Stretching the Truth

By TChris, Section Elections 2008
Posted on Wed Sep 03, 2008 at 10:46:48 PM EST
Tags: (all tags)

Share This: Digg!

This AP article examines some of the ways Republican speakers (to put it nicely) "stretched the truth" tonight. An example:

PALIN: "There is much to like and admire about our opponent. But listening to him speak, it's easy to forget that this is a man who has authored two memoirs but not a single major law or reform — not even in the state senate."

More...

THE FACTS: Compared to McCain and his two decades in the Senate, Obama does have a more meager record. But he has worked with Republicans to pass legislation that expanded efforts to intercept illegal shipments of weapons of mass destruction and to help destroy conventional weapons stockpiles. The legislation became law last year. To demean that accomplishment would be to also demean the work of Republican Sen. Richard Lugar of Indiana, a respected foreign policy voice in the Senate. In Illinois, he was the leader on two big, contentious measures in Illinois: studying racial profiling by police and requiring recordings of interrogations in potential death penalty cases. He also successfully co-sponsored major ethics reform legislation.

< Sarah Palin Post Speech Thread | Move Over John Edwards, The Enquirer Goes After Palin >

Legal

Nothing on this site should be construed as legal advice. TalkLeft does not give legal advice.

TalkLeft is not responsible for and often disagrees with material posted in the comments section. Read at your own risk.

Stretching the Truth | 51 comments (51 topical)

Readers Must Login or Create an Account to Comment

it's called hyperbole (5.00 / 1) (#1)
by TeresaInPa on Wed Sep 03, 2008 at 10:50:22 PM EST

the democrats do it too.

It's called lying, smearing, swiftboating (5.00 / 1) (#23)
by nalo on Wed Sep 03, 2008 at 11:41:23 PM EST

Republicans have turned it into an artform and its poisoned our political discourse and ruined our country.

The people at the bottom are upset.


All depends on the meaning (none / 0) (#26)
by frankly0 on Wed Sep 03, 2008 at 11:56:24 PM EST

of "major".


: Yup (none / 0) (#31)
by Pianobuff on Thu Sep 04, 2008 at 12:46:06 AM EST

You would look for a roll call vote, news coverage, major write-up in Congressional Quarterly, etc. depending on the level of importance, bi-partisan work required, controversy, etc.

I believe the (5.00 / 1) (#2)
by Grace on Wed Sep 03, 2008 at 10:54:36 PM EST

operative word is "authored."

Has Obama authored any legislation? I honestly don't know so I can't comment on whether this is accurate or not.

yes, he has authored (5.00 / 4) (#5)
by A DC Wonk on Wed Sep 03, 2008 at 10:56:41 PM EST

he authored, and, in fact, it was his idea, the Obama-Lugar Non-Proliferation Act.


follow link below (5.00 / 2) (#14)
by wystler on Wed Sep 03, 2008 at 11:12:12 PM EST

for some meat from WaPo:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/01/03/AR2008010303303.html

teh google is your friend


: In Illinois state senate, his talent (none / 0) (#37)
by andrys on Thu Sep 04, 2008 at 01:32:06 AM EST

was in taking the 20-26 bills worked on by others for years, and given to him by Emil Jones to help him up his creds for U.S. Senate, and steering them through once the Democrats got a majority in the 7th year or so.
The New Yorker article linked above includes this:
In the State Senate, Jones did something even more important for Obama. He pushed him forward as the key sponsor of some of the Party's most important legislation, even though the move did not sit well with some colleagues who had plugged away in the minority on bills that Obama now championed as part of the majority. "Because he had been in the minority, Barack didn't have a legislative record to run on, and there was a buildup of all these great ideas that the Republicans kept in the rules committee when they were in the majority," Burns said. "Jones basically gave Obama the space to do what Obama wanted to do. Emil made it clear to people that it would be good for them."

Effective (5.00 / 4) (#3)
by Athena on Wed Sep 03, 2008 at 10:54:53 PM EST

Palin delivered the most effective decimation of Obama's claims for the Presidency that we have yet seen. There's no way around that conclusion.

But Obama has made himself open to exquisite dissection and ridicule by running for President well before he had a record to champion. It's a huge liability in the candidate at the top of the ticket.

Agree with your assessment. (5.00 / 1) (#8)
by alexei on Wed Sep 03, 2008 at 10:59:43 PM EST

It was painful for me to watch since I can't stand the Republicans and Obama has opened the door to such ridicule. This is worse than Kerry.


: Yeah right (5.00 / 1) (#24)
by nalo on Wed Sep 03, 2008 at 11:44:19 PM EST

Obama's got more loyal support than you. Aren't you guys usually complaining that Obama supporters are too fervent? You think a typical speech of Republican lies is actually going to convince people?

I think I found a way around your conclusion. (none / 0) (#38)
by dws3665 on Thu Sep 04, 2008 at 02:57:24 AM EST

Here it is: She was lying, left, right, and center.

Obama's claim for the Presidency is his nomination by the Democratic Party, not some sense of divine right. Exquisite dissection? Honestly, the wishful thinking is getting pretty deep in here.

Obama is not my favorite candidate, nor was he my choice in the primaries. However, this speech by a political non-entity that was full of untruths and petty, snide remarks is not exactly the undoing of the Dem ticket that you seem to be hoping for.


That will be a talking point tomorrow. Along with (5.00 / 2) (#4)
by Angel on Wed Sep 03, 2008 at 10:55:38 PM EST

the line about change making a career or making a career of maing change. Whatever we think of McCain/Palin policy ideals you have to admit that she hit on a lot of themes that will resonate with a lot of people. We need to remember that most of America does not study the issues and are not political junkies like most of us are. This is the age of the "30 second soundbite."

and hopefully . . . (5.00 / 3) (#12)
by A DC Wonk on Wed Sep 03, 2008 at 11:05:10 PM EST

(among subjetcs discussed tomorrow) is that she was in favor the Bridge to Nowhere before she was against it.


She was infavor of it (5.00 / 0) (#15)
by demchick on Wed Sep 03, 2008 at 11:12:47 PM EST

then she learned all the details, after getting elected, and spiked it. That's all they need to say. The people will believe it, and her, after tonight.

Nit picking the speech to death is not going to work. Nor is picking at her record. She is not running for the top of the ticket.


Palin is the one (5.00 / 1) (#19)
by shoephone on Wed Sep 03, 2008 at 11:22:02 PM EST

who is falsely using her so-called opposition to the Bridge to Nowhere as proof that she is a maverick reformer willing to take on her own party. It's a lie. She opened the door and she will have to endure the fact-checkers publicizing the facts.


Actually she lays claim to more (none / 0) (#30)
by hairspray on Thu Sep 04, 2008 at 12:18:47 AM EST

than the bridge story. She sat on an ethics committee for a couple of years and eventually brought down several GOP insiders on corruption. I've read her record and it is a mixed bag, because she has done somethings that I don't consider good, like reducing property taxes while increasing sales taxes as a mayor. Sales taxes are more regressive, but frankly I don't know enough about that. She also said both creation and evolution should be taught in the schools and people should not be afraid to talk about these issues. I agree. But abstinence only programs are not effective and I don't agree with that. She did say that Sex ed would not be taught on her watch. Not good.


Are we sure on the abstinence as sole method? (5.00 / 1) (#35)
by andrys on Thu Sep 04, 2008 at 01:03:23 AM EST

I've read several Dems today say that she has supported contraception and also school ed on contraception as long as they don't have graphic illustrations as they do in some films. She's pushed an abstinence-focused program also, but was it as a sole-method? They say that would be a turnaround, so until I see cites I'm still exploring on this one.

Re creationism, I've seen her own quotes and she's for its being 'discussed' within current courses as one alternative idea.

The thing I'd concentrate on is the extreme use of religion to make decisions for this country, especially war. For the same reason I am not encouraged by Obama's twice-seen now (in film or photo) that he feels he wants to be "the instrument of God's will" -- that doesn't leave me comfortable either.

But she sounds far more restrictive. So, that is what counts for me. To the extent she'd restrict others (and one of her vetos was on funding for care of unwed teenagers), that's a problem for me.


I just read something from gyrfalcon (?) (none / 0) (#36)
by hairspray on Thu Sep 04, 2008 at 01:08:52 AM EST

who explained the issue something like this. Covenant house had been getting 1.2 million and they asked the state for 10 million to build a new facility. The leg gave them 5 mil and Palin cut it down to 4mil, still an increase. Covenant house helps more than just pregnant teens. So not a complete evil witch story.


: hairspray - I admin'd research grants and (none / 0) (#43)
by andrys on Thu Sep 04, 2008 at 07:32:32 AM EST

it's sad that you always need to ask for more than you feel you need in order to get close to what you need... it's such a game.
Thanks for that added info!

what makes it a nit-pick (none / 0) (#29)
by A DC Wonk on Thu Sep 04, 2008 at 12:10:09 AM EST

when it's a flat out lie, and is considered by her to be important enough to repeat it in her very first speech (last week) and again at the convention?


How can this mean much as offensive method (none / 0) (#34)
by andrys on Thu Sep 04, 2008 at 12:57:04 AM EST

if we've seen Obama flip on so many things, the major one being against the FISA bill to the extent he promised to help filibuster it and then he instead voted FOR it ?

He has had enough turnarounds that this tactic will not even begin to work.


McCain (none / 0) (#39)
by dws3665 on Thu Sep 04, 2008 at 02:59:29 AM EST

is the king of pandering flip flops. This is not a winning issue for the GOP. Compared to McCain, Obama is an amateur at flip-flopping.


It's not a winning one for either party. (none / 0) (#44)
by andrys on Thu Sep 04, 2008 at 07:36:18 AM EST

In just 2 months after the nomination, we saw Obama flip flop on a few, in a relatively short political life -- relative to McCain. How can anyone trust either party?


: fair enough (none / 0) (#49)
by dws3665 on Thu Sep 04, 2008 at 09:22:36 AM EST

for me, this is where the candidates' overall world views come into play for me. Yes, so they both flip-flop and pander to get elected. But what is their larger vision of government, their view of humanity and people? What kind of country do they want the US to be? Those are the questions that have influenced my decision making (not that you asked or care!). And it's no contest.

Change change change (5.00 / 3) (#7)
by pixpixpix on Wed Sep 03, 2008 at 10:59:38 PM EST

So which exactly of the Bush Cheney policies and programs do they want to change?

It must be a very long list......

You might have made a bad VP pick, if . . . (5.00 / 1) (#9)
by McCainBush08 on Wed Sep 03, 2008 at 11:01:19 PM EST

A funny Palin take-down:

http://reasonsnottovoteformccain.blogspot.com/2008/09/you-may-have-made-bad-vp-pick-if.html

Did she just say that McCain "doesn't run with Washington lobbyists"?

'Cos he is quite literally running with Washington lobbyists.

Attaching A Name To Legislation (5.00 / 3) (#10)
by JimWash08 on Wed Sep 03, 2008 at 11:04:39 PM EST

means nothing. It's as easy as pulling the "Present" lever.

A quick check on THOMAS will clear up this misconception that he did anything really substantial during those 10 months in the Senate before he dove straight into forming exploratory committee for the presidential run.

My job, among many of my responsibilities, is running a fine-toothed comb through House and Senate legislation, especially those on health care and veterans health. I know sufficiently enough about how much a co-sponsor does in the passage of legislation. There are ways, albeit time-consuming, to determine how much a co-sponsor has contributed to the bill.

Obama and Lugar in 2005 (5.00 / 1) (#21)
by A DC Wonk on Wed Sep 03, 2008 at 11:31:00 PM EST

according to AP: "traveled to Russia, Ukraine and Azerbaijan to examine the former Soviet Union's stockpiles of nuclear, chemical and biological weapons.", etc etc. This was not a case of simply "attaching a name" to legislation.


I just checked via THOMAS too (5.00 / 0) (#25)
by Grace on Wed Sep 03, 2008 at 11:53:02 PM EST

and found he was a cosponsor.

Most of these Lugar Nonproliferation bills come out of the "Nunn-Lugar Act" which was actually a significant piece of legislation authored by Senators Nunn and Lugar.

I'm asking what bills he authored, not cosponsored.


: just because it "came out of" (2.00 / 0) (#28)
by A DC Wonk on Wed Sep 03, 2008 at 11:59:54 PM EST

doesn't mean he didn't author it.
You might want to google Obama-Coburn on ethics legislation.

a quick check with google ... (none / 0) (#17)
by wystler on Wed Sep 03, 2008 at 11:18:02 PM EST

... would clear up any misconceptions that your obfuscation would spread

try this for a starting point: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/01/03/AR2008010303303.html


If she keeps making speeches like that one (5.00 / 2) (#11)
by myiq2xu on Wed Sep 03, 2008 at 11:04:45 PM EST

and the Democrats respond with nit-picky fact-checking, McCain can start measuring the drapes in the White House

Wouldn't want facts (5.00 / 4) (#13)
by TChris on Wed Sep 03, 2008 at 11:09:38 PM EST

to get in the way of the Republican machine.


: i don't think (none / 0) (#16)
by wystler on Wed Sep 03, 2008 at 11:15:44 PM EST

... that her speech tonight will serve to call off the media's dogs. I guess we'll just have to wait and see.

