Reform?

Palin said that McCain had sounded the alarm on Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac two years ago.

Palin is referring to a bill that would have increased oversight on Fannie and Freddie. In our recent article about assigning blame for the crisis, we found that by the time McCain added his name to the bill as a cosponsor, the collapse was well underway. Home prices began falling only two months later. Our colleagues at PolitiFact also questioned this claim.

Palin’s Health Care Hooey

Palin claimed that McCain’s health care plan would be “budget-neutral,” costing the government nothing.

The McCain campaign hasn’t released an estimate of how much the plan would cost, but independent experts contradict Palin’s claim of a cost-free program.

The Urban-Brookings Tax Policy Center estimates that McCain’s plan, which at its peak would cover 5 million of the uninsured, would increase the deficit by $1.3 trillion over 10 years. Obama’s plan, which would cover 34 million of the uninsured, would cost $1.6 trillion over that time period.

The nonpartisan U.S. Budget Watch’s fiscal voter guide estimates that McCain’s tax credit would increase the deficit by somewhere between $288 billion to $364 billion by the year 2013, and that making employer health benefits taxable would bring in between $201 billion to $274 billion in revenue. That nets out to a shortfall of somewhere between $14 billion to $163 billion – for that year alone.

Palin also said that Obama’s plan would be “universal government run” health care and that health care would be “taken over by the feds.” That’s not the case at all. As we’ve said before, Obama’s plan would not replace or remove private insurance, or require people to enroll in a public plan. It would increase the offerings of publicly funded health care.

Did McCain “vote the same way” as Obama on funding troops? This correction by Factcheck.org answers that question.

Correction Oct 3: This article originally faulted Biden for saying that McCain had voted “the exact same way” as Obama on a controversial troop funding bill. We said that McCain was absent for the vote and so didn’t vote at all. Biden was, however, correct.

McCain did vote against the troop-funding bill in question, H.R. 1591, on March 29, 2007, when it originally cleared the Senate. The vote to which we referred, and which McCain missed, was a later vote on the House-Senate compromise version of the same bill, on April 26, 2007. McCain opposed the bill, which Obama supported, because it contained language calling for withdrawal of troops from Iraq. Biden was responding to Palin’s accusation that “Obama voted against funding troops.” Obama voted for the bill March 29 and April 26, and then on May 24, 2007, following a veto by President Bush, Obama voted against a similar troop-funding bill, H.R. 2206, that lacked any withdrawal language.


To read more facts on the topics that the Vice Presidential candidates discussed Thursday night, check out wire.factcheck.org and PolitiFact.org.

A few other misleads of note:

  • Palin said, “We’re circulating about $700 billion a year into foreign countries” for imported oil, repeating an outdated figure often used by McCain. At oil prices current as of Sept. 30, imports are running at a rate of about $493 billion per year.
  • Palin threw out an old canard when she criticized Obama for voting for the 2005 energy bill and said, “that’s what gave those oil companies those big tax breaks.” It’s a false attack Sen. Hillary Clinton used against Obama in the primary, and McCain himself has hurled. It’s true that the bill gave some tax breaks to oil companies, but it also took away others. And according to the Congressional Research Service, the bill created a slight net increase in taxes for the oil industry.
  • Palin repeated a falsehood that the McCain campaign has peddled, off and on, for some time; that under Obama “millions of small businesses” will pay high taxes. As we reported June 23, it’s simply untrue that “millions” of small business owners will pay higher federal income taxes under Obama’s proposal.
  • Palin: We need to look back, even two years ago, and we need to be appreciative of John McCain’s call for reform with Fannie Mae, with Freddie Mac, with the mortgage-lenders, too, who were starting to really kind of rear that head of abuse.

    October 4, 2008

    Does Folksy REALLY work for you?

    Sarah Palin

    Sarah Palin

    I was born, and spent most of my childhood, in a small town. When I was twelve years old, my family picked up and moved to the big city of Atlanta. From one southern state to another, that hospitality was something that was never lost. I still smile at strangers when I walk down the street. Wave at my neighbors as I drive through my subdivision. Guest are still offered something cold to drink, something to eat. While others from bigger cities may scoff at this, one thing we from the south will always be known for is a hospitality that is genuine and meaningful.

    But here’s the thing… There is quite a fine line between that genuine graciousness and the quite disingenuous nature of what we saw displayed on stage, by Governor Palin, last night.

    Leading up to last nights debate, I had the opportunity to see several clips from Palin’s previous debates; and for a moment I thought perhaps that that would be the Palin that would show up last night. Not that I heard anything riveting during any of those performances… but the “folksiness” was kept to an absolute minimum. Why the drastic change of persona over the last couple of years? Is it that she doesn’t think she can speak to Americans, as a whole, as if we have more than two braincells to rub together? The only time I speak in the manner that she spoke to us last night is when I am playing with my 9 month old nephew. Being talked to as if I am an infant, or at best, a toddler is not something that I would calling “endearing.”

