FACTCHECK.ORG

Katrina Kerfuffle

McCain claims he "supported every investigation" into the government's role regarding the hurricane, when in fact he twice voted against an independent commission.

By Lori Robertson | factcheck.org
Jun 5, 2008 | Updated: 6:42  p.m. ET Jun 5, 2008

« Return to Article

Discuss

Member Comments

  • Posted By: Reginald.Malone@richmondgov.com @ 06/17/2008 12:39:14 PM

    I hope the voters in this country will remember Sen.McBush's vote on the katrina disaster in New orleans. Sen. Mcbush voted in 05 & 06 against an investigation about the federal government's handling of the katrina incident. On both occasions, the unwise senator supported the White House position on the investigation move by the U.S. Senate. Now you know where Sen. Mcbush stands on helping the poor.

  • Posted By: Jack999 @ 06/13/2008 1:42:38 AM

    Obama supporter lets make a petition to Pentagon againt John MCain entry as Military Officer when his Highest Qualifcation only HIGH SCHOOL to Probe the descrpancies,but yet manage to enter Annapolis Naval Academy as Navy Officer Pilot?He should only be a Private or Cpl to his Qualification.Does this have to do to his father position as Admiral?He was shoot Twice by enemy during his Career,I dont find this amused of his failure as his IQ level not up to the Mark to An Officer let alone pilot.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_McCain#Formative_years_and_education

    Check his Qualification .Facts,not smarter then Forrest Gump

  • Posted By: kat52770 @ 06/10/2008 3:42:46 PM

    McLame is about more of the same. He can't tell the truth to save his life. Either that or he really is senile--take your pick. I am sick of selfish Republicans blindly leading us to World War III. Wake up America, the draft is ah comin.'

  • Posted By: dtechba @ 06/06/2008 3:39:08 PM

    So, Clinton's amendment didn't ahve any pork but what about the original bill? Let's try to be at least a little honest hear when launching an attack article. Or maybe the reporter is just stupid (my choice). Ridiculous....

    • Posted By: Johnsonium @ 06/06/2008 3:47:58 PM

      It's not an "attack". This word has been used and abused way too much by those that think their candidate shouldn't have to address legitimate issues about their record. When the media was pressing Obama about Wright, I didn't consider it an "attack". They were following the story because it seemed to have legs. Luckily, Obama responded perfectly.

      • Posted By: SuzyQ1 @ 06/10/2008 2:05:17 PM

        Mr. Obama did not properly respond concerning Wright or the disgusting priest playing to the worst attitude of his audience. As far as I can tell, Wright was correct in describing Obama's responses as "political." And Mrs. Obama's comment. I believe that she said exactly what she meant. I understand that it is "correct" to say shame on the whit'es for the wrongs done long before they were born, If we are ever to get past the conflict between black and white, both need a correction of attitude - one that starts in the heart.

  • Posted By: SuzyQ1 @ 06/10/2008 1:32:43 PM

    Thank you for the article on Sen. McCain's failure to own up to his straight party votes as well as his failure to see the need for a probe into the disgraceful response of the Bush administration to the Katrina disaster, especially since McCain went around saying that he would have done a better job. Bush the younger sure proved that he is his father's son. Lee

  • Posted By: Wolfheart @ 06/10/2008 1:23:05 PM

    This is my favorite line from this piece by far:

    McCain campaign spokesman Brian Rogers: It doesn't bode well for Senator Obama's pledges to run a campaign of hope and change when on the first day of the general election he's launching the same tired negative attacks that the American people are so sick and tired of.

    What the American people truly are sick and tired of is politicians lying through their teeth even when faced with cold hard fact and truth. The Republicans certainly weren't complaining about "negative attacks" when people who were speaking out against the Iraq invasion early on were lambasted by the media and they had the public feeding on whatever line they chose to give out. But when the truth about the war and the patent falsehoods that were propagated by the administration started coming to light, suddenly it was "the liberal media attacking" them.

    An administration that can't stand straight in the light of day and stand tall in the face of truth is not one that I would choose to be led by. Our Constitution, our very government was created in defiance of tyranny and once stood as a beacon that several other nations the world over chose to follow. How far this government has fallen from that ideal. You don't create democracy by invading another country and installing your own puppet government, for that is the path of the despot and the tyrant. You don't lead with the whip, you lead by example.

    McCain has shown time and again that rather than stand straight and face truth, he would instead twist and distort it to make him appear something he is not. Values he once spoke out for and stood by he has readily abandoned in order to curry favor from his own party. Even if he chose to break away from Bush and his plans, it would still be a third term of an administration rife with dishonesty and double dealing with the American public.

    I am an independent myself, and as a Texan, I honestly had some hope for Bush making a positive change. Those hopes were shattered his first year in office, though, before even 9/11. Watching and reading about Obama, however, I find myself hoping again. He has endured countless attacks on his person and integrity, and has weathered them all with greater poise and honesty than most I have seen in a long time. He says that he is for a more transparent government and greater communication with the people of this nation. Unlike his adversary McCain, his voting history and his policies bear that out. There is a world of difference between a "negative attack" and "setting the record straight," and it's time the American public became more active and started learning about that. I do believe that Obama is this nation's best chance at this juncture in history to rise once more and stand on its own in the light of day. When choosing your leader, be sure it is one that listens to you and speaks for you, not one that speaks to you and would have you liste

  • Posted By: Wolfheart @ 06/10/2008 1:19:48 PM

    This is my favorite line from this piece by far:

    McCain campaign spokesman Brian Rogers: It doesn't bode well for Senator Obama's pledges to run a campaign of hope and change when on the first day of the general election he's launching the same tired negative attacks that the American people are so sick and tired of.

    What the American people truly are sick and tired of is politicians lying through their teeth even when faced with cold hard fact and truth. The Republicans certainly weren't complaining about "negative attacks" when people who were speaking out against the Iraq invasion early on were lambasted by the media and they had the public feeding on whatever line they chose to give out. But when the truth about the war and the patent falsehoods that were propagated by the administration started coming to light, suddenly it was "the liberal media attacking" them.

    An administration that can't stand straight in the light of day and stand tall in the face of truth is not one that I would choose to be led by. Our Constitution, our very government was created in defiance of tyranny and once stood as a beacon that several other nations the world over chose to follow. How far this government has fallen from that ideal. You don't create democracy by invading another country and installing your own puppet government, for that is the path of the despot and the tyrant. You don't lead with the whip, you lead by example.

    McCain has shown time and again that rather than stand straight and face truth, he would instead twist and distort it to make him appear something he is not. Values he once spoke out for and stood by he has readily abandoned in order to curry favor from his own party. Even if he chose to break away from Bush and his plans, it would still be a third term of an administration rife with dishonesty and double dealing with the American public.

    I am an independent myself, and as a Texan, I honestly had some hope for Bush making a positive change. Those hopes were shattered his first year in office, though, before even 9/11. Watching and reading about Obama, however, I find myself hoping again. He has endured countless attacks on his person and integrity, and has weathered them all with greater poise and honesty than most I have seen in a long time. He says that he is for a more transparent government and greater communication with the people of this nation. Unlike his adversary McCain, his voting history and his policies bear that out. There is a world of difference between a "negative attack" and "setting the record straight," and it's time the American public became more active and started learning about that. I do believe that Obama is this nation's best chance at this juncture in history to rise once more and stand on its own in the light of day. When choosing your leader, be sure it is one that listens to you and speaks for you, not one that speaks to you and would have you liste

  • Posted By: salamforall @ 06/09/2008 9:54:18 AM

    to me McCain is not lying about the vote but he does not remember, I gues it's the age factor. Reporters should ask him about visit ti Israel and the comments about the relaitionship between Iran and Al-qa'eda? he need alot of facts checked before answering questions to reporters.

