Fact-Checking the End Game Smears

As the election cycle enters its final week, the lies coming from the McCain campaign are multiplying both in their numbers and in their sleaziness. Chances are you've heard one or more of the ones listed here. Please click the links for further information if you have any doubts on just how false they really are.

ALSO, please forward this information to everyone and anyone! We need to get the truth out. We can't afford to elect "leaders" who will say or do anything just to hold power and further their own political ambitions. Now is the time to hold them accountable. Once they are in office, there is little we can do to stop them (see: George W. Bush).

Driver's Licenses, Social Security, and Healthcare for Immigrants

Ad accuses Obama of wanting to give driver's licenses to illegals (including terrorists), healthcare to illegals, social security to illegals...

• http://www.factcheck.org/elections-2008/a_license_to_kill.html

"Hardly a word in the ad is true. … despicable terror-pandering of the highest order."

Obama is Going to Take Away the Guns!

An ad accuses Obama of voting to "deny citizens the right of self-protection", and that he would make the homeowner a criminal in cases of home-invasion. All he voted for was to uphold a previously existing local gun ban in a small town, which had a maximum penalty of a $750 fine.

• http://www.factcheck.org/elections-2008/the_rifle_associations_true_story.html

Obama's Tax Plan is Bad for Small Business Owners

In fact, it would benefit the vast majority of small businesses.

• http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2008/10/09/fact-check-obama-tax-plan-and-small-businesses/
• http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2008/10/21/fact-check-would-obama-hike-taxes-on-small-businesses-that-employ-16-million/
• http://www.factcheck.org/elections-2008/right_change_is_wrong.html

Obama is a "Socialist" who wants to "Spread the Wealth"

Ridiculous right-wing lying and fear-mongering at its finest.

• http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2008/10/18/fact-check-obama-said-he-would-spread-his-wealth-around/
• http://www.factcheck.org/elections-2008/obamas_welfare.html
• http://www.factcheck.org/elections-2008/spread_the_tax_hooey.html

Obama and "congressional liberals" want to raise taxes on families making $42,000

It's just false. This is not now and never has been part of Obama's tax proposals.

• http://www.factcheck.org/elections-2008/more_tax_deceptions.html
• http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2008/10/15/fact-check-did-obama-vote-to-raise-taxes-for-people-making-as-little-as-42000/
• http://www.factcheck.org/elections-2008/spread_the_tax_hooey.html

Obama voted 94 times to increase taxes.

Again, not even close.

• http://www.factcheck.org/elections-2008/tax_tally_trickery.html

McCain and Palin are Socialists!

Actually this one is true. Well, in as much as, they support the same type of "wealth-spreading" policies that they are accusing Barack Obama of.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/27424491/

Obama wants sex-ed for kindergarteners?!?

This has been simultaneously one of the more laughable and one of the more despicable attack ads created by the McCain campaign. The facts are below, but ask yourself: Is someone who would stoop this low, simply to satisfy his own political ambition, really qualified to be the leader of the free world?

The piece of legislation that the McCain ad is referring to called for "age-appropriate" sex education all the way from K thru 12. What this meant specifically in regards to younger children was simply teaching them how to recognize inappropriate touching and avoid sexual predators. It had nothing to do with teaching them "comprehensive sex education" on topics like male/female physiology, intercourse, etc.

As such, the bill would probably be supported by most parents; assuming most parents don't want their children to be molested by strangers. But even the odd few that had some sort of objection would have had the option to opt-out of this curriculum for their children!

(I wonder if the Obama campaign considered responding with an ad suggesting that McCain supports child molestation, since he is apparently against this legislation.)

Source: FactCheck.org

Obama and the Slum Lord

This is another topic that was brought up originally by the Clinton campaign during the primaries. There was lots and lots of innuendo, but after thorough investigation... it all amounted to nothing.

It can be summed up thusly:

• Tony Rezko was a powerful real estate developer in Chicago.
• He was an early financial supporter of Obama.
• Obama bought a house next to a piece of land that was bought by Rezko. Obama later bought part of that lot from the Rezko's, at market value.
• Rezko never requested nor received political favors from Obama, save one: Obama gave an internship to a friend's son at Rezko's request.
• Many years later, Rezko was indicted for crimes that we have no reason to believe Obama was aware of. Obama severed ties at that point.