    Didn’t we, as Americans, learn our lesson last go around with Bush? That wanting to have a beer and pizza with the president (or in this case, vice president) isn’t a qualifying factor? That it simply cannot be the barometer by which we measure presidential competency? It’s as if many of us are allergic to those who are intelligent. How else can you justify smearing someone for being a Harvard Law grad, while praising someone who took years to find a major, after changing schools three or four times? Yes, that may make her “normal” and “just like many other Americans,” but is that what we really want in someone who has to deal with the complexities of being one of the leaders, if not the leader, of the “Free World?”

    The definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over and expecting different results.

    I know that the Obama/Biden ticket has been trying to draw comparison between the Bush/Cheney Administration, and what a McCain/Palin Administration would look like, but after last night, never before has the similarities been so glaringly obvious. A (potential) vice president that has their own interpretation of the constitution? Where have we seen that before?

    Palin made an attempt to further explain her position on the constitution and the role of the vice president today on FoxNews:

    Incoherent? Maybe. Unnerving? Definitely.

    September 26, 2008

    Palin is Out of Her League

    After watching Palin in interviews, it’s a given that she will be slaughtered during the debates. She has an extremely limited vocabulary that is compounded by her weak grasp of the issues. As described by conservative columnist, Kathleen Parker, “Palin filibusters. She repeats words, filling space with deadwood. Cut the verbiage and there’s not much content there.”

    I could not say it better myself.

    I honestly wonder how many other conservatives out there are willing to admit that Palin is completely out of her league. That this pick was a huge gamble that only paid off in the short run, and things are starting to unravel… Beginning at the base.

    Kathleen Parker joins a steady stream of conservatives that have been questioning McCain and his decision-making throughout this campaign.

    Kathleen Parker

    Kathleen Parker

    Palin Problem, by Kathleen Parker on National Review Online

    If at one time women were considered heretical for swimming upstream against feminist orthodoxy, they now face condemnation for swimming downstream — away from Sarah Palin.

    To express reservations about her qualifications to be vice president — and possibly president — is to risk being labeled anti-woman.

    Or, as I am guilty of charging her early critics, supporting only a certain kind of woman.

    Some of the passionately feminist critics of Palin who attacked her personally deserved some of the backlash they received. But circumstances have changed since Palin was introduced as just a hockey mom with lipstick — what a difference a financial crisis makes — and a more complicated picture has emerged.

    As we’ve seen and heard more from John McCain’s running mate, it is increasingly clear that Palin is a problem. Quick study or not, she doesn’t know enough about economics and foreign policy to make Americans comfortable with a President Palin should conditions warrant her promotion.

    Yes, she recently met and turned several heads of state as the United Nations General Assembly convened in New York. She was gracious, charming and disarming. Men swooned. Pakistan’s president wanted to hug her. (Perhaps Osama bin Laden is dying to meet her?)

    And, yes, she has common sense, something we value. And she’s had executive experience as a mayor and a governor, though of relatively small constituencies (about 6,000 and 680,000, respectively).

    Finally, Palin’s narrative is fun, inspiring and all-American in that frontier way we seem to admire. When Palin first emerged as John McCain’s running mate, I confess I was delighted. She was the antithesis and nemesis of the hirsute, Birkenstock-wearing sisterhood — a refreshing feminist of a different order who personified the modern successful working mother.

    Palin didn’t make a mess cracking the glass ceiling. She simply glided through it.

    It was fun while it lasted.

    Palin’s recent interviews with Charles Gibson, Sean Hannity, and now Katie Couric have all revealed an attractive, earnest, confident candidate. Who Is Clearly Out Of Her League.

    No one hates saying that more than I do. Like so many women, I’ve been pulling for Palin, wishing her the best, hoping she will perform brilliantly. I’ve also noticed that I watch her interviews with the held breath of an anxious parent, my finger poised over the mute button in case it gets too painful. Unfortunately, it often does. My cringe reflex is exhausted.

    Palin filibusters. She repeats words, filling space with deadwood. Cut the verbiage and there’s not much content there. Here’s but one example of many from her interview with Hannity: “Well, there is a danger in allowing some obsessive partisanship to get into the issue that we’re talking about today. And that’s something that John McCain, too, his track record, proving that he can work both sides of the aisle, he can surpass the partisanship that must be surpassed to deal with an issue like this.”

    When Couric pointed to polls showing that the financial crisis had boosted Obama’s numbers, Palin blustered wordily: “I’m not looking at poll numbers. What I think Americans at the end of the day are going to be able to go back and look at track records and see who’s more apt to be talking about solutions and wishing for and hoping for solutions for some opportunity to change, and who’s actually done it?”

    If BS were currency, Palin could bail out Wall Street herself.

    If Palin were a man, we’d all be guffawing, just as we do every time Joe Biden tickles the back of his throat with his toes. But because she’s a woman — and the first ever on a Republican presidential ticket — we are reluctant to say what is painfully true.

    What to do?

    McCain can’t repudiate his choice for running mate. He not only risks the wrath of the GOP’s unforgiving base, but he invites others to second-guess his executive decision-making ability. Barack Obama faces the same problem with Biden.