  • Posted By: Tony C. @ 06/06/2008 2:28:10 PM

    IF OBAMA CHOOSES HILLARY I WILL VOTE FOR HIM, IF NOT, THE LOSER IS ON HIS OWN.

    HOW I HAVE LONGED FOR THE DAY WHEN CLOWNS LIKE SHAPRTON, JACKSON, WRIGHT AND SO MANY OTHER BUFFOONS CAN HAVE THEIR DISGUISES RIPPED OFF, BE EXPOSED FOR THE FRAUDS THEY ARE, AND FORCED, AT LAST, TO COME OUT FROM BEHIND THE RACE CARD WHICH THEY HAVE HIDDEN BEHIND FOR DECADES, AND FINALLY HAVE TO GET REAL JOBS.

    THAT ALONE WOULD BE WORTH SEEING OBAMA SUCCEED.

    • Posted By: Nins @ 06/07/2008 10:04:51 PM

      Tony, you are a little confused. The Reverends Sharpton, Wright and jackson have never pretended to be anything except what they are: middle aged balck men who grew up in a segregated, lynch-mob America and lived to tell the tale. They are not wearing masks. They are witnessing to what they saw.

      Hiding behind the race card? That good old bullet-proof race card that Martin Luther King Jr. was hiding behind when he got shot? Oh, yes, it is obvious to all of us that MLK was only making it all up -- there was no racism in America then, and there is none now. NOT.

      Tony, go soak your head.

    • Posted By: Johnsonium @ 06/06/2008 3:34:13 PM

      Why do racists always post in all-caps? Do they think shouting their hatred will make it acceptable?

      • Posted By: Pia1981 @ 06/06/2008 9:50:55 PM

        No, no, that's good. Let them. It keeps other posters from wanting to read their comments. I never read all-caps.

  • Posted By: Nins @ 06/07/2008 12:41:18 AM

    Concerned Citizen, you really shouldn't talk about Obama voting "Present" when he was in the Illinois State Senate, a body where voting Present is a commonly accepted practice among all the Senators. You are making me just itch to tell the world the truth about McCain's voting record (or lack thereof).

    In the first session of the 110th Congress (2007), McCain holds the dubious honor of missing, by a wide margin, more votes than any other Senator save one. The only one who missed more? That would be Senator Tim Johnson, who was recovering from a brain hemorrhage.

    The Washington Post has a database that tracks vote missed in the Senate. McCain missed a whopping 261 of 468 votes, about 56%. And it not because he wasn't there in the building. He refuses to vote on any bill that is controversial or that he might be criticized for. Consequently, he votes on almost all of the silly votes (like "Name a Daisy Day") but fails to be in the room when really important stuff is going down, like votes concerning the war in Iraq. Senator Harry Reid, the Senate Majority Leader became so angry with McCain about this that he took him task for it right on the Senate floor, saying "Senator McCain has spent considerable time defending the President on Iraq, but has only managed to show up for four of the last fourteen Iraq votes."

    In case you think I made that up, I will give you a reference: "McCain Missed Votes on Iraq Triggers Reid Rebuke" published in The Hill, May 17, 2007.

    You may be asking why would McCain not want to vote on Iraq? Because he already knew then that he would be running for President, and he knew the war was increasingly unpopular, and he didn't want the Democrats to be able to point to his record and say "Look how he votes on Iraq."

    McCain has also missed important votes on national security, funding of law enforcement, equipment for firefighters, and of course, his most recent no-show, on giving veterans the GI Bill. In fact, McCain misses more than half of his votes.

    I could write at least five more blogs about how McCain is failing as a Senator by refusing to vote, giving lots of details. And my information is true, with references that can be verified. You write smears about Obama, take one true thing and amplify and distort it into a complete exaggeration, and offer no sources for your information.

    I promise you that every time you do that, i will respond with more true facts about John McCain, and as far as McCain is concerned, the truth hurts. I don't care if you criticize Obama or say that you don't like him, but make sure that the "facts" you use are correct or I will rebut them with REAL stuff about your candidate that will really make you wish you hadn't started this whole smear campaign against Obama.

    • Posted By: notroubleatall1963 @ 06/07/2008 10:51:28 AM

      Excellent rebuttal post!

      Do we really want a moron in the White House for another four years?

  • Posted By: notroubleatall1963 @ 06/07/2008 10:59:24 AM

    Here's the biggest joke: The Republican Party can't even say they're fiscally responsible or that they controlled "big Government" from getting out of hand. War spending has expanded Government beyond anywhere near where even the most liberal Democrat would like to see it go.

    And the economy is heading fast toward a recession - and possibly a global crisis.

    We need a leader with brains and integrity. That rules out anyone from the GOP as far as I can tell.

    • Posted By: RMax304823 @ 06/07/2008 1:10:45 PM

      It's curious, isn't it. The Republican party has always been the party of small government, less interference in private lives, avoidance of international entanglements, strict adherence to the Constitution, and fiscal responsibility -- and many conservatives still stand for those things, but not the Bush administration. Bush, Cheney, and the rest are not conservatives at all in the traditional sense. There's no good name for their approach to government but "radical" comes as close as any. As for paying for the Iraq war it's all being swept under the rug for the next president and the next generation to deal with. It's being funded largely by treasury bonds sold to Japan and China., while the mantra continues to be "cut taxes." We can't even see photos of the coffins arriving daily at Dover AFB. Four thousand American dead and tens of thousands grievously wounded, and a war that costs about $2B a week or almost $30M per HOUR. And no exit strategy. We're fat, dumb, and happy. Except for grunts and their families, nobody's sacrificing anything because we're being given a proverbial "free lunch." McCain is going to pay for this by cutting taxes for the wealthy, cutting pork (which cost us about $12B in last year's budget), and by voting against benefits for GIs with 3 or more years of experience. Here's a look at the national debt from the White House web site.

      http://zfacts.com/p/318.html

      • Posted By: notroubleatall1963 @ 06/07/2008 8:37:15 PM

        This set of Bush Republicans (neo-Cons?) are not radical so much as totally cynical - manipulating the government system with a phony war to line their pockets and those of their rich buddies in the military-industrial complex (and that includes oil). That is the sole reason we're in Iraq - it's not about "democratizing" the Middle East. It's about building 50 bases there and handing all the contracts to KBR (formerly part of Halliburton, Dick Cheney's famed company) and other companies that supported the Regime. Bush is laughing all the way to the bank - along with the Saudis he's friends with and all the other "silent rich" among the true Republican base. Or maybe it's the silent nouveau riche, I haven't really understood it not being part of that clan.

        This Bush Administration was a complete and utter departure from core Republican values. It's a sham Regime put in place by Bush Sr.'s friends to start a war that would generate a ton of profit for them all.

        • Posted By: Nins @ 06/07/2008 9:57:54 PM

          A ton of profit for all of them. And a ton of debt for the rest of America.

      • Posted By: Nins @ 06/07/2008 9:56:25 PM

        Dear RMax, I agree with you. I'm a Republican, and I am mad as hell at the horrible mangling of real conservative values that Bush & Co. have pandered off as "conservative thinking." I wouldn't have minded half so much if they had been successful at creating a robust economy while they played their little games, but they have landed us in the soup up to our necks, while fattening their own calves. I'm sure that most of their crimes have yet to be unveiled. History will have some very strongly negative things to say about Geo. W Bush.

