The Ugly New McCain - Page 2

Zyphlin · 09-17-08, 10:24 AM

I really wish the Media and liberals would apply the same standard for what a "lie" is to Obama as they do to McCain.

I would call it dishonest, but not a lie. Certain parts stretch the truth, certain parts leave out information, and some things are open to interpirtation. Nothing is an outright lie.

For example

The ad claims Obama supported legislation to teach "comprehensive sex education" to kindergarteners. This is not a lie. The bill he supported stated it was a "comprehensive sex education" bill that would extend to kindergartners. That's not a lie. Its dishonest to a point becasue it omits that for it states it'd be "age appropriate". That said, I do not doubt there are MANY families out there that do not feel there is any kind of "appropriate" sex education that should be taught in school to a 5 year old child.

The ad claims this is Obama's only "accomplishment" in the realm of legislation on education. This is the only part that can perhaps be a lie...depending on a few things I have no been able to research yet. He did not arthor the bill...HOWEVER, if there was no other major educational bill he voted on, and if he did not arthor any educational bill...then it wouldn't be a complete lie to say its the only accomplishment in that realm.

Likewise, the "lipstick on a pig ad" does not contain a distinct lie by the McCain camp. No where does it state "Obama called Palin a pig". They play Palin's comment, and then McCain's. Is it dishonest? In my mind, yes, as it is giving the impression he's calling her a pig. I've stated my point here that I don't believe Obama saying it had NOTHING to do with Palin, but don't agree with the thought he was calling her a pig. HOWEVER, I DO believe it is completely legitimate for someone to have seen that speech and come to EITHER of those conclussions as there is no real way to prove his intent one way or another.

Just because its a "popular americanism" doesn't mean it wasn't used for a specific reason. (for example, while I don't think its the case, its not hard to look at that entire group of lines and infer he's refering to Palin as the Pig and McCain as the Old Fish).

He is distorting things and misrepresenting things. These are things I still find low brow and hate to see in Politics. But I'm sorry if I'm not going to jump up and down in step with the media and the liberals condemning him non-stop when they will not hold thier own candidate to the same standards. They call distortions from McCain "lies" while writing off Obama's as "a matter of interpritation". Bull****.

So excuse me if I don't really care about the feigned outrage of Obama's adoring fans over the other candidate doing the same thing as their own.

Anjire · 09-17-08, 10:35 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Zyphlin

I really wish the Media and liberals would apply the same standard for what a "lie" is to Obama as they do to McCain.

I would call it dishonest, but not a lie. Certain parts stretch the truth, certain parts leave out information, and some things are open to interpirtation. Nothing is an outright lie.

For example

The ad claims Obama supported legislation to teach "comprehensive sex education" to kindergarteners. This is not a lie. The bill he supported stated it was a "comprehensive sex education" bill that would extend to kindergartners. That's not a lie. Its dishonest to a point becasue it omits that for it states it'd be "age appropriate". That said, I do not doubt there are MANY families out there that do not feel there is any kind of "appropriate" sex education that should be taught in school to a 5 year old child.

The ad claims this is Obama's only "accomplishment" in the realm of legislation on education. This is the only part that can perhaps be a lie...depending on a few things I have no been able to research yet. He did not arthor the bill...HOWEVER, if there was no other major educational bill he voted on, and if he did not arthor any educational bill...then it wouldn't be a complete lie to say its the only accomplishment in that realm.

Likewise, the "lipstick on a pig ad" does not contain a distinct lie by the McCain camp. No where does it state "Obama called Palin a pig". They play Palin's comment, and then McCain's. Is it dishonest? In my mind, yes, as it is giving the impression he's calling her a pig. I've stated my point here that I don't believe Obama saying it had NOTHING to do with Palin, but don't agree with the thought he was calling her a pig. HOWEVER, I DO believe it is completely legitimate for someone to have seen that speech and come to EITHER of those conclussions as there is no real way to prove his intent one way or another.

Just because its a "popular americanism" doesn't mean it wasn't used for a specific reason. (for example, while I don't think its the case, its not hard to look at that entire group of lines and infer he's refering to Palin as the Pig and McCain as the Old Fish).

He is distorting things and misrepresenting things. These are things I still find low brow and hate to see in Politics. But I'm sorry if I'm not going to jump up and down in step with the media and the liberals condemning him non-stop when they will not hold thier own candidate to the same standards. They call distortions from McCain "lies" while writing off Obama's as "a matter of interpritation". Bull****.

So excuse me if I don't really care about the feigned outrage of Obama's adoring fans over the other candidate doing the same thing as their own.

FactCheck.org: Off Base on Sex Ed

Quote:

His Only Accomplishment?

The ad claims the bill was Obama's "one accomplishment." This is doubly false. Obama was neither a cosponsor nor a sponsor of the sex education bill, which never got past "go" in the Senate. So it was not an "accomplishment" at all. Furthermore, Obama can properly claim a number of real accomplishments.

He was a cosponsor of what became the Chicago Education Reform Act of 2003, which allowed for an increase in the number of Chicago charter schools and required the Chicago Board of Education to enter into a formal partnership with the Chicago Teachers Union to "advance the Chicago Public Schools to the next level of education reform." He was also a cosponsor of a bipartisan bill to help Illinois high school graduates be eligible for in-state college tuition rates even if they weren't U.S. citizens.

On the federal level, Obama sponsored three amendments to The America COMPETES Act, which became law in 2007. All three amendments were passed in the Senate by unanimous consent and became law. One amendment proposed language that would create a mentoring program for women and minority groups during their studies in Department of Energy programs. He also proposed language to support summer learning programs and boost their math curricula. And he put forward a requirement that women and minorities be represented in the President's Science and Technology Summit. Whether or not one considers any of these measures earth-shaking, they're accomplishments nonetheless

Will you now agree that McCain flat out lied?

aps · 09-17-08, 10:42 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Zyphlin

So excuse me if I don't really care about the feigned outrage of Obama's adoring fans over the other candidate doing the same thing as their own.

So you're saying that Richard Cohen is an adoring fan of Obama? Did you read the article?

Zyphlin · 09-17-08, 10:43 AM

Yep, I'll admit he flat out lied that it was his only accomplishment in the realm of education.

Zyphlin · 09-17-08, 10:45 AM

No, I don't think he's an adoring fan of Obama. And I believe he's also took Obama to task in the the past over his misrepresentations. I can understand a bit of someone who supported a person being a bit harder on his own side.

I am speaking more of the people that are picking up this article and running with it to launch yet another hypocritical attack on McCain while continuing to dismiss, rationalize, and excuse their candidate.

aps · 09-17-08, 10:53 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Zyphlin

No, I don't think he's an adoring fan of Obama. And I believe he's also took Obama to task in the the past over his misrepresentations. I can understand a bit of someone who supported a person being a bit harder on his own side.

I am speaking more of the people that are picking up this article and running with it to launch yet another hypocritical attack on McCain while continuing to dismiss, rationalize, and excuse their candidate.

Okay, I see your point. Clearly Richard Cohen is disillusioned with McCain. That is the same with me, although my disillusionment started when he caved on the tortue issue. That was my turning point for him--and Lindsey Graham, who I used to genuinely respect.

Anjire · 09-17-08, 11:28 AM

Just a comparison of truthfulness for both campaigns - links provided so that people can judge for themselves the accuracy of the below ratings.

I do wish they'd rank the third party candidate as well.

Quote:

PolitiFact | The Barack Obama file

# True 40
# Mostly True 24
# Half True 21
# Barely True 12
# False 18
# Pants on Fire 0

PolitiFact | The Joe Biden file

# True 7
# Mostly True 4
# Half True 6
# Barely True 4
# False 4
# Pants on Fire 2

combined:

# True 47 33%
# Mostly True 28 20%
# Half True 27 19%
# Barely True 16 11%
# False 22 15%
# Pants on Fire 2 1%

Quote:

PolitiFact | The John McCain file

# True 25
# Mostly True 21
# Half True 19
# Barely True 21
# False 23
# Pants on Fire 6

PolitiFact | The Sarah Palin file

# True 4
# Mostly True 1
# Half True 4
# Barely True 1
# False 0
# Pants on Fire 0

combined:

# True 29 23%
# Mostly True 22 18%
# Half True 23 18%
# Barely True 22 18%
# False 23 18%
# Pants on Fire 6 5%

independent_thinker2002 · 09-17-08, 11:49 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Anjire

Just a comparison of truthfulness for both campaigns - links provided so that people can judge for themselves the accuracy of the below ratings.

I do wish they'd rank the third party candidate as well.

I would point people to the "pants on fire" numbers. Obama has zero. Biden has two. McCain has six.

I think it's appropriate to point this out. The voters will decide which lies matter and which are the worst lies.

Anjire · 09-17-08, 11:58 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by independent_thinker2002

I would point people to the "pants on fire" numbers. Obama has zero. Biden has two. McCain has six.

I think it's appropriate to point this out. The voters will decide which lies matter and which are the worst lies.

Palin has zero "pants on fire" and zero "false".

It seems Palin is more of a help to McCain for Truthfulness then Biden is to Obama.

aps · 09-17-08, 12:00 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Anjire

Palin has zero "pants on fire" and zero "false".

It seems Palin is more of a help to McCain for Truthfulness then Biden is to Obama.

I think Palin's number will increase shortly. Her allegations that she said thanks but no thanks to the bridge to nowhere is an outright lie.