Watching Anderson Cooper on CNN last night, I saw an interesting piece on an ad Senator Obama is running against John McCain. CNN was particularly critical of the ad, calling it dead wrong, not factual, and way out of context. And it seems CNN is not the only news organization calling "bull" on Obama's new Spanish-language television ad.
ABC's Jake Tapper did a blog post on this subject yesterday, saying, "There are some real factual problems with this ad, which is titled ‘Dos Caras,' or two faces." Tapper explains: "First of all, tying Sen. McCain - especially on the issue of immigration reform - to Limbaugh is unfair. Limbaugh opposed McCain on that issue. Vociferously. And in a larger sense, it's unfair to link McCain to Limbaugh on a host of issues since Limbaugh, as any even occasional listener of his knows, doesn't particularly care for McCain."
"Second," Tapper says, "the quotes of Limbaugh's are out of context. Railing against NAFTA in 1993, Limbaugh said, ‘If you are unskilled and uneducated, your job is going south. Skilled workers, educated people are going to do fine ‘cause those are the kinds of jobs NAFTA is going to create. If we are going to start rewarding no skills and stupid people, I'm serious, let the unskilled jobs that take absolutely no knowledge whatsoever to do - let stupid and unskilled Mexicans do that work."
The Obama ad only shows Limbaugh saying "...stupid and unskilled Mexicans," and "You shut your mouth or you get out!" As Tapper explains, "Not one of his most eloquent moments, to be sure, but his larger point was that NAFTA would mean that unskilled stupid Mexicans would be doing the jobs of unskilled stupid Americans. I'm not going to defend how he said it, but to act as if this was just a moment of Limbaugh slurring Mexicans is not accurate."
Next, Tapper says in reference to the second quote, "In 2006 Limbaugh was mocking an actual Mexican law..." that says foreigners need to keep their mouths shut or get out of the country. Tapper also notes that McCain has changed his immigration stance, which could be considered flip-flopping, but that "...the Obama campaign is quoting his selectively and unfairly to make their points." Tapper closes by saying, "...the Obama campaign has crossed a line into misleading the viewers of its new TV ad. In Spanish, the word is erroneo."
CNN also pointed out last night that Obama has spent more on negative advertising in the past week than has McCain. But both candidates are playing dirty at this point in the campaign. I expect it will only get uglier from here on out.
rate
email
print
link to this page
Comments: 82
Thanks, AC for the article. Wouldn't it be wonderful if the media actually calls them both on negative ads and it starts a snowball effect where candidates actually have ads about what they are for instead of what their opponents are not for?
I doubt that there is a Republican out there that can say with any certainty what McCain will do if he were granted the presidency of this great country. But that doesn't matter to these Republican 'water carriers'--they just stubbornly tow the Republican line even if McCain destroys this country in the process.
[I am listening to a McCain speech right now. What an absolutely disgusting and pathetic candidate these Republican 'water carriers' have.]
Now, it appears, McCain is simply spinning in circles with no reasonable plan to help America. Looks like he is about to crash another plane.
The same could be said of Democrats and Obama. All politicians lie to get elected... it really isn't a very good system if you ask me. The biggest and best liar gets the job. Bully for us!
Damn liberal media!!!!
On the other hand, Obama does not come off as a liar and Biden is experienced and also, for the most part, is honest.
If one were to stand back and take a look at what is offered from each party, Obama/Biden is a much safer bet.
"Now these same Republican 'water carriers' are upset with Obama over an ad that may be taking a few liberties with McCain's 'about face' on everything he use to stand for."
First, Obama has been conducting negative campaigning since the primaries. Just last night CNN said he was the FIRST candidate to launch a negative ad in the campaign. Second, taking a few liberties? Deliberate distortion of the truth, otherwise known as a lie. Third, about faces. How about these for Obama: NAFTA, FISA, the surge, drilling for oil, rolling back the Bush tax cuts, meeting with Ahmadinejad, etc., etc., etc. It cuts both ways and stings like a bitch, doesn't it?
"Now, it appears, McCain is simply spinning in circles with no reasonable plan to help America." Actually McCain just laid out specifics for the "financial crisis" yesterday while Obama has yet to take a concrete position, insteading waiting for all the facts to emerge.
"The difference is that McCain is clearly a very deceitful man and Palin is not at all what the Republican spin machine has been trying to sell." Really? Obama has not been deceitful? Why no investigative reporting on his ties to Tony Rezko, Bill Ayers, and Jeremiah Wright. Associations with negative characters comes to light, Obama disavows them despite years of ties, and he gets a pass.
"On the other hand, Obama does not come off as a liar and Biden is experienced and also, for the most part, is honest." Except that Obama is lying in his ads too. Biden is not running for president. Too bad. He is more experienced than Obama. As is McCain. And Palin. Even the Obama camp has dropped the experience argument, realizing it is a loser for them.
"If one were to stand back and take a look at what is offered from each party...." I have, and that is why I'm voting McCain / Palin.
Good for you, AC W. Carry that water right to the bitter end.
Limbaugh said this, Limbaugh is a republican, therefore McCain must be responsible for this. That defies logic. They dropped the ball. As simple as that.
However, McCain's ads were called BULL, Canards, multiple times. He has been called a downright liar. I don't see you admit or post that. If you keeping scores on non factual ads, the tally would be something like 20-3, McCain leading with 20 lies.
And your tally would be off. A quick scan of factcheck.org reveals that both guys have been distorting the truth, through outright lies or by omission of facts, for quite a while now. It's the nature of the beast.
I don't think he's the type for frivolous lawsuits, but I think this possibly could fall under libel law if Rush wanted to pursue it--this wasn't done by accident and you can imagine how many clips and how far back they had to go through to piece that together even out of context (1993 and 2006). From what I understand though he's been offered the opportunity by several media organizations to set things straight. It's going to be interesting how that pans out.
The whole right wing echo machine does have its occasional discrepancies
in order to maintain some semblence, (read illusion) of independence, but
they all know the butter on their bread comes from maintaining the illusion
of this mythologically great system that has to turn on its own people
and cannibalized them.
When the debate is over, slander becomes the tool of the loser. --Socrates.
--Bruce K
Socrates would be on my side ... think about it, it was the ancient Republicans that forced him to drink hemlock you dip.
And for the record, your last sentence above just supports my assertion.
Factcheck is updated. McCain has done it more. That's not the point. If you claim to be something, you live up to it.
I like the Obama that attacks! Take it to them. NO swift boating. This no John Kerry campaign. Fight hard. 47 days to go. Who cares about 'the politic of old' primary rhetoric?
Attack, Attack, Attack. Let's talk about Palin's D in macroeconomics and her charging rape victims money to get they rape kit. Put that on an ad. I will contribute for that. One week before the elections, Keating 5 baby. It's relevant.
Attack, attack, attack? So you won't mind when McCain does it either? You won't mind the ads about Bill Ayers, Jeremiah Wright, and Tony Rezko? You won't mind the ads on Johnson and Raines at Fannie Mae? You won't mind the ads about Obama being #2 on the list of recipients of money from F&F for a 20 year period, even though he's only been in the Senate three and a half years? You won't mind the attacks on Obama's flip flops on NAFTA, FISA, taxes, domestic drilling, the surge?
It works both ways, and it's going to be ugly.
If anyone on either side says anything about themselves they just just relentlessly attacked for it. When the people are not interested or capable of making rational choices democracy is a farce.
Now, looking back, what caused this situation ... lots of ideas on that, but does it matter?
Do we fix it, or do we try to cut the people out of the system, or say continue to cut the people out of the system and pretend that what we are doing is still democratic?
Somewhere along the line I think we have to realize we are not going to kill the rich or the poor, nor would we or should we want to, we have to stop the big party and get down to work. That means making every American part of the a system that we all should have been in since birth, it means demanding something of everyone, and depending on those with more to help out ... patriotism.
Do we need a world war to motivate it or can be depend on ourselves to do the needful?
Fox News fair and balance, right?
Don't you get it. You don't rationalize bad behavior by pointing to bad behavior. Just cause OJ gets away with murder doesn't mean you get to try it.
That was Crap and everyone knows it. How can he put his name to, "I'm Barack Obama and I support this Message." Makes me laugh.
The reason for the focus on this add is because Obama has been touting the image of change from Washington politics as usual. Now he finds himself doing the very things he said would stay away from. It is no secret that McCain has been using dirty ads since the beginning of the campaign. That is not new.
What is new is that Obama is now engaging in the very type of politics he has decried, and, according to CNN, has now begun to outpace McCain in distorted, misleading, and false ads.
That's the explanation. Not excusing it from McCain, but pointing out a major shift by Obama by when it suited his needs.
And I watch CNN, not Fox News.
