I've listened to Sarah Palin several times in the past few days. (It's my job--what I get the big bucks to do.) And as she whips up the crowds that come to her rallies, her biggest argument against Barack Obama is that he WILL RAISE YOUR TAXES. Did you get that? Oh, you missed the nuance. HE WILL RAISE YOUR TAXES. And her case is built on two facts. But they are not facts--or not full facts. And though these attacks have been debunked repeatedly by mainstream media factcheckers, Palin and John McCain keep using them. Call me naive, but I still find it surprising that they believe they can get away with such serial misrepresenting (or lying). So for the last time--I hope--let's look at these two claims.
Claim 1: Obama voted to raise taxes on people making as less as $42,000.
Here's how Factcheck.org evaluated that charge:
The measure [a Democratic budget bill] Obama supported contained a provision - which is not part of his current tax proposals - that would have increased the rate paid by those who have taxable income high enough to fall into the 25 percent tax bracket. The 25 percent rate would have increased to 28 percent, as it was before the Bush tax cuts. The effect would have been to increase taxes for a single taxpayer with as little as $32,550 in taxable income in 2008, after all deductions and exclusions from total annual earnings.
But that works out to be $41,500 a year in total income for a single taxpayer with no dependents who takes the standard deduction and exemption allowed by the tax code. So it's true that a single taxpayer making $42,000 this year would see an income tax increase - of $15. That assumes the provision Obama voted for had been enacted and assumes further that the taxpayer did not qualify for more than the standard deduction.
The bill was a budget measure, which sets general parameters for spending and taxing legislation. It would not have raised any tax rates in and of itself. But the bottom line is this: if the revenue measures of the bill had been enacted as tax legislation, some single taxpayers might have had to pay another $15 in taxes. And as Factcheck.org noted, this tax rate change is not part of Obama's current tax proposal. So it's a minor detail--not a gotcha piece of evidence.
Claim No. 2: Obama voted 94 times to raise taxes.
No, he didn't. Politifact.com says:
Ninety-four times? Not that we could find. The tally more accurately demonstrates how easy it is to distort a candidate's record by characterizing in broad strokes complicated bills and resolutions that contain myriad policy proposals.
The GOP's list is misleading for a number of reasons....First, it counts votes on Democratic budget resolutions, which set nonbinding parameters for considering tax and spending legislation but don't have the force of law. For example, the Republicans cite Obama's votes in support of a fiscal 2009 budget resolution they say would raise taxes on individuals earning as little as $31,850. We've previously dealt with this claim and ruled it False. The document assumes that many of President Bush's 2001 and 2003 tax cuts will be allowed to expire at the end of 2010, or that their cost will be offset by new sources of revenues. Republicans point to this as evidence that Democrats want to raise taxes. But the documents don't have line items on tax proposals. And even if they did, they would amount to little more than political statements, because the documents cannot change tax law. So voting in favor of the resolution isn't akin to voting to raise taxes....
The 94-vote list also takes liberties characterizing which votes actually are "for higher taxes." McCain's folks count Obama's opposition to extending lower tax rates for dividends and capital gains (at least nine votes), and his votes against exemptions to the Alternative Minimum Tax for middle-class taxpayers (at least five votes). These proposals were hallmarks of Republican efforts to extend a variety of popular tax breaks that were expiring when the GOP controlled Congress. Many Democrats, including Obama, opposed them as fiscally irresponsible and primarily benefiting the rich....
The McCain campaign could easily claim that Obama has "repeatedly" supported higher taxes according to his record in the Senate. But by using such a precise number, the McCain campaign's charge carries a greater level of authority and credibility, which it really doesn't deserve. It's not merely that their count is wrong, but that they're misleading with their attempt at unsupported precision. We say False.
It's too bad any time has to be wasted at this point correcting what's already been corrected. But the McCain-Palin camp keep on hurling falsehoods and phony stats at Obama. There are indeed real policy disagreements between the two tickets. And John McCain was once the sort of politician who would have been satisfied to stick to those. But it seems that he and his aides believe that their best chance is to present a false case. And what does that say about their belief in their own campaign and ideas?
![[RSS]](http://blogs.cqpolitics.com/templates/images/rss_icon.gif){kind=icon}
![[ARCHIVES]](http://blogs.cqpolitics.com/templates/images/archives_icon.png){kind=icon}
Comments
DC,
"You can discover what your enemy fears most by observing the means he uses to frighten you."
~ Eric Hoffer
Seems like projection more that even rhetoric.
Posted by: capt
| October 30, 2008 12:06 PM
"than rhetoric" - not that rhetoric.
Posted by: capt
| October 30, 2008 12:06 PM
David - THANK YOU! Keep it up!
Posted by: flan
| October 30, 2008 12:24 PM
We know, from the 2009 budget resolution that a Democratic Congress will want to increase the 25% rate to 28%. Is there anything in Obama's record to indicate he would oppose his party on this? Is Obama telling the truth?
Posted by: Murad
| October 30, 2008 12:24 PM
"Something" Ad
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qxbGPDIVINM
ANNCR: Something's happening in America.
In small towns and big cities.
People from every walk of life...uniting in common purpose.
Barack Obama. Endorsed by Warren Buffett and Colin Powell.
A leader who'll bring us together.
BO: We can choose hope over fear, and unity over division, the promise of change
over the power of the status quo.
That's how we'll emerge from this crisis stronger and more prosperous...as one nation; and as one people.
BO: I'm Barack Obama and I approved this message.
Posted by: capt
| October 30, 2008 12:34 PM
"Rearview Mirror" Ad
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ML2ki8xEj9c
(I'm Barack Obama and I approve this message.)
Wonder where John McCain would take the economy?
Look...
...behind you.
John McCain wants to...
...continue George Bush's economic policies.
As President he'd...
...provide no tax breaks to 101 million Americans...
...but keep tax breaks for companies that ship our jobs overseas.
He wants $4 billion dollars in new tax breaks for big oil
And would tax your health care benefits for the first time ever
Look behind you.
We can't afford more of the same.
Posted by: capt
| October 30, 2008 12:36 PM
Where is Joe?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j1TT7gt5F0w
lololololo
Posted by: capt
| October 30, 2008 12:37 PM
NC Neighbors -- VOTE '08
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UQvw8rvcQxg
Posted by: capt
| October 30, 2008 12:40 PM
EXALTING ATROCITY: The GOP's Torturer-American Candidate
http://tinyurl.com/6r52nu
Posted by: as_if!
| October 30, 2008 12:58 PM
Are we better off now than when Democrats took over Congress in 2005?
Cutting business taxes will bring more businesses and more jobs into the U.S.A.; you shouldn't have to be a businessman to understand that.
Posted by: Murad
| October 30, 2008 2:33 PM
Obama 375 McCain 157 Ties 6
Dem pickups (vs. 2004): CO FL IN IA MO NV NM NC OH VA
GOP pickups (vs. 2004): (None)
Today in 2004:
Kerry 243 Bush 280
http://electoral-vote.com/
Posted by: capt
| October 30, 2008 3:21 PM
A letter to all McCain supporters
http://tinyurl.com/6fbxq3
Posted by: capt
| October 30, 2008 3:26 PM
Exxon Mobil breaks another earnings record
Oil giant posts biggest U.S. quarterly profit ever; breaks own record
HOUSTON - Exxon Mobil Corp., the world’s largest publicly traded oil company, reported income Thursday that shattered its own record for the biggest profit from operations by a U.S. corporation, earning $14.83 billion in the third quarter.
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/27453305/
Posted by: capt
| October 30, 2008 3:43 PM
Battling Our Greatest Fear
Sarah Palin was my worst nightmare.
It was like experiencing a real-life reenactment of the movie The Omen. Not that I literally thought Sarah Palin was Damien with a 666 birthmark on her scalp, but it still felt like some kind of terrible pre-ordained horror. Worse -- a person who thought that "seeing" Russian land in the distance gave her an edge on international relations? A person who believed that men walked with dinosaurs when the world began 6000 years ago? Worse. The idea that person who believed that the "End of Days" would likely happen in her lifetime would possess the launch codes for enough firepower to actually bring that Armageddon to fruition without God's help. The personification of the repressive, small-minded extreme religious right in the driver's seat of the racecar called Earth!
Uh uh. No way.
http://tinyurl.com/57ns2s
Posted by: capt
| October 30, 2008 4:15 PM
McCain Raised Taxes 477 Times… Ouch. ;)
http://www.johnmccainrecord.com/taxes/taxmyth.pdf
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tpIWbYs8sec
Posted by: capt
| October 30, 2008 4:30 PM
Captain,
You seek truth in all the wrong places.
Posted by: Murad
| October 30, 2008 4:47 PM
David Corn,
An article on truth by the author of a book that disgraces truth, "The Lies of George W. Bush", is laughable.
Posted by: Murad
| October 30, 2008 5:10 PM
Mr. Murad: Mr. Corn's book, "The Lies of George W. Bush," points out the lies of our current president. There is nothing untruthful about the book, which did a great service but, alas, was ignored by too many voters.
Posted by: Unitarian Patriot
| October 30, 2008 5:35 PM
CNN Rick Sanchez Catches McCain Spokesman Mike Goldfarb Lying
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HCaOCWYpPk4
Posted by: capt
| October 30, 2008 7:40 PM
"Michael Goldfarb, thank you for coming. We really do appreciate you..."and for looking like the horses ass you are - Sanchez thought out loud and everyone watching could hear!
Not gonna watch the pundits tonight. Time to settle down and watch 'V for Vendetta' and remember the 5th of November!
Posted by: geof01
| October 30, 2008 8:03 PM
Guy Fawkes day?
This year will be a celebration outstanding
Posted by: capt
| October 30, 2008 8:33 PM
ah the incomparable murad!
speaking of lies, i remember when murad told us all that he was a "pentagon insider whose job it was to protect the country from evil-doers".
classic!
Posted by: as_if!
| October 30, 2008 9:44 PM
And I thought murad was a band-aid.
What Obama offers us is an idea. There is nothing, or no one, that can make us complete. The notion of completeness competes with God. That idea that is offered is enough to unite us, and as such will bring change. This is true whether the winner on November 5th is Obama or McCain.
And an idea is impervious to threats or extinction. "An idea is bulletproof" http://vforvendetta.warnerbros.com/
And you can't put a band-aid on that.
Posted by: geof01
| October 30, 2008 10:39 PM
This country's financial situation has been, at least for the past 40 - 60 years, better under a Democratic administration vs. a Repulican one. It's the economy stupid!
Would Obama’s Plan Be Faster, Fairer, Stronger?
The stark contrast between the whiz-bang Clinton years and the dreary Bush years is familiar because it is so recent. But while it is extreme, it is not atypical. Data for the whole period from 1948 to 2007, during which Republicans occupied the White House for 34 years and Democrats for 26, show average annual growth of real gross national product of 1.64 percent per capita under Republican presidents versus 2.78 percent under Democrats.
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/08/31/business/31view.html?_r=1&scp=1&sq=history%20siding%20with%20obama&st=cse&oref=slogin
Is History Really Siding With Obama or is it McCain? Read this Before You Vote!
The expenditures to receipts ratio.:Over the past 30 years our country has been in red ink each year with the exception of three years during Clinton’s second term. If you look at the graph of total receipts to expenditures you can clearly see that there is a large spending discrepancy during periods of Republican tax policy. Especially during Reagan and even more so during George H.W.
The consequences of the Bush tax cut can be seen here. The policies set in place over the last 7 years have passed off massive amounts of debt to my generation. This is the greatest hypocrisy of the neo-conservative movement. They run on a platform of fiscal responsibility and limited government but you don’t see that here. Whether or not there is a democratic or republican president or controlled congress our government’s overall expenditures consistently rise.
In my opinion, the Bush tax cuts are fiscally irresponsible and John McCain’s notion to keep them in effect is reason enough not to vote for him. You can really see the difference when we break down the net lending or borrowing down by each president. Or rather the amount of debt incurred by each of the past five presidents as not a single one has racked up more debt during his term:
http://donttrustthisguy.com/2008/09/13/150/
Posted by: flan
| October 31, 2008 10:03 AM
An 'Idiot Wind'
John McCain's latest attempt to link Barack Obama to extremism
For the record, Mr. Khalidi is an American born in New York who graduated from Yale a couple of years after George W. Bush. For much of his long academic career, he taught at the University of Chicago, where he and his wife became friends with Barack and Michelle Obama. In the early 1990s, he worked as an adviser to the Palestinian delegation at peace talks in Madrid and Washington sponsored by the first Bush administration. We don't agree with a lot of what Mr. Khalidi has had to say about the Israeli-Palestinian conflict over the years, and Mr. Obama has made clear that he doesn't, either. But to compare the professor to neo-Nazis -- or even to Mr. Ayers -- is a vile smear.
It's fair to question why Mr. Obama felt as comfortable as he apparently did during his Chicago days in the company of men whose views diverge sharply from what the presidential candidate espouses. Our sense is that Mr. Obama is a man of considerable intellectual curiosity who can hear out a smart, if militant, advocate for the Palestinians without compromising his own position. To suggest, as Mr. McCain has, that there is something reprehensible about associating with Mr. Khalidi is itself condemnable -- especially during a campaign in which Arab ancestry has been the subject of insults. To further argue that the Times, which obtained the tape from a source in exchange for a promise not to publicly release it, is trying to hide something is simply ludicrous, as Mr. McCain surely knows.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/10/30/AR2008103003244.html
This article does not report that McCain himself gave over $400,000 to Khalidi - much more than Obama - who gave around $80,000, I believe.
More proof of how McCain has sold his soul for this election. Meanwhile Obama remains above this. More proof on who is really ready to lead this country.
Posted by: flan
| October 31, 2008 10:18 AM
WHAT IS PALIN HIDING?
ABC News has asked every day this week about the status of the release of information and received no updates from the campaign. It is unclear what is holding things up.
"We are working on this and it will happen sooner than later," Schmitt said on Sunday.
Aides suggested privately that there was nothing to hide in the records, but that it was simply taking a while to call doctors and round up the appropriate information to release.
But an entire week?
It was last Wednesday that Governor Palin said she would be "fine" with releasing her records.
She is the only one of the presidential or vice presidential candidates who has not released any health information about herself.
http://blogs.abcnews.com/politicalradar/2008/10/still-no-medica.html
Posted by: flan
| October 31, 2008 10:22 AM
Maybe her medical records don't show her having a baby last year.
Posted by: geof01
| October 31, 2008 10:31 AM
But the larger moral of my story became clear in recent weeks as the McCain camp entered a pattern of spiraling electoral thuggery that bears all the markings of the behavior I experienced. First came McCain's petulant withdrawal from Larry King, compounded by the vitriol Sarah Palin directed at the mainstream press at the Convention. But as the McCain candidacy unraveled over the weeks that followed, with his own staffers coming to call Palin a "Diva" and a "whack job"and both sides sowing the seeds for a post-election blame game, the strategy of shooting the messenger has proven to be just another bizarre flare-up in the fog of a turbulent campaign. Arguably, when your opponent can outspend you 4 to 1 on advertising, offending the free-of-charge mainstream press, which John McCain once called "my base," might not be the best idea. So why did they do it? Why all the fuss and desperation? Where does the palpable insecurity within the McCain camp come from? And what does it tell us?
The superficial answer to these questions lies in my own experience as a precursor to what I
have seen play out in the campaign. In her strident debut, Palin played the straight-talk card in
describing McCain. "Wherever he goes and whoever is listening, John McCain is the same man!" she declared. Like so many of the talking points she was given, one can assume these words were carefully crafted to unmake a prevailing impression the McCain team perceives as a liability. This time, it was the fact that McCain is widely perceived as politically slippery - a politician who says different things to different people. For me, witnessing the John McCain who courageously appeared in my film and the later McCain whose staff went after me for sharing his thoughts with the American public, I've seen firsthand how the Straight-Talk Express really works....
...With all due respect to the inner challenges McCain faces as he tries to reconcile the politician
with the human being, what America most needs today -- alongside an unrelentingly engaged
public - is deep, inspired, and coherent leadership, not a continuation of the personal insecurity, confused morality, and political opportunism that got us where we are.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/eugene-jarecki/the-straight-talk-train-w_b_139218.html
I second that last statement and Obama is the person that can provide this kind of leadership!
Posted by: flan
| October 31, 2008 10:37 AM
Geof - that is what I was thinking!
Posted by: flan
| October 31, 2008 10:38 AM
Maybe Bristol had the baby and McCain was the father!
Posted by: geof01
| October 31, 2008 11:22 AM
capt. and it's the lack of serious discourse that got McCain in the situation he's in today. No one knows where he stands on the issues, the straight talk express is in the ditch, Palin was a flawed attempt to pander to the extremes, and Joe the Plumber is a meaningless attempt to portray Obama as a socialist.
and if I don't stp reading these blogs I'll never make enough to get a tax increase.
Posted by: geof01
| October 31, 2008 11:48 AM
There is an old Jewish saying, "A half truth is a full lie." McCain and Palin are all about half truths and even outright full lies.
BTW Semitic is the name of a language group. All Semites are people who use Semitic languages. If Khalidi speaks Arabic he is a Semite. (Have you ever heard of anyone being called ProSemitic?)
Semitite comes from thre brothers Ham , Shem & Yaphet. The children of Shem are presumed to Semites. I know people who avoid pork products so you may consider them to be anti-Ham. I am unaware of any anti-Yaphets.
Posted by: kalpal
| November 1, 2008 7:39 AM
Post A Comment