Below the fold are the Obama campaign’s pre-debate rebuttals to crap/lies you’ll probably hear John McSame spew tonight. Obama’s rapid-response team is the best in history and you should love them for it.
Below are some of John McCain’s most recently debunked claims – about his own record and proposals, and Barack Obama’s – that he may use to night to distract from the issues of importance to the American people.
Most Recently Debunked
DEBUNKED CLAIM: OBAMA VOTED TO RAISE TAXES 94 TIMES
Ø REALITY: The McCain-Palin Claim That Obama Voted 94 Times To Increase Taxes Is A “Dubious Count.” “PALIN: Said of Democratic presidential candidate Barack Obama: ’94 times he voted to increase taxes or not support a tax reduction.’ THE FACTS: The dubious count includes repetitive votes as well as votes to cut taxes for the middle class while raising them on the rich. An analysis by FactCheck.org found that 23 of the votes were for measures that would have produced no tax increase at all, seven were in favor of measures that would have lowered taxes for many, 11 would have increased taxes on only those making more than $1 million a year.” [AP FactCheck, 10/3/08]
Ø REALITY: Five Ohio Newspapers Said That The Claim That Obama Voted To Raise Taxes 94 Times Is An “Exaggeration” And Rated A McCain Ad On The Subject A “0” Out Of 10 On The Truthfulness Scale. The Plain Dealer, in cooperation with the Canton Repository, the Cincinnati Enquirer, the Columbus Dispatch and Dayton Daily News rated a McCain ad on taxes a 0 out of 10 on the truthfulness scale. They wrote, “During Thursday’s vice presidential debate, Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin repeated the exaggeration that Sen. Obama voted 94 times to increase taxes. According to Factcheck.org, the total includes seven votes that would have lowered taxes for many, while raising them on corporations or affluent individuals; 23 votes were against tax cuts; and 17 came on seven different bills. A closer look reveals Obama has consistently voted to restore higher tax rates on upper-income taxpayers, but not on low- or middle-income workers.” [Cleveland Plain Dealer, 10/3/08]
DEBUNKED CLAIM: OBAMA WILL RAISE TAXES ON SMALL BUSINESSES
Ø REALITY: Claim That Obama Would Increase Taxes On Millions Of Small Businesses Is “Untrue”; The Vast Majority Of Small Businesses Would Not Have Increased Taxes. “On another point, Palin said a tax hike that hits earners over $250,000 would hit ‘millions of small businesses.’ That is untrue. The vast majority of small businesses barely break even and do not pay the top tax brackets. To get that figure, Republicans count affluent taxpayers who claim some income from some small business income as ‘small businessmen.'” [Washington Post, 10/3/08]
Ø REALITY: Roughly 97% Of Small Business Would Not Be Affected By Obama’s Tax Plan. “Tax Policy Center analysis concluded that ‘roughly 97% of small businesses would not be affected at all by increases in the top two tax rates.’ Len Burman, who runs the Tax Policy Center, said in an interview Thursday: ‘The vast majority of small businesses would not be affected by the Obama tax increases’ because they are not in the top two tax brackets. He added, ‘Most small business owners have relatively modest incomes.'” [USA Today, 10/3/08]
DEBUNKED CLAIM: OBAMA VOTED FOR THE LARGEST TAX INCREASE IN HISTORY
Ø REALITY: Claim That Obama Voted For “Largest Tax Increase In History” Is False. Palin “claimed that Biden and Obama voted for ‘the largest tax increase in history.’ Palin is referring here to the Democrats’ 2008 budget proposal, which would indeed have resulted in about $217 billion in higher taxes over two years. That’s a significant increase. But measured as a percentage of the nation’s economic output, or gross domestic product, the yardstick that most economists prefer, the 2008 budget proposal would have been the third-largest since 1968, and it’s not even in the top 10 since 1940.” [FactCheck.org, 10/3/08]
DEBUNKED CLAIM: OBAMA SAID SUBPRIME LOANS WERE “A GOOD IDEA”
