Here's what I think....

Monday, October 20, 2008

The Conservative "Are you with us or against us" mentality

Barack Obama's fight with conservatives can be summed up with a quote from Albert Einstein: "Great spirits have always found violent opposition from mediocrities. The latter cannot understand it when a man does not thoughtlessly submit to hereditary prejudices but honestly and courageously uses his intelligence." The prevailing attitude of the vocal conservative movement in this country has been that intelligence is elitism. Barack Obama is called an elitist because he is an ivy league graduate, a former college professor, and supports progressive policies. Ignoring the fact that President George W. Bush holds an MBA from the same ivy-league institution Senator Obama attended, the GOP has labeled Obama as an intellecual elitist who can't possibly know how to govern middle America. What the GOP fails to mention is that Obama came from modest means, and was able to better himself and work his way into the living room of Americans using brains, hard work, and resourcefulness.

In other words, Barack Obama symbolizes the American dream. His story tells any child who has a rough start in life, due to the choices their parents made, can overcome any circumstance and fulfill any dream, no matter how large.

Senator Obama did not have a name like Bush or Kennedy to give him a hand up. He did not marry an heiress to finance his lifestyle and support his family while he ran for office. John W. Dean, former counsel to the President, summed it up by saying,

"Ironically, Obama has done exactly what conservatives preach: pulled himself up to the top by his own hard work, and taken advantages of his God-given gifts. He was not only president (in essence, editor-in-chief) of the prestigious Harvard Law Review – an exceptional accomplishment for any Harvard Law student, but also the first African- American ever to hold the post. Yet this is just one of many distinctions that will be used as evidence of his elitism. "

Is Obama an elitist because he was a lawyer? Are conservative doctors and lawyers elitist as well? These are questions we should ask ourselves and our neighbors - try to provoke thought and challenge these stereotypes as presented by either party.

Failing to question the failures of the most recent conservative President and Congressmen are why the Republican Party is struggling to maintain control of their most historically reliable supporters. Conservative pundits rarely question actions of their representatives in government in public; to do so is to betray the Republican Party. When Kathleen Parker, a well-known conservative columnist, correctly suggested in late September that Sarah Palin should respectfully bow out of the race so as to not be a liability to the McCain campaign because she was not qualified to be president, she recieved over 11,000 e-mails from conservatives that berated her for being a traitor. Christopher Buckley, son of William Buckley, endorsed Obama and had to subsequently resign his post at his late father's conservative magazine - a resignation that was happily accepted.

The most recent public figure that has acknowledged the failures of the Republican party is perhaps the most shocking and the most extreme. Colin Powell, a four-star Republican general and former Secretary of State, was for years billed as a race-neutral public official who could be relied on to legitimize conservative policies because of his wealth of experience and superior intellect. The same thought process that was accepted and respected for years by conservatives is now being dismissed and criticized because he's publicly questioned the Republican campaign strategy, economic policy, and vice-presidential selection and endorsed a Democrat. High visibility conservatives immediately went to the race card - Powell's concise, detailed, and thoughtful endorsement was dismissed as simply one black man supporting another.

Are Parker, Buckley and Powell traitors? Ronald Reagan said "Don't be afraid to see what you see." Perhaps it's ok to see what you see as long as you don't say anything that contradicts the current party talking points. Are they less American today because they've acknowledged the Republican Party is not the same party they've supported and believed in? These public figures have reached across the aisle for what they see as the best direction for their country. Conservative pundits have questioned their patriotism, credibility, and motives for doing so publicly. I'd contend they're exhibiting the type of integrity that our country was founded on. Had early British settlers not questioned their government, America wouldn't be the great nation it is today. It is the appreciation of free thought and honest rebellion that allows America to constantly change into the country it needs to be to allow the best security and quality of life possible for the very citizens that refuse to question it. Does questioning your party make you a traitor or a patriot? Those who have the courage to speak up to those who are hurting our country for political gain knowing they'll be ostracized for doing so are the most patriotic, in my opinion.

Friday, October 17, 2008

Why isn't Fox News reporting voter fraud in Republican states?

This article appeared in the Houston Chronicle last week. All I'll say about it is that Waller County is heavily Republican. The county itself has admitted breaking federal law in denying Prarie View A&M students voter registration cards based on non-essential information being filled out "correctly." Prarie View, for those of you who don't know, is a predominantly black college. So - is it only voter fraud in swing states or states that go democrat? There's another example after this lengthy article - so keep reading.

Waller County admits voter error
If court agrees, Prairie View A&M students' forms must be processed
By CINDY GEORGECopyright 2008 Houston Chronicle
Oct. 10, 2008, 11:17PM

Waller County officials acknowledged in court papers that they rejected voter registration applications from Prairie View A&M University students through practices the U.S. Justice Department described as violations of federal laws.

Justice officials filed suit in Houston federal court Thursday against the county and Waller Registrar Ellen C. Shelburne. The complaint, alleging voting and civil rights violations, was followed by a consent decree to settle the case.
The agreement must be approved by a panel of three federal judges.

