Fact check debate Nonsense in Nashville

[strollingbones]

FactCheck.org: FactChecking Debate No. 2

Summary

McCain and Obama debated for the second time, in Nashville. We noted some misleading statements and mangled facts:

McCain proposed to write down the amount owed by over-mortgaged homeowners and claimed the idea as his own: “It’s my proposal, it's not Sen. Obama's proposal, it's not President Bush's proposal.” But the idea isn’t new. Obama had endorsed something similar two weeks earlier, and authority for the treasury secretary to grant such relief was included in the recently passed $700 billion financial rescue package.

Both candidates oversimplified the causes of the financial crisis. McCain blamed it on Democrats who resisted tighter regulation of federal mortgage agencies. Obama blamed it on financial deregulation backed by Republicans. We find both are right, with plenty of blame left over for others, from home buyers to the chairman of the Federal Reserve.

Obama said his health care plan would lower insurance premiums by up to $2,500 a year. Experts we’ve consulted see little evidence such savings would materialize.

McCain misstated his own health care plan, saying he’d give a $5,000 tax credit to “every American” His plan actually would provide only $2,500 per individual, or $5,000 for couples and families. He also misstated Obama’s health care plan, claiming it would levy fines on “small businesses” that fail to provide health insurance. Actually, Obama’s plan exempts “small businesses.”
McCain lamented that the U.S. was forced to “withdraw in humiliation” from Somalia in 1994, but he failed to note that he once proposed to cut off funding for troops to force a faster withdrawal.

Obama said, “I favor nuclear power.” That’s a stronger statement than we've heard him make before. As recently as last December, he said, “I am not a nuclear energy proponent.”

McCain claimed “1.3 million people in America make their living off eBay.” Actually, only 724,000 persons in the U.S. have income from eBay, and only some of them rely on it as their primary source.

see full anaylis of debate at above link

 

[del]

what a shock. 2 politicians that lie, exaggerate and flip flop.

i have to go rest; i feel the vapors coming on.

 

[Silence]

what a shock. 2 politicians that lie, exaggerate and flip flop.

i have to go rest; i feel the vapors coming on.

vapors?

The minute I heard McCain mention buying up the bad mortgages and claim it as his own I knew he was lying because I heard Obama say it before...I also seem to recall the Repubs bitching about the idea.

seems those worried about a socialist nation have to worry about McCain as much as they're worried about Obama.

 

[Ravi]

The one about Fannie and Freddie was, IMO, McCain's biggest lie. Or maybe he really is stupid...but F&F did NOT make subprime loans.

I thought it was pretty funny that McCain said 300 billion would be enough to buy up bad mortgages...wth do we need a 700 billion bailout for then? His tacit admission that mortgages aren't the main cause of this mess.

 

[del]

The one about Fannie and Freddie was, IMO, McCain's biggest lie. Or maybe he really is stupid...but F&F did NOT make subprime loans.

I thought it was pretty funny that McCain said 300 billion would be enough to buy up bad mortgages...wth do we need a 700 billion bailout for then? His tacit admission that mortgages aren't the main cause of this mess.

i thought obama's 180 on genocide was telling. last year he said that the US use of military force to prevent genocide/ethnic cleansing in iraq wasn't a good enough reason to stay there longer.

last night, he said,"When genocide is happening, when ethnic cleansing is happening . . . and we stand idly by, that diminishes us."

like i said, politicians flipflopping. i'm shocked.

 

[Ravi]

i thought obama's 180 on genocide was telling. last year he said that the US use of military force to prevent genocide/ethnic cleansing in iraq wasn't a good enough reason to stay there longer.

last night, he said,"When genocide is happening, when ethnic cleansing is happening . . . and we stand idly by, that diminishes us."

like i said, politicians flipflopping. i'm shocked.

There was no ethnic cleansing going on Iraq when we invaded, so I'm not sure that would qualify as a flip flop...but I'd have to see that quote.

 

[del]

There was no ethnic cleansing going on Iraq when we invaded, so I'm not sure that would qualify as a flip flop...but I'd have to see that quote.

you're right, there wasn't, and you know how i feel about the war. however...

obama last night:
"So when genocide is happening, when ethnic cleansing is happening somewhere around the world and we stand idly by, that diminishes us.

And so I do believe that we have to consider it as part of our interests, our national interests, in intervening where possible."

obama last year:

SUNAPEE, N.H. (AP) - Democratic presidential hopeful Barack Obama said Thursday the United States cannot use its military to solve humanitarian problems and that preventing a potential genocide in Iraq isn't a good enough reason to keep U.S. forces there.

Obama: Don't Stay in Iraq Over Genocide

imagine, a politician telling people what he thinks they want to hear.
i'm stunned. change my ass.

 

[Ravi]

Okay, even though I can't find the question he was answering in your link, it was a pretty stupid change of mind.

 

[xsited1]

What is truly sad is that one of them will become President of the United States. And the people who will be responsible will be the ones who voted for them.

 

[del]

Okay, even though I can't find the question he was answering in your link, it was a pretty stupid change of mind.

here you go....from last night's debate. apparently, he wants to go into Darfur. great idea, huh?

BROKAW: Sen. Obama, let me ask you if -- let's see if we can establish tonight the Obama doctrine and the McCain doctrine for the use of United States combat forces in situations where there's a humanitarian crisis, but it does not affect our national security.

Take the Congo, where 4.5 million people have died since 1998, or take Rwanda in the earlier dreadful days, or Somalia.

What is the Obama doctrine for use of force that the United States would send when we don't have national security issues at stake?

OBAMA: Well, we may not always have national security issues at stake, but we have moral issues at stake.

If we could have intervened effectively in the Holocaust, who among us would say that we had a moral obligation not to go in?

If we could've stopped Rwanda, surely, if we had the ability, that would be something that we would have to strongly consider and act.

So when genocide is happening, when ethnic cleansing is happening somewhere around the world and we stand idly by, that diminishes us.

And so I do believe that we have to consider it as part of our interests, our national interests, in intervening where possible.

But understand that there's a lot of cruelty around the world. We're not going to be able to be everywhere all the time. That's why it's so important for us to be able to work in concert with our allies.

Let's take the example of Darfur just for a moment. Right now there's a peacekeeping force that has been set up and we have African Union troops in Darfur to stop a genocide that has killed hundreds of thousands of people.

We could be providing logistical support, setting up a no-fly zone at relatively little cost to us, but we can only do it if we can help mobilize the international community and lead. And that's what I intend to do when I'm president.

 

[AVG-JOE]

...imagine, a politician telling people what he thinks they want to hear.
i'm stunned. change my ass.

Change it to what, exactly?

-Joe

 

[Ravi]

hmmm...I admit, I don't know enough about Darfur to make an intelligent comment. But if it really was a matter of little cost to us, I'd be okay with it. And quite honestly, I don't care if we pull out of Iraq and they all get into a power struggle and kill each other off.

Though I do feel guilty thinking that.

 

[del]

hmmm...I admit, I don't know enough about Darfur to make an intelligent comment. But if it really was a matter of little cost to us, I'd be okay with it. And quite honestly, I don't care if we pull out of Iraq and they all get into a power struggle and kill each other off.

Though I do feel guilty thinking that.

i don't know much about Darfur, either, but i know we're beyond broke.

i kinda feel the same way about iraq, although i do have a "we broke it, we own it" sense of responsibility towards them.

if only W hadn't been a bedwetter as a kid.......

 

[AVG-JOE]

hmmm...I admit, I don't know enough about Darfur to make an intelligent comment. But if it really was a matter of little cost to us, I'd be okay with it. And quite honestly, I don't care if we pull out of Iraq and they all get into a power struggle and kill each other off.

Though I do feel guilty thinking that.

I have to admit... I would prefer that the US Military be thought of as the "Worlds Firefighters" instead of the "Worlds Police Force", if leaving everybody else alone is not an option.

Nobody likes it when the cops show up, but firefighters are usually welcomed, as a bad day is in progress.

-Joe

 

[Ravi]

I also agree with the you broke it you own it philosophy. I hate it when my thought collide like this!!!

Though given the state of our economy, it may be in the interests of national security to pull out of Iraq.

 

[N4mddissent]

Most of the time I appreciate Factcheck's efforts, but they, like many others sometimes seem to have difficulty with certain nuanced positions. From their own site:

Obama flatly said he favored nuclear energy – embracing it more warmly than in the past:

Obama: Contrary to what Sen. McCain keeps on saying, I favor nuclear power as one component of our overall energy mix.

Previously Obama has been more hesitant. He said at a town hall meeting in Newton, Iowa, on Dec. 30, 2007, when asked if he was "truly comfortable" with the safety of nuclear power:

Obama (Dec. 30, 2007 I start off with the premise that nuclear energy is not optimal. ... I am not a nuclear energy proponent.

He then went on to say later in the same response that he has "not ruled out nuclear ... but only so far as it is clean and safe." The energy plan Obama released in October 2007 only grudgingly conceded that more nuclear power is probably needed to reduce carbon emissions: "It is unlikely that we can meet our aggressive climate goals if we eliminate nuclear power from the table."

I fail to see any real inconsistency here. I wonder why it was included? Perhaps they felt they had too many McCain mistakes and didn't want to seem biased? About the genocide thing, it seems from reading the entire article that Obama was saying then that we can't use the military alone in a unilateral way to prevent genocide. He stated clearly that he didn't see the potential of ethnic violence in Iraq as reason to stay because he believes that there is enough stability to make it unlikely if we do a cautious withdrawal and that there would be military forces in the area to intervene if necessary. Just going by your quote from last night,

So when genocide is happening, when ethnic cleansing is happening somewhere around the world and we stand idly by, that diminishes us.

And so I do believe that we have to consider it as part of our interests, our national interests, in intervening where possible."

Intervention does not exclusively imply unilateral military action but can include diplomacy and/or multilateral U.N. backed interventions. Unless there is more context to suggest he was speaking strictly about American military intervention, I don't necessarily see that as inconsistent with the context of his earlier statements.

I think nuance is confusing for some. Like a position in which one supports clean coal technology but does not advocate clean coal technology. Idealistic goals with practical plans sometimes result in positions where you compromise and find yourself with views like this.

And by the way, did everyone notice that Factcheck did indeed correct itself on Biden's claim that McCain voted the same way as Obama, against funding the troops? They said McCain was absent and that was true on one version of the bill, but an earlier version McCain did vote against, for the exact reasons Biden gave- it had a timetable. Good to see that they can at least admit when they're wrong.

 

[dilloduck]

I hate it when my thought collide like this!!!

Ravi----the human Hadron !

 

[N4mddissent]

Ravi----the human Hadron !

lol
when thoughts collide at the speed of light what happens? Will they become tiny black holes, voids where reason is lost? Perhaps we will discover the "Hick's" Boson?