Emphasis Check: Joe Biden <strike>WRONG</strike> Right on McCain’s Loyalty to Bush

-

mccain bush hug twn.jpg
I really like Michael Dobbs. He’s generally fair and balanced in sifting through truth and fantasy spun by candidates on all sides of any ticket. . .sort of a “just the facts, ma’am” kind of guy.
Today in his “Fact Checker” column in the Washington Post, Dobbs goes after the top two on both presidential tickets — but in the view of this blogger, he has an odd snippet with out of whack emphasis on Joe Biden.
Dobbs writes:

Joseph R. Biden, Jr.
“In the Senate, John [McCain] has voted with President Bush 95 percent. And that is very hard to believe.”
Biden is exaggerating McCain’s support for the President’s policies. According to Congressional Quarterly, which keeps score, McCain supported the Bush administration on 95 percent of the votes in 2007. But his loyalty score for the first 7 1/2 years of the Bush presidency is lower: 90 percent.
The analysis suggests that the presidential election campaign has drawn McCain closer to Bush. In 2005, the senator from Arizona voted with the White House 77 percent of the time. So far in 2008, he has a 100 percent pro-Bush rating, but he has missed many votes as a result of being on the campaign trail.

I wonder when he wrote this if he was chuckling about it, knowing folks would walk away knowing that Biden’s point about John McCain is even more true than Biden may say.
On the others, Dobbs charges Obama with not being able to show how he would “pay for every dime” of plans outlined in his powerful convention speech. Dobbs quotes my colleague Maya MacGuineas as President of the Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget, but Dobbs fails to mention that the Committee is at the New America Foundation, where MacGuineas is also Director of New America’s Fiscal Policy Program. Just to fill in the details.
But on McCain and Palin, Dobbs is right on target.
Dobbs says that the Russia as invading villain in the Georgia-Russia narrative in McCain’s convention speech fails to note that “Georgia attacked first.”
And on Palin, Dobbs whacks the Alaska Governor for distorting her opposition to earmarks for the “Bridge to Nowhere.” In fact, the more we learn about Governor and Mayor Palin, the more it seems as if she was in fact a reigning diva of earmarks in an appropriations realm governed by her close friend, the now federally indicted Senator Ted Stevens.
— Steve Clemons

Comments

5 comments on “Emphasis Check: Joe Biden <strike>WRONG</strike> Right on McCain’s Loyalty to Bush

  1. Kathleen says:

    This is an interesting piece on what the surge is and is not accomplishing…as usual though, like every other piece, it fails to mention that the Maliki gov’t has been asking for troop withdrawals ever since their election…this is nothing new…
    http://www.truthout.org/article/who-lost-iraq-is-maliki-government-jumping-off-american-ship-state

    Reply

  2. Salam Amir says:

    I would like to say something about the surge
    McCain is lecturing us on every day. I think Mr.
    Obama should say that Bush’s surge didn’t defeat
    terrorism. It was PM Maliki surge (by increasing
    the number of Iraqi troops fighting terrorists)
    and the Sunni surge that defeated terrorists and
    brought victory to the US and Iraq.
    Salam Amir / Iraqi living in London/UK

    Reply

  3. Tahoe Editor says:

    Special-Interest Joe
    If Barack Obama really wants to fix “the broken politics of Washington,” he could start with his running mate, Beltway insider Joe Biden.
    http://www.nypost.com/seven/09072008/postopinion/editorials/special_interest_joe_127959.htm

    Reply

  4. Linda says:

    IMO, this election will be decided by two things:
    1. Events that none of us can control or much influence–a big mistake by candidates in a debate or otherwise, new and documented negative information about any of the candidates, big enough outside event.
    I’m not sure what big enough is to tip the electorate–one more unemployment rate increase in October, Fannie Mae/Freddie Mac, stock market drop, terrorist attack, or any other foreign or domestic event.
    2. Whether people vote with their brains and self-interest or their guts and hearts. And on that it probably matters about people in some states more than others. Pundits, media, blogosphere, pollsters, political strategists, and politicians are going to be very busy in the next 60 days. Who knows what of that will get through to which voters? Totally unpredictable.
    Brains surely aren’t working on moderate Republicans I’ve talked with who, like me, are retired and not paying income taxes, i.e., kinda comfortable but not rich. They think Obama will raise their taxes and McCain will lower them for their children and grandchildren.
    They refuse to hear that McCain will not be able to get his tax program through a Democratic Congress. He can’t deliver on his promises–even to get rid of earmarks. And then I’m told they don’t want “socialized medicine” and don’t realize what they don’t want is something like Medicare that they already have.
    I could go on and on with details of this discussion including “I just don’t like Obama.”
    This person who is a friend can’t tell me why she doesn’t like him or what she doesn’t like about him–not one reason. This very talkative person goes silent. Then I raise the race card, as I am talking with a Caucasian person raised and living in the South. She protests that, but still can’t give me one reason.
    So in a few instances with such people that I really like for other reasons than our strong political differences, politics will not be a topic I will raise in the next two months.
    A third important point is that tracking polls and all polls are useless until around 9/15. Lots of dust and dirt has been stirred up daily and needs to settle. This entire Presidential election cycle (from the primaries through the conventions and to the elections has been so unique) that more analyses, articles, and books will be written about it than any in my lifetime.
    So I doubt that I will have much more to contribute here for the next two months beyond this. I do urge people who have the money and/or the time to get involved and contribute and work for candidates of their choice, and for Congress as well as President and for all local contests too.
    And try to have intelligent conversations with family and friends to win them over to the candidate you favor and start dialogues on things like race/religion/gender, as we need to have them, especially after this election is over–and probably about guns and the death penalty. Europe is way ahead of us on most of these cultural issues.
    I’m betting, but no money, on brains but that is purely based on being an optimistic person or perhaps realistic, i.e., not going to wring my hands and worry that Obama will lose–or expect things to get much better for a few years if he wins.
    Who is this country wouldnt like things to change for the better? But realistically, “change” now is a political buzz word meaning many different things to many different people. And realistically any change will be slow and difficult to do. And so much needs to change, that down deep I am realistically every bit as cyncial as POA.

    Reply

  5. Gary says:

    2000:
    “A reformer with results”
    “A uniter not a divider”
    2004:
    “We’re living in times of danger.”
    “Reform, unite, protect” = obstruct, divide, scare.
    Are people really going to buy this again?

    Reply

Add your comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *