Obama Just As Misleading As McCain

Senator Obama has been running an ad recently that has been "Scaring Seniors," according to Newsweek. His ad is about social security, and Senator McCain's support of privatization of the system. According to Newsweek, the ad is flawed and misleading. Watch below:


In the linked article above, Lori Robertson and Brooks Jackson from www.Factcheck.org go step-by-step through the Obama ad pointing out the many misleading details. I'm not going to repeat them all here, but just to sum up - Senator Obama's ad strongly implies that senior citizens should be concerned that their social security checks that many of them rely on are going to be cut in half should Senator McCain become president.

From "Scaring Seniors"
The ad refers to a Bush proposal from 2005 to hold down the growth of benefits for future retirees. Compared to the buying power of benefits paid to today's retirees, that would not have been a "cut" for anybody. It would have been a "cut" of half only in relation to benefits now promised to retirees who have yet to be born. And for average workers, that "cut" in 2075 was projected by one of Obama's own economic advisers to be 28 percent, not "half."

The article goes on to quote Senator McCain in 2007 saying, "...It's got to be bipartisan..." when referring to the Social Security reforms necessary to keep the system from going broke. Overall, it becomes very clear that Obama is being just as misleading in his advertising as McCain was with his recent Katie Couric WebAd.

"Can you really afford more of the same?" That's the closing line of the Obama-Biden Social Security ad. In its own way, this is more of the same - misleading ads that are then exposed in the media.

Stump the Candidate

I just watched this video of someone asking Governor Palin about her "...perceived lack of foreign policy experience," and even after re-watching twice, I'm still pretty sure she didn't answer the question, or even come close to it:


Isn't this the second time someone from the McCain camp has evaded this very question? Brent posted about the Campbell Brown - Tucker Bounds fiasco on his blog if you'd like to see the video I'm referring to.

Sometimes, I do think the media goes too far, asking questions to intentionally trip someone up or mislead viewers/readers, but in both these cases, Governor Palin and Tucker Bounds were asked the same, fair and simple question and any damage done was entirely self-inflicted. Do they really think Americans are going to be fooled by this? Tucker Bounds did nothing but turn the question into an excuse to re-iterate Senator Obama's inexperience, while Governor Palin answered with an excited We're ready so, Go Team!

The media doesn't always have to spin something to make a point, sometimes the candidates do it for them.

McCain's Misleading WebAd

YouTube, a major video-sharing website, has just taken down a McCain WebAd that featured Katie Couric from CBS News talking about sexism in the election. She is quoted, "One of the great lessons of that campaign is the continued and accepted role of sexism in American life." The ad implies that Couric was speaking about Sarah Palin when, in fact, she said this long before Palin became McCain's VP choice. Couric was actually speaking about Hillary Clinton, not Palin.

Couric talking about sexism in reference to Hilary Clinton:


CBS responded to the situation, saying "CBS News does not endorse any candidate in the Presidential race. Any use of CBS personnel in political advertising that suggests the contrary is misleading."

While I don't think this particular ad played a major role in anything, I do think this is an ethical issue. Whoever it was from Team McCain that came up with the concept for this ad must have been aware that Couric's statement had nothing to do with Palin, but chose to use it anyway.

Ultimately, I think this choice will hurt the McCain campaign more than it could ever have helped it, because it is so blatantly and purposely misleading. I think this will only add to the mistrust that many Americans feel towards politics in general, and now more specifically McCain's campaign. By manipulating this latest video to misdirect people, I think they've taken away a lot of their own credibility for any future statement, especially anything involving a public figure.

Blizzard of Words Hits Alaska

If you haven't seen it yet, watch the Charlie Gibson interview with Sarah Palin (part 1) here:


I'm a little concerned that "Alaska is close to Russia" seems to be foreign policy experience in the eyes of McCain and Palin. I was really glad Gibson brought this up (at 2:28). This was such an important interview for Palin, I really expected her to be ready to step it up and answer the foreign policy question, but once again she did not. She's really not even that good at distracting us from the question. To me, it's always so obvious that she has no idea what to say, as I'm sure it is for the millions of Americans who watched this interview.

At 3:31, Gibson asks Palin if she has ever traveled outside of the country except for her recent trip to Germany and Kuwait. Gibson brought this up right after Palin failed to answer the foreign policy question, of course. Palin quickly answered that she has also been to Canada and Mexico. Are Canada and Mexico really all that relevant today in terms of foreign policy? She was just telling us how energy issues are at the crux of the foreign policy issue, then she brags about visiting Canada and Mexico? I'm unimpressed.

At 7:52, Gibson asks Palin what she thinks of the Bush Doctrine. She makes it immediately clear that she has no idea what the Bush Doctrine is. Gibson, rather than helping her out, lets her embarrass herself first.

If it was Gibson's intention to expose Palin for her inexperience, I think he did a terrific job, and he did it by asking fair, direct questions without any personal commentary. Well, until he said what every viewer was thinking... "I got lost in a blizzard of words there..." (9:52).