Friday, September 26, 2008

NYT on Obama's Recent Ads

Dubious Claims in Obama’s Ads Against McCain, Despite a Vow of Truth
"A radio advertisement running in Wisconsin and other contested states misleadingly reports that Mr. McCain “has stood in the way of” federal financing for stem cell research; Mr. McCain did once oppose such federally supported research but broke with President Bush to consistently support it starting in 2001 (his running mate, Gov. Sarah Palin of Alaska, does not support it).

A commercial running here on Thursday morning highlighting Mr. McCain’s votes against incentives for alternative energy misleadingly asserts he supports tax breaks for “one source of energy: oil companies.” Mr. McCain’s proposed corporate tax break would cover all companies, including those developing new sources of power.

A new television advertisement playing in areas with high concentrations of elderly voters and emphasizing Mr. McCain’s support for President Bush’s failed plan for private Social Security accounts misleadingly implies Mr. McCain supported “cutting benefits in half” — an analysis of Mr. Bush’s plan that would have applied to upper-income Americans retiring in the year 2075.

A much criticized Spanish-language television advertisement wrongly links the views of Mr. McCain, who was a champion of the sweeping immigration overhaul pushed by Mr. Bush, to those of Rush Limbaugh, a harsh critic of the approach, and, frequently, of Mr. McCain.

The advertisement implies Mr. Limbaugh is one of Mr. McCain’s “Republican friends,” and quotes Mr. Limbaugh as calling Mexicans “stupid and unqualified.” Mr. Limbaugh has written that his quotes were taken out of context and that he was mocking the views of others.

In all, Mr. Obama has released at least five commercials that have been criticized as misleading or untruthful against Mr. McCain’s positions in the past two weeks. Mr. Obama drew complaints from many of the independent fact-checking groups and editorial writers who just two weeks ago were criticizing Mr. McCain for producing a large share of this year’s untruthful spots (“Pants on Fire,” the fact-checking Web site PolitiFact.com wrote of Mr. Obama’s advertisement invoking Mr. Limbaugh; “False!” FactCheck.org said of his commercial on Social Security.) "

8 comments:

Anonymous said...

Now that McCain & Obama have spent time in Mississippi are they experts on the marine life in the neighboring Gulf of Mexico?
Z

Anonymous said...

I guess if McCain was a lesser man, he could do this:

http://governor.mo.gov/cgi-bin/coranto/viewnews.cgi?id=EkkkVFulkpOzXqGMaj&style=Default+News+Style&tmpl=newsitem
Paul

Anonymous said...

Wow. Asking for Missouri's laws against misleading ads to be enforced sure does make Obama a "lesser man." And Blunt's bellyaching about Obama is about as credible as Barney Frank crying about McCain.
Z

Anonymous said...

Wow, Z, you can't really be this dumb, can you?
The point of my comment was that Obama feels he can run as many false ads (even the NYT calls him out on it) as he wants, but he wants law enforcement to crack down on anyone who runs ads he feels are unfair.
It's funny, though, to watch Obama supporters twist themselves into pretzels defending him.
Paul

Anonymous said...

Paul:

Matt Blunt??? Are you kidding me?? The boy-governor who was forced to step down after one term by his own party, this is your proof of anything? Matt Blunt is almost as irrelevant as Bush. No, I take that back. He is the most irrelevant governor in the country. At least somebody is bored enough to pay heed to his press releases. Give him a call Paul, he would probably take it since nobody in Mo. pays him any attention.

Steve's original post is fairly meaningless. Both campaigns distort the truth. This is no surprise and should hardly make mature observers take notice of anything. This is politics--and claims of misleading ads is politics as well--I know why campaigns issue denunciations but I can't see why you, Steve or Paul, think this is significant of anything except it is a presidential election. it is a very big so what? We had a debate and a massive bailout and you guys are accusing Obama of running misleading ads? Sheez, talk about trying to change the subject.

Jeff

Anonymous said...

Still missing the point.
Obama wants it both ways: prosecution of misleading ads, all the while running misleading ads.
Paul

Anonymous said...

Paul:

I get it. Blunt's press release is politics in the same way a commerical is--he is trying to accuse the Obama campaign of something it isn't doing. A press release from a GOP governor isn't proof anything. Why do you insist on believing that your candidate is pure and the other side is impure? Can't they both be hardball pols who are doing what it takes to win?

Jeff

Anonymous said...

Paul:

Follow this link to hear a conservative editorial page's comment on Blunt's press release. This newspaper is located in Springfield, MO--the reddest place in the state and a hotbed of evangelicals and movement conservatives. This ain't the NTY or WAPO.
http://www.news-leader.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20080930/OPINIONS01/809300326/1006/OPINIONS

Jeff