Undecided On Who To Vote For? Need Facts On The Issues, Not Political Spin Or Mudslinging?
Just in case you were still undecided on who to vote for in the upcoming American Presidential election, and you're confused by all the contradictory "facts" and mudslinging coming out of Washington, here's a site which purports to cut through the crap and bring you the real story on both sides of the political coin. Called FactCheck.org, it claims to show people what's really going on behind those political ads, speeches, electomercials, spin, and rumors. Best of all, it doesn't seem to be to favor one political party or ideology over another, because it features all sides of the political spectrum. At least, the articles I've read seem to fairly cover both liberal and conservative politicians and points of view.
Among some stories I found that might be of interest:
- An anti-Obama group said that he would give a driver's license to someone like terrorist Mohammed Atta:
An upstart group calling itself the "National Republican Trust PAC" mixes a pile of false claims and the image of 9/11 mastermind Mohammed Atta to create one of the sleaziest false TV ads of the campaign.
- The spot falsely claims Obama has a "plan" to issue driver's licenses to illegal immigrants. In fact, Obama has said quite specifically, "I am not proposing that that's what we do."
- The ad implies such licenses would enable terrorist attacks. In fact, Atta wouldn't have needed one to carry out his attacks.
- It claims that Obama's health care plan will apply to illegal immigrants. But Obama has stated quite clearly that his plan "does not" cover illegal immigrants.
Despite its name, the National Republican Trust has no formal connection to the Republican Party. [k's note: People forget, or just don't know, that the word "republican", lower-case "r", did not originally describe one political party.] It is an independent group with ties to the conservative Web site Newsmax. It sprang into being barely a month ago and has reported spending more than $900,000 to attack Obama through e-mail messages and, now, TV ads. Its TV spot first showed up on the air in Columbus, Ohio, Oct. 26, and it has also received considerable circulation on the Web. It attempts to link Sen. Barack Obama to the 9/11 hijackers. The link? A spurious claim that Obama plans to give driver's licenses to illegal immigrants. NRT PAC, which is headed by a former writer for the Rev. Sun Myung Moon's Insight magazine, says it plans to air the ad in other swing states.
- The ad falsely claims that Obama's plan "gives illegals Social Security benefits," which is also flatly untrue. [...]
- An Obama ad says McCain is going to cut meemaw and peepaw's medical benefits:
In a TV ad and in speeches, Obama is making bogus claims that McCain plans to cut $880 billion from Medicare spending and to reduce benefits.
- A TV spot says McCain's plan requires "cuts in benefits, eligibility or both."
These claims are false, and based on a single newspaper report that says no such thing. McCain's policy director states unequivocally that no benefit cuts are envisioned. McCain does propose substantial "savings" through such means as cutting fraud, increased use of information technology in medicine and better handling of expensive chronic diseases. Obama himself proposes some of the same cost-saving measures. We're skeptical that either candidate can deliver the savings they promise, but that's no basis for Obama to accuse McCain of planning huge benefit cuts.
- Obama said in a speech that McCain plans "cuts" that would force seniors to "pay more for your drugs, receive fewer services, and get lower quality care."
- Update, Oct. 21: A second Obama ad claims that McCain’s plan would bring about a 22 percent cut in benefits, “higher premiums and co-pays," and more expensive prescription drugs.
- McCain attacks Obama's tax plan yet again...second verse, same as the first:
The McCain-Palin campaign has released a new ad that once again distorts Obama's tax plans.
- The ad claims Obama will raise taxes on electricity. He hasn't proposed any such tax. Obama does support a cap-and-trade policy that would raise the costs of electricity, but so does McCain.
- It falsely claims he would tax home heating oil. Actually, Obama proposed a rebate of up to $1,000 per family to defray increased heating oil costs, funded by what he calls a windfall profits tax on oil companies.
The McCain campaign argues in its documentation for this ad that, whatever Obama says he would do, he will eventually be forced to break his promise and raise taxes more broadly to pay for his promised spending programs. That's an opinion they are certainly entitled to express, and to argue for. But their ad doesn't do that. Instead, it simply presents the McCain camp's opinion as a fact, and it fails to alert viewers that its claims are based on what the campaign thinks might happen in the future.
- The ad claims that Obama will tax "life savings." In fact, he would increase capital gains and dividends taxes only for couples earning more than $250,000 per year, or singles making $200,000. For the rest, taxes on investments would remain unchanged.
- And just where do we start with the mud thrown at Sarah Palin?
We’ve been flooded for the past few days with queries about dubious Internet postings and mass e-mail messages making claims about McCain’s running mate, Gov. Palin. We find that many are completely false, or misleading.For more on each story, click the links...what I've provided is a summary only. And there is much more there about both political parties. They don't appear to play favorites. Basically, it comes down to this...if you're vehemently anti-Obama or anti-McCain, wholeheartedly anti-Republican or anti-Democrat, nothing is going to change your mind. However, if you approach these things with an open mind and a willingness to look beyond the whitewash applied by slick professional political fence-painters, you might find out some interesting facts. My dad always taught me to "vote your conscience, not the party," and I've found that to be good advice.
- Palin did not cut funding for special needs education in Alaska by 62 percent. She didn’t cut it at all. In fact, she increased funding and signed a bill that will triple per-pupil funding over three years for special needs students with high-cost requirements.
- She did not demand that books be banned from the Wasilla library. Some of the books on a widely circulated list were not even in print at the time. The librarian has said Palin asked a "What if?" question, but the librarian continued in her job through most of Palin's first term.
- She was never a member of the Alaskan Independence Party, a group that wants Alaskans to vote on whether they wish to secede from the United States. She’s been registered as a Republican since May 1982.
- Palin never endorsed or supported Pat Buchanan for president. She once wore a Buchanan button as a "courtesy" when he visited Wasilla, but shortly afterward she was appointed to co-chair of the campaign of Steve Forbes in the state.
- Palin has not pushed for teaching creationism in Alaska's schools. She has said that students should be allowed to "debate both sides" of the evolution question, but she also said creationism "doesn't have to be part of the curriculum."
The important things are that you become informed, that you get the information you need to make your decision, and then that you get out there and vote next Tuesday!
[I guess I need to say it...the above opinions are k's alone, and don't necessarily reflect the views of everyone at GlossLip, Blogcritics, Technorati, my house, the interwebs, or anyone else on the third rock from the sun.]
UPDATE: For everybody flipping out and wetting themselves because of the name Annenberg Foundation (which I knew about before writing the article, and which is on the top of the site in question), here is an article from the Huffington Post:
On Wednesday morning, John McCain's campaign released a list of 100 former ambassadors endorsing the GOP presidential nominee. Second on the list, though her name is misspelled, is Leonore Annenberg, currently the president and chairman of the Annenberg Foundation and widow of ambassador and philanthropist Walter Annenberg. Ms. Annenberg was herself the "chief of protocol" at the State Department under President Reagan. If the last name sounds familiar, it's because it also graces the name of the Chicago education board where Barack Obama and William Ayers sat in the room six times together. In recent days, the McCain-Palin ticket (and particularly Palin) has faulted Obama for having served on that board with Ayers, who was a founding member of the radical 60's Weather Underground group when Obama was in grade school. Since then, however, Ayers has been rehabilitated in Chicago society, carving out a niche in education circles. As a former Republican representative in Illinois told NPR on Monday, smearing Obama for his board association with Ayers is "nonsensical." "It was never a concern by any of us in the Chicago school reform movement that he had led a fugitive life years earlier ... It's ridiculous," Republican Rep. Diana Nelson said. "There is no reason at all to smear Barack Obama with this association. It's nonsensical, and it just makes me crazy. It's so silly." Separate calls to the Pennsylvania and California offices of the Annenberg Foundation were not immediately returned Wednesday morning.Like I said, if you're vehemently one way or the other, this site won't make a bit of difference. This is for people who like to educate themselves on the issues.