Very Apt AC
Note, we are a nation of immigrants who want to close the door after the last of our relatives gets in.
Billy, both sides are guilty of distortions, falsehoods, exaggerations, choose your adjective, and both sides blame the other. It is the ugly side of American politics. Yet every election cycle I find myself hoping that someone will take the high road. And every election cycle I'm disappointed.
Anderson Cooper, and Keith Olberman or both dolts, I cann't stand any of the media anymore ... we need to clone Walter Cronkite and some of the old guard.
The mindset of the Republicans is just so repugnant, they go off and do whatever, and then raise major stinks over every minor thing that other side does.
Why is it so hard for the Democrats to see the Republicans never fight fair, and do not even care about fairness in the election ... do you think they care about telling the truth or living up to the promises?
For the longest time McCain didn't want to run a 'dirty' smear campaign. Even during the Democratic convention McCain congratulated Obama.
I'm noticing that recently he is more apt to speak up about things. It is about time!
"The mindset of the Republicans is just so repugnant, they go off and do whatever, and then raise major stinks over every minor thing that other side does. Why is it so hard for the Democrats to see the Republicans never fight fair, and do not even care about fairness in the election ... do you think they care about telling the truth or living up to the promises?"
You can't be serious? Are you blind or just a partisan hack? BOTH sides are equally guilty and your comment could just as easily be applied to the Democratic Party. It's the nature of American politics.
I will gladly admit it, AC W, along with millions of others who also carry the water for Obama, in hope of putting out the massive fire that the GOP started.
Sure there are Democrats who voted with the Republicans, but it it not Democrats who come up with this stuff, or who have an agenda of bankrupting the government so they can screw eveything up and take advantage of Americans even more without regulation.
As I just posted, we should be glad that we did not switch social security over to private accounts.
Obama is different enough to get my vote, and any other American who is not a multi-millionaire should think twice about falling into the McCain/Palin delusion.
And can you not see the Democratic Party has been hijacked by socialists? Take from the rich and give to the poor. Where have I heard that before? Other than Robin Hood, Karl Marx. To me, that is not at all amusing. And if you can't see that, there is nothing I can do for you.
Democrats and not bankrupting the government? Beside the obvious fact that the government doesn't have any money (it's taxpayer money-which is why I hate the phrase government is going to give...you fill in the blank--government doesn't give anything; other taxpayers do), have you seen the trillions Obama plans to spend over the next 10 years (new spending), even though he wouldn't be in office that long?
It's a massive government growth plan.
Personally, I'd love private accounts. Then I could choose where to invest for my retirement, of my own free will, without the government dictating it to me, and I would probably get a better return on my investment.
Economics 101: The Robin Hood Syndrome - You, too, Can Live the Fairy Tale!
History 101: The Melding of Karl Marx and Barack Obama - Obarx Unlimited
Obama 77%
McCain 56%
Obama is no different than any other politician. He's ambitious and driven. He's not above lying "for the Greater Good" will take money from anybody (and he has).
Runs dirty ads and pats himself on the back continually, proud how he's running a clean race.
He's no different and there will be no GOOD change.
Kathy! You're going crazy with the visuals! I love it!
And can you not see the Democratic Party has been hijacked by socialists? Take from the rich and give to the poor. Where have I heard that before? Other than Robin Hood, Karl Marx. To me, that is not at all amusing. And if you can't see that, there is nothing I can do for you."
My, my, you are dense! There is nothing fiscally conservative about the present Republican party. Nothing, absolutely nothing.
Cathi L. wrote: "Yeah, Obama is advised by Franklin Raines. That really shows fiscal responsibility. "
Another not-to-bright, FAUX News brainwashed, right wingers. Go here if you want to be educated regarding this idiotic lie:
http://voices.washingtonpost.com/the-trail/2008/09/19/_the_ad_obama_has.html
But, of course, Cathi, you will not because you are quite pleased knowing what little you know as long as it follows your hate-filled line of thinking.
If McCain becomes president, you won't even have a jar.
"My, my, you are dense! There is nothing fiscally conservative about the present Republican party. Nothing, absolutely nothing." You're right. No question Republican spending is out of control too. But it is not as out of control as Democratic spending. We are forced to choose the lesser of two evils. And that would be McCain.
I would much rather spend billions in our country, than in foreign wars which is exactly what you will get with McCain.
"The Washington Post reported that Franklin Raines "has taken calls from Barack Obama's presidential campaign seeking his advice on mortgage and housing policy matters. Raines said in a statement through the campaign, "I'm not an advisor to Obama nor have I provided his campaign with advice on housing or economic matters." Now, McCain spokesman Brian Rogers notes that Obama didn't contradict the claim when it first appeared in the Post, that he only contradicts it now when McCain puts it in an ad."
Limbaugh changes his tune on anyone and anything he is lambasting dependent on who and what the current Republican theme song is glorifying.
One can use Limbaugh on any issue whatsoever and be more than likely right. He has probably derided virtually every single ethnic group in America at some point in his career, even the drug addicts he sees in the mirror every morning.
Rush Limbaugh:
"We're not sexists, we're chauvinists -- we're male chauvinist pigs, and we're happy to be because we think that's what men were destined to be. We think that's what women want."
“Feminism was established to allow unattractive women easier access to the mainstream.”
“Women's liberation is just a lot of foolishness. It's men who are discriminated against. They can't bear children. And no one is likely to do anything about that.”
Then, on SARAH PALIN: The babe is the icing on the cake aspect, something the Democrats can't claim on their side.
No one could ever in a million years get a Rush Limbaugh quote out of context. One only needs an IQ of 5 to the 2nd power
AC, As to the attempt in your argument that the Republican campaign is not in service of the Limbaugh show, then here's a conversation between the President of the United States and the man.
THE PRESIDENT: Hello!
RUSH: Oh, jeez. The president?
THE PRESIDENT: Rush Limbaugh?
RUSH: Yes, sir, Mr. President.
THE PRESIDENT: President George W. Bush calling to congratulate you on 20 years of important and excellent broadcasting.
RUSH: Well, thank you, sir. You've stunned me! (laughing) I'm shocked. But thank you so much.
THE PRESIDENT: That's hard to do.
RUSH: (laughing) I know, it is.
THE PRESIDENT: I'm here with a room full of admirers. There are two others that would like to speak to you and congratulate you, people who consider you friends and really appreciate the contribution you've made.
It's way more than fair to take anything from Rush and use it as part of a political ad.
Sounds like a bit more than being a fan, if the audience that this Republican Party endorsement is aimed at is the American public (it wasn't just Bush who endorsed Limbaugh in this interview). That McCain/Palin even is being considered viable by half the American public certainly indicates a serious flaw in simple logical thinking among a great many.
Give it up already, or go back to grade school at least.
"That McCain/Palin even is being considered viable by half the American public certainly indicates a serious flaw in simple logical thinking among a great many."
You know, that HALF of the public feels the same way about the thinking of those supporting Obama / Biden. What makes them wrong and you right, or you wrong and them right? Personal opinion.
Rush Limbaugh's mad ranting?
That was definately the Bush et al message on Aug. 1, 2008
AC, yes, *mad ranting* has historically generated a lot of stuff. Seem to remember lots of *mad ranters* whom people madly followed all the way to exterminating anyone who didn't dance to the tune.
The Hate Jocks, in-between worshipping the right, call for the bombing of Mexico, the shooting of Mexicans and plain old ridiculing anything Latino. I see no immigration debate, non, just hate geared towards violence against Latinos.
True story about local hate jock, posted this on my web site :
Steve Mitton told his radio audience that local schools were expelling kids for not saluting the Mexican flag. Only a psycho would believe such a lie.
“what school is it?!” the psycho demanded to know.
“ I can’t tell you cause I don’t think they are doing it anymore” Steve back peddled.
“I did not spend 20 years in the military, risking my life, so that some liberal can force kids to salute a foreign flag” psycho exclaimed.
“They did it last year, but I don’t think they’re doing it anymore” Steve added.
“We need to confront them about it” psycho replied.
“Call me back during the break and I will tell you what school it is” Steve relented.
I feared psycho was going to confront the school with a gun.
http://kkkbar.org/MORMONISM.aspx
These hate jocks will not be satisfied until the shooting starts. Did I mention he’s a Republiklan.
Would a self respecting Jew vote for any member of the Nazi party?
RUSH LIMBAUGH AND MEXICANS SLANDERED BY OBAMA CAMPAIGN
http://www.gather.com/viewArticle.jsp?articleId=281474977454764
You beat me to the subject by several days, but I have a link to Rush's WSJ op-ed response, as well as my own two cents, including my statement, and defense of "Rush Limbaugh is a great American."
Great catch, and analysis, AC!