Nothing illegal or improper has ever been found... and don't think for a moment that the GOP war machine hasn't been digging HARD. Yes, he received campaign contributions from the man, just as he has from millions of others. He has been forthright in stating that the real estate deal to buy his house -- while again not improper -- was a "boneheaded move" simply because of the conclusions people might draw.

Notably missing from ALL the information on ties between Obama and Rezko is even a HINT that there was some sort of wrong-doing or quid-pro-quo from Obama in return for the campaign financing help that he received. It is widely believed that Rezko's main reason for supporting Obama was that it made him feel important/connected to be close to a political candidate. It was merely a status symbol for him.

Sources:

• http://www.salon.com/news/feature/2008/02/01/rezko/index1.html
• http://www.suntimes.com/news/watchdogs/757340,CST-NWS-watchdog24.article

Obama Voted Against Our Troops!

The McCain campaign threw this out on a commercial a few months ago. They recently trotted it out again, this time by Cindy McCain saying that Senator Obama had voted against "funding for my son".

Senator Obama has voted for troop funding at least 10 times since he's been in the senate. The GOP is referring to a single vote that took place in 2007. On this particular bill, the democrats had added a non-binding call to withdraw the troops from Iraq. Senator Obama voted for that version of the bill. John McCain (who did not vote for or against the measure) urged President Bush to veto the bill, which he did.

(As such, it would also be true to say that "John McCain urged a veto of funding for our troops." Which would be just as misleading as their claim about Obama.)

When the bill came back through the senate, Obama this time voted against it in protest. When he did so, he sent out a press release explaing his decision. In read in part: "We must fund our troops. But we owe them something more. We owe them a clear, prudent plan to relieve them of the burden of policing someone else's civil war."

Sources:

• FactCheck.org: The Truth on Troop Support
• CNN.com: Did Obama vote to cut funds for troops?
  
  

Did Obama Vote 94 Times to Increase Taxes?

Yes... if you are John McCain and you live in la-la land. McCain & Company have been repeating this highly misleading statistic quite often in recent days, trying to scare voters away from Obama. He even repeated it during the second presidential debate... all this in spite of the truth.

FactCheck.org did an in-depth analysis of the 94 votes in question, and came up with the following findings:

• Twenty-three votes were for measures that would have produced no tax increase at all; they were against proposed 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 corporations or affluent individuals.
• Eleven votes would have increased taxes on those making more than $1 million a year – in order to fund 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. We found their tally included a total of 17 votes on seven measures, effectively padding their total by 10.
• 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.

A closer look reveals that Obama has 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.

Does Obama Hang Out with Terrorists?

This claim was sufficiently debunked during the primary elections, which should have been the end of it. But the McCain campaign has recently trotted it out again in a desperate attempt to smear Sen. Obama and call his judgment into question. In particular, Sarah Palin has mentioned it at nearly every public appearance she has made in the past week.

Here are the facts. The man in question, Bill Ayers, was a member of a radical organization in the 1960's (when Obama was a young child) that protested the Vietnam war. Today he is a respected professor of education at the University of Illinois. To refer to him in the present tense as a terrorist is highly deceiving. In any case, Obama's actual ties to the man are tenuous at best:

• They lived in the same neighborhood in Chicago.
• They once served on the board of a charitable organization in the late 90's.
• Obama once attended a democratic fundraiser at Ayers' home -- 12 years ago -- long after Ayers had turned his life around and become an educator.

That's it. They are not friends or "pals"; barely acquaintances.

What's even more interesting about the Sarah Palin claim is that she said she was simply quoting an article in the New York Times. But that article clearly debunks the "terrorist pal" theory:

"The two men do not appear to have been close. Nor has Mr. Obama ever expressed sympathy for the radical views and actions of Mr. Ayers, whom he has called 'somebody who engaged in detestable acts 40 years ago, when I was 8.' "

So either Sarah Palin is purposely lying, or she simply can't read and process information as well as the average sixth grader. You decide which is worse.

UPDATE 10/12: We've added a few more sources below, all debunking the claims being made by McCain/Palin. What's more disturbing is that their ads continue to run on TV, radio, and the Internet, despite it having now been shown conclusively that it is full of lies.

Additional Sources:

• FactCheck.org: "He Lied" About Bill Ayers?
• CNN: Is Obama Palling Around with Terrorists?
• Newsweek: Assessing Ayers: Innuendo vs. Information