Case in point - during last night's debate, Sarah Palin made the following statement "Barack had 94 opportunities to side on the people's side and reduce taxes, and 94 times he voted to increase taxes or not support a tax reduction — 94 times."
What Sarah, obviously either at her own discretion or the insistence of the Republican Party, failed to mention was the following:
–23 were against proposed tax cuts.
— 7 were "for measures that would have lowered taxes for many, while raising them on a relative few, either corporations or affluent individuals."
– 11 were to increase taxes on people making more than $1 million a year, to help fund programs such as Head Start, school nutrition, or veterans' health care.
– 53 were votes on budget resolutions or amendments that "could not have resulted by themselves in raising taxes," though many "were clear statements of approval for increased taxes"
The total also includes multiple votes on the same measures. Annenberg says a close look at the record reveals that Obama has "voted consistently to restore higher tax rates on upper income taxpayers but not on middle- or low-income workers."
The Fact Check Verdict: Misleading. Palin's summary ignores the fact that some of the votes were for measures to lower taxes for many Americans, while increasing them for a much smaller number of taxpayers. The total also includes multiple votes on the same measures and budget votes that would not directly lead to higher taxes.
Note: All of the above information came from this article on cnn.com.
The fact is, Sarah Palin told enough of the truth for her statement not to be an outright lie. She just failed to fill in pertinent details, obviously hoping the voting public was ignorant and would not bother checking facts. What, is she living beneath a rock?? Google is my friend. A good portion of the voting public knows how - and will - to check facts. Perhaps Sarah, and every other politician out there, might want to consider that option before they lie by omission.
Now, since I'm being fair here, let's pull out the following statement from Joe Biden - "As a matter of fact, John recently wrote an article in a major magazine saying that he wants to do forthe health care industry (is) deregulate it and let the free market move like he did for the banking industry."
Now for the facts, my friends.
In Congress, Sen. John McCain has frequently supported deregulation. Some aspects of that deregulation are now widely blamed for the problems on Wall Street.
In the current issue of a magazine for the American Academy of Actuaries, McCain discussed a change he wants to bring to the health care market: allowing people to buy plans across state lines. "Opening up the health insurance market to more vigorous nationwide competition, as we have done over the lastdecade in banking, would provide more choices of innovative products less burdened by the worst excesses of state-based regulation," he wrote in the magazine called "Contingencies."
Biden and Democratic presidential nominee Barack Obama have pointed to the first part of that quote to bolster their argument that McCain wants to see the health care industry undergo the same changes as the banking industry. But the reform McCain wants for health care — state deregulation — is only one of several types of deregulation that reshaped the banking industry. McCain has not proposed reshaping the health care industry in all the same ways as banks.
McCain and his opponents disagree over what impact state deregulation could have on the health care industry. McCain says the increased competition would benefit consumers; Obama says consumers would lose key protections, and insurance companies would be given more power.
Though a frequent fan of deregulation, McCain blames the current Wall street mess partly on federal regulatory agencies failing to do their jobs, and vows to "replace the outdated patchwork quilt of regulatory oversight" with a high-level, bipartisan oversight board.
Verdict:Misleading. McCain does want to overhaul state oversight of health care, but the deregulation he is calling for is not nearly as extensive as what was done to the banking system.
Note: All of the above information came from this article on cnn.com.
Again, Biden told a partial instead of a full truth. In effect, like Sarah Palin he lied. Enough with the lies, people. Try telling the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth for a change.
Also, check out this - very interesting.
S
My Writing Process
11 years ago
0 comments:
Post a Comment