<<< Watergate Offices 1973 - Where all the lying began
It is becoming more and more apparent that starting back in the Nixon era, the Republicans decided that a basic, on-going trait of their party was going to be to lie to the public about whatever it took to win an election! It started out with the Watergate Scandal, it settled down after Nixon resigned and throughout President's Ford's Administration. But since then, the Republican's "lying trend" has gradually escalated ever since Ronald Reagan's Iran-Contra Affair became public.
The George H.W. Bush presidency provided a bit of an improvement in this area of lying to the public. However, starting with Newt Gingrich's 1994 Contract With America and the Republicans' gaining the majority in the Congress, the GOP and President George W. Bush with his associates, have continued to break all the rules for even attempting to offer the public complete truth and honesty.
This Administration has told so many lies that there are now Internet web sites specifically dedicated to provide "almost immediate political "fact checking" of statements made by key political figures or by their political parties".
When Bill & Hillary Clinton's names are brought up in these discussions, the response is usually that no other American political couple have ever been investigated as much as Bill & Hillary Clinton. Even after a very long, detailed investigation, costing millions of tax-payer dollars, a court-appointed special prosecutor eventually found the Clintons to be "totally innocent" of the crimes for which they were accused of by the members of the GOP.
And when the Republicans bring up Bill Clinton's lie,under oath, to a Grand Jury about "not having sexual relations with that woman", it is hard to compare his lying about a personal sexual relationship between two consenting adults, to having a current President and his Administration blatantly lying to the "world" in order to take the strongest military power on the globe into its longest and its most expensive ever, military conflict. Think about it! This president ordered an unnecessary invasion of a sovereign nation that killed thousands of American Troops, tens of thousands of innocent Iraqi civilians and has cost Billions of American tax-payer dollars. And all this has occurred in a country that was subsequently found to be "not guilty as accused". Trying to compare Clinton's "lie" to Bush's "Iraq Disaster" is as ridiculous as it gets. But I'm sure the GOP will continue to keep trying.
TODAY'S 2008 PRESIDENTIAL CAMPAIGN:
Today, these new "fact checking" sites analyze and catalogue the supposed lies, statements or claims. These are then listed on their site by the subject and by those who had made the statement or claim with the date and location of the occurrence. They then state in detail the real truth of the statement, situation or issue.
John McCain, with all of his major changes in direction and values, is many times shown as just changing his position with the direction of the political winds. But, as the November election gets closer, McCain is now taking the "tried and true" GOP approach of just stating blatant lies about his opponent, and then just letting the lies do their damage. For the last two decades, the Republicans have made an art out of following through on the old idea that; "If you repeat a lie often enough, people will begin believing that it's true."
This concept has become such a prevalent way of doing business in the GOP that even popular political comedians are using the Republican reputation for being "liars" as the foundation for many of their jokes.
One Las Vegas comedian always starts his lounge act monologue by asking his audience; "Do you know that the United States has more of its citizens in American prisons than any other country in the world? Honest, that's the truth."
"The reason that so many American citizens are in American prisons today is that they were put in jail, just for impersonating their political American heroes.........You know, those Republican politicians that are continually being subpoenaed, indicted and sent to jail for telling big lies and making false accusations."
Actually, one has to admit the joke isn't "that" funny. But it's also not so funny because the joke represents a certain degree of truth as well as the current perceptions of many of today's average Americans.
In fact, an excellent example of this kind of "truth" occurred just this last week in one of John McCain's, Town Hall Meetings.
McCain had stated to his Republican audience (and to the always present TV news cameras) that "Barack Obama had voted in the Senate, 94 times for higher taxes." This statement by John McCain is in fact, a bare-faced lie and is a totally misleading summary of Obama's Senate votes. In fact, both the McCain Campaign and the Republican National Committee (RNC) immediately issued press releases claiming that Obama had voted "94 times for higher taxes."
Fortunately, as I had mentioned, the public and the media now have available on the Internet, "fact investigation" sites such as; www.factcheck.org .
These were the results from the investigation by FactCheck.Org:
Per FactCheck:
After looking at every one of the 94 votes that the Republican National Committee includes in its tally of Obama's votes, it was found that:
>>> Twenty-three Obama votes were for measures that would have produced no tax increase at all; they were all against proposed Republican tax cuts.
>>> Seven of the votes were in favor of measures that would have lowered taxes for many, while raising them on a relative few, either on corporations or affluent individuals.
>>> Eleven votes the GOP is counting would have increased taxes on those individuals making more than $1 million a year – in order to fund educational programs such as Head Start and school nutrition programs or Veterans´ Health Care.
>>> The GOP sometimes counted two, three and even four votes on the same measure. It was found that their tally included a total of 17 votes on seven measures, effectively padding their total by an extra 10 votes. (Multiple votes on the same bill in the Senate are very common.)
>>> The majority of the 94 votes – 53 of them, including some mentioned above – were on budget measures, not tax bills, and would not have resulted in any tax change. Four other votes were non-binding motions related to conference report negotiations.
SUMMARY
It's true that some of the votes the GOP counted would either have increased taxes for the wealthy, or set budget targets calling for their potential increases. But by repeating their inflated 94-vote figure, the McCain Campaign and the GOP have falsely implied that Obama has pushed indiscriminately to raise taxes for nearly everybody. A closer look reveals that he's voted consistently to restore higher tax rates on upper-income taxpayers but not on middle- or low-income workers. That's consistent with what he's said he'd do as president, which is to raise taxes only on those making more than $250,000 a year.
Here are the Analysis Details, as performed by FactCheck.org:
Author: For publication space considerations, I have abbreviated some of the written comments of the analysis. However, none of the key statements or the final results were changed.
In a June 9 press release, Tucker Bounds, spokesman for Senator John McCain's campaign said that "during just three years in the U.S. Senate, Barack Obama has already voted 94 times for higher taxes." The same day, the Republican National Committee (RNC), which researched Obama´s votes and is the original source of the claim, issued its own release, saying "Obama Voted At Least 94 Times For Higher Taxes" and that he had voted "For A Tax Increase Approximately Once Every Five Days Congress Has Been In Session." A few days later, McCain adviser Douglas Holtz-Eakin and other campaign staffers repeated this charge, which was quoted in various news stories. "We[FactCheck.org] suspect we'll be hearing this figure a lot more as the campaign wears on."
If this type of claim sounds familiar, it´s because George W. Bush's campaign used a similar refrain against Senator John Kerry in 2004, charging that Kerry voted for "higher taxes" a whopping "350 times". We found that claim to be incorrect as well. This time around, the Republicans are using some of the same tricky accounting to beef up the number of votes.
Higher Than My Taxes Are Now?
By our count, about a quarter of these votes for "higher taxes" – 23 to be exact – are votes Obama cast against changing tax rates from what they were at the time. Taxes would not have gone up. They would have been "higher" only compared to the cuts being proposed by the Republicans. The RNC counts these as votes "for higher taxes" even though Obama voted to keep taxes right where they were.
Win Some, Lose Some
Seven votes on the RNC's list were votes Obama cast for measures that called for lowering certain taxes broadly and would have paid for the cuts by raising taxes on high-income individuals or corporations. Of course, the RNC didn't give Obama credit for voting for the lower taxes.
Two votes were in favor of a "windfall profit tax" on oil companies. Another favored giving tax benefits to areas affected by Hurricanes Katrina, Rita and Wilma and extending several other tax relief provisions and all of it financed by closing corporate and individual "loopholes". It also, extended Superfund taxes on corporations. This fund is currently used to pay for toxic waste cleanup projects. Obama also voted for a refundable tax credit for farmers, paid for by closing a loophole that gives a foreign income tax credit to oil companies. Yet another of these pieces of legislation, an amendment to the 2007 energy bill, would have extended and expanded all kinds of renewable energy tax credits and covered the cost by increasing taxes, or removing subsidies on oil companies.
Raising Taxes? Or Wages?
Two of the items the RNC calls votes "against tax incentives for small businesses" were actually votes against Republican counter-measures to Democratic efforts to raise the minimum wage. Democrats were voting for a measure to raise the minimum wage to $7.25.
Higher Taxes for Whom? And for What?
Several of Obama's votes did indeed favor raising taxes above current levels on upper-income individuals or on corporations. One such amendment by Senator. Christopher Dodd to a 2006 bill, proposed the creation of a "veterans hospital improvement fund," financed by increasing the capital gains and dividend tax rates on those earning $1 million a year or more. An amendment to a 2009 budget resolution called for restoring the income tax rate on "million-dollar-a-year incomes" to pre-2001 levels for funding children's education efforts, such as Head Start and school nutrition programs. Amendments to the 2007 budget aimed to set aside $5 billion for new emergency responders' coordinated communications equipment and funds for port security. Both of which would be offset by "closing tax loopholes." Others called for increasing funding for a low-income home energy assistance program or restoring cuts slated for vocational education and student loan programs, paid for by closing "corporate tax loopholes." No tax "increases" required for these amendments.
Double, Triple and Quadruple Counting
The 94-vote RNC list includes 17 votes that applied to only seven separate measures, effectively padding the GOP's list by 10. Two or three votes on the same measure are not uncommon in the Senate.
The RNC counts these as four separate votes for "higher taxes."
Non-Binding Votes
Of the total, 53 votes were on amendments to budget resolutions or the resolutions themselves. Budget resolutions merely set targets for tax-writing and appropriations committees and don't alter the tax code directly. Another four votes were on motions to instruct House-Senate conferees, which aren't binding either, and are seldom followed. The 57 non-binding votes wouldn't have raised anybody's taxes.
The Final Tally
This exercise underscores how easily a campaign can spin their opponent's record.
In the end, there were 54 measures listed under the "higher taxes" category. These were only listed because they were measures for not extending some current tax cuts for those individuals or corporations with higher incomes. Many of these were aimed to fund government programs and most did not actually raise taxes, in and of themselves. There were also another seven votes in favor of lowering some taxes.
Author's Note:
I'm sure this is only one of the many issues that "FactCheck" will be dealing with before the 2008 November election. And I would also bet that most of FastCheck's efforts will not be used on checking out the statements of the Democratic candidate. Of course, this kind of political lying occurs within both parties, but it's not as deeply imbedded in the Democratic history and DNA as it has become within the GOP.
It is becoming more and more apparent that starting back in the Nixon era, the Republicans decided that a basic, on-going trait of their party was going to be to lie to the public about whatever it took to win an election! It started out with the Watergate Scandal, it settled down after Nixon resigned and throughout President's Ford's Administration. But since then, the Republican's "lying trend" has gradually escalated ever since Ronald Reagan's Iran-Contra Affair became public.
The George H.W. Bush presidency provided a bit of an improvement in this area of lying to the public. However, starting with Newt Gingrich's 1994 Contract With America and the Republicans' gaining the majority in the Congress, the GOP and President George W. Bush with his associates, have continued to break all the rules for even attempting to offer the public complete truth and honesty.
This Administration has told so many lies that there are now Internet web sites specifically dedicated to provide "almost immediate political "fact checking" of statements made by key political figures or by their political parties".
When Bill & Hillary Clinton's names are brought up in these discussions, the response is usually that no other American political couple have ever been investigated as much as Bill & Hillary Clinton. Even after a very long, detailed investigation, costing millions of tax-payer dollars, a court-appointed special prosecutor eventually found the Clintons to be "totally innocent" of the crimes for which they were accused of by the members of the GOP.
And when the Republicans bring up Bill Clinton's lie,under oath, to a Grand Jury about "not having sexual relations with that woman", it is hard to compare his lying about a personal sexual relationship between two consenting adults, to having a current President and his Administration blatantly lying to the "world" in order to take the strongest military power on the globe into its longest and its most expensive ever, military conflict. Think about it! This president ordered an unnecessary invasion of a sovereign nation that killed thousands of American Troops, tens of thousands of innocent Iraqi civilians and has cost Billions of American tax-payer dollars. And all this has occurred in a country that was subsequently found to be "not guilty as accused". Trying to compare Clinton's "lie" to Bush's "Iraq Disaster" is as ridiculous as it gets. But I'm sure the GOP will continue to keep trying.
TODAY'S 2008 PRESIDENTIAL CAMPAIGN:
Today, these new "fact checking" sites analyze and catalogue the supposed lies, statements or claims. These are then listed on their site by the subject and by those who had made the statement or claim with the date and location of the occurrence. They then state in detail the real truth of the statement, situation or issue.
John McCain, with all of his major changes in direction and values, is many times shown as just changing his position with the direction of the political winds. But, as the November election gets closer, McCain is now taking the "tried and true" GOP approach of just stating blatant lies about his opponent, and then just letting the lies do their damage. For the last two decades, the Republicans have made an art out of following through on the old idea that; "If you repeat a lie often enough, people will begin believing that it's true."
This concept has become such a prevalent way of doing business in the GOP that even popular political comedians are using the Republican reputation for being "liars" as the foundation for many of their jokes.
One Las Vegas comedian always starts his lounge act monologue by asking his audience; "Do you know that the United States has more of its citizens in American prisons than any other country in the world? Honest, that's the truth."
"The reason that so many American citizens are in American prisons today is that they were put in jail, just for impersonating their political American heroes.........You know, those Republican politicians that are continually being subpoenaed, indicted and sent to jail for telling big lies and making false accusations."
Actually, one has to admit the joke isn't "that" funny. But it's also not so funny because the joke represents a certain degree of truth as well as the current perceptions of many of today's average Americans.
In fact, an excellent example of this kind of "truth" occurred just this last week in one of John McCain's, Town Hall Meetings.
McCain had stated to his Republican audience (and to the always present TV news cameras) that "Barack Obama had voted in the Senate, 94 times for higher taxes." This statement by John McCain is in fact, a bare-faced lie and is a totally misleading summary of Obama's Senate votes. In fact, both the McCain Campaign and the Republican National Committee (RNC) immediately issued press releases claiming that Obama had voted "94 times for higher taxes."
Fortunately, as I had mentioned, the public and the media now have available on the Internet, "fact investigation" sites such as; www.factcheck.org .
These were the results from the investigation by FactCheck.Org:
Per FactCheck:
After looking at every one of the 94 votes that the Republican National Committee includes in its tally of Obama's votes, it was found that:
>>> Twenty-three Obama votes were for measures that would have produced no tax increase at all; they were all against proposed Republican tax cuts.
>>> Seven of the votes were in favor of measures that would have lowered taxes for many, while raising them on a relative few, either on corporations or affluent individuals.
>>> Eleven votes the GOP is counting would have increased taxes on those individuals making more than $1 million a year – in order to fund educational programs such as Head Start and school nutrition programs or Veterans´ Health Care.
>>> The GOP sometimes counted two, three and even four votes on the same measure. It was found that their tally included a total of 17 votes on seven measures, effectively padding their total by an extra 10 votes. (Multiple votes on the same bill in the Senate are very common.)
>>> The majority of the 94 votes – 53 of them, including some mentioned above – were on budget measures, not tax bills, and would not have resulted in any tax change. Four other votes were non-binding motions related to conference report negotiations.
SUMMARY
It's true that some of the votes the GOP counted would either have increased taxes for the wealthy, or set budget targets calling for their potential increases. But by repeating their inflated 94-vote figure, the McCain Campaign and the GOP have falsely implied that Obama has pushed indiscriminately to raise taxes for nearly everybody. A closer look reveals that he's voted consistently to restore higher tax rates on upper-income taxpayers but not on middle- or low-income workers. That's consistent with what he's said he'd do as president, which is to raise taxes only on those making more than $250,000 a year.
Here are the Analysis Details, as performed by FactCheck.org:
Author: For publication space considerations, I have abbreviated some of the written comments of the analysis. However, none of the key statements or the final results were changed.
In a June 9 press release, Tucker Bounds, spokesman for Senator John McCain's campaign said that "during just three years in the U.S. Senate, Barack Obama has already voted 94 times for higher taxes." The same day, the Republican National Committee (RNC), which researched Obama´s votes and is the original source of the claim, issued its own release, saying "Obama Voted At Least 94 Times For Higher Taxes" and that he had voted "For A Tax Increase Approximately Once Every Five Days Congress Has Been In Session." A few days later, McCain adviser Douglas Holtz-Eakin and other campaign staffers repeated this charge, which was quoted in various news stories. "We[FactCheck.org] suspect we'll be hearing this figure a lot more as the campaign wears on."
