Harsh
Michael Cooper and Jim Rutenberg look at the truth about John McCain and flinch from telling their readers about it:
Harsh advertisements and negative attacks are a staple of presidential campaigns, but Senator John McCain has drawn an avalanche of criticism this week from Democrats, independent groups and even some Republicans for regularly stretching the truth in attacking Senator Barack Obama’s record and positions.
Not only is it strange to refer to McCain’s lying as “stretching the truth,” it’s odd to make the active clause here the fact that McCain “has drawn an avalanche of criticism” for his truth-stretching rather than the fact that McCain is lying. But most of all, there’s no reason the press should treat harsh, negative, accurate attacks as somehow continues with harsh, negative, lies. For example, Barack Obama has often been a supporter of unsound coal liquification schemes. I just put that pretty politely. One could say something harsher and more negative about Obama’s coal record. And there’s nothing wrong with that. Politicians should be harshly criticized for things they do by their political adversaries.
But doling out harsh negative criticism of something a politician actually did is an entirely different can of worms from doling out harsh negative attacks based on lies. The notion that Obama called Sarah Palin a “pig” is a lie — the McCain campaign made it up. It’s not “harsh,” it’s false.
56 Responses to “Harsh”
Register
RSSLogin
Topic Cloud
ArchivesBlog RollAbout Matt YglesiasContact Me
Donate
September 13th, 2008 at 8:41 am
McCain ad: “Barack Obama fought with the Japanese armed forces in WWII and killed Americans at Okinawa because he loved Japanese fascism.”
Press: “This week, the Obama campaign decried what it called an ‘outrageous’ distortion by John McCain, regarding an ad in which John McCain stretched the truth about Obama’s views on World War II.”
September 13th, 2008 at 8:49 am
John McCain made it clear on The View that he personally approves of the content of both the sex education ad and the lipstick ad (he states that the ads are factual). Any pundit defending McCain on the basis that he doesn’t personally approve of his campaigns tactics now has to realize that John McCain is either delusional or a liar.
The press has no excuse not to use the word. The same can be said of Think Progress.
September 13th, 2008 at 8:51 am
I don’t know. I keep hearing about McCain telling all these lies. Which is probably accurate. But, um… I keep hearing about it. And not just on visits to Kos. Last night I was watching a network newscast (Hello, middle America!)and I heard a report about… the lies. I did a search in the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette for “McCain” and pig.” I got about five stories about… Lies.
I am not really sure what you need to see here. You keep talking about this “narrative.” But a larger narrative is made up of smaller narratives. And I see about 20 of them a day telliong me that McCain is a liar. Do you honestly think people aren’t hearing that? What would satisfy you? The Cleveland Plain Dealer changing its tagline to “John McCain is a lying fuckface”? For someone convinced that progressives are more committed to “reality” than conservatives, you are in an awkward position here. You say nobody is calling McCain on these lies. But when someone points to a thousand stories calling him out on these lies, you say that’s not enough. You need a “narrative.”
People are talking about it. Seriously. Pay attention. You are starting to sound like conservatives who bitch about media bias. Yeah, you can score some points and make some good arguments. But man, it gets tiresome after, oh, the 2 millionth tear.
September 13th, 2008 at 9:02 am
“Lying” isn’t even a very precise word for when McCain approves an ad saying Barack Obama supports sex education for Kindergartners and then shows a leering Obama, as if he’s some kind of predator on Kindergarten children.
First, the factual claim in that ad isn’t so much lying, as it is severe distortion and misleading. The images, on the other hand, are an attempt at demonization and character assassination — something most seem to think is just hopelessly subjective and thus fair game in politics.
September 13th, 2008 at 9:10 am
I actually thought this article was pretty good – and the sort of thing you’ve been calling for. I think if you were to go back to 2000, you would find that all the Gore=exaggerator stories read the same way: “The nominee is coming under increasing pressure as Republicans allege etc. etc.” It’s a little silly, but this is about as good as things are likely to get. The article quotes Republicans, Democrats, and View hosts alike in calling McCain out.
Aside from being good for Obama and bad for McCain, this kind of article will put pressure on the McCain campaign to lay off of some of its sleazier tactics – and, as you have noted before, the American body politic is better served by campaigns on substantive issues than by bullshit-spewing.
I wish that the headline had contained the phrase “lying scumbag”, but I’d be inclined to see this as a glass half full.
September 13th, 2008 at 9:10 am
Could part of the “stretching” charge be due to fact that Obama doesn’t have much of a record? If you want to attack a near non-existant record than you would have to “stretch” it in order to have something to work with.
September 13th, 2008 at 9:14 am
Sam M, it’s true — you can find plenty about the McCain Campaign veering away from the truth, with Sen. McCain not only complicit, and defending the choice to lie in light of what a “tough” campaign he finds it, but even with his possibly driving the lies and repeating them himself, blaming their sad necessity on Barack Obama’s having refused him the kinds of meet-ups he likes the best. Just watch The View — of all girltalk venues. Where you won’t find unsparing reportage and outrage, however, is on the front pages and editorial pages of the most respected and widely read newspapers in the land, and on the half hour of network television news that so-called low-information voters may watch if they want to catch up with what’s going on. You are looking for coverage of the unfolding Orwellian nightmare, and are finding it where you know to look. The voters who most need to see such coverage are being coddled in their blindness to it by their preferred sources of hard news. This is something new under the American sun, and bloggers who keep the growing horror front and center are not bores who need a new hobby-horse, but patriots.
September 13th, 2008 at 9:28 am
Elatia,
It’s sad, but McCain being sonned by the ladies from The View will probably have more impact than any opinion column.
September 13th, 2008 at 9:32 am
Yeah, Obama called her the lipstick on the pig, not the pig. That’s a helpful defense. First she’s “good looking”, then just a mother and small town mayor, and now she’s the lipstick. No intent to demean. Definitely not sexist.
September 13th, 2008 at 9:33 am
Seems like the stupid adds are bipartisan. Obama puts an add out mocking McCain for not sending email, a bit mean spirited considering he has trouble typing due to war injuries.
http://www.outsidethebeltway.com/archives/obama_mocks_mccains_computer_skills/
Maybe McCain can’t email, but Obama’s team clearly can’t seem to Google. It shall be fun to watch the hacks and MSM play cover for Obama on this one.
September 13th, 2008 at 9:37 am
it is “amusing” how some reporters make it seem as if the untruths (!) are accidental, that McCain is somehow unaware of what’s going on: but if only those reporters would think this through, what does it say about McCain’s management ability if he really is clueless about what his subordinates are doing????
p.s. please keep calling attention to this: it is helping to drive the narrative, and it needs to keep on being driven, over and over again (even if some commenters weary of it)
September 13th, 2008 at 9:43 am
Thomas, she is good looking, and calling her so was part of a Joe Biden joke in which the gist of the punchline is that he isn’t. If that’s demeaning, then we really have reached the point where we can’t say anything.
Also, I shouldn’t have to say it, but this is the big leagues, this is a woman who stands a decent chance of being president. It’s Palin herself who puts forward her motherhood in public constantly. Can you cite anywhere where Obama, Biden, or their campaign staff called her “just a mother” — sorry, man, that’s just a fiction. Yeah, they attacked the small-town mayor stuff as qualification for president, but how is that sexist?
How conservatives became these fragile flowers always imagining sexism behind every corner! More troublingly, they’ve become people who don’t seem to care a whit about their leaders knowing anything. It’s sad.
September 13th, 2008 at 9:56 am
But Elatia, as I mentioned, I DID see this story on the network news. A full two or three minutes. It mentioned a slew of lies that McCain had told, compared this with one Obama had told, and concluded that mcCain was leading the charge in this regard.
Which seems, er, about right.
On the network news.
And like i said, there are a whole bunch of stories about his in the news section of the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette. And a whole bunch of Paul Krugman AND local columnists on the op-ed page straight-up calling McCain a liar.
Seriously. We have the partisan blogs leading the charge. We have major networks reporting on the issue, and it has filtered down to the smaller “heartland” outlets.
What’s missing here? What’s the complaint? Do we need Punch Sultzberger walking the streets with a sandwich board that challenges McCain to a fistfight?
Who is not getting this message? And if so, whose fault is it? Certianly not CBS news or the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette. or any of the 5,000 other outlets exploring this meme.
