Obama (Ironically) Accuses McCain/Palin Of "Dishonesty"

In a new Obama ad today, an announcer accuses McCain and Palin of "lying about their records." In a speech today, Obama criticized the Republican candidates as attempting to "reinvent themselves." It's ironic that Obama is accusing the duo of lying about their record when he himself has frequently flip flopped and changed opinions on a variety of issues. Since most won't accept such a comment without proof, here ya go:

1.) Public Financing of Elections

In September 2007, BO pledged to accept public financing should he become his party's nominee "if his major opponents agree to forgo private funding in the general election campaign." (Newsweek 2007). McCain, in March, said he would accept public funds. Obama stated "If I am the Democratic Nominee, I will agressively pursue an agreement with the Republican nominee to preserve a publicly financed general election." (February 2007, Newsweek). Obama has since renegued on his pledge and has foregone public funding. Obama is the first presidential candidate since Nixon (1972) to state that his campaign will be financed totally and completely by private donations with no limits on spending. In 2004, Democratic 527s spent three times as much as Republican 527s. Obama, however, claimed he did it because "John McCain’s campaign and the Republican National Committee are fueled by contributions from Washington lobbyists and special interest PACs," he said. "And we’ve already seen that he’s not going to stop the smears and attacks from his allies running so-called 527 groups, who will spend millions and millions of dollars in unlimited donations." (Newsweek). Too bad he's outspent McCain thus far, as have Democratic-leaning 527s (The Washington Post).

2) The Cuban Embargo

In January of 2004, Obama stated that he thought it was time to end the Cuban Embargo because "it [had] utterly failed in the effort to overthrow Castro." However, 3 years later, when speaking to a Cuban-American audience in Miami, Obama said he "would not take off the embargo" if were elected President because "it is an important inducement to change." (Reason.com)

3) Illegal Immigration

In a questionnaire he filled out in March 2004, Obama was asked should "[the U.S. government] crack down on business that hire illegal immigrants." Obama answered "oppose." In January 2008 (televised debate) Obama remarked that "we do have to crack down on those employeres that are taking advantage of the situation." (The Washington Post)

4) Special Interests

In January 2008, Obama described the union members contributing to the campaings of Clinton and Edwads as "special interests." However, once he began collecting his own union endorsements, he referred to the money as coming from "working people" and said he was "thrilled" by their support. (Washington Post)

5) Marijuana

While campaigning for the U.S. Senate in Illinois in 2004, Obama spoke before a college-aged audience and told them that he supported eliminiating "criminal penalties" for marijuana use. However, on October 30, 2007 (presidential debate) he tagged along with the other Democratic candidates and stated he did not support the decriminalization of marijuana.

6) Running For President

On Meet the Press (1/22/06) Obama was asked wether he would serve his 6-year term as U.S.

Senator from Illinois. Obama responded "I will serve out my 6-year term. You know, Tim, if you get

asked enough, sooner or later, you get weary and you start looking for new ways of saying things. But

My thinking has not changed." Russert said, "So you will not run for President or Vice President in

2008?" Obama: "I will not."

7) Iran

Prior to clinching the nomination, Obama pledged that he would meet with various heads of

terror states (most notably Ahmadinejad of Iran) "without preconditions." Then, soon after, Obama

rescinded earlier statements and said "There's no reason why we would necessarily meet with

Ahmadinejad. He's not the most powerful person in Iran."

8) NAFTA

In October 2007, Obama stated he supported NAFTA expansion. In March 2008 (while

campaigning in Ohio) he expressed a desire for a "reopening" of the trade pact's terms. In June

2008, in describing his own rhetoric, he used the word "overheated." He said NAFTA has had a

positive effect on the U.S. economy.

In other news...Obama, on O'Reilly Factor tonight stated 1) That he supports income/wealth

redistribution (he claimed, however, that that is not a socialist policy.) Dick Morris (on Hannity

and Colmes after the interview) revealed the following tax figures:

In 1986 the top 1% pays 20% of taxes

In 1993 the top 1% pays 36% of taxes

In 2008 the top 1% pays 40% of taxes

The bottom 10% of taxpayers consistently pays just 2% of taxes.

Obama stated that he will raise taxes on those making $250,000+ in the U.S. These taxpayers

will see their taxes go up in excess of $50,000. Morris also made the point that Obama has yet

to elucidate how he is going to pay for the programs he's proposing. He will raise payroll, capital

gains and income taxes, which will amount to about $80 billion. However, Obama (in the interview)

stated that his programs will add about $1 trillion to the budget. Where's the extra $920 billion

coming from?

Obama's exaggerations...a little insight!

I just watched an interview on CNN of several young voters, citing that they weren’t voting for John McCain and Sarah Palin because McCain “frequently lied.” While I’m sure one can point to instances where McCain stretched facts or misworded things (as you can do with any candidate) I wanted to compile a list to combat accusations of this nature. Specifically, a list of instances where Obama has been less-than-truthful to his devoted followers and undecideds. A comeback, if you will, to accusations that McCain is the only exaggerating politician ever.

