***FactCheck.Org : Clinton attack on Obama an "awful distortion"***

[grantcart]

http://www.factcheck.org/elections-2008/youve_got_mailers_1.html

When you don't have money use fear.

1)Hillary Clinton is now using a mailer that terrifies tax payers that Obama

"wants to raise Social Security taxes by a trillion dollars."

FactCheck dismisses the reckless charge, "That's an awful distortion. Nothing Obama has proposed or supported would affect Social

Security taxes paid by the overwhelming majority of workers."

As everyone in DU is certainly aware Obama has the audacity to detail how he will fix Social Security by lifting the cap on taxing incomes of $ 97,000.

" . . .lifting the cap was "probably going to be the best option" and "much preferable to the other options that are available." But he came just short of promising to do so.

Clinton's Plan for fixing Social Security: Undisclosed - so as to not alienate anyone, another great profile in courage.


2)They also detail to other major distortions in the mailer

"The Clinton mailer says Obama has "no plan" for a moratorium on foreclosures such as the one Clinton has proposed. That’s true, but Obama has his own plan for homeowner relief. The mailer leaves the impression that Obama has "no plan" at all, which is false."

and

"It says Obama "voted for Dick Cheney's energy bill that gives huge tax breaks to oil companies," another distortion. By the time Congress passed the 2005 energy bill, it raised taxes on the oil industry more than it decreased them and also contained billions for alternative fuels research and subsidies for energy-efficient buildings and vehicles."


Now what other recent American political leader frequently used cheap fear tactics to try and get an electoral advantage? Anyone?

[bellasgrams]

1. That's what he gets for not talking issues, all he does is prance

around letting people admire him. He doesn't talk issues in detail.

[Jed Dilligan]

3. Yeah...

Too bad for him that he is losing petty squabbles for his supporters on the internet while inspiring millions across race and party lines to support him.

[grantcart]

9. "not talking issues" he provides a solution Clinton refuses to do so

http://.barackobama.com

If you want to read the detailed policy positions please feel free to spend the next several hours going through

the web site.

"all he does is prance" is something below sophmoric. If you want to argue with his positions then fine but don't be lazy and

make idiotic statements like that. All of the democratic candidates have detailed policy plans and the overwhelming concensus by

commentators is their is about a gnat's eyelash of difference between them.

The issues between these two candidates are centering on issues of leadership, experience and charachter.

If you had bothered to read the article you would have understood that an independent organization is stating that Obama's Social Security plan is more detailed than Clinton's. Clinton has refused to provide a detailed plan and this was well covered in the debates.

Try and not embarass your candidate.

[EFerrari]

12. You really seem to have a problem with the admiration Obama gets.

Prance? Do you even know what that means?

lol

[speedoo]

2. This explains how Hillary is getting the beercan vote. Lies.

Pathetic desperation, maybe?

[Name removed]

6. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[grantcart]

11. ok half wit here it is in its total form clearly stating that the three

points of the mailer: "gives a false picture . . big distortion. . .false. . .another distortion"

Here is the link http://www.factcheck.org/elections-2008/youve_got_mailers_1.html

quote
A direct-mail piece sent to voters by the Clinton campaign twists Obama’s words and gives a false picture of his proposals:

It says he "wants to raise Social Security taxes by a trillion dollars," a big distortion. Obama has said a “good option” would be to apply Social Security payroll taxes to incomes over $97,500 a year, but that would only affect taxes paid by 6.5 percent of individuals and couples. And he hasn’t formally proposed such a move anyway.


The Clinton mailer says Obama has "no plan" for a moratorium on foreclosures such as the one Clinton has proposed. That’s true, but Obama has his own plan for homeowner relief. The mailer leaves the impression that Obama has "no plan" at all, which is false.


It says Obama "voted for Dick Cheney's energy bill that gives huge tax breaks to oil companies," another distortion. By the time Congress passed the 2005 energy bill, it raised taxes on the oil industry more than it decreased them and also contained billions for alternative fuels research and subsidies for energy-efficient buildings and vehicles.

unquote

[usregimechange]

4. Say anything to get elected

[MagsDem]

7. Yes, Obama certainly does, and his supporters too!

FactCheck: Removing $97,500 cap would be $1.3T tax increase
Clinton called Obama's proposal to raise Social Security taxes on earnings over $97,500 per year, the current upper limit on which any tax is levied, a trillion-dollar increase on "middle class families." Clinton said, "I do not want to fix the problems of Social Security on the backs of middle class families and seniors. If you lift the cap completely, that is a $1 trillion tax increase. I don't think we need to do that."
Taxing all earnings would indeed amount to a $1.3 trillion increase over the next 10 years alone, according to estimates by Cato Institute Social Security experts. A similar estimate comes from Citizens for Tax Justice, which figures the measure would bring in $124 billion per year.

Obama defended his proposal by saying it would fall only on the upper class: "Understand that only 6% of Americans make more than $97,000--so 6% is not the middle class--it's the upper class."

Source: FactCheck.org on 2007 Democratic debate in Las Vegas Nov 15, 2007

[grantcart]

13. and again half wit quoting directly fact check directly slams the three

points of the mailer: "gives a false picture . . big distortion. . .false. . .another distortion"

Here is the link http://www.factcheck.org/elections-2008/youve_got_maile...

quote
A direct-mail piece sent to voters by the Clinton campaign twists Obama’s words and gives a false picture of his proposals:

It says he "wants to raise Social Security taxes by a trillion dollars," a big distortion. Obama has said a “good option” would be to apply Social Security payroll taxes to incomes over $97,500 a year, but that would only affect taxes paid by 6.5 percent of individuals and couples. And he hasn’t formally proposed such a move anyway.


The Clinton mailer says Obama has "no plan" for a moratorium on foreclosures such as the one Clinton has proposed. That’s true, but Obama has his own plan for homeowner relief. The mailer leaves the impression that Obama has "no plan" at all, which is false.


It says Obama "voted for Dick Cheney's energy bill that gives huge tax breaks to oil companies," another distortion. By the time Congress passed the 2005 energy bill, it raised taxes on the oil industry more than it decreased them and also contained billions for alternative fuels research and subsidies for energy-efficient buildings and vehicles.

unquote

[MagsDem]

5. Let's factcheck your ass, shall we?

FactCheck: Removing $97,500 cap would be $1.3T tax increase

Clinton called Obama's proposal to raise Social Security taxes on earnings over $97,500 per year, the current upper limit on which any tax is levied, a trillion-dollar increase on "middle class families." Clinton said, "I do not want to fix the problems of Social Security on the backs of middle class families and seniors. If you lift the cap completely, that is a $1 trillion tax increase. I don't think we need to do that."
Taxing all earnings would indeed amount to a $1.3 trillion increase over the next 10 years alone, according to estimates by Cato Institute Social Security experts. A similar estimate comes from Citizens for Tax Justice, which figures the measure would bring in $124 billion per year.

Obama defended his proposal by saying it would fall only on the upper class: "Understand that only 6% of Americans make more than $97,000--so 6% is not the middle class--it's the upper class."

Source: FactCheck.org on 2007 Democratic debate in Las Vegas Nov 15, 2007

Lie much?

[grantcart]

14. and for the third time direct quotes and the link

points of the mailer: "gives a false picture . . big distortion. . .false. . .another distortion"

Here is the link http://www.factcheck.org/elections-2008/youve_got_maile...

quote
A direct-mail piece sent to voters by the Clinton campaign twists Obama’s words and gives a false picture of his proposals:

It says he "wants to raise Social Security taxes by a trillion dollars," a big distortion. Obama has said a “good option” would be to apply Social Security payroll taxes to incomes over $97,500 a year, but that would only affect taxes paid by 6.5 percent of individuals and couples. And he hasn’t formally proposed such a move anyway.


The Clinton mailer says Obama has "no plan" for a moratorium on foreclosures such as the one Clinton has proposed. That’s true, but Obama has his own plan for homeowner relief. The mailer leaves the impression that Obama has "no plan" at all, which is false.


It says Obama "voted for Dick Cheney's energy bill that gives huge tax breaks to oil companies," another distortion. By the time Congress passed the 2005 energy bill, it raised taxes on the oil industry more than it decreased them and also contained billions for alternative fuels research and subsidies for energy-efficient buildings and vehicles.

unquote

[MagsDem]

16. Factcheck defends Obama by claiming he hasn't confirmed his position on it?

... Just kinda sorta mentioned that might his solution. LOL -- yeah, let's give him points for ducking the issue once he realized it was a trillion dollar tax increase.

[grantcart]

17. fact check isn't in the position of defending anyone

It simply examines statements as to their truthfulness

Here it is saying that the position that Clinton has attributed to him is a) factually false b) his preferred position not promoted as a final position in concrete.

Hillary is the one that has completely ducked it.

Your repeated spamming the same comment into the thread multiple times is an infraction of the rules

(but it does keep the thread alive when it was long gone)

[MagsDem]

18. That's exactly what factcheck says in their analysis

That's it's not a fair statement by Clinton because Obama merely suggested it, he hasn't committed to it. As far as spamming, I was responding to duplicate posts of the selective cut and paste from Factcheck. So the spammer is not me. :)

[grantcart]

15. thanks for repeatedly kicking my thread it actually had died

for the night. I alerted the moderator that you keep spamming my thread with the exact same charge even though I quote fact check and provide the link - which you do not.

[MagsDem]

19. No problem, but you do realize you posted the same thing 3 times, right?

I mean, you even say "for the third time" in one of your headers, but it's the same cut and paste. Are there some special rules for Obama supporters that the rest of us don't know about?

[Azathoth]

8. So when is Paul Krugman gonna write an outraged article over this?

:shrug:

[Thrill]

10. Hillary thought she was the inevitable nominee.....So of course

they are going to get nasty and negative. This is just the beginning of how dirty they are going to get

[CatnHat]

20. Why does the

Obama supporters feel the need to be victimized? What is so nasty and negative about making Obama take a stand on issues? What are people supposed to do--just sit there and "adore" him. Sorry, this is a presidental race, people want to know what the issues and how a candidate stands on issues, and mainly how is going to affect them. Not "cute" little slogans, time to roll up the sleeves. Seems that Obama supporters just want to rally and "feel good". Time to get to the business of being president, and how each candidate could stand the test of running for office. It's no cake walk, like the Obama camp may think it is.

[grantcart]

23. no vicitimization just reporting what an objective source says about

Clinton and her machine are cooking up.

As the Clintons get more desperate the lies will become more obvious.

We will not take it lying down but we will document it and expose it - with our sleeves rolled up.

[TheWraith]

21. This is supposed to be a surprise? Half of what comes out of the Clinton camp is lies and distortion

And most of the rest is innuendo and attacks. They have nothing else to run on.

[rinsd]

22. Goose Gander & all that jazz

An Obama mailer stretches the differences between the candidates on health care. Specifically:

* It touts measures included in Obama's plan to help low-income individuals buy insurance but fails to mention that Clinton would provide similar financial assistance.

* It says Obama's plan would save the average family $2,500 per year – an estimate provided by experts at the campaign's request – but doesn't say that Clinton estimates hers will save $2,200 per year.

* It also neglects to point out that Clinton's plan isn't the only one that would have an enforcement mechanism for those who failed to purchase insurance. Obama's plan, which would require that children be insured, would need one as well, though it would affect fewer persons.


ttp://www.factcheck.org/elections-2008/harry_louise_again.html