September 13th, 2008 at 10:02 am
Ban, undoubtedly Obama is also “clean” and “articulate” but nonetheless those characterizations are rightly deemed demeaning and offensive. The Obama camp is repeatedly and intentionally drawing attention to Palin’s gender (by referring to her as the lipstick, by describing her as a mother but never as a governor, by describing her as “good looking”). None of these things are done to male candidates and none of them are relevant to the campaign. So why does the Obama camp keep doing it? I’m sure it’s not sexism–it couldn’t be. Obama would never run a campaign based in sexism. Well, not twice in the same year anyway.
September 13th, 2008 at 10:04 am
The author of Comment 10 needs to answer this question, if McCain can’t type how does he use a Blackberry?
Does he press those little keys with his nose, his toes or his fingers?
September 13th, 2008 at 10:05 am
I love the way Matt obsesses about this, but manages to not find time to notice the controversy over Obama’s email ad. I thought making fun of crippled people wasn’t part of the progressive project, but I guess I was wrong.
September 13th, 2008 at 10:12 am
If what you’re saying about what the Obama camp is doing “repeatedly” were correct, Thomas, then, yeah, it’s a subtle form of sexism. I just don’t think it’s correct. Always describing her as a mother, never as a governor? — where do you get that? Maybe it’s your perception, maybe shaped from a Hillary dead-ender perspective, but I just don’t think it’s true at all. I’m pretty sure Obama refers to her as Governor Palin. And c’mon, the “good looking” was just one dumb joke by Biden, who’s known for them.
Note that “clean and articulate” and “good looking” both came from the fertile mouth of Joe Biden. I’m not sure we need to read more into them than that.
September 13th, 2008 at 10:13 am
controversy over Obama’s email ad
James,
Can you please answer my question? Does McCain press those little keys on his Blackberry with his nose, his toes or his fingers?
September 13th, 2008 at 10:14 am
MSW, are you calling Obama a liar? I know that McCain doesn’t use a blackberry, because if he did that would mean he knows how to use email! Matt, quick, update the post!
Man, some days Barry just can’t win. Either he’s demonstrating he doesn’t understand the sacrifices made by authentic American heroes like McCain, or he’s telling lies about authentic American heroes like McCain. (MSW clearly thinks the second horn is the better one to be caught on politically speaking, but it does take a bit of the sting away from the Obama/MSM talking point from yesterday.)
September 13th, 2008 at 10:19 am
ok, judging from your last post, obviously you’re just a shameless partisan hack, Thomas, and it’s a waste of time engaging you.
September 13th, 2008 at 10:24 am
“msw”
If McCain uses a BBerry for email, then Obama’s add is a lie and should be pulled down or corrected.
September 13th, 2008 at 10:29 am
No Thomas,
Obama is not lying. McCain himself admitted he did not use email until a few month ago. He just started using a computer by his own admission. We must assume he types or uses voice recognition software, but he did not do this until the spring.
How many people do you know that have not used a computer over the last five years? How many senators do not use a computer?
September 13th, 2008 at 10:31 am
Ban, in the “lipstick speech”, Obama followed up the famous comment with this, according to Jake Tapper: “‘John McCain has a compelling biography, you know Sarah Palin is an interesting story.’
The crowd booed.
‘No, she’s new!’ Obama said. ‘She hasn’t been on the scene, you know, she’s got five kids and my hat goes off to anybody who’s looking after five. I’ve got two and they tire Michelle and me out!’” Nothing about her public record, no reference to her as “Governor”. Just “she’s a mother of five and can’t possibly have time to focus on both.”
Yes, many offensive comments come from Joe Biden. But that can’t be a defense of the comments, or of Joe Biden.
September 13th, 2008 at 10:33 am
Whining is for losers. The MSM is already doing all that you can reasonably expect them to do to help your candidate. In fact, they’re losing what little is left of their reputations. A recent Rasmussen poll shows that 68% of Americans believe the media intentionally help the candidate they favor.
Thirty second ads are by their nature simplistic, distorted b.s. McCain offered town meetings, but Obama chose advertising as his weapon of choice. Now that he’s losing the duel, it’s weak and effeminate for him to whine. He should fire his ad crew, especially the genius who decided to attack McCain for not using a computer. A Google search would have determined that he can’t type because the North Vietnamese smashed his fingers.
The deranged, obsessive attacks on Sarah Palin are also backfiring badly. America loves Sarah. They don’t much love radical community organizers from corrupt big city machines with a haughty, sneering attitude. Outside the coasts and the upper midwest, that is.
September 13th, 2008 at 10:35 am
If McCain uses a BBerry for email, then Obama’s add is a lie and should be pulled down or corrected.
No it means you posted a bullshit excuse for McCain not using a computer. An excuse your limited brain thought was so awesome you just had to type it. You never thought to yourself, he must be able to push keys to make a phone calls.
September 13th, 2008 at 10:40 am
Looks like a lot of people are earning their McCain points this fine morning.
You trolls should know you’re not likely to make any traction or convince a single person here. Why are you wasting your time? If you’re gonna spout these clearly ridiculous talking points, at least find a place with even a single undecided voter.
September 13th, 2008 at 10:47 am
“posted a bullshit excuse for McCain not using a computer”
It’s fairly well documented that McCain has trouble with a keyboard due to his war injuries. It’s also well documented that he does use a computer via surrogates and was on the cutting edge of using the internet in his 2000 campaign. That’s why this ad is so stupid, the Obama people didn’t even do a simple Google search. Not to mention, running a campaign is supposed to be The One’s primary executive experience claim. In any event, the Obama ad says explicitly that McCain “cant’ send an email”, which is either a lie, or a mean spirited mock of his injuries, most likely both.
September 13th, 2008 at 10:57 am
E. O’ Neal yesterday:
E. O’ Neal doesn’t understand the difference between ‘asset’ and ‘liability’. These are fairly simple concepts, yet even after it was repeatedly explained to him why the government was not taking on $5 trillion in liabilities he still did not understand. Therefore, since E. O’ Neal is clearly incapable of understanding very simple concepts, it stands to reason that he incapable of understanding anything about anything.
September 13th, 2008 at 11:13 am
It’s fairly well documented that McCain has trouble with a keyboard due to his war injuries.
I would like to see this so-called “documentation”. I’m sure I’m not the only one.
September 13th, 2008 at 11:17 am
foolfrommars, I explained that was not technically the case, but that the Treasury (taxpayers) was now backing the GSE’s guarantees on over $5 trillion of mortgages. That makes these mortgages, the vast majority of which are performing, an off balance-sheet obligation of the U.S.
September 13th, 2008 at 11:19 am
Dragon NaturallySpeaking – Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Dragon NaturallySpeaking is a speech recognition software package developed by Dragon Systems, and sold by Nuance Communications for Windows personal …
September 13th, 2008 at 11:24 am
Neil H., this was reported by both the Boston Globe and Forbes in 2000. I linked to both on the “Ignorance is Bliss” thread. You have to admire the brilliant strategery of the McCain campaign in establishing his alibi for not typing on a keyboard eight years before Obama attacked. Stunning!
September 13th, 2008 at 11:24 am
“I would like to see this so-called “documentation”. I’m sure I’m not the only one.”
http://graphics.boston.com/news/politics/campaign2000/news/McCain_character_loyal_to_a_fault+.shtml
Key quote: “McCain’s severe war injuries prevent him from combing his hair, typing on a keyboard, or tying his shoes.”
September 13th, 2008 at 11:27 am
Since we have been deluged with wingnuts, perhaps one of them can explain why calling Obama “Barry” is such a knee-slapper to them. Is there something funny about a teenager with a foreign-sounding name trying to anglicize it to fit in with his classmates? Or does this go back to the birth certificate thing, and you really believe “Barack Hussein Obama” is this identity that “Barry” created to run for President? Either way, it reflects worse on you than him.
September 13th, 2008 at 11:40 am
Obama called her the lipstick on the pig, not the pig. That’s a helpful defense.
Of course, as any literate person would understand Obama wasn’t calling Palin anything. He was referring to McCain’s policies; Palin had nothing to do with it.
September 13th, 2008 at 11:45 am
Uh, what avalanche of criticism?
September 13th, 2008 at 11:48 am
Um, who said it was an alibi? Not me. I just wanted evidence of an assertion that had no documentation to back it up. Thank you for providing it when it was asked.
September 13th, 2008 at 12:01 pm
kth, I think you’ve got the story backward. Obama was Barry all his life, until he found it useful to be Barack. And making fun of a guy with a name like “Barry” seems to me to be the sort of thing you guys could appreciate it. I mean, Barry is an all American name–nothing exotic or racially coded about it–but it’s kind of a funny name. Sort of like “Felix.”
Heck, I’m probably helping Barry by calling him Barry–he’d probably carry Ohio if people there knew him as Barry.
September 13th, 2008 at 12:03 pm
kth,a beloved Republican was named Barry, so it’s not a slur. Obama went by that name until he decided to re-define himself as “black” rather than “mixed-race”. He writes about it at length in his first autobiography. This is the same impulse that led him to join Rev. Wright’s Afro-centric church and to adopt, chameleon-like, the style and speech cadences of the inner city. This milieu was totally alien to his white family background, the multi-ethnic culture of Honolulu, or the very elitist schools he attended.
Searching for one’s identity and redefining oneself is an honorable American tradition, but there does seem to be an element of opportunistic posing involved with Obama. At least, I prefer to think that sitting in that racist, anti-American church for twenty years, and forming close ties with such as Rezko and Ayers, was merely opportunistic. I would analogize Obama’s life journey to that of a child of a Lithuanian absentee dad and a black American woman in L.A. moving to West Virginia, becoming a “hill-billy”, and achieving great political success. It’s hard to pull off, but Barack has done it. I salute him.
I also call him The Chosen One and The Word Made Flesh.
September 13th, 2008 at 12:41 pm
Why so gnetle with McCain’s lies. The Irish know: “If you get the reputation as an early riser, you can sleep till noon.” The Straight Talk Express live on as an embedded myth..
September 13th, 2008 at 12:44 pm
E. O’Neal, you know what? You’re getting to be like a sorority pledge who comes way too clean in an attempt to bond. So, I know enough about you now, and you can go.
September 13th, 2008 at 12:49 pm
Elatia, your forensic powers are astonishing. You go, girl!
September 13th, 2008 at 1:10 pm
Very interesting factoid from yesterday’s AP poll that had McCain up by 4. When asked whether the four candidates had the right type of experience to be president, these percentages said the candidate did not have the right type of experience: McCain, 15; Obama 47; Palin 36; Biden 20.
http://www.ap-gfkpoll.com/pdf/AP-GfK_Poll_91208_Topline_findings_final.pdf
The more the Obamites attack Palin’s lack of experience, the more the voters focus on the utter lack of accomplishment of The Chosen One.
September 13th, 2008 at 1:16 pm
Since Palin herself raised the lipstick issue in her convention speech, it is now fair game.
September 13th, 2008 at 2:14 pm
As noted before, I agree with Sam M–I think Matt’s desired narrative has indeed been firmly established at this point, as in fact is demonstrated by this article, and frankly Matt’s nitpicking about this particular sentence strikes me as missing the forest for the trees.
September 13th, 2008 at 4:34 pm
I think DTM’s sort of right. On the one hand, stylistic niceties mean that the news section of the NYT shies away from all forms of the verb ‘to lie’. (A bullshit constraint, but that’s where we are.) They’re going as far as they can without passing that red line.
On the other hand, a press model that implicitly rewards lying is not healthy.
The Obama campaign seems to have grasped the dynamic here — that the faux-balance model of the American press will only allow the word ‘lying’ in the news section if someone in the other campaign says it.
September 13th, 2008 at 10:49 pm
You still don’t fucking GET IT, do you, Yglesias?
They are force-feeding McCain on the US electorate! Get a fucking clue! They don’t GIVE A SHIT how many times he lies!
Now try thinking of some way for Obama to deal with that so we don’t end up with these lunatics running the asylum.
March 11th, 2009 at 11:45 am
I want to say – thank you for this!
March 13th, 2009 at 6:36 am
If you have to do it, you might as well do it right
March 17th, 2009 at 3:48 am
I bookmarked this site. Thank you for good job!
tramadol
March 22nd, 2009 at 8:00 am
tramadol
I bookmarked this site. Thank you for good job!
April 8th, 2009 at 6:18 am
If you have to do it, you might as well do it right
viagra
April 9th, 2009 at 2:35 am
Hi, I can