Come on.... (1.00 / 0) (#18)
by Key on Wed Sep 03, 2008 at 11:18:13 PM EST

Simple advertisement:

"There they go again. Lie after lie after lie.

Palin Quote with "LIE" in big bold letters, then "Truth: Obama...."

"7 years of lies from Bush and his friend McCain. America can't afford 4 more years of the same. Lie after lie after lie after lie....."


Governor Palin sounded like a lightweight (5.00 / 1) (#20)
by obamahasmyvote on Wed Sep 03, 2008 at 11:25:13 PM EST

It was difficult to believe that her speech wasn't Tina Fey pretending to be Palin. Nobody in their right mind wants the person who gave that speech anywhere near our Military power.

And Palin LIES. She never said, "Thanks, but no thanks," to The Bridge to Nowhere Funding, she accepted the money.

If a Progressive or Democratic Party supporter can find Palin "impressive", then they belong in the Conservative movement.

Let's put it this way (5.00 / 1) (#33)
by blogtopus on Thu Sep 04, 2008 at 12:56:47 AM EST

Obama is going to be a much easier target for his experience than Kerry was for his military record... and look how effective that approach was.

Any debate will have to be weighted heavily in the GOP's favor before any words are spoken, if only for how effective they have proven to be in the past.

I'm honestly surprised that anyone has to be reminded of this, and I certainly hope the Obama campaign didn't expect anything different.

The gloves are coming off now, folks. Hard two months ahead.

no, a nausea-inducing speech (5.00 / 1) (#45)
by No Blood for Hubris on Thu Sep 04, 2008 at 08:00:25 AM EST

I've been PUMA-ing around for a while, but not after that speech.

Yecch.

McCain/Palin even worse than Bush/Cheney, if you can wrap your mind around that.

Missing the boat completely (5.00 / 1) (#47)
by Jlvngstn on Thu Sep 04, 2008 at 08:44:26 AM EST

How many jobs have been lost this year? How many more this month? How did Palin relate to those who cannot afford gas, in credit debt, losing their homes etc? No denying she was powerful in her speech but to what end? National security and liberal as a dirty word are passe at this point. People are not looking for the blood of democrats, they are looking for jobs and relief. I think the O haters left and right liked the speech, but I think the construction worker who cannot find work because of the housing crisis walked away from that speech wondering when in the hell someone was going to acknowledge him or her. The right and Foxnews continually preach "what recession" as if quoting gdp or exports or ignoring the artificial security the stimulus provided will make americans think that the "recession" is a democratic made up condition. The next three months are going to be a bloodbath economically and McCains camp erred tremendously in taking advantage of that. The fact is that they do not think we are in a recession and the recession and their denials will not only cost them the election but will make them lose it by more than 8%.

Well, Jl, I swear I saw her say something (none / 0) (#52)
by sarcastic unnamed one on Thu Sep 04, 2008 at 12:30:52 PM EST

about Obama wanting to increase taxes and how that won't put gas in your tank or help you pay your mortgage, or something like that.

Not saying that that didn't have some hyperbole in it, but still...


comments in passing (none / 0) (#53)
by Jlvngstn on Thu Sep 04, 2008 at 02:17:36 PM EST

parsed and eclipsed by anger and sarcasm in the face of what is going to be a severe financial downturn (unemployment is at a 5 year high and will be over 6% easily by end of year) fail miserably as addressing the concerns of the people she purports to represent.

She operated from a position of weakness and attempted to disparage the other party without addressing her qualifications, accomplishments or vision for america. Reform, like change without specificity is empty rhetoric. John McCain voted with W 90-95% of the time and is hardly an endorsement for reform.

Selling a plane on Ebay was the most dramatic accomplishment she could convey on her biggest night in front of her biggest audience. Admirable yes, a significant accomplishment?

The media will not give her a free pass and each flub in press conferences will get more air time than Biden's not because of her gender but because of her hubris. This is a different ball game altogether and the press has something to prove here. Campbell Brown took a step in the right direction and others will follow.

Middle america is not that angry about our lack of drilling, they are disgusted with the course of this country. When she begins to tell us what programs she intends to cut and how she is going to shrink the federal gov't, she will begin to speak to middle america. Unfortunately, Reagan and Bush increased the size of gov't and gov't spending and with McCain voting 90-95% with Bush the reform ticket is a gross and manipulative mischaracterization of who they are.


: Well, all good, just saying she did mention it... (none / 0) (#54)
by sarcastic unnamed one on Thu Sep 04, 2008 at 02:33:17 PM EST

TChris, I think these are more ... (none / 0) (#32)
by Robot Porter on Thu Sep 04, 2008 at 12:54:53 AM EST

sensible criticisms of Palin's speech than others I've seen on the site.

But the thing you're missing about the line is the suggestion that Obama is more interested in self-aggrandizing actions (writing books about himself), than political actions to help others.

This is an argument against Obama which I've always found hard to counter. It's one of the reasons I didn't support him in the primaries.

I think Obama's policies will be much better for this country than those of John McCain.

But it's hard to disagree that he isn't also a man who's often placed personal political ambition before helping others or standing strong on issues that matter.

Faith of My Fathers, by John McCain (none / 0) (#40)
by dws3665 on Thu Sep 04, 2008 at 03:07:08 AM EST

They all write books about themselves these days. It's in the playbook.

Seeking the Presidency is, ipso facto, about ego and self-aggrandizement. That's partly why the "she's so ambitious" crap about Hillary was so dishonest. They are ALL ambitious and self-aggrandizing.

If standing strong on issues that matter is your criterion, there is simply no way you can support McCain, who has pandered and reversed himself constantly since he decided that being President was what he wanted (and that the GOP wouldn't nominate an outsider/maverick).

Obama is not the poster child for this trait either, but unwavering consistency is not a McCain characteristic.


Dreams of My Father was published ... (none / 0) (#41)
by Robot Porter on Thu Sep 04, 2008 at 07:12:56 AM EST

in 1995 before Obama's political career began. I believe he was still in Law School when he wrote it. It takes a special kind of chutzpah for a law student to write a personal memoir.

Even Teddy Roosevelt, who I believe is the most prolific author to hold the presidency (and not a man above personal self-aggrandizement), wrote a number of books of history and natural history before essaying his first memoir.

TR also didn't limit his writing to the printed page. When he was in the state legislature he authored more bills than any of his colleagues.


he published that book (5.00 / 1) (#48)
by dws3665 on Thu Sep 04, 2008 at 09:18:03 AM EST

right coincident to his first run for political office. again, part of the playbook (though I agree it's a tad advanced when running for state office). But there you have it: ambition.

They're all ambitious or else they wouldn't be there.


: And his brother-in-law has said (none / 0) (#50)
by sallywally on Thu Sep 04, 2008 at 11:25:42 AM EST

he was already mentioning the presidency then.
I don't have a link but I'll hunt for it.
Obama is a problem. They need to get the Clintons out there big time.
But McCain/Palin is a terrifying ticket. After supporting Clinton since Edwards dropped out, I'm in the race for Obama now. Like the Clintons are.

game changing speech (none / 0) (#42)
by Bornagaindem on Thu Sep 04, 2008 at 07:25:21 AM EST

I might remind you that Obama is what. 47 and he has 2 memoirs while McCain is 72 and has one. The difference is McCain was a war hero and Obama's memoirs are oh gee my mother got knocked up when she was 17 and was forced into a mixed marriage with a Kenyan and I came out- is liberal twaddle. No matter what- McCain being a prisoner of war means he is a hero. I blasted people for belittling Kerry's service and I will do the same if they belittle.

Sarah Palin hit it out of the park yesterday. She is a gifted speaker and had some real zingers that hit home. I woudl never have predicted that I a democrat would watch the republican convention to hear a speech. This a game changer and I think just another nail in the democratic coffin. Thank you Pelosi , Dean , and Donna Brazile.

Alaskan Independence Party (none / 0) (#46)
by bison on Thu Sep 04, 2008 at 08:23:34 AM EST

Was she wearing an Alaskan First Flag pin?

This Clinton supporter (none / 0) (#51)
by sallywally on Thu Sep 04, 2008 at 11:41:52 AM EST

was moved to Obama by her speech and Bill's at the convention. And by Obama's relatively progressive acceptance speech.

And by the choice of Biden, because I am hoping that with the Clintons, as well as Gore and others at the convention, the DNC, having put him out there, are now forcing him to the left.

And they need to get all those folks out there with the progressive message. People who supported Clinton's message in the "low-information, racist" states like mine (Ohio) we can hope will see the difference between Clinton's real progressivism and McCain/Palin's lies about supporting middle class and working folks and the vets, for instance. Health care. Tax cuts. Jobs. Real environmental progress.

Palin is truly frightening. She needs to be exposed, not obsessed on.

This HAS to be about the power of the Dems stances on issues that are critical to this nation. And about the Repubs smears, lies and complete lack of support for all the important issues.

Like the Clintons, I believe we absolutely must elect a Dem this time. No equivocation now that Palin's ... well.... evil has been added to the Repub ticket.