In the Tank, or On the Ball

Steve Schmidt, John McCain’s Rove clone, has accused the New York Times of being “in the tank” for Obama. In GOPSpeak, that means the Times does not always kowtow to the McCain campaign. Here are excerpts from the most recent article to upset Mr. Schmidt.

Drilling Down on the Facts in McCain’s Speech

Speaking in Albuquerque on Monday, Senator John McCain attacked Senator Barack Obama on several fronts that by now have become familiar. But many of his charges relating to the economic meltdown, taxation and health care contained inaccuracies or exaggerations of his own position or Mr. Obama’s.

  • 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…
  • Mr. McCain also said that Mr. Obama “was silent on the regulation of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, and his Democratic allies in Congress opposed every effort to rein them in.” That oversimplifies a complicated situation that was the subject of partisan wrangling dating back to the 1990s, long before Mr. Obama arrived in the Senate in 2005.
  • 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.
  • Mr. McCain also criticized Mr. Obama’s policies on taxes, in language similar to last month’s first debate, with a few new fillips. But fact-checking organizations have already repeatedly dismissed the bulk of the accusations he made as inaccurate or exaggerated.
    • 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.
    • According to Mr. McCain, Mr. Obama also has “promised to double taxes on every American with a dividend or an investment.” This too is false: Mr. Obama has said he favors raising the capital gains tax rate from its present 15 percent to somewhere between 20 and 28 percent, and that “my guess would be it would be significantly lower than that” 28 percent ceiling.
    • More importantly, however, Mr. Obama’s planned increase would apply only to couples making $250,000 a year or more, or less than two percent of the population. It would not, therefore, double taxes on every American. The same applies to any increase in the Social Security payroll tax, which Mr. McCain also included in his list of taxes that would supposedly rise for the middle class if Mr. Obama were elected.
    • Finally, Mr. McCain said that Mr. Obama has “promised higher taxes on electricity.” This is apparently a reference to Mr. Obama’s support for a cap-and-trade system to reduce carbon emissions. But Mr. McCain has also endorsed the same concept, albeit with less detail, which would impose new levies on the consumption of coal, gas and oil in order to encourage a shift to clean and renewable sources of energy. So by that definition, Mr. McCain too wants higher taxes on electricity.
  • 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.
    • Secondly, the health care system that Mr. Obama favors is not one that would place government “in charge of health care.” Adults would be allowed to keep the health insurance that they have now, to choose from competing private plans or, as Mr. Obama has repeatedly said on the campaign trail, sign up for a new public plan that will offer much the same coverage that members of Congress have.
    • In addition, Mr. McCain’s statement that Mr. Obama would allow “bureaucrats to stand between you and your doctor” is misleading. That statement implies that the government would have a role in individuals or families choosing a doctor, which is not correct. With the possible exception of Medicaid and SCHIP, Mr. Obama’s health care plan would allow people to retain physician choice.

Mr. Schmidt, in case you’ve missed his bullet-head image on the trail, is the man who runs the McCain campaign. He decides the attack — including, apparently, the mistaken accusations catalogued above — and the rest of over-all strategy. Most interesting to me was the news that it was Schmidt who picked Sarah Palin as the running mate.

Advertisements

One thought on “In the Tank, or On the Ball

  1. Of course we all remember Palin bad mouthing Couric (“the Sarah Palin in that interview was annoyed”), and accusing her of ambush journalism (“no matter what you say, you’re gonna get clobbered.”)
    http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/10/03/palin-on-fox-news-couric_n_131655.html?page=3

    No wonder Schmidt loved her. She’s been blaming the media right from the beginning. He probably didn’t even have to coach her on the power of manipulation. She was ready, willing and able.

    At a rally in California the other day, she very slyly warned women there’d be “a special place in hell” for them, should they not vote for her. Innocently, she claims, “Madeline Albright!! She said it! I didn’t!” Nevermind the fact Albright was misquoted, Ezra points out what is more annoying:

    “I’m struck, rather, by her closing line. At the end, where, after reading the incendiary quote, she says, “and now, California, let’s see what a comment like I just made, how that is turned into whatever it’s turned into tomorrow in the newspaper.” Presumably, what the newspapers will report is that she…uttered this comment. But you’re seeing this in a lot of Palin comments: She’s using the media’s treatment of her as a way to evade responsibility for her own statements. When she says something crazy and the media reports that she said something crazy, well wouldn’t you just know they’d do that? Just shows how much they hate us, and in turn, how much you should hate them. Wink. I can’t remember George W. Bush engaging the culture war with anything even approaching this ferocity in 2004.”

    http://www.prospect.org/csnc/blogs/ezraklein_archive?month=10&year=2008&base_name=palin_and_the_coffee_cup

    This is “working the refs” like I’ve never seen.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s