Garfield's Ad Review
Stay on top of the news, sign up for our free newsletters
Lying Politicos McCain and Obama Should Take the Oath
We're Heartbroken That Fabricating Big Lies From Nominal Truths Has Become Standard Operating Procedure
For those of us who support Barack Obama, watching the behavior of John McCain lately has been perversely satisfying. Alarming poll numbers have yielded desperate tactics of the most self-defeating kind.To wit: Gov. Gidget aboard the Hate Talk Express accusing Obama of "palling around with terrorists." Oh, yeah, with the global economy in freefall, that'll entice the independents. Meantime, the campaign is on the air with a spot directly accusing Obama of being a liar.
|
Title: Hypocritical Candidate: John McCain ![]() Agency: Foxhole Productions |
|
| Here the sleaze artists in the McCain camp have caught the sleaze artists in the Obama camp red-handed. |
TV-NEWS CLIP: Obama's presidential campaign is asking Missouri law enforcement to target anyone who lies or runs a misleading television ad.
VOICE-OVER: How hypocritical. Obama's Social Security attack was called "a falsehood." His health-care attack ... "misleading." Obama's stem-cell attack ... "not true." Barack Obama. He promised better. He lied.
JOHN MCCAIN: I'm John McCain and I approve this message.
It's easy to roll one's eyes over this kind of charge -- surely the ultimate case of the pot calling the kettle black -- but don't roll them too fast.
It's true.
Yeah, McCain's a liar, and Obama's a liar too. Here the sleaze artists in the McCain camp have caught the sleaze artists in the Obama camp red-handed. Each Obama assertion about McCain's record, vetted by independent fact-checkers, was exposed as a shameful twisting of facts. For instance, before he changed his position in 2001, McCain did oppose stem-cell research. But the Obama ad's participle form -- "has stood in the way" -- suggests McCain's enduring opposition. Which is a lie.
It would be equally true to say, "With the global economy reeling from cataclysmic events, John McCain needed to wear diapers and cried every day." That was true, in 1936, during the Great Depression, when the candidate was born. But not lately. (Probably.)
So this is all very discouraging. Admittedly, we surrendered to the sick pleasure of Mr. Straight Talk Express revealing himself as just another cynical, self-serving politician, but we're correspondingly disgusted with Mr. Change We Can Believe In, who has revealed exactly the same thing. More broadly, we're simply heartbroken that this tactic -- fabricating big lies from decontextualized elements of nominal truth -- has become, in our most important national discourse, standard operating procedure. Needless to say, if Crest or Wal-Mart or Bridgestone tried it, there would be hell (or at least lots of lawyers) to pay.
Two years ago, we proposed something called The Oath, whereby every candidate would pledge, on behalf of his or her entire campaign, "not to lie or misrepresent my opponent's record and positions on the stump, in my press materials or in my advertising."
The theory was that no candidate could refuse to make such a pledge, and because every trespass is now documented by the opponent or the media, nobody could dare break it. Or, as we put it back then, "The Straight Talk Express will be like that bus in 'Speed.' Take your foot off the truth gas, and the whole thing explodes."
Alas, needless to say, nobody took us up on this. The result is the current spectacle: tens of millions of dollars worth of absolute malarky inundating Florida, Ohio, Pennsylvania, Missouri, et. al.
It's funny that, amid McCain-Palin's most despicable smears, this ad happens to be dead-on accurate. The irony is that it no longer matters. When a liar and hypocrite calls someone a liar and hypocrite, who is even paying any attention?
Stay on top of the news and stay ahead of the game—sign up for e-mail newsletters now!









Which is even scarier.
What's ironic is that it took a McCain ad to demonstrate to Mr. Garfield that an Obama ad is inaccurate or exaggerated or sophistic or wreaking with quarter-truths or semi-truths. So some of the millions of dollars of ad spending had a salutary effect on Garfield.
Time to do as I have suggested before, read up on the facts and don't react emotionally. Obama is an empty suit with no legislation in the US Senate with his name on it-especially related to issues he promised his constituents. There is $1 million a day in earmarks that he has taken out of all of our pockets to line local Chicago projects.
There is evidence of radical education projects funded by the Bill Ayres association with the Annenburg money. No public scholl received a dime from the fund.
Read the facts before you vote.
McCain has been restrained in his attacks on Obama. One might hope he would be more direct in stating the record-it is not racist or a personal attack to state the facts.