Obama Exaggeration #1:

Obama: “Now, many of these plans will cost money, which is why I’ve laid out how I’ll pay for every dime – by closing corporate loopholes and tax havens that don’t help America grow.”

What he should have mentioned: Over the summer, the Barack Obama campaign told newspapers that their tax proposals were estimated to cost the U.S. approximately $130 billion dollars. The Tax Policy Center analysis reveals that "closing corporate loopholes and tax havens" America would save only $80 billion dollars, leaving $50 billion that still would be unpaid for. Another little fact Obama didn't mention is that he plans to return taxes on people making $250,000+ to pre-Bush tax cuts levels to provide additional income for the government. Another point? The Tax Policy Center indicates that without significant cuts in spending by the federal government, the deficit would increase significantly over the next 10 years, to about $3.8 trillion, even with the ending of the Iraq War and the aforementioned $100 billion factored in.

Obama Exaggeration #2:

Obama: "Now, I don't believe that Senator McCain doesn't care what's going on in the lives of Americans; I just think he doesn’t know. Why else would he define middle-class as someone making under five million dollars a year?"

What he should have mentioned: What McCain actually suggested was that taxes should be low for all income levels. His '$5 million' comment was a joke, as demonstrated in the transcript below:

Pastor Rick Warren: "Give me a number, give me a specific number - where do you move from middle class to rich?" 

McCain: "I don't want to take any money from the rich – I want everybody to get rich. ... So, I think if you are just talking about income, how about $5 million? [Laughter from audience] But seriously, I don't think you can - I don't think seriously that - the point is that I'm trying to make here, seriously – and I'm sure that comment will be distorted – but the point is that we want to keep people's taxes low and increase revenues." (From August 16, 2008)

Obama Exaggeration #3:

Obama: "When John McCain said we could just “muddle through” in Afghanistan, I argued for more resources and more troops to finish the fight against the terrorists who actually attacked us on 9/11."

What he should have mentioned: What McCain actually said was that the U.S. "may muddle through" indicating that he was "guardedly optimistic about" Afghanistan. The exact quote was:

McCain: I think Afghanistan is dicey. I think that there are certain areas of the country, particularly along the Pakistani border, that are clearly not under the control of either Pakistan or the Afghan government. ...There has been a rise in al Qaeda activity along the border. There has been some increase in U.S. casualties. I am concerned about it, but I'm not as concerned as I am about Iraq today, obviously, or I'd be talking about Afghanistan. But I believe that if Karzai can make the progress that he is making, that – in the long term, we may muddle through in Afghanistan." (2003)

McCain has strongly and consistently argued for more troops in Afghanistan, as well as installation of NATO forces.

Obama Exaggeration #4

Obama: "And next week, we'll also hear about those occasions when he's broken with his party as evidence that he can deliver the change that we need. But the record's clear: John McCain has voted with George Bush 90 percent of the time." 

What he should have mentioned: If Senate votes are the measure of whether a candidate breaks with his party or not, then McCain is partisan at an average of about 85% of the time while Obama votes with the Democrats about 97% of the time (Congressional Quarterly Study of Senate Votes). Either way, neither candidate can claim to be that bipartisan if this is the measure of bipartisanship we're using.

A Few Other Exaggerations:

Obama suggested that during the presidency of George W. Bush, the average American family experienced an income drop of about $2,000. That is flat-out wrong. Figures from the U.S. Census actually state that the "average" family income decreased by $348 - quite a jump from $2,000. Obama aides clarified what Obama meant by saying he was referring to "median" income not "average" income. Median refers to the middle point (not the average). The aides also insisted Obama was referring to working families as opposed to including retired couples, etc. 

He was still outrightly incorrect. Median family income increased under George W. Bush by $272.

Leave a comment if you want sources on these facts!

Students, Beware! How Obama's "Plans" May End Up Costing Young People Most

With just 67 days until the general election on November 4, 2008, it is the responsibility of the American public to educate themselves on who is best to represent the US for the next 4 years. The Dems have chosen Mr. Obama and Mr. Biden, the Republicans, Mr. McCain and Mrs. Palin. This election cycle, students represent a dynamic and critical constituency who seem overwhelmingly in favor of the former - a Harvard University School of Politics poll found that while 32% support Mr. McCain, 55% support Mr. Obama (Harvard University, 2008).
Below, I've outlined just 5 of the numerous reasons why that 55% should rethink their decision to support Mr. Obama:

1. Healthcare
Mr. Obama's healthcare plan is referred to as a "community rating" program and seeks to ensure all Americans pay the same premium on health insurance. The downside? Healthier and younger Americans will end up paying for the health care of older people - at a huge financial cost. I, for one, am not yet in a position where I can pay for someone else's healthcare. Additionally, Mr. Obama's plan prohibits high-deductible, low cost insurance plans, making it increasingly hard for young people just entering the workplace to afford insurance on their own. This may force many young people to forego purchasing insurance in the first place.

2. Social Security
Our country's SS taxes are already incredibly high - especially in relation to the benefits received. Despite early support to keep all options on the table, Mr. Obama now opposes a plan to allow young people to invest their social security taxes in a separate account to make money over time. The program is facing a troubling future - some suggest future obligations of SS could add up to more than $15.3 trillion dollars. What does this mean for you and me? We will either face a massive tax hike to pay for other people's social security, or we will face a dramatic decrease in benefits when it comes time for us to retire and collect.

3. Medicare
Medicare's anticipated debt is even higher than Social Security's - some suggesting it may equal more than $70 trillion. Despite a multitude of concerns about the future viability of this expensive program, Mr. Obama opposes most, if not all, Medicare reforms and in fact wants to increase benefits of the prescription drug program. Translation? Another massive tax hike for young voters.

4. Government Budget and Debt
Congressman Wayne Allard (R-Co.) proposed an amendment last Spring aimed at demonstrating just how much all of Mr. Obama's programs would cost. The total? Approximately $1.4 trillion dollars over 5 years - that's only including Mr. Obama's universal healthcare program, eliminating income taxes for seniors, and "expanding" the army (Source: Politico.com).
Without Mr. Obama's programs, the Congressional Budget Office estimates that in the near future, the government could consume nearly 35% of our Gross Domestic Product (GDP). According to columnist Michael Tanner, "Paying for a government that size would require raising both the corporate tax rate and top income tax rate from their current 35% to 88%, the current 25% tax rate for middle-income workers to 63%, and the 10% tax bracket for low-income workers to 25%. The impact on workers, businesses and the economy at large would be catastrophic" (Tanner, 2008, New York Daily News). Tanner goes on to say that "Far from restraining the growth of government, Mr. Obama is proposing program after program of new spending. According to the most recent tally from the National Taxpayers Union, he has laid out $343 billion per year in new government spending" (Tanner).
Furthermore, Mr. Obama has no plans to eliminate or even reduce the budget deficit. "Now I want to go ahead and tell you the truth, which is, we will not eliminate the deficit or the national debt in the next four years, or even in the next eight years" (Sen. Barack Obama, Remarks At A Campaign Event, Fairfax, VA, 7/10/08).
In another article, it is reported that "[Elizabeth Sperling] says the key difference between the two candidates' proposals is that [Sen. Hillary] Clinton has been more conscientious and rigorous about finding specific, realistic ways to pay for her plans. 'There is a significant gap between Sen. Clinton and Sen. Obama on the fiscal responsibility of their proposals,' says Sperling. 'She felt very much that when you're talking to people you need to be able to look them in the eye and tell them very specifically where's the beef.' Sperling notes Mr. Obama estimates it would cost about $85 billion a year to deliver the three tax cuts he's proposed that Clinton hasn't - for seniors, for payroll taxes, and another that would allow a mortgage-interest tax credit for non-itemizers. The cost of Obama's tax cuts has raised eyebrows not only in Clinton's camp. Leonard Burman, director of the Tax Policy Center in Washington, a joint venture of the Urban Institute and Brookings Institution, says he is concerned that both candidates have promised too much at a time 'when we know our fiscal situation is bad and getting worse.'" (Elizabeth Auster, "Clinton, Obama Plans Are Similar," [Cleveland] Plain Dealer, 2/24/08)

5. Foreign Policy
Mr. Obama's relative lack of experience is easy to ignore in the face of all that charm and lofty and un-ignorable rhetoric. However, behind that polished facade is someone who has been in the Senate less than 1 term (in fact, he has only served about 170 days), was in the Illinois state senate before that, and previously was a "community organizer" - whatever that is. Which of those prepare him best for Foreign Policy issues? "None" was Mr. Obama's answer. Instead, Mr. Obama pointed to his 4 years living in Indonesia. Was he an ambassador? A diplomat? Neither. Mr. Obama wasn't even a teenager when his family moved to the island nation for their brief tenure there. Even Senator Hillary Clinton has criticized Obama's lack of experience. From Time Magazine last year: "Voters will judge whether living in a foreign country at the age of 10 prepares one to face the big, complex international challenges the next President will face," Clinton, the former First Lady who has spent seven years on the Senate Armed Services Committee, told supporters Nov. 20 in Shenandoah, Iowa. "I think we need a President with more experience than that." (Time, December 2007).

Judge for yourselves, but it seems those are 5 major drawbacks to Senator Obama as a presidential candidate. Certainly both candidates have their flaws, negatives, and points of disagreement - as does anyone - but Mr. Obama's seems perversely anti-youth. I'd rather not gamble on a risk like Senator Obama.