If this type of claim sounds familiar, it´s because George W. Bush's campaign used a similar refrain against Senator John Kerry in 2004, charging that Kerry voted for "higher taxes" a whopping "350 times". We found that claim to be incorrect as well. This time around, the Republicans are using some of the same tricky accounting to beef up the number of votes.
Higher Than My Taxes Are Now?
By our count, about a quarter of these votes for "higher taxes" – 23 to be exact – are votes Obama cast against changing tax rates from what they were at the time. Taxes would not have gone up. They would have been "higher" only compared to the cuts being proposed by the Republicans. The RNC counts these as votes "for higher taxes" even though Obama voted to keep taxes right where they were.
Win Some, Lose Some
Seven votes on the RNC's list were votes Obama cast for measures that called for lowering certain taxes broadly and would have paid for the cuts by raising taxes on high-income individuals or corporations. Of course, the RNC didn't give Obama credit for voting for the lower taxes.
Two votes were in favor of a "windfall profit tax" on oil companies. Another favored giving tax benefits to areas affected by Hurricanes Katrina, Rita and Wilma and extending several other tax relief provisions and all of it financed by closing corporate and individual "loopholes". It also, extended Superfund taxes on corporations. This fund is currently used to pay for toxic waste cleanup projects. Obama also voted for a refundable tax credit for farmers, paid for by closing a loophole that gives a foreign income tax credit to oil companies. Yet another of these pieces of legislation, an amendment to the 2007 energy bill, would have extended and expanded all kinds of renewable energy tax credits and covered the cost by increasing taxes, or removing subsidies on oil companies.
Raising Taxes? Or Wages?
Two of the items the RNC calls votes "against tax incentives for small businesses" were actually votes against Republican counter-measures to Democratic efforts to raise the minimum wage. Democrats were voting for a measure to raise the minimum wage to $7.25.
Higher Taxes for Whom? And for What?
Several of Obama's votes did indeed favor raising taxes above current levels on upper-income individuals or on corporations. One such amendment by Senator. Christopher Dodd to a 2006 bill, proposed the creation of a "veterans hospital improvement fund," financed by increasing the capital gains and dividend tax rates on those earning $1 million a year or more. An amendment to a 2009 budget resolution called for restoring the income tax rate on "million-dollar-a-year incomes" to pre-2001 levels for funding children's education efforts, such as Head Start and school nutrition programs. Amendments to the 2007 budget aimed to set aside $5 billion for new emergency responders' coordinated communications equipment and funds for port security. Both of which would be offset by "closing tax loopholes." Others called for increasing funding for a low-income home energy assistance program or restoring cuts slated for vocational education and student loan programs, paid for by closing "corporate tax loopholes." No tax "increases" required for these amendments.
Double, Triple and Quadruple Counting
The 94-vote RNC list includes 17 votes that applied to only seven separate measures, effectively padding the GOP's list by 10. Two or three votes on the same measure are not uncommon in the Senate.
The RNC counts these as four separate votes for "higher taxes."
Non-Binding Votes
Of the total, 53 votes were on amendments to budget resolutions or the resolutions themselves. Budget resolutions merely set targets for tax-writing and appropriations committees and don't alter the tax code directly. Another four votes were on motions to instruct House-Senate conferees, which aren't binding either, and are seldom followed. The 57 non-binding votes wouldn't have raised anybody's taxes.
The Final Tally
This exercise underscores how easily a campaign can spin their opponent's record.
In the end, there were 54 measures listed under the "higher taxes" category. These were only listed because they were measures for not extending some current tax cuts for those individuals or corporations with higher incomes. Many of these were aimed to fund government programs and most did not actually raise taxes, in and of themselves. There were also another seven votes in favor of lowering some taxes.
Author's Note:
I'm sure this is only one of the many issues that "FactCheck" will be dealing with before the 2008 November election. And I would also bet that most of FastCheck's efforts will not be used on checking out the statements of the Democratic candidate. Of course, this kind of political lying occurs within both parties, but it's not as deeply imbedded in the Democratic history and DNA as it has become within the GOP.
