Archive for Sarah Palin

It All Comes Down To This

Posted in Watch for Yourself with tags , , , , , , , , on October 31, 2008 by doubletalkexpress

I guess it’s only fitting that Ronald Regan’s Chief of Staff Ken Duberstein announced today that he will not be voting for John McCain.

Update: 

Here is a small list of other prominent republicans that have chosen to endorse Barack Obama over John McCain:

  • Former Republican Governor of Massachusetts William Weld
  • Former Rhode Island Senator Lincoln Chafee
  • Former Republican Governor of Minnesota Arne Carlson
  • Former Iowa Congressman Jim Leach
  • Wayne Gilchrest, Congressman from Maryland
  • Larry Pressler, Former Senator from South Dakota
  • Lowell Weicker, Former Governor and Senator from Connecticut
  • Richard Riordan, Former Mayor of Los Angeles
  • Jim Whitaker, Fairbanks, Alaska Mayor
  • Linwood Holton, Former Governor of Virginia
  • Colin Powell, Former Secretary of State
  • Douglas Kmiec, Head of the Office of Legal Counsel under Reagan & Bush (41)
  • Charles Fried, Solictor General of the United States under Reagan
  • Jackson M. Andrews, Republican Counsel to the United States Senate
  • Susan Eisenhower, Granddaughter of President Eisenhower and President of the Eisenhower Group
  • Francis Fukuyama, Advisor to President Reagan
  • Rita Hauser, Member of President Bush‘s Foreign Intelligence Advisory Board
  • Larry Hunter, Former President Reagan Policy Advisor
  • Bill Ruckelshaus, served in the Nixon and Reagan Administrations
  • Scott McClellan, Former Press Secretary to President Bush (43) 
  • Ken Adelman
  • Jeffrey HartNational Review Senior Editor
  • Wick Alison, Former Publisher of the National Review
  • Christopher Buckley, Son of National Review Founder William F. Buckley and former National Review columnist
  • Michael Smerconish, Columnist for The Philadelphia Inquirer
  • C.C. Goldwater, Granddaughter of Barry Goldwater

    Note:
    John McCain is not fairing to well with newspaper endorsements either.  He is trailing Obama 245 to 78 with both the The Financial Times and The Economist coming out against him last week.
  • McCain Camp Admits Your Current Insurance Is Probably Way Better Than What You Could Get Under His Plan

    Posted in Accountability, Watch for Yourself with tags , , , , , on October 28, 2008 by doubletalkexpress

    From Think Progress:

    Hotlz-Eakin argues that “under McCain’s plan, employer-funded care will generally be preferable to the tax credit alone — since it’s the tax credit plus the employer contribution — but that the tax credit alone will be a huge step up for people who have nothing at all.” In other words, in the individual market, without the employer contribution, Americans would have to pay more for less…and less as McCain’s tax credit does not keep up with medical inflation.

    In fact, high deductible plans typically lead to higher out-of-pocket expenses, resulting in “a one-time shift in spending from premiums to patient out-of-pocket outlays.” As Holtz-Eakin himself points out:

    McCain’s would leave them better off than they are now, but still with something less than complete coverage, unless they reach into their pockets to supplement the tax credit.

    Oddly enough, Holtz-Eakin is now arguing that under McCain’s health care plan (which pushes about 20 million Americans out of the employer market and into the unregulated individual market), Americans would receive sub-prime health care coverage.

    Desperate Times: McCain using spliced and edited youtube video of Obama to lie to voters

    Posted in Outright Lies, Read for Yourself with tags , , , , , , , , on October 28, 2008 by doubletalkexpress

    From Ben Calhoun, Chicago Public Radio:

    In 2001, Chicago Public Radio interviewed then Illinois State Senator Barack Obama about civil rights.  Over the weekend, someone posted excerpts of the interview, edited to misrepresent Obama’s statements.  The item is now catching national attention.

    Click here for Obama’s full interviews.

    The clips are taken from an interview that aired in January of 2001. Then State Senator Obama is one of three legal scholars interviewed for a show about civil rights. Over the weekend, someone pulled excerpts of the show and posted them to You Tube—and today, the posting caught fire on political blogs, the Drudge Report, and Fox News.

    The 4 minute spliced collection of clips portrays Obama as advocate a redistribution of wealth through the power of the Supreme Court. That folds in with some allegations by the McCain Palin campaign.

    The twist here is that, when heard in the context of the whole show, Obama’s position is distinctly misrepresented by the You Tube posting. Taken in context, Obama is evaluating the historical successes and failures of the Civil Rights movement—and, ironically, he says the Supreme Court was a failure in cases that it took on a role of redistributing resources.

    The McCain campaign told ABC News it plans to use the material to bolster its criticism of Obama.

     

    Note: WaPo fact checker debunked this almost immediately.  This just goes to show how little substance the McCain campaign is working with at this point.  Instead of focusing on the issues that are important to us he has focused solely on the old warn out politics of negativity and fear.

    Fact Check: McCain Lying About Obama’s 2001 Interview

    Posted in Outright Lies, Read for Yourself with tags , , , , , , on October 28, 2008 by doubletalkexpress

    Update:  It has just been brought to light by the radio station in which the interview below took place, that the audio has been spliced and edited.  They have released the full audio here.

    From the WaPo Fact Checker:

    The Facts

    “Obama Bombshell Audio Uncovered. He wants to Radically Reinterpret the Constitution to Redistribute Wealth!!” runs the YouTube headline from the conservative video blog Naked Emperor News. “This video exposes the radical beneath the rhetoric.”

    On closer inspection, the “bombshell audio” turns out to be a rather wonkish, somewhat impenetrable, discussion of the Supreme Court under Earl Warren. Obama, then a University of Chicago law professor and Illinois state senator, argued that the courts have traditionally been reluctant to get involved in income distribution questions. He suggested that the civil rights movement had made a mistake in expecting too much from the courts — and that such issues were better decided by the legislative branch of government.

    You can read the entire transcript of the interview here, courtesy of Fox News, but here is the passage in which Obama explains that courts are “not very good” at redistributing wealth:

    Maybe I am showing my bias here as a legislator as well as a law professor, but you know I am not optimistic about bringing about major redistributive change through the courts. You know the institution just isn’t structured that way…. Any of the three of us sitting here could come up with a rationale for bringing about economic change through the courts. I think that, as a practical matter, that our institutions are just poorly equipped to do it.

    In other words, Obama says pretty much the opposite of what the McCain camp says he said. Contrary to the spin put on his remarks by McCain economics adviser Douglas Holtz-Eakin, he does not express “regret” that the Supreme Court has not been more “radical.” Nor does he describe the Court’s refusal to take up economic redistribution questions as a “tragedy.” He uses the word “tragedy” to refer not to the Supreme Court, but to the civil rights movement:

    One of the tragedies of the civil rights movement was that the civil rights movement became so court focused, I think, there was a tendency to lose track of the political and organizing activities on the ground that are able to bring about the coalitions of power through which you bring about redistributive change.

    Holtz-Eakin “read a different interview to the one I heard,” said Dennis Hutchinson, a University of Chicago law professor who joined Obama in the panel discussion. “Obama said that redistribution of wealth issues need to be decided by legislatures, not by the courts. That is what a progressive income tax is all about.”

    While there are sharp differences between the two candidates on economic issues, they both favor a progressive income tax system in which people with high incomes are taxed at a higher rate than people with low incomes.

    The Pinocchio Test

    With very few exceptions, all American politicians, including both presidential candidates, are in favor of a progressive income tax system and welfare policies (such as Medicare and Social Security) that “redistribute wealth.” Barack Obama is more enthusiastic about “spreading the wealth around” than his Republican rival. But that does not make him a “Socialist.” The McCain camp is wrong to suggest that the Illinois senator advocated an “wealth redistribution” role for the Supreme Court in his 2001 interview.


    Race Baiters For McCain

    Posted in Watch for Yourself with tags , , , , on October 28, 2008 by doubletalkexpress

    In perhaps the saddest move of the political season CNN reports that a McCain spokesman was pushing the story of their poor campaign worker being attacked by a 6’4″ black man who carved a B in her face before the details were even released by the police department:

    Note:  I do not believe John McCain in any way condoned this sick attempt at race baiting by some in his Pennsylvania camp.  This is however another example of the dirty attempts to play on peoples racial fears made by people in his camp.

    Conservative Women to John McCain: Man Up…Stop Hiding Behind Sarah Palin

    Posted in Character, Watch for Yourself with tags , , , on October 10, 2008 by doubletalkexpress

    Republican Michelle Lexalt gives John McCain a little straight talk about hiding behind Sarah Palin and not supporting equal pay for women:

     

    You can see the whole discussion here.

    CNN Fact Check: Would McCain’s mortgage plan shift burden to taxpayers?

    Posted in Accountability, Read for Yourself with tags , , , , , , on October 10, 2008 by doubletalkexpress

    From CNN 10/10/08

    The Statement:

    An ad released Thursday, October 9, by Sen. Barack Obama’s campaign, titled “Tested,” takes aim at Sen. John McCain’s mortgage plan. “McCain would shift the burden from lenders to taxpayers, guaranteeing a loss of taxpayer money,” the ad’s narrator says. “Who wins? The same lenders that caused the crisis in the first place.”

    Get the facts!

     

    The Facts:
    The ad refers to a plan McCain announced during a debate Tuesday night in Nashville, Tennessee. “I would order the secretary of the Treasury to immediately buy up the bad home loan mortgages in America and renegotiate at the new value of those homes — at the diminished value of those homes — and let people be able to … make those payments and stay in their homes,” McCain said.

    On his Web site, McCain calls it “an American Homeownership Resurgence Plan.” Under his plan, the government would buy up some troubled mortgages at their full value — meaning the lenders would not take a loss. The government would then renegotiate those mortgages, so that eligible homeowners would be paying rates based on their homes’ current, reduced value.

    McCain previously supported renegotiating mortgages with lenders, who would take losses. His economic adviser, Douglas Holtz-Eakin, told reporters Wednesday that McCain now believes having the government pay the entire value of the loans is “the only way” to begin stabilizing the housing market “in a timely fashion.”

    Obama, in his ad, highlights this quote from a CNNMoney.com story: “Much of the burden of paying to keep troubled borrowers in their homes will shift to taxpayers.” The McCain campaign acknowledged that point, both on a conference call with Holtz-Eakin on the day after the debate and in a follow-up interview with CNN’s Les Christie, writer of the CNNMoney.com story.

    The McCain campaign says the plan would cost about $300 billion. “Funds provided by Congress in (the) recent financial market stabilization bill can be used for this purpose; indeed by stabilizing mortgages it will likely be possible to avoid some purposes previously assumed needed in that bill,” the campaign Web site says.

    McCain’s plan puts him at odds with a bill adopted by Congress in July that required lenders to write down mortgage balances to 90 percent of a home’s current market value in order to qualify for refinancing insured by the Federal Housing Administration. Neither McCain nor Obama voted on that bill.

    While the Obama ad refers to “lenders that caused the crisis in the first place,” Obama himself has been using slightly different language on the stump, referring to lenders who “helped create this mess in the first place.” But the substance of Obama’s attack has not changed.

    The Verdict:
    True. The McCain campaign acknowledges the plan would shift the burden to taxpayers.