Ø REALITY: McCain Taking Obama’s Quote “Out Of Context And Reverses The Intent Of Mr. Obama’s Remarks, Which Were Clearly Meant Primarily As A Criticism Of Practices On Wall Street.” “For instance, Mr. McCain claimed that ‘as recently as September of last year,’ Mr. Obama ‘said that subprime loans had been, quote ‘a good idea.’ But that quote is taken out of context and reverses the intent of Mr. Obama’s remarks, which were clearly meant primarily as a criticism of practices on Wall Street.” [New York Times, 10/6/08]
DEBUNKED CLAIM: OBAMA IS “PALLING AROUND” WITH TERRORISTS
Ø REALITY: Palin’s Reference To Obama And Ayers “Palling Around” Was “Exaggerated At Best If Not Outright False.” “Her reference to Obama’s relationship with William Ayers, a member of the Vietnam-era Weather Underground, was exaggerated at best if not outright false. No evidence shows they were ‘pals’ or even close when they worked on community boards years ago and Ayers hosted a political event for Obama early in his career. Obama, who was a child when the Weathermen were planting bombs, has denounced Ayers’ radical views and actions.” [AP, 10/5/08]
Ø REALITY: Palin’s Claim That Obama Is Palling Around With Terrorists Is “False.” CNN Fact check wrote about Palin’s claim that Obama is palling around with terrorists, “Verdict: False. There is no indication that Ayers and Obama are now “palling around,” or that they have had an ongoing relationship in the past three years. Also, there is nothing to suggest that Ayers is now involved in terrorist activity or that other Obama associates are.” [CNN, 10/5/08]
Ø REALITY: A Review Of Records And Interviews Shows That Obama And Ayers “Do Not Appear To Have Been Close” And Obama Has Never Expressed Sympathy For The Radical Views Or Actions Of Ayers. “A review of records of the schools project and interviews with a dozen people who know both men, suggest that Mr. Obama, 47, has played down his contacts with Mr. Ayers, 63. But the two men do not appear to have been close. Nor has Mr. Obama ever expressed sympathy for the radical views and actions of Mr. Ayers, whom he has called ‘somebody who engaged in detestable acts 40 years ago, when I was 8.’ [New York Times, 10/3/08]
DEBUNKED CLAIM: OBAMA SAID OUR TROOPS IN AFGHANISTAN ARE JUST BOMBING VILLAGES AND KILLING CIVILIANS
Ø REALITY: McCain Claim That Obama Was Disrespecting Our Troops In Afghanistan “Recycles a Misleading” Charge. “A McCain-Palin ad calls Obama ‘dishonorable,’ while distorting his words and votes on troop funding. It accuses him of saying ‘our troops in Afghanistan’ are just bombing villages and killing civilians. What Obama said, in context, was a criticism of U.S. military strategy, and not of American troops. It accuses Obama and ‘Congressional liberals’ of voting repeatedly to cut off funding for troops, ‘increasing the risk on their lives.’ In fact, the votes were for bringing the troops home, cutting off funding only if the president failed to comply. The McCain-Palin campaign released the ad, titled ‘Dangerous,’ and said it would be televised nationally. It recycles a misleading, 14-month-old charge that Sen. Barack Obama disrespected U.S. troops fighting in Afghanistan by accusing them of ‘just air-raiding villages and killing civilians.’ It also misrepresents votes in favor of withdrawing troops from Iraq as being votes ‘increasing the risk on their lives.'” [FactCheck.org, 10/6/08]
DEBUNKED CLAIM: OBAMA OPPOSES CLEAN COAL
Ø REALITY: Obama’s Energy Plan Calls For Investment In Clean Coal, McCain’s Claims Are “False” And “Not True.” “The McCain-Palin campaign is airing radio ads in four states claiming that the Obama-Biden ticket ‘oppose[s] clean coal.’ That’s false: Obama’s energy plan, which he began promoting well over a year ago, calls for investing in ‘low emissions coal plants’ and creating ‘5 ‘first-of-a-kind’ commercial scale coal-fired plants with carbon capture and sequestration.’ His position in support of clean coal has been clear. The ad’s claim rests solely on a remark Biden made when questioned while shaking hands on a rope line in Ohio. Biden said, ‘We’re not supporting clean coal.’ The campaign says he meant something else entirely. Regardless, it’s Obama’s energy plan that the ticket is running on.” [FactCheck.org, 9/30/08]
Debunked During The First Debate
DEBUNKED CLAIM: OBAMA VOTED TO RAISE TAXES ON THOSE MAKING $42,000 A YEAR
Ø REALITY: McCain’s Claim During The First Debate That Obama Voted To Raise Taxes People Making $42,000 A Year “Is Misleading On Several Levels.” “McCain claimed that Obama voted in the Senate to raise taxes on anyone making more than $42,000 a year. This is misleading on several levels. The vote that McCain is talking about was a non-binding resolution on the budget that envisioned letting the Bush tax cuts to expire, as scheduled, in 2011. But these budget resolutions come up every year, and do not represent a vote for higher taxes in future years. In fact, Obama has said that he will continue the Bush tax cuts for middle and low-income taxpayers. He says that he will cut taxes for all but the wealthiest tax-payers.” [Washington Post, 9/26/08]
Ø REALITY: Obama’s Vote For Budget Resolution Was “Not A Tax Increase.” “Just as in the debate, for example, Mr. McCain accused Mr. Obama of voting to raise taxes on people making as little as $42,000 a year. But that vote was in favor of a non-binding budget resolution that would have allowed the tax cuts President Bush pushed through Congress in 2001 and 2003, which mainly benefitted the wealthy, to expire. It was not a tax increase and as a resolution, it did not have force of law.” [New York Times, 10/6/08]
DEBUNKED CLAIM: OBAMA’S TAX PLAN WILL RAISE TAXES
Ø REALITY: Over 95% Of Families Would Get A Tax Cut Under Obama’s Plan. “In fact, an analysis of the candidates’ tax plans by the Urban Institute-Brookings Tax Policy Center found that 95.5 percent of households with children would get a tax cut under Obama’s plan.” [Factcheck.org, 9/24/08]
DEBUNKED CLAIM: OBAMA HAS NOT LED ON FINANCIAL CRISIS
Ø REALITY: “The Record Shows That Obama Has Not Been Quiet On Such Issues And Indeed Has Proposed Measures For Some Time On Topics The Ad Claims McCain Has ‘Led’ On.” “We make no judgment as to which candidate offers better or more effective solutions to the financial crisis or limiting corporate CEOs pay checks. But the record shows that Obama has not been quiet on such issues and indeed has proposed measures for some time on the same topics the ad claims McCain has ‘led’ on.” [Factcheck.org, 9/24/08]
Ø REALITY: Obama Called for Efforts to Restore Public Trust in Capital Markets More than a Year Ago And Outlined Principles For Revamping The Financial Regulatory Framework Six Months Ago. On September 17, 2007, Barack Obama gave a speech at the NASDAQ in which he rightly foresaw that capital markets cannot succeed without public trust. Obama explained: “there is no dividing line between Main Street and Wall Street” —the struggles of ordinary Americans are at the root of our current financial turmoil, and that we all “have a stake in each other’s success.” Following this speech, in January 2008, former Federal Reserve Chairman Paul Volcker endorsed Obama, saying that the depth of the challenges facing America “demand a new leadership and a fresh approach.” On March 27, 2008, Barack Obama outlined six detailed principles for how government should correct failures in financial market oversight and move forwards to restore accountability, transparency, and trust. Going well beyond what the Treasury or other candidates would propose, Obama foresaw current challenges in calling for broad sweeping regulatory changes, including permanent oversight for any firm with access to the Fed’s discount window. [Obama Speech At Nasdaq, 9/17/07; Wall Street Journal, 1/31/08; Obama Speech, 3/27/08]
DEBUNKED CLAIM: MCCAIN A LEADER IN EFFORT TO REFORM FANNIE AND FREDDIE
Ø REALITY: McCain “Exaggerates His Own Role” In Efforts To Prevent Abuses At GSE’s. “In addition, Mr. McCain exaggerates his own role in efforts to prevent abuses at the federally-chartered companies. ‘I was the one who called at the time for tighter restrictions on Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac that could have helped prevent this crisis from happening in the first place,’ he said. In reality, Mr. McCain signed on to the 2005 bill in May 2006 and was not one of its original sponsors.” [New York Times, 10/6/08]