    Only Palin can save McCain, her party, and the country she loves. She can bow out for personal reasons, perhaps because she wants to spend more time with her newborn. No one would criticize a mother who puts her family first.

    Do it for your country.

    Kathleen Parker is a nationally syndicated columnist.

    © 2008, Washington Post Writers Group

    Link to the article.

    September 25, 2008

    McCain Gambles In Effort To Regain The Offensive

    Isn’t that what we ALL do when life gets a little hard…. Take a time out!!

    – – –

    John McCain, losing ground as the economic crisis deepens, sought today to beat Barack Obama to the punch by suspending his campaign, postponing Friday’s presidential debate, and calling for an emergency meeting between the President, congressional leaders and both nominees to produce legislation addressing the threat of a Wall Street collapse and a dangerous recession.
    Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

    September 16, 2008

    Conservatives Turn On McCain-Palin


    The facts are this: Every so called “qualification” that the Mac Camp have attributed to Palin, if not an outright lie, has been a gross exaggeration. Someone who is truly qualified for the position does not have to inflate their resume in the way that she has. This may work for obtaining menial jobs, but we are talking about the vice presidency to a man who has had several bouts with melanoma.

    This is serious stuff.

    Sarah Palin has many virtues. If you wanted someone to destroy a corrupt establishment, she’d be your woman. But the constructive act of governance is another matter. She has not been engaged in national issues, does not have a repertoire of historic patterns and, like President Bush, she seems to compensate for her lack of experience with brashness and excessive decisiveness.

    More on Sarah Palin
    Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

    September 16, 2008

    Republicans Flock to Reprimand John McCain!!

    OK, maybe not so much a “flock” as much as a little teeny trickle. But, it’s still slightly amusing, and marginally enjoyable all the same.

    Mitt Romney is the latest republican to openly criticize John McCain for his turn toward “The Dark Side” of politics.

    See the video:

    Mr. Romney also touched on the fact that, despite numerous unbiased reporting of his distortion of the facts, McCain and his henchmen have continued down the same path. He warned that if they insisted on continuing down this road, that they will continue to take heat for it.

    So far, the Mac Camp haven’t strayed too much from message.

    September 12, 2008

    Obama fights back! Sort of…

    Last night as I was took my nightly stroll through the blogs and message boards that litter the world that we call “Cyber Space” I stumbled upon the following:

    Senator Barack Obama will intensify his assault against Senator John McCain, with new television advertisements and more forceful attacks by the candidate and surrogates beginning Friday morning, as he confronts an invigorated Republican presidential ticket and increasing nervousness in the Democratic ranks.

    An involuntary of jolt of electricity shot through me as I thought to myself, “well, it’s about fucking time.”

    This is what many of us democrats have been waiting for after days, and even weeks, of political ads that have painted Obama as this celebrity figure that feels that people should worship the ground that he walks on. Most recently, the McCain campaign has released ads that have accused Obama of wanting to teach children about sex, even before they learn to read; to claiming that Obama’s sour because his light is fading now that Palin has come on the scene.

    The only messages out of the McCain camp has been slanderous mudslinging, and out and out lies that they have recited on an daily basis as they make their pit stops across the nation; despite media outlets across the board calling them out on it.

    So yes, a tougher Obama camp is just what the doctor ordered.THEN I watched the commercials.

    ::crickets::

    I blinked and asked myself, “Is that it?”

    THIS is supposed to hold a candle to, “Obama wants to teach 5 year olds about sex” and “Obama just called Palin a Pig” and “Obama thinks that he’s the Messiah and can part the sea” and “Obama is an Elitist” and “Obama is jealous because Palin stole his light” and the countless other attacks against him and his character that have been unfounded, and factually unjust?

    Let me ask this again, does pointing out that McCain can not use a computer or send an email REALLY combat ANY of the aforementioned slander?

    What about calling the McCain camp out on their insistence of labeling “the bridge to no where” as a significant accomplishment of Governor Palin’s, when facts are to the contrary? What about “mocking” the notion that the fact that Alaska is the closest part of the US to Russia (and by golly you can actually SEE it from several areas of Alaska) makes for real foreign policy experience? What about highlighting the fact that, although they are running on this “anti-earmark” policy, Palin herself has requested millions in earmarks as mayor of Wasilla and governor of Alaska? What about the FACT that the McCain Camp is shielding Palin from interviews? If she is so ready for VP, why is she not ready to take on the press?

    Why not formulate an entire commercial that highlights the underhanded way that the McCain camp is misleading the country; especially in terms of Obama wanting to teach kids about sex when in actuality, he was trying to PROTECT kids from molestation. McCain/Palin for pedophiles? Hey, why not? If “they” want to go there, then why can’t we?

    The point is this… There is SO much, that is so much more tangible to attack the McCain/Palin ticket on, and they are missing the mark BIG TIME.

    This campaign is no longer about simply sticking to the issues. This is war, people, and perception is everything. The dem’s better pull it together.