Bruce Kaplan
New York
That same logic (no concise answers, all double talk) followed them to their spots and rallies. After each of their nominations everything changed. Both pandered to the policies and dogma of their respective parties, becoming demigods for them. Somehow they lost their personal views, as though brain washed, to become party demigods. That is what we are hearing; and get use to it for the next four-years as they continue it in congress.
Campaigns spiraled down to talking about the other guy instead of making any statements about how they'll get us out of this fix. The McCain that once existed got lost in party politics and can no longer have a truthful or sincere moment because he doesn't believe the crap he is forced to peddle himself, and it shows. McCain started as a middle of the road Republican and ended up far right. Obama started out in the middle as well, and where he'll end up is anybody's guess.
Obama's out of Iraq theme, when he was up against Hillary (she wanted out, but like McCain opted for the Generals to say when), but then magically changed to move the solders over to Afghanistan and kill Muslims over there, I will get us out (sometime). He has become a political puppet for the Democrats, losing whatever he believed to begin with. The Military Industrial Complex is strong and well throughout America.
McCain couldn't get beyond that stinking war, that he says is won, but isn't won; taxes just like before, war just like before, business as usual like before, like Bush. Obama's plan is a lot like resurrecting Johnson's Great Society, without war, but higher taxes.
Plain speak and using concise Key Points appear to have been exchanged for Key Dogma of the political parties. I don't think we really want to know the truth, which is why these diversion campaigns continue.
The economy killed McCain's campaign. Big oil, Wall Street, Corporate America, and those with incomes greater then $250K, must all be Democrats, and their collusion drove a spike through McCain's campaign effectively killing Republican rule. And if they didn't do it, who in the hell did? Was this all a worldwide conspiracy to elect the president of their choice?
About lies, we'll all find out about the truth in November. When the other shoe falls, we'll all see their true colors and learn our fate.
Sincerely, thank you for your comments. I love public discourse (when it's untainted by hateful comments like Kill Him OR Treason!). My one question for you would be: Do you think that Sarah Palin's Troopergate and The FACT that her husband has recently been a secessionist is fair game OR NO? If your answer is no (it's not fair game), then I'd have to question your sincerity for a full search for the FACTS and wonder if you're simply a scaled back version of the GOP's crowd-goers at recent rallys and events. FACTS: Barack Obama is NOT an ARAB, He is NOT a Terrorist, AND He didn't help Bill Ayers plant any bombs when he was 8 years old.
Anthony Stover- Philadelphia, PA
There is no discenible difference in either campaign's handling of the truth. The only reason Obama is surging now is due to the freefall of the economy. Here again, truth has nothing to do with the campaign statements. Obama lays the blame for the crisis as free market captialism run wild and suggests the solution lies in more regulation of the markets. Yet, the Bush administration first sounded the same theme in 2001 as regarding Fannie and Freddie Mac. It's efforts were rebuffed by Democrats led by Barney Frank. In 2004, 2005 and 2006 measures were introduced to provide greater regulation and were defeated by Democrats led by Frank in the house and Shumer and Dodd in the senate...Ironic to hear the same Three Stooges talk about how it was all preventable..Obama knows it was his party that led the charge over the finanacial abyss under the guise of affordable housing for all, yet blames it on Bush...the easiest pinata to hit...while we are hammering CEOs in Congress (deservedly so!), why not have Obama call for Frank, Shumer and Dodd to take the witness stand too...and explain it all under oath? Better yet, why don't both candidates call for an independent prosecutor now to really dig into the mess and investigate both congress and the private sector and let the chips fall where they may? Again, that truth will be a little to close for comfort for all concerned so don't hold your breath waiting for it to happen. But, if we can have a special prosecutor look into whther a sitting president was getting blow jobs on the job, I don't see any reason why we shouldn't have one for a situation that has affected the entire financial well being of our country and each and every individual who resides in it. Do you?
The Oath is a great idea, but clearly these guys are no more willing or able to self regulate than our friends on Wall Street.
Let's look in the mirror and acknowledge that the ad industry and broadcast media outlets share a lot of the blame. Who's going to pass up on a couple hundred million in ad revenue, right? We'd rather take the money than do anything serious to stop the lies, so the ad industry is clearly culpable here.
Why can't an independent, bi-partisan truth squad screen these ads before they run? Clearly, the facts can be checked quickly, and if the news outlets say "we won't run this is as" maybe the campaigns would realize they have to stop spreading malicious propaganda.
If you're reading this and thinking "our agency doesn't have political clients and we would never do ads like these", you're missing the point: consumers have no idea respectable shops like yours wouldn't pump out this crap, so you are judged in the same light as those who do. If the ad industry took the lead in forcing change here, maybe we'd change our already tarnished image in the eyes of the consumer.
I agree, "both candidates call for an independent prosecutor now to really dig into the mess and investigate both congress and the private sector and let the chips fall where they may?"
But it won't happen. The economy is being looked at through tunnel vision, that of Paulson and Bernanke. Like the administration and Congress is going to say everything they did was wrong? What they'll do is what the two candidates are doing now - lies and contriving spin against the other. The Investment Bank's 'Swaps,' pretatory lending, and an agreeable administration is to blame. So how do you unravel that? And which of them doesn't have a vested interest?
The problems were top down, which is precisely why there will be no investigation. Scholars will write books about it that no one will read. Just like the conspiracy books on the JFK Assassination, by the time the truth be told no one will care.
Is there something wrong with this rationale? Yes there is.
And that is, it is believed the American people and voters are fools and idiots. For anyone who feels they cannot vote for a far superior, far better educated, far more stable and rational individual, with even a better presidential demeanor, because of the color of their skin... Is very sad. To think of how critical we were of South Africa just a few years ago. Isn't this hipocrisy at its very best? Where is the Patriotism gone, should Country not come first after all? BTW, I am a veteran who was also in the service just before McCain's service time, and all veterans can tell you about the US Armed Forces Code of Honor. And John McCain failed that test, as per the US Armed Forces. So yes, America has always been proud about been and giving the best. In this case clearly and by a land slide, Senator Barack Obama and Joe Biden are virtually two men that easily qualify as superior Presidential candidates over their opponents.
Everything is healthy about Coco Puffs, otherwise is untrue.
If you are an afraid of sugar freak, or diabetic, it shouldn't be on your list of foods to eat, but for everyone else it is Nutritious(whole grains and fortified with essential Nutrients) and a part of a healthy diet -- unlike the candidates here in question.
I take issue with your "(...) in fact ALL commercials are made by an industry that relies on partial truths." As well. The company you selected for your example does indeed have a truth policy in place, more than can be said of the candidates.
The Oath, whereby every candidate would pledge, on behalf of his or her entire campaign, "not to lie or misrepresent my opponent's record and positions on the stump, in my press materials or in my advertising," is the issue -- your response using Coco Puffs was equivalent to the TVC we are seeing from the two candidates: diversion, not truth.
Now I can get back to my bowl of Coco Puffs in peace. In this time of perplexing contradictions, it is good to have a comfort food that you can depend on -- that's good for you too.
Reminds me of when the TIME cover of OJ that was deliberately darkened; where his photograph made him look darker, and the resulting flack that they had received for that feed into deepening the nation's racial divide.
Am I the only one who noticed? Or am I being the racist for even noticing? He does look like he's guilty of something. We'll probably find out in November.
Which brings up another point: will the press be politically correct with Obama after he is president? If he does get elected, watching how critics attack him will be interesting. Or will the press love affair continue after the election? And how will the nation's racial divide change after the election?
Take for a moment the supposition that Obama isn't a liar by nature, but only by necessity. McCain's campaign, who, for purposes of this example will be called, "Evil" is free to distort the truth as much as its cold, black heart desires, unfettered by ethical considerations. An altruistic response by the Obama camp ("Good" for this example) would be weak and pallid by comparison. No one is truly as bad as malicious, half-truthed political ads portray them. So McCain's lies would make Obama look far worse than Obama's truths could ever paint McCain. Obama, or really any candidate up against an opponent that doesn't subscribe to your "Oath" is forced by necessity to play the same game.
Of course this is all based on the assumption that Obama is a truthful man by nature, and that assumption is based on his supporters' desire for it to be true. Both candidates are lying now. Who's the progenitor of this environment? Just look to see who lied first.
// JASON BLOOM \ BALTIMORE, MD
Americans don't want an oil foundry in their backyards. They're smelly, dirty and they aren't an attractive part of the landscape. They cost billions of dollars and it takes 3 to 7 years to build one.
So Obama or McCain camp -- GET REAL. Even if we DID drill for oil on our own shores, here's the fundamental problem. We cannot PROCESS OIL INTO GASOLINE!!!
The oil would stack up and wait to be processed, but drilling for more oil here isn't going to solve the problem of getting GASOLINE until American's decide it's okay to build a few more processing plants.
I'm a registered Republican and McCain lost my vote and my respect. I like IKE. Let's bring IKE back. It will be a cardboard cut out sitting in the oval office. This idea certainly beats the two choices we have now. As for me, I'm voting NONE of the above next month.