The lawsuit stems from voting changes the county made in 2007 without the required federal clearance. The county's new rules included refusing any application the registrar's staff deemed incomplete. Most of those registrations were filed by students who attend PVAMU, a historically black college.

Under Texas law, a person cannot be denied the right to vote because of a registration error or omission if it is not material to the person's qualification to cast a ballot.

According to the consent decree, Waller County officials rejected applications without a ZIP code and registrations that weren't filed on the most current form.

The county has seven days to re-process voter registrations rejected since 2007. Applicants who meet the requirements of state law and are not registered elsewhere will be able to vote in the Nov. 4 general election.

Houston attorney Debra Mergle, who represents the county and Shelburne, said she didn't know how many voters might be added to the county's roll as a result of the decree.
"I don't anticipate there will be very many at all," she said.

But Waller Justice of the Peace DeWayne Charleston estimates that the county's review will turn up several hundred voters who were illegally left off voting lists.

"The Justice Department has given validity to the fact that many students were denied the right to register to vote," said Charleston, a critic of the county's voting practices.

"That the county owned up to it lends credence to our rush to try to slow down that Waller bond election because the Waller County rolls were not legitimate."

A $49 million Waller ISD school construction bond passed by 300 votes in May 2007. Charleston estimates 200 to 300 potential voters, mostly PVAMU students, were illegally rejected prior to that vote.

Shelburne, the county tax assessor who also serves as voting registrar, was sued in her official capacity. Neither she nor County Judge Owen Ralston could be reached for comment.
Section 5 of the 1965 Voting Rights Act requires certain local governments, including Waller County, and some states, including Texas, to get federal approval before changing voting procedures. Created to remedy documented discrimination, the provision requires a jurisdiction to prove that election changes do not have the intent or effect of discriminating against minority voters.

Waller County's voting age population is 52 percent white and 31 percent black, according to the federal lawsuit.

"By promptly agreeing to settle this matter, the county has demonstrated a commitment to addressing past problems and to complying with federal law in the future," Grace Chung Becker, acting assistant attorney general for the Justice Department's civil rights division, said in a news release.

The agreement also requires Waller County officials to hold voting registrar training on the Prairie View campus and conduct voter registration drives at the campus student center.
Special monitoring of Waller County's voting practices lasts through Dec. 31, 2012.

The county has faced numerous voting rights lawsuits over the last 30 years and is under a criminal probe by Texas Attorney General Greg Abbott.

The following article appeared in the Texas Observer. You can verify this information by simply googling "escapees rainbow rd texas" and you'll find the official website.

..TR>
Oct 3, 2008 -- The Texas Observer: The Winnebago VoteHow 12,000 RVers tilt East Texas elections.By: Forrest Wilder

In a place called Rainbow's End, amid towering East Texas pines and hulking Winnebagos, sits an unremarkable, gray-brick building that is home to the biggest and most influential voting bloc in ..:namespace prefix = st1 ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:smarttags" />Polk County. No one actually lives at 100 Rainbow Drive, but the building hosts 12,000 registered voters.
The 10,000-square-foot building houses a massive mail-forwarding service, the largest in the nation. The service is geared toward recreational vehicle enthusiasts and allows them to receive mail—and vote by mail in Polk County elections—from wherever they happen to be. Known as the Escapees, the mostly white-haired RV owners have—in theory at least—exchanged fixed abodes for a life zipping across America in mobile mansions. These 12,000 overwhelmingly Republican voters—some of whom have never even set foot in the area—have helped erode what was once a stronghold of yellow dog Democrats deep in the Piney Woods of Texas. To some, the operation allows the Escapees to enjoy life on the open road. To critics, it is voter fraud on a grand scale.

The ballot-mailing service is run by Escapees Inc., a family owned business that operates eight RV parks around the country, including its headquarters at Rainbow's End RV Park outside Livingston, about 80 miles northeast of Houston. This 140-acre, deluxe RV park boasts a swimming pool, more than 150 RV lots, a clubhouse, library, even an adult day-care center. Only a couple hundred souls live here. Some Escapees make annual pilgrimages; others have never so much as peeled out in East Texas. They hail from Kansas, California, wherever, yet they're all considered Livingston "locals" who vote in Polk County elections by mail ballots forwarded to them from the warehouse at 100 Rainbow.

The state of Texas, with its notorious residency requirements, recognizes the Escapees as Polk County residents even though many have never been here. In fact, they need only enter Texas once—to get driver's licenses—to become residents.

Some Escapees aren't even full-time RVers. They own homes elsewhere, spend seasons in other states (Arizona and California are popular), and though technically Texas residents, probably couldn't tell a bluebonnet from a bluebird. What Escapees have escaped from is a state income tax, which is levied in 43 states, but not in Texas.

The Escapees account for more than 30 percent of registered voters in Polk County, giving them significant sway over who gets elected to county and even state legislative offices.

The cache of mail order voters has long irked some local Democrats, who accuse the group of distorting East Texas politics. They filed an ultimately unsuccessful legal challenge in 2000 to strip the Escapees from the Polk County voting rolls. With Texas Republicans talking tough about cracking down on voter fraud, some Democrats say the Escapees operation warrants new attention and even an investigation.

Angie Carr is the executive director of Escapees Inc. (Motto: "Adventure Awaits. It's Time to Escape."). A prim woman with long, reddish hair who married into this third-generation business, Carr leads me on a tour of the mail warehouse. This is, in essence, where the 12,000 voters "live." Hobbled on crutches from an injury she sustained on a recent RV road trip, Carr proudly shows off the highly efficient operation.

Each morning at 9 a.m., an 18-wheeler postal truck bypasses the Livingston post office to deliver mail directly to the Escapees, who have their own zip code. In the back room, a sophisticated machine sorts the mail (2 million pieces every year). Meanwhile, 40 employees are busy answering phones, filing mail, and readying packages to be forwarded all over the world. Thousands of folders—one for each Escapee account—fill three separate rooms. Each folder represents a unique address, with a Rainbow Drive street address that doesn't exist and personal mailbox number. That address appears next to the voter's name on the voter rolls and on the Texas driver's licenses of residents.

None of these addresses actually exists—there are no buildings to be found. Yet these "paper" addresses allow Escapees to register and vote by mail in Polk County, whether they're in East Texas or touring through Maine.

The mailroom is the hub of the Escapees' voting system, the intermediary for registration applications and ballots moving between government and voter.

State law mandates—with some exceptions—that an absentee ballot must be sent out of county. For this reason, Carr maintains a post office box in Shepherd, a small town 15 miles south in neighboring San Jacinto County. The box's sole purpose is to receive ballots mailed by the county clerk a few miles up the road from Rainbow's End. An Escapees employee periodically picks up the ballots in Shepherd and drives them back to the mailroom, where they are processed and mailed to Escapees around the world.

It's an impressive, if jury-rigged, operation, and its impact may be widening. With a presidential election less than two months away, the flow of applications for mail ballots has picked up dramatically—some 200 to 300 each day, according to the county clerk's office.

Carr is proud of the operation her family has built. "We started out with a file cabinet," she says of the mail service's inception in 1985. How did her business come to this strange state of affairs? "I assume, like everything else in our business, it arose from a need," Carr says.

Later, Carr's mother-in-law and Escapees CEO Cathie Carr tells me: "We're not just paper. We are real people."

To Sharon and Dennis Teal, Livingston Democrats, the idea that the Escapees are legitimate Polk County residents and voters defies common sense. "I don't know what your idea of a permanent resident is, but it's not someone who visits once every nine years," Dennis Teal says over a dinner of fried catfish at a Livingston restaurant. "They have no vested interest in this community other than to use it to avoid paying a state income tax."

Buck Wood, an Austin election-law attorney who mainly represents Democrats, estimates—based on interviews he and his staff did with about 100 Escapees—that roughly half the members have never been to Rainbow's End. "That is deadly," he says. "You cannot register [to vote] in a place you've never been." Only about 10 percent, he contends, are even full-time RVers, people so committed to the RV lifestyle that they no longer rent or own a home. (A cross-check of Polk County voter rolls and out-of-state property records confirms that at least several Escapees members own homes or RV lots in other states.)

Cathie Carr, who calls Sharon Teal "vicious" and "irritating," insists that most Escapees are plugged into Polk County, serving on juries, volunteering in the community, and attending church services. "These people are the very people you would want in your community," Carr says. "Just because they choose to travel the majority of their time is no reason to shun them or exclude them from voting." Individuals who have never been to Polk County are "very rare," she says.

In 2000, attorney Wood represented several local Democrats in an unsuccessful challenge to the Escapees' residency status. The case, which bounced among three courts, was carefully tracked by both parties. In that election, control of the Texas Senate—where Republicans held a one-vote majority—had come down to a single, nasty East Texas contest between Republican Todd Staples (now agriculture commissioner) and Democrat Todd Fisher. Staples accused Fisher and the Democratic Party of orchestrating the lawsuit to bump reliable Republicans out of the election. In the end, a three-judge panel of the federal Fifth Circuit shot down the residency challenge and allowed the Escapees to vote. Staples won the election by a landslide, and the RVers' votes were not decisive.

After the election, Wood filed another suit contesting the results of a county commissioner's race in which Democrat-turned-Republican Bob Willis bested incumbent Democrat B.E. "Slim" Speights by almost 2,800 votes. In that race, the Escapees votes proved critical, favoring Willis 4-1. Willis had previously served as the tax assessor-collector—an office that includes voter registration duties—and had rallied to the Escapees' defense. Wood and Speights sought to overturn the election results by proving that the Escapees were not legitimate residents of Polk County.

In part, the case hinged on the definition of residence. The election code refers to residence as a "fixed place of habitation to which one intends to return after any temporary absence." In depositions Wood collected, some voters testified they had never been to Rainbow's End, and that they owned homes in other states and had no clear intentions of ever living in Polk County. But a 2-1 majority of a state appeals court sided with Willis, ruling that Wood had failed to show the individual circumstances and intentions of the more than 5,000 absentee voters. The majority also noted that county officials had allowed Escapees to register and vote at the fictitious Rainbow Drive addresses for years.