Ø REALITY: Claim That Democrats Caused The Financial Crisis And That Legislation That McCain Cosponsored That Would Have Prevented The Crisis Is “Oversimplified” And Its “Unclear” How Much The Legislation Would Have Helped As McCain “Signed On Just Two Months Before The Housing Bubble Popped.” “A McCain-Palin ad, in turn, blames Democrats for the mess. The ad says that the crisis ‘didn’t have to happen,’ because legislation McCain cosponsored would have tightened regulations on Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. But, the ad says, Obama ‘was notably silent’ while Democrats killed the bill. That’s oversimplified. Republicans, who controlled the Senate at the time, did not bring the bill forward for a vote. And it’s unclear how much the legislation would have helped, as McCain signed on just two months before the housing bubble popped.” [FactCheck.org, 10/1/08]
Ø REALITY: McCain Signed Onto Legislation To Reform Fannie And Freddie 16 Months After It Was Introduced. “Gov. Sarah Palin boasted that Mr. McCain ‘sounded that warning bell’ about Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, echoing some of Mr. McCain’s recent comments in which he portrayed himself as being on the vanguard in warning about the impending financial crisis. Ms. Palin was referring to Mr. McCain’s decision in 2006 to sign on as a co-sponsor of a Senate bill that would have overhauled regulations governing Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. But the legislation was introduced more than 16 months earlier and the debate over the issue had been going on for some time. He also only added his name after an oversight agency issued a lengthy report condemning practices at Fannie Mae.” [New York Times, 10/2/08]
DEBUNKED CLAIM: OBAMA’S PLAN WOULD ADD ALMOST A TRILLION IN NEW SPENDING AND INCREASE DEFICITS
Ø REALITY: Claim That Obama Would Spend A Trillion Dollars More Is “Misleading” Because It Doesn’t Take Into Account The Savings From Other Policy Changes Obama Is Calling For. “The McCain campaign is basing this figure on its own tally of how much money all of the new programs Obama has vowed to fund would ultimately cost. The total does not look at how much money Obama would save through cutbacks in other parts of his spending plan…Verdict: Misleading. The figure McCain gave is based on his campaign’s tally of the costs of numerous programs Obama has discussed, but ignores the savings from other policy changes Obama is calling for.” [CNN, 9/29/08]
Ø REALITY: Former McCain Advisor: Obama Has Proposed $990 Billion In New Spending But Also $989 Billion In Spending Cuts So The Net Cost Roughly Balances Out. Maya MacGuineas, a former McCain advisor in his 2000 campaign is now the president of the Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget. The Washington Post wrote, “The non-partisan Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget calculates that Obama has promised a total of $990 billion in new spending over his first four-year term. At the same time, he has also proposed spending cuts that amount to around $989 billion, so the net cost roughly balances out…’Obama has talked about a lot of new spending initiatives, but he has also talked about new ways to curb spending,’ said Maya MacGuineas, president of the Committee, whose detailed budget analyses are available here. ‘I give him points for holding the line.'” [Washington Post, 10/1/08; Committee For A Responsible Federal Budget Website]
DEBUNKED CLAIM: OBAMA WANTS A GOVERNMENT-RUN, SINGLE PAYER HEALTH CARE SYSTEM
Ø REALITY: Obama’s Plan Does Not Call For Government-Run Health Care. “At the vice presidential debate in St. Louis, Mo., Sarah Palin defended John McCain’s health care plan and criticized Barack Obama’s. Obama has a plan ‘to mandate health care coverage and have a universal government run program,’ Palin said. ‘And unless you’re pleased with the way the federal government has been running anything lately, I don’t think that it’s going to be real pleasing for Americans to consider health care being taken over by the feds.’ Problem is, Obama’s plan keeps the free-market health care system intact, particularly employer-based insurance. It is not a goverment-run program and is very different from the health care systems run by the government in some European countries … So Palin is mostly wrong about Obama’s plan having a mandate; it only has one for children. He would like it to be universal at some point. She also emphasized that Obama proposes government-run health care, a statement that is completely inaccurate.” [POLITIFACT.com, 10/2/08]
Ø REALITY: McCain Statements Are “Misleading Or Distorts” Obama Position On Health Care. “On health care, Mr. McCain repeated accusations he made in his acceptance speech at the Republican convention, which fact-checking organizations criticized then. ‘He has said his goal is a single payer system where government is in charge of health care and bureaucrats stand between you and your doctor,’ Mr. McCain claimed Monday. Each of those statements is misleading or distorts Mr. Obama’s position in one way or another. First of all, Mr. Obama does not say his ‘goal’ is a single-payer system, under which one entity would handle all health care insurance for the population.” [New York Times, 10/6/08]
Ø REALITY: The Claim That Obama Would Allow “Bureaucrats To Stand Between You And Your Doctor” Is “Misleading.” “In addition, Mr. McCain’s statement that Mr. Obama would allow ‘bureaucrats to stand between you and your doctor’ is misleading.” [New York Times, 10/6/08]
DEBUNKED CLAIM: MCCAIN HEALTH CARE PLAN DOES NOT INCLUDE TAX INCREASE
Ø REALITY: McCain Acknowledged Health Care Plan Would Raise Taxes For Some Americans. In an appearance on ABC’s This Week, McCain acknowledged that his health care plan would result in higher taxes for some Americans. When Stephanopoulos said, “So they would see their taxes go up potentially, McCain responded, “It depends on, on what plan they have. But that’s usually the wealthiest people.” [ABC News, “This Week,” 9/28/08]
DEBUNKED CLAIM: MCCAIN’S HEALTH CARE PLAN WILL REDUCE COSTS
Ø REALITY: “There’s Zero Evidence” That McCain’s Health Care Plan Would Reduce Health Care Costs. “It’ s a shock to move from group plans into the harsh world of individual insurance. You get ‘choices’ (rah, rah). But the policies cost more and cover less than company plans do—especially for women, older people and those whose health is less than perfect. That is, if you can find coverage at all. In 2006, the Commonwealth Fund studied working-age adults hunting for individual policies. One fifth were charged more or rejected for health reasons. More than half found it hard or impossible to secure a policy they could afford. Conservatives love health plans that throw more of the costs on you. When it’s hard to pay the bills, you see the doctor less. Through the ‘magic of the marketplace,’ that’s supposed to slow the rate of increase in medical costs. Friends, there’s zero evidence that that works. In the long run, tax credits will raise your costs without changing the game. And we still won’t have helped most of the uninsured.” [Jane Bryant Quinn, Newsweek, 10/13/08]
DEBUNKED CLAIM: OBAMA VOTED TO CUT OFF FUNDING FOR THE TROOPS
Ø REALITY: Obama Did Not Vote Against Troop Funding But Voted Against A War Funding Bill Without A Timeline For Withdrawal. “Palin repeated the claim that Obama ‘voted against funding our troops.’ The claim refers to a single 2007 vote against a war funding bill. Obama voted for a version of the bill that included language calling for withdrawing troops from Iraq. President Bush vetoed it. (McCain supported that veto, but didn’t call it ‘vetoing support for our troops.’) What Obama voted against was the same bill without withdrawal language. And he had voted yes on at least 10 other war funding bills prior to that single 2007 no vote.” [FactCheck.org, 10/2/08]
Ø REALITY: Using McCain’s Standard He Also Voted Against Funding The Troops “McCain himself voted against the troop-funding bill when it contained withdrawal language.” [FactCheck.org, 10/6/08]
