Hey, That’s My Name

On her fabulous new MSNBC show last night Rachel Maddow discussed the impact of lying (and calling the opposition “liars”) in a Presidential campaign. She posited that a candidate only suffers for lying when the press begins to police them by actually calling them, well, a liar. You see, the theory is that the opposing candidate complaining about lies is just that person making excuses for why they’re losing. But once the media begins calling the candidate a liar, then the game shifts a little. However, this seems to happen less in this the day and age of “balanced news” in which news organizations simply quote both sides and don’t bother to fact check either because, apparently facts are a thing of the past.

But it seems that there is, apparently something of a lying threshold. At some point, even the press stops and takes note of the ridiculous falsehoods and between pigs, lipstick, sex ed for kindergartners and – the lie Maddow discusses – crowd sizes, McCain may have been spinning too much too fast for anyone to let slide. In her report, Maddow gave a prophetic example of when the media’s label of liar stuck to a candidate: Al Gore.

Well, today the McCain campaign seemed to be daring the press to compare him Vice President Gore with the following response to a questionnaire focusing on science and technology:

I am uniquely qualified to lead our nation during this technological revolution. While in the Navy, I depended upon the technologies and information provided by our nation’s scientists and engineers with during each mission. I am the former chairman of the Senate Committee on Commerce, Science and Transportation. The Committee plays a major role in the development of technology policy, specifically any legislation affecting communications services, the Internet, cable television and other technologies. Under my guiding hand, Congress developed a wireless spectrum policy that spurred the rapid rise of mobile phones and Wi-Fi technology that enables Americans to surf the web while sitting at a coffee shop, airport lounge, or public park.

[From Sciencedebate 2008]

DailyKos polices this claim well by pointing out that the foundation of cell phone and Internet regulation was actually brought about by the Telecommunications Act of 1996. This is a bill that was signed by President Clinton and a bill for which Senator John McCain was one of the few senators that voted against (it passed with 81 votes).

As if claiming ownership over mobile phones and Wi-Fi weren’t enough, Douglas Holtz-Eakin, a McCain campaign advisor implied that his candidate was responsible for the Blackberry. While speaking with reporters Holtz-Eakin held up his Blackberry and proclaimed, “He did this…You’re looking at the miracle John McCain helped create and that’s what he did.” A great postscript to this story, former FCC chairman Reed Hunt spoke to Thing Progress today noting that the Blackberry was created by a Canadian company and that “it’s American entrepreneurship our President is supposed to encourage.”

Additionally, on CNBC this morning McCain cited his experience on the commerce committee again, this time as evidence of his economic experience, stating that they had oversight over all aspects of the American economy.

The point is, I was chairman of the commerce committee. Every part of America’s economy, I oversighted. I have a long record, certainly far more extensive of being involved in our economy than Senator Obama does.

Really? You want to take credit for the economy? Now?!? But that’s not even the point. You see, as the Washington Post points out, the commerce committee does not, in fact, oversee every part of America’s economy because there’s also this committee called the Senate Banking Committee and it’s kind of in charge of, well, banks and other financial institutions. The Post points out that the commerce committee’s website says it oversees “regulation of consumer products and services … except for credit, financial services, and housing.” So that claim about McCain having “oversighted every aspect of America’s economy while leading the commerce committee is a total lie.

Gore was blasted for claiming he invented the Internet (which he never said) and for claims that he was the inspiration for the male character in the movie Love Story and items like that sent the media into a whirl over his exaggerations. You think they’ll maybe do the same thing with John McCain now? Can I hope a little.

See the above mentioned report from The Rachel Maddow Show:

There have been several points in the John McCain campaign where he’s contradicted himself from day to day. Apparently that wasn’t enough, because Think Progress caught McCain articulating different opinions in the span of less than an hour this morning as he visited various morning talk shows to discuss his position on the economy. The candidate couldn’t quite seem to get a handle on how he really feels about “excessive” government regulation.

On NBC’s Today Show, McCain told Matt Lauer:

Of course I don’t like excessive and unnecessary regu — uh, government regulation.

But on CBS’s Early Show, McCain told Harry Smith:

Do I believe in excess government regulation? Yes. But this patchwork quilt of regulating bodies was designed for the 1930s when they were invented.

[From McCain Flip-Flops On ‘Excessive Regulation’ In Less Than An Hour | Think Progress]

She had seemed like one of the most poised McCain surrogates out there, but the past couple of days have not been kind to former HP CEO Carly Fiorina. Yesterday she repeated the campaign line when anyone dares to even imply anything disparaging of Sarah Palin (even if it’s in jest) by saying that the Saturday Night Live sketch that featured Tina Fey as Sarah Palin and Amy Poehler as Hillary Clinton was “sexist.” That alone would have been ridiculous, but it was made even moreso by the fact that the support she offered for this view seems to actually debunk her own claim:

Well, I think that she looked a bit like her. I think that, of course, the portrait was very dismissive of the substance of Sarah Palin, and so in that sense, they were defining Hillary Clinton as very substantive, and Sarah Palin as totally superficial. I think that continues the line of argument that is disrespectful in the extreme, and yes, I would say, sexist in the sense that just because Sarah Palin has different views than Hillary Clinton does not mean that she lacks substance. She has a lot of substance.

[From Carly Fiorina Criticizes Tina Fey As "Disrespectful...Sexist" | The Huffington Post]

Perhaps I’m confused, but last I checked Hillary Clinton is a woman. So forgive me, but I don’t quite understand how drawing a contrast between one woman and another is sexist. Take out the “sexist” claim and Fiorina had set up a great defense for slamming Saturday Night Live as a bunch of Hollywood liberals, but the implication of sexism doesn’t pass the smell test.

But sexism and SNL seem like small potatoes when compared to what Fiorina got herself into today.

It began when she appeared on the McGraw Milhaven Show on St. Louis KTRS Radio this morning. The host asked Fiorina if she thought that Sarah Palin had the experience to run a major company like Hewlett Packard. Her response:

No, I don’t. But you know what? That’s not what she’s running for. Running a corporation is a different set of things.

She goes on to repeat the party line about how Sarah Palin is more experienced than Obama because she has executive experience. But still, how can you make the case that Palin doesn’t have the experience to run a corporation but does have the experience to run a country with a population of more than 300 million people and a GDP of more than $13 trillion?

But Fiorina didn’t stop there. She appeared on MSNBC later in the day to give her comments about the governor’s experience some context…by saying that John McCain (as well as Barack Obama and Joe Biden) couldn’t run a corporation either.

Well I don’t think John McCain could run a major corporation. I don’t think Barack Obama could run a major corporation. I don’t think Joe Biden could run a major corporation. But on the other hand, a major corporation is not the same as being the president or vice president of the United States. It is a fallacy to suggest that the country is like a company. So of course, to run a business, you have to have a lifetime of experience in business. But that’s not what Sarah Palin, John McCain, Joe Biden or Barack Obama are doing.

Obama campaign spokesman Tommy Vietor responded:

If John McCain’s top economic advisor doesn’t think he can run a corporation, how on Earth can he run the largest economy in the world in the midst of a financial crisis? Apparently even the people who run his campaign agree that the economy is an issue John McCain doesn’t understand as well as he should.

[From Fiorina clarifies: ‘I don’t think John McCain could run a major corporation.’ | Think Progress]

I had ambitions of blogging about important stuff today, but I got a little tied up with work and cleaning my kitchen. So instead I’ll just be giving you this for now with plans of more substantive posts later in the week. I got a kick out of it, hope you do, too.

581

Data courtesy of the Washington Post.