Wood, on the other hand, dwells on the cases he lost. He quotes a bit of election lawyer wisdom: "If you're gonna steal an election, steal it big ... You can contest an election where there are 10 illegal votes or 20 or 50, but once it gets much bigger than that, it's impossible."

At the 4 p.m. social hour in the comfy Rainbow's End clubhouse, partisan politics is the last thing on anyone's mind. About 20 RVers have gathered to tell bad RV jokes (Have you heard the one about the guy who thought he had won a Winnebago from one of those peel-off tab contests?—turns out he had "won a bagel") and discuss movies ("All I remember about Braveheart is Mel Gibson's bare tush"). As it turns out, most of the attendees are part of the small percentage of Escapees who actually live at Rainbow's End. Politicians campaign for their support, and they vote at a real polling place. They are a proud, friendly group. Dottie Piercy, a young-looking 83-year-old with bright blue eyes, explains the appeal of Rainbow's End. "I live here as a widow," she says. "I feel safe. I have friends here, and the ones who don't [live here] come through and see me." A woman wearing a jaunty hat walks into the room carrying an Obama-Biden sign. A man wearing a U.S. Navy cap boos lustily. Everyone laughs. This is a real community, real politics, but what about the rest of those 12,000 voters who aren't here? The Teals view the Escapees as interlopers who have artificially shifted the area's political balance toward the GOP.
There is evidence to support this assertion. The 12,000 registered Escapees—up from 9,000 eight years ago—account for 30 percent of the county's registered voters, certainly enough to tilt the balance in close races. Roughly two-thirds of them vote Republican, often straight-ticket. In 2004, Republican John Otto beat the Democratic incumbent, three-term state Rep. Dan Ellis of Livingston, by a little more than 1,400 votes in Polk County. If you took the Escapees out of the equation, Ellis would have won the county by more than 500 votes. Otto would have been elected anyway because of his advantage elsewhere in the district, but the Teals say the Escapees machine poses real hurdles for Democratic candidates.

Arlan Foster, a long-shot Democratic candidate to unseat Otto and president of the Correctional Employees Union, AFSCME Council 7, sees the problem from a candidate's perspective.
"It's hard to take a pulse on a voter that lives out of state and you can't communicate with," Foster says. "From my standpoint, I believe the job description is in the job title—state representative means just that—you represent the people. How can I represent someone in Illinois who's never been to Texas? And what would I be doing for that person?"

The Escapees effect is even more measurable at the local level. Since Reconstruction, no Republican had held a local office until Willis won a seat on the county commissioner's court in 2000. Since 2002, six other local Democratic officials have switched to run as Republicans.
"What Democratic officials we have here are scared to death of this thing," Dennis Teal says. "The Democrats are frustrated because they know the system is rigged."

That may be so, but other elected Democrats in town seem to have made peace with the Escapees, if only out of fear, perhaps, of provoking them.

"You learn to do your job and do it well as you can," says Marion "Bid" Smith, the Democratic tax assessor-collector, whose duties include registering voters. "You make sure to provide services in their favor."

Benny Fogleman, the county Republican chairman, is more than happy with the Teals' assault on the Escapees. "Sharon's been very good for the Republican Party," he says. "I could have never brought the party to where we are without her."

Among some Democrats, though, the Escapees represent the one type of "voter fraud" that Texas Republicans are willing to tolerate.

Since 2005, Texas Attorney General Greg Abbott has spent millions criminally prosecuting Democratic Party activists, almost all minorities, for infractions such as not including their signatures and addresses on the backs of ballots they mailed for senior citizens (see "Vote by Mail, Go to Jail," April 18, 2008).

In a lawsuit against the state of Texas that was settled in May, Gerry Hebert, an attorney with the Campaign Legal Center, represented several of the Democratic activists whom Abbott had prosecuted. One of the provisions the state had used against the activists made it a crime to possess the mail ballot of another voter. Another stipulated that the ballot envelopes had to include the helper's signature.

The Escapees' mail-forwarding service involves the possession of thousands of ballots. The envelopes aren't signed.

"It just struck me as odd that you would have the AG taking a somewhat inconsistent approaches to two different groups of people," Hebert says. The case was settled before Hebert could raise the issue in a trial. But he contends that Republican attorneys general have a track record of protecting the Escapees.

Hebert cites a letter from Andy Taylor, then an assistant attorney general, to Cathie Carr. Taylor represented the state of Texas in the 2000 litigation. In the November 2000 letter, Taylor thanks Carr for a "monogrammed polo shirt and honorary membership into the Escapees," and confesses that he has "felt sorry for you and your fellow RVers during this controversy—you have been treated like pawns in a political chess game."

Last year, Republicans in the Texas Legislature came within one vote of passing legislation that would have required voters to present picture identification at the polls, a measure that Democrats contend would present unwarranted hurdles for low-income and minority voters. The measure is likely to be taken up again next year.

Wood compares the Escapees to the Chicken Ranch, a brothel near La Grange that operated in the open for nearly 70 years. "It was illegal, but everyone said, 'so what.' No one did anything about it. The situation with the Escapees in Polk County is the same thing ... If the Democrats had an operation like that, the attorney general would be down there tomorrow, and everybody would be indicted."

Random funny observations

My sister and I went to see the Texans vs. the Dolphins Sunday. Good game. Nice to see the Texans win. Sorry, James.

Reliant Energy and the Houston Texans might want to re-think how they name their promotional items. I'll have a picture soon to back this up (upload it, Casey!).
Seen on jumbotron several times throughout Sunday's game:

"White Power Towels provited by Reliant Energy."
'nuff said.

Second funny observation - although it's more sad than funny.

Hank Williams Jr. opened for Sarah Palin at a rally over the weekend. He didn't sing "If the South Would have Won, We'd've had it made." That would have been too obvious.

Labels:

Texas Obama Supporter has Vehicle Vandalized with Dirty Diaper

I live in Texas. I was born in Texas. Educated in Texas. The major events of my life all took place in Texas. The formation of my beliefs; prejudices; hopes; all from Texas. Got it?

I have never been so disgusted with the way of thinking in this state.

After years of reading, learning, watching truth vs. talking points, I've decided that I'm a democrat. I am voting for Barack Obama. Republicans had complete control and their policies FAILED. Period.

After watching tactics by the McCain campaign I personally find reprehensible and IGNORANT, I decided to finally place the Obama '08 sticker I recieved in MARCH from my brother onto my vehicle.

One week later, I came out to my car to find a URINE FILLED DEPENDS DIAPER under my windshield.

Coincidence? My car is the only car in the 'hood with my Obama sticker on it.

Could be a coincidence. Sure.

So, two days later, another URINE FILLED DEPENDS DIAPER is under my windshield again.

What the HELL is wrong with ignorant ass people that think because I support Obama for president I deserve TWO piss diapers on my truck?!

Those of you that support McCain, buy into the Ayers BS (and turn your head away from the Keating 5) please tell me how this tactic is supposed to change my vote?

I have kids in my house. How would my 7 year old have felt if she'd seen that? Thank GOD she didn't.

I am NOT intimidated. You can kiss my Obama - loving - ass.

I used to be proud to be a Texan. After listening to enough Hannity and Rush and watching some Fox News I am disgusted that a propaganda machine and a campaign that encourages this type of behavior through political rallies that allow "kill him" and "terrorist" and "off with his head" to be shouted into the television that is given any credibility as an actual campaign.

You can never say you sympathize with modern prejudice until you've seen it. Now I know why black people believe prejudices are so prevalent. Because I wasn't racist I didn't really understand and had an overall optimistic view of our country's beliefs. But to be harrassed like this because I support a Democrat, or a black nominee, is ignorant, sad, and you who identify with this party should be horribly ashamed of your like-minded-Texans.

Labels:

Enough spin and lies, McCain

Originally posted early September on my myspace blog. Enjoy, it's long!

Let me begin by stating my opinions clearly and succinctly. I will give supporting information, supported by factcheck.org and snopes.com. McCain has shown he is not qualified to be an honorable, honest public servant by refusing to talk about issues and by flat out lying time and time again in this campain to the American people. Palin has also continually lied, albeit at the behest of McCain's campaign managers - even after her lies have been proven, she has still repeated them. Obama has tried again and again to take the high road; ignoring most of the lies and trying to keep the campaign on the issues. I will also be searching for information regarding misleading ads by Obama to be fair in this blog. This will be long, biased towards Obama (although how anything honest and fair couldn't lean towards Obama fails me). I would love to hear other opinions and comments, but please keep them clean and fair.

Let me also begin with a short political history of my personal beliefs - so that you see I'm not just some yellow dog democrat. I always vote the candidate who will be best for the country in my opinion. In 2000, the first election I was of age to exercise my voting privilege, I voted for George H. W. Bush. He was a wonderful governor of Texas. I had personally benefited from his policies; he made health care affordable for my daughter when I was a single mother, he funded schools in a manner that made my entry to college easier, and overall, did the right thing for the state. In 2004, I voted for Kerry. The reason behind that was simply a vote against Bush. I knew, even then, that Bush was leading our country down an economic path that would lead us into really hard times. Unfortunately, I was correct. I am personally pro-life, pro-gun (to a point), pro-death penalty. I am all about fiscal conservatism. Above all, I advocate a smart fiscal policy that keeps taxes as low as they can be, spending low, and eliminates deficits.

So why am I not voting Republican?

I'll start issue by issue, gaff by gaff, misstatement by misstatement.

1) McCain's ad on Iran.

"Obama says Iran is a "tiny" country, "doesn't pose a serious threat." Terrorism, destroying Israel, those aren't "serious threats"?"

Obama's actual words: Strong countries and strong presidents talk to their adversaries. That's what Kennedy did with Khrushchev. That's what Reagan did with Gorbachev. That's what Nixon did with Mao. I mean think about it. Iran, Cuba, Venezuela – these countries are tiny compared to the Soviet Union. They don't pose a serious threat to us the way the Soviet Union posed a threat to us. And yet we were willing to talk to the Soviet Union at the time when they were saying we're going to wipe you off the planet.

From factcheck.com: "
Obama didn't say Iran is tiny – except in comparison to the once-huge Soviet Union. Iran's population is estimated to be about 72.2 million by the Population Reference Bureau. Iran's own statistics put it at 70,495,782 in 2006-2007. Either way, that's about one-fourth of the 270 million people estimated to be living in the U.S.S.R. in 1982, according to various sources.
Nor did he say Iran doesn't pose a serious threat, except in comparison to the former Soviet Union. And that's a fact. "


I'll take your attention back to McCains claim that "destroying Israel.. those aren't serious threats?"

Obama's words on Iran on June 4: "The Iranian regime supports violent extremists and challenges us across the region. It pursues a nuclear capability that could spark a dangerous arms race and raise the prospect of a transfer of nuclear know-how to terrorists. Its president denies the Holocaust and threatens to wipe Israel off the map. The danger from Iran is grave, it is real, and my goal will be to eliminate this threat."

FactCheck.orgs summary of this ad: "By separating Obama's words from their context, and from his other comments on the subject, McCain's ad distorts Obama's stated views on Iran. "

I agree. This is one of the "spins". I won't call it a lie. We'll get to those shortly.

2) There have been four ads by McCain talking about Obama's tax policy.

The first ad said Obama once voted for a tax increase on people making $42K a year. The ad showed a woman with two children. According to factcheck.org, the tax increase would have been $15 a year for a single person making $42K and the mother with two children in the ad wouldn't have had an increase unless she made over $62K a year. Plus, it's not part of his proposed tax plan now. So it's a spin (not a lie) but a moot point and very misleading. How's that for honorable?

I'll just copy factcheck.org's review of the second ad instead of paraphrasing it for you: A Spanish-language radio ad claims the measure Obama supported would have raised taxes on "families" making $42,000, which is simply false. Even a single mother with one child would have been able to make $58,650 without being affected. A family of four with income up to $90,000 would not have been affected. Again, let me point out this is not part of his current tax plan either.

McCain's third ad, as presented by factcheck: The TV ad claims in a graphic that Obama would "raise taxes on middle class." In fact, Obama's plan promises cuts for middle-income taxpayers and would increase rates only for persons with family incomes above $250,000 or with individual incomes above $200,000.

So...that one's a blatant lie.

Fourth ad, as presented by factcheck: The radio ad claims Obama would increase taxes "on the sale of your home." In fact, home-sale profits of up to $500,000 per couple would continue to be exempt from capital gains taxes.

If you sell a home over $500,000 as a married couple, you now pay a tax rate of 15% on gains over $500,000. After 2010, based on the Bush tax cuts that McCain supports anyway, the capital gains tax above that $500,000 threshold ($250,000 for non-married) will be raised to 20%. According to the L.A. Times and BarackObama.com, Obama will raise the capital gains tax to 20%. So... McCain put out an ad that slams Obama for using the same plan he's supporting. So, if you are so fortunate as to have a home that you bought for $100,000, and it sells for $700,000, you've made a $600,000 profit. $500,000 is non-taxable. Of the remaining $100,000 that is taxable, you'll pay $20,000 in taxes regardless of whether you vote for Obama or McCain. So a $20,000 tax bill on a $600,000 profit amounts to a 3.3% tax rate.

Yes, it's confusing. That's why McCain thinks he can get away with lying to us about it. It's working, as most blogs I've seen talk again and again about Obama raising our taxes.

Now here's the DOOZY! Ready?

McCain ad: "
Crowd: Obama, Obama…
Announcer: Take away the crowds, the chants. All that's left are costly words. Barack Obama and out of touch congressional leaders have expensive plans. Billions in government spending, years of deficits, no balanced budgets, and painful tax increases on working American families. They're ready to tax, ready to spend, but not ready to lead."

FactCheck.org: The ad says Obama and "out of touch Congressional leaders" plan to implement "painful tax increases on working American families," and it shows an image of a family presumably upset about an impending tax increase. But, as we've reported numerous times, Obama proposes a tax cut for the vast majority of households.
Len Berman, director of the nonpartisan Urban-Brookings Tax Policy Center, which has produced one of the most authoritative analyses of the two candidates' tax plans. When we asked him if Obama's claim that he would "cut taxes for 95 percent of all working families" was true, Berman told FactCheck.org that it was "consistent with our estimates." Overall, the TPC found that
Obama's plan would produce a tax cut for 81.3 percent of all households, and a cut for 95.5 percent of all households with children.Under Obama's plan, the TPC estimates that people (or couples) making between $37,595 and $66,354 a year would see an average savings of $1,118 on their taxes.
Here's the best part!!!!!!!Under
McCain's plan, on the other hand, those same individuals would save $325 on average — $793 less than the average savings under Obama's plan.

Ok, so I think I've successfully debunked the McCain tax myths about both himself and Obama. Just for fun, I'll allow to McCain to defend why he got all that stuff wrong. McCain: "[the] issue of economics is not something I've understood as well as I should"

Lets move on to the Republican Convention.

Cl.. Lieberman said Obama had never reached across party lines to accomplish anything significant.

Verdict: Lie. Obama worked with Sen. Tom Coburn and Dick Lugar to pass laws enhancing government transparancy (ie trying to prevent cover-ups) and "curtailing the proliferation of nuclear and conventional weapons."

Cl.. Thompson said he would bring "one of the largest tax increases in American history."
Verdict: Lie. See above tax claims.

Cl.. Obama voted against funding for Iraq war.

Verdict: Spin. The only vote Obama ever made against a war funding bill came after the version of the bill Obama supported was vetoed (McCain supported the Veto but never showed up to vote on the bill). I love this line from factcheck.org: "Based on those facts, it would be literally true to say that 'McCain urged a veto of funding for our troops.' But that would be oversimplified to the point of being seriously misleading." And the same goes for Lieberman's claim at the convention.

On to night three of the convention!

Factcheck.org:
Palin may have said "Thanks, but no thanks" on the Bridge to Nowhere, though not until Congress had pretty much killed it already. But that was a sharp turnaround from the position she took during her gubernatorial campaign, and the town where she was mayor received lots of earmarks during her tenure. "The window is now," she wrote, "while our congressional delegation is in a strong position to assist." (ie, while we have Republicans in office who will send us this money) It was only after she won the governorship that Palin shifted her position. And even then, it's inaccurate to say that she "told the Congress 'thanks, but no thanks.'" Palin accepted non-earmarked money from Congress that could have been used for the bridge if she so desired. That she opted to use it for other state transportation purposes doesn't qualify as standing up to Congress. My addition: She kept the money for other Alaska highway projects. While writing a check to citizens of Alaska for $3200 each. McCain himself said recently that that bridge to nowhere money could have prevented the 35W collapse had the funding gone where it was actually needed.

Palin's accusation that Obama hasn't authored "a single major law or even a reform" in the U.S. Senate or the Illinois Senate is simply not a fair assessment. Obama has helped push through major ethics reforms in both bodies, for example.

Giuliani distorted the time line and substance of Obama's statements about the conflict between Russia and Georgia. In fact, there was much less difference between his statements and those of McCain than Giuliani would have had us believe.

Giuliani also said McCain had been a fighter pilot. Actually, McCain's plane was the A-4 Skyhawk, a small bomber. It was the only plane he trained in or flew in combat, according to McCain's own memoir.

Finally, Huckabee told conventioneers and TV viewers that Palin got more votes when she ran for mayor of Wasilla than Biden did running for president. Not even close. The tally: Biden, 79,754, despite withdrawing from the race after the Iowa caucuses. Palin, 909 in her 1999 race, 651 in 1996.

Now I'll be fair. Here's the Dem's convention spins. Fortunately, they didn't blatantly lie. But they did spin a bit.

Obama said he could "pay for every dime" of his spending and tax cut proposals "by closing corporate loopholes and tax havens." That's wrong – his proposed tax increases on upper-income individuals are key components of paying for his program, as well. And his plan, like McCain's, would leave the U.S. facing big budget deficits, according to independent experts. Is it wrong for me to be just happy he plans on finding SOME of the money he needs to pay for this stuff? I'd prefer him to find ALL of it...

He twisted McCain's words about Afghanistan, saying, "When John McCain said we could just 'muddle through' in Afghanistan, I argued for more resources." Actually, McCain said in 2003 we "may" muddle through, and he recently also called for more troops there. My addition: The day after Obama called for two more combat brigades in Afghanistan, McCain called for three.

Obama asked why McCain would "define middle-class as someone making under five million dollars a year"? Actually, McCain meant that comment as a joke, getting a laugh and following up by saying, "But seriously ..." My addition: I saw the comment, and it was a joke. He then failed to answer the original question "what constitutes the middle class" by giving a feel-good answer of "it's not money that makes us rich, it's family and love". He's yet to answer the "middle class" question.

Obama noted that McCain's health care plan would "tax people's benefits" but didn't say that it also would provide up to a $5,000 tax credit for families (although a normal health insurance policy is about $12K)

Obama also pulled some sleight of hand when he stated that "the average American family" saw its income "go down $2,000" under George Bush. That's not correct. Census figures show average family income went down $348. My addition: I'm appalled that average income went down $348 in eight years! Productivity has gone up and wages have gone down!? As the dollar loses value, adjust that number with inflation, gas, and energy costs and I'm sure $2000 is closer to the real number.

Now it's McCain's turn. Here we go with his acceptance speech:

Cl.. Obama's health care plan would "force small businesses to cut jobs" and would put "a bureaucrat ... between you and your doctor."

Verdict: Lie. In fact, the plan exempts small businesses, and those who have insurance now could keep the coverage they have.

Cl.. McCain attacked Obama for voting for "corporate welfare" for oil companies.

Verdict: Blatant Lie. In fact, the bill Obama voted for raised taxes on oil companies by $300 million over 11 years while providing $5.8 billion in subsidies for renewable energy, energy efficiency and alternative fuels.

So we've got an absolute liar and flip-flopper in McCain (does anyone else remember when he almost left his party to become a Democrat in 2000???? IF that isn't flip flopping what is?) with a VP candidate who is currently under investigation for abuse of power (and just got her first passport in 2007- how's that for foreign policy experience). UPDATE: it's been concluded she abused said power.

On the other hand, we've got a candidate who's trying his damndest to actually talk about issues while taking the high road about all of these attacks and a VP candidate with 36 years of foreign policy experience. Why isn't McCain failing in the polls? UPDATE: McCain is failing in the polls! Yeha!!!

Please don't tell me it's because Obama is black. Please. Please. Please.

Labels: , , , ,

Why lying about something on factcheck.org is a bad idea.

Originally posted on my MySpace blog on September 11, 2001:


McCain-Palin Distorts Our Finding
September 10, 2008
Those attacks on Palin that we debunked didn't come from Obama.
Summary
A McCain-Palin ad has FactCheck.org calling Obama's attacks on Palin "completely false" and "misleading." That's what we said, but it wasn't about Obama.Our article criticized anonymous e-mail falsehoods and bogus claims about Palin posted around the Internet. We have no evidence that any of the claims we found to be false came from the Obama campaign.The McCain-Palin ad also twists a quote from a Wall Street Journal columnist. He said the Obama camp had sent a team to Alaska to "dig into her record and background." The ad quotes the WSJ as saying the team was sent to "dig dirt."Update, Sept. 10: Furthermore, the Obama campaign insists that no researchers have been sent to Alaska and that the Journal owes them a correction.
Analysis
We don't object to people reprinting our articles. In fact, our copyright policy encourages it. But we've also asked that "the editorial integrity of the article be preserved" and told those who use our items that "you should not edit the original in such a way as to alter the message."
McCain-Palin 2008 Ad:"Fact Check"Announcer: The attacks on Governor Palin have been called "completely false"..."misleading."On screen: Photo of Obama, FactCheck.org banner, "'completely false' . . . 'misleading' 9/0/08"And, they've just begun.The [Wall Street] Journal reports Obama "air-dropped a mini-army of 30 lawyers, investigators and opposition researchers" into Alaska to dig dirt on Governor Palin.As Obama drops in the polls, he'll try to destroy her.Obama's "politics of hope"? Empty words.McCain: I'm John McCain and I approved this message.
Less Than HonestWith its latest ad, released Sept. 10, the McCain-Palin campaign has altered our message in a fashion we consider less than honest. The ad strives to convey the message that FactCheck.org said "completely false" attacks on Gov. Sarah Palin had come from Sen. Barack Obama. We said no such thing. We have yet to dispute any claim from the Obama campaign about Palin. My comment: Because Obama doesn't seem to be a blatant liar. They call the ad "Fact Check." It says "the attacks on Gov. Palin have been called 'completely false' ... 'misleading.' " On screen is a still photo of a grim-faced Obama. Our words are accurately quoted, but they had nothing to do with Obama.Our article, posted two days earlier, debunked a number of false or misleading claims that have circulated in chain e-mails and Internet postings regarding Palin. There is no evidence that the Obama campaign is behind any of the wild accusations that we critiqued. There is no more basis for attributing these viral attacks to the Obama campaign than there is for blaming the McCain campaign for chain e-mail attacks falsely claiming that Obama is a Muslim, or a "racist," or that he is proposing to tax water. The anti-Palin messages, like the anti-Obama messages, have every appearance of being home-grown.
Digging for "Dirt"The ad also quotes the Wall Street Journal as saying that the Obama campaign "air-dropped a mini-army of 30 lawyers, investigators and opposition researchers to dig dirt on Governor Palin." That's also a distortion. The Wall Street Journal opinion article did not say that the Obama team was there to "dig dirt." It said they were there to "dig into her record and background." Maybe the McCain-Palin campaign knows something we don't about what's in Palin's record and background.The full quote, from an item by conservative columnist John Fund, dated Sept. 9:
WSJ's John Fund, Sept. 9: Democrats have airdropped a mini-army of 30 lawyers, investigators and opposition researchers into Anchorage, the state capital Juneau and Mrs. Palin's hometown of Wasilla to dig into her record and background. My sources report the first wave arrived in Anchorage less than 24 hours after John McCain selected her on August 29.Fund said the opposition researchers were mainly interested in a controversy surrounding Palin's firing of her public safety commissioner, Walt Monegan. Monegan has claimed he was dismissed because he wouldn't fire a state trooper who was in a divorce battle with Palin's sister; the Alaska Legislature is investigating whether Palin acted properly. Fund also stated that the Palin family has accused the trooper of "using a Taser on his 10-year-old stepson, drinking in his patrol car and illegally shooting a moose." Now, that's "dirt."Update, Sept. 10: After this article was posted, the Obama campaign contacted us to say that John Fund's article is wrong.
Obama spokesman Tommy Vietor, Sept. 10: John Fund's claim that we "air-dropped" 30 lawyers into Alaska is false. No one from the Obama campaign or the DNC has been sent to Alaska. We've asked Mr. Fund for a correction.Footnote: At least one Obama spokesman has repeated an allegation that we debunked in our story, that Palin was a supporter of Pat Buchanan. However, the Obama campaign was not the originator of the claim. –by Brooks Jackson

Labels: , ,

Free Blog Counter