Independent fact checkers find McCain camp off base with its lipstick and sex-ed ads
September 11th, 2008 at 12:47pm Pat Cunningham
Two non-partisan Web sites have put the lie to John McCain’s campaign ads faulting Barack Obama for, respectively, a sex-education bill he supported in the Illinois Senate and a remark he made about “lipstick on a pig.”
Regarding the latter, PolitiFact.com, a joint venture of Congressional Quarterly and the St. Petersburg Times, SAYS the McCain camp is guilty of an “outrageous attempt to distort the facts.”
Regarding the former, FactCheck.org, SAYS McCain’s ad ”claims Obama’s ‘one accomplishment’ in the area of education was legislation to teach comprehensive sex education to kindergartners. But the claim is simply false, and it dates back to Alan Keyes’ failed race against Obama for an open Senate seat in 2004.”
Poor John McCain. The vultures running his campaign are squandering his reputation for honor and integrity. No wonder he sometimes seems confused and out of touch with the garbage that’s being peddled in his name and the words his speechwriters are putting in his mouth.
As the Washington Post said almost sadly in an editorial just this morning: “John McCain is a serious man who promised to wage a serious campaign. Win or lose, will he be able to look back on this one with pride? Right now, it’s hard to see how.”
UPDATE: Democratic activist James Carville, an admirer of McCain, SAYS he doubts that Mr. Straight Talk is even aware of some of his camp’s attack ads. (But then, I sometimes wonder whose side Carville is on.)
Entry Filed under: Uncategorized
8 Comments Add your own
1. Uncle Bouncy | September 11th, 2008 at 1:14 pm
To quote a better reporter than you:
Okay, I think McCain’s ad is wrong in one respect. As the bill never passed, it’s wrong to call it an Obama “accomplishment.”
And seriously…not a great hit. but an even worse response from the chosen one, honestly…questioning McCain’s honor? Obama can’t take the high road on that one.
And this is at least grounded in fact…unlike every Governor Palin smear you’ve reprinted in this blog
2. Pat Cunningham | September 11th, 2008 at 1:26 pm
Bouncy: The sex-ed bill supported by Obama (and apparently opposed by you) was aimed at teaching kindergartners about “improper touching.” It’s aimed at curbing pedophilia. Why would you oppose something like that?
3. equalityrkfd= | September 11th, 2008 at 1:40 pm
Why bother with the truth? It is just so inconvenient. It is McSame all over, how many lies has “W” told?
4. LD | September 11th, 2008 at 1:57 pm
Chris Hanson would like Uncle Bouncy to have a seat over there.
5. Uncle Bouncy | September 11th, 2008 at 2:50 pm
Here Pat…this is a by a reporter who actually READ the bill in question: Jim Geraghty…and where I stole the “accomplishment” joke
I’ll defer to what he says unless you have actually read the bill and can refute what Jim says
McCain’s Ad Is Right on the Sex Education Bill
I was going to avoid too much partisan politics today, but there are new details the sex education bill that are worth getting out there.
I continue to get furious e-mails from allegedly longtime readers (who I’ve never heard from before) now say they’ll never read me again because of my assessment of McCain’s ad hitting Obama on education. (Their rhetoric is suspiciously similar to those “longtime Republicans” who call into C-SPAN, who have never voted for a Democrat before, but who are now outraged that Republicans oppose universal health care/windfall profits taxes/the Fairness Doctrine and now are going to vote for Obama/Kerry/Gore.)
Anyway, having now looked at the text of the sex education bill in question… it’s clear that one of its key purposes was to change existing law that said “Each class or course in comprehensive sex education offered in any of grades 6 through 12 shall include instruction on the prevention, transmission and spread of AIDS” to “Each class or course in comprehensive sex education offered in any of grades K through 12 shall include instruction on the prevention of sexually transmitted infections, including the prevention, transmission and spread of HIV.” Yes, the legislation permitted parents to take their children out of the class. But that was already existing law.
(Note that the legislation also aimed to change the language from “All public elementary, junior high, and senior high 20 school classes that teach sex education and discuss sexual –intercourse shall emphasize that abstinence is the expected norm in that abstinence from sexual intercourse is the only protection that is 100% effective against unwanted teen pregnancy, sexually transmitted diseases, and acquired immune deficiency syndrome (AIDS)” to “All public elementary, junior high, and senior high school classes that teach sex education and discuss sexual activity or behavior shall emphasize that abstinence is an effective method of preventing unintended pregnancy, sexually transmitted diseases, and HIV when transmitted sexually.”)
Yes, there is a section stating that course material ought to be “age and developmentally appropriate.” But the bill also talks about alcohol and drug use education instruction in grades 5 through 12. So the legislation clearly recognized that some topics are best held until later years, but deemed that instruction on sexually-transmitted diseases - not merely “good touch, bad touch” - wasn’t one of them.
The bill was approved by the state senate’s Health and Human Services Committee with the support of… Barack Obama. The bill must have run into objections from the full chamber, because shortly thereafter, one of the bill’s original sponsors, State Sen. Carol Ronen, apparently rethought the age issue and introduced an amendment to shift it back to grade 6. But the revised bill never came up for a vote in the full chamber.
In this argument, it is worth noting which side is actually quoting the bill and how it sought to change existing law and which side is arguing, as one reader put it, “common sense suggests that McCain’s ad is b*******. Shouldn’t the fact that it was first used by Alan Keyes have given you a hint?” If a broken clock can be right twice a day, it is not unthinkable that Keyes would raise a legitimate objection to the bill.
I’m sure it’s a lot easier to scream that McCain is a shameless liar and that those who deemed the ad valid are hacks than to concede that one’s preferred candidate backed a bill with an unwise provision.
UPDATE: Okay, I think McCain’s ad is wrong in one respect. As the bill never passed, it’s wrong to call it an Obama “accomplishment.”
09/11 09:31 AM
6. Milton Waddams | September 11th, 2008 at 3:24 pm
“Each class or course in comprehensive sex education offered in any of grades K through 12 shall include instruction on the prevention of sexually transmitted infections, including the prevention, transmission and spread of HIV.”
Really? I didn’t see the part where it said Grades K-12 SHALL receive a comprehensive sex education course. Additionally, abstinence only education simply doesn’t work, that’s as plain as your VP selection.
7. Katrinka Yobotz | September 11th, 2008 at 9:40 pm
Obama at Planned Parenthood on Sex Education
At a Planned Parenthood event on July 18, 2007, with Planned Parenthood written all over the background, Obama specifically mentions Alan Keyes and mocks him saying:
OBAMA: I remember Alan Keyes–I ran against Alan Keyes–I don’t know if you guys remember Alan Keyes–
AUDIENCE: [laughter]
OBAMA: –but I remember Alan Keyes him saying [mocking voice]: “Barack Obama supports teaching sex education to kindergarteners.”
AUDIENCE: [laughter]
OBAMA: And, [shrugging] you know which, I don’t know–
AUDIENCE: [laughter]
OBAMA: I didn’t know what to tell him, heh heh. [pause] BUT IT’S THE RIGHT THING TO DO.
http://abcnews.go.com/Video/playerIndex?id=3386492
8. Milton Waddams | September 12th, 2008 at 12:47 pm
I don’t really follow what the point of your comment was…I am guessing that you intended to demean what Obama said and take it out of context, as Alan Keyes did. However then you provide a link which gives the whole context and ruins your soundbite/talking point comment.
Leave a Comment
Some HTML allowed:
<a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <code> <em> <i> <strike> <strong>
Trackback this post | Subscribe to the comments via RSS Feed