  • Posted By: Nins @ 06/07/2008 9:50:33 PM

    Perumania writes that "McCain is the democratic option for Democrats." But real Democrats wouldn't touch McCain with a ten foot poll. McCain has PROMISED the right wing of the GOP that he will appoint conservative religious right judges to any and all Federal posts that come open. That includes the Supreme Court, which he specifically named in this promise. Four of the current Justices are elderly and ready for retirement, making it highly likely that the next President will get to name at least two or three of them. And then, guess what? There are enough conservative Christian judges on the Supreme Court to overturn Roe vs. Wade.

    Most Democrats, even ones who are religious themselves and/or oppose abortion, are strongly in favor of retaining the separation of church and state which is so essential to our democracy. Allowing a religious group (more especially a radical right wing one) to control the interpretation and application of the laws by making sure that they control the Supreme Court, well, that doesn't sound very democratic to me.

    In addition, McCain is against government funding of birth control and sex education. This opposition included a vote against spending $100 million to reduce teen pregnancy through education. And he opposes the federal minimum wage. On January 24, 2007 he voted to repeal it.

    NOT the democratic option for Democrats.

  • Posted By: Nins @ 06/07/2008 12:40:40 AM

    Here's some data taken from the National Overview of 2008 Primary Results:

    OBAMA BEAT McCAIN in THE POPULAR VOTE in FORTY STATES.

    AL: 302,684 Obama / 211,071 McCain
    AR: 79,411 Obama / 44,608 McCain
    CA: 1,746,013 Obama / 1,093,560 McCain
    CO: 79,334 Obama / 10,621 McCain
    CT: 179,349 Obama / 78,741 McCain
    DE: 51,124 Obama / 22,626 McCain
    DC: 85,534 Obama / 3,929 McCain
    GA: 700,366 Obama / 303,639 McCain
    IL: 1,301,954 Obama / 424,071 McCain
    IN: 630,399 Obama / 44,608 McCain
    KS: 27,172 Obama / 4,587 McCain
    KY: 209,778 Obama / 142,826 McCain
    LA: 220,588 Obama / 67,609 McCain
    ME: 2,079 Obama / 958 McCain
    MD: 464,474 Obama / 163,677 McCain
    MA: 511,887 Obama / 204,027 McCain
    MN: 141,527 Obama / 13,822 McCain
    MS: 255,809 Obama / 113,074 McCain
    MO: 405,284 Obama / 194,304 McCain
    MT: 102,373 Obama / 72,455 McCain
    NH: 104,772 Obama / 88,466 McCain
    NJ: 492,186 Obama / 310,427 McCain
    NY: 697,914 Obama / 310,814 McCain
    NC: 875,683 Obama / 381,616 McCain
    ND: 11,625 Obama / 2,224 McCain
    OH: 979,025 Obama / 636,256 McCain
    OK: 130,087 Obama / 122,748 McCain
    OR: 360,728 Obama / 280,030 McCain
    PA: 1,046,220 Obama / 587,210 McCain
    RI: 75,115 Obama / 17,468 McCain
    SC: 295,091 Obama / 147,283 McCain
    SD: 43,574 Obama / 42,657 McCain
    TN: 250,730 Obama / 174,763 McCain
    TX: 1,358,785 Obama / 709,477 McCain
    UT: 70,373 Obama / 15,264 McCain
    VT: 91,740 Obama / 28,488 McCain
    VA: 623,141 Obama / 244,135 McCain
    WA: 354,111 Obama / 262,295 McCain
    WV: 91,747 Obama / 89,782 McCain
    WI: 646,007 Obama / 224,226 McCain


    Here are the states where McCain won:

    AZ: 171,368 Obama / 233,299 McCain
    FL: 569,041 Obama / 693,508 McCain
    ID: 23,973 Obama / 87,341 McCain
    NE: 46,291 Obama / 118,092 McCain
    NV: 4,773 Obama / 5,651 McCain
    NM: 67,531 Obama / 93,674 McCain


    GRAND TOTAL: 16,928,770 Obama / 9,122,079 McCain

    Some states are missing from the list. I did not include the votes of any states where one party held a primary and the other party held a non-head count caucus, because that is like comparing apples to oranges -- you can't fairly say that one or the other won. If you add all the votes, Obama is close to 18,000,000 and McCain is around 9,400,000.

    Just think, Obama bested McCain like this, even though he was splitting the vote with his formidable opponent, Clinton, who walked away with half of the Democratic electorate.

    The next time someone tells you that "Obama can't win the general election" you might want to refer them to these results.

    • Posted By: Pia1981 @ 06/07/2008 10:32:14 AM

      Thanks Nins. The Dem turnout for Obama was unprecedented.

      • Posted By: notroubleatall1963 @ 06/07/2008 10:37:07 AM

        Yes, and the race this Fall will be a landslide victory for OBAMA! Even the Wall Street Journal owner agrees.

  • Posted By: eddiewhere @ 06/07/2008 4:52:53 PM

    WE are about to find out whether America is still RACIST. IF BARAK wins he will be the first man to be from two races to win. HE IS BOTH BALCK AND WHITE and that should work in this favor.
    McCAIN can only win if he pLAyS the race card. THE REpublicans have destroyed the fabric of this country . THey HAVE TURNED THE LAND OF IMMIGRANTS AND OppORTUNITy TO THE LAND OF DEBT, RACISM AND WAR. THEy HAVE LEFT A HUGE CRATER WHICH McCAIN WANTS TO MAKE DEEpER by CONTINUING their misguided ONE HUNDRED yEAR pOLICIES. BUSH/CHENEy pOLICIES have catered to the rich and put the middle class through hell. I call it Economic Feudalism.

    BILL CLINTON is such a gifted man but his one flaw, addiction to women, cost GORE AND HIS WIFE THE presidency. Bill was the best president, we the people, have ever had. ADDICTION will bring anyone down AND THE people AROUND THEM, regardless of who they are. IT is a shame because Bill Clinton has done AMAZING things around the globe and here at home over the last fifteen years.
    Hillary I do not know what to say, you are a great women and AMERICA NEEDS yOU.

    BARAK, congratulations, I have been commenting on your wave of change since NOVEMEBER. All my posts turned out to be dead on. yOU are a champion who beat another champion.

  • Posted By: perumanian @ 06/07/2008 2:11:27 PM

    Mccaine., the democratic option for Democrats.

    • Posted By: Zig Zag @ 06/07/2008 3:02:19 PM

      If you are going to support McCain, then you should at least learn how to spell his name correctly. Otherwise, people might think you are ignorant.

  • Posted By: notroubleatall1963 @ 06/07/2008 10:53:27 AM

    GOP - Lies, stolen elections, arranged assassinations, murders, death, death, death in useless wars...

    Yet, ironically, they are "pro-life" - don't kid yourselves. This is the party of cynical crooks. They don't give a hoot about life. They want to line their pockets with corruption, death and deceit at the expense of ordinary, hard working Americans.

    A vote for McCain is immoral.

  • Posted By: cerrojim @ 06/07/2008 10:49:32 AM

    Oooops, I am so old I forgot myself and post twice! (And I am younger than the elder Senator from Arizona.)

  • Posted By: notroubleatall1963 @ 06/07/2008 10:43:42 AM

    No more Texans for President either. They are crooked politicians - dating back to LBJ's infamous vote stealing in 1948 Senate election - against Stevenson, who really won. The results were exactly like what we witnessed in Florida in 2000, when Bush Jr. "won" there after all the exit polls called clearly in favor of Gore. The mass confusion, the rulings against re-counts, the loss of a significant amount of votes, the "banana republic" that ensued -- all the legacy of the corrupt Texan political machine.

    LBJ figured out how to cheat the system and passed the knowledge down to the conservatives who funded his campaigns. When the South turned Republican for good in the 1960s in reaction to Civil Rights (they were so prejudiced back then), the legacy was handed off to the Republicