Friday, February 08, 2008

Dems making up facts for political gain since....who knows how long

Obama at the last debate:

Obama claimed Democratic voter turnout has doubled in "every single election that we've had so far in this [nominating] contest." Not true. It doubled in only two. In New Hampshire the turnout increased by 30 percent.
Obama misleadingly said corporate tax loopholes totaled $1 trillion. That figure is an estimate for a 10-year period and includes items such as low-income housing tax credits and tax-free bonds for state and local governments.
Obama mischaracterized Clinton's earlier statements on driver's licenses for illegal aliens, saying, "You said you were for it. Then you said you were against it." Actually she avoided giving a yes-or-no answer in one debate, then made clear she opposed the idea.

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.

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.

2 comments:

Marshal Art said...

So the Dems are voting for or against the bigger liar? I'm not sure.

I know it's off topic, but, just what is a "tax-loophole"? Can anyone give a true example of one? I would think that it can't be a specific item of the tax code, since if it's in the code, it is legal. I would think a "loophole" would be illegal or barely legal in the strictest sense. I think "tax-loophole" is just a scare tactic, a piece of meaningless rhetoric used to incite the voters to vote against the opponents of the person using the expression. Help me out here.

Anonymous said...

i like this that i found at wisegeek.com:

"A tax loophole is an exploitation of a tax law which can reduce or eliminate the tax liabilities of the filer. Quite often the original wording of a tax break is used to justify the use of a tax loophole. Several years ago, for example, a substantial tax break was offered to small companies who invested in SUVs and other heavy vehicles for their transportation fleets. Because the tax law allowed for 50% personal use, small business owners could upgrade their own personal vehicles to SUVs and still receive a tax credit. This exemplifies a tax loophole -- the original intent is not illegal, but the definition can be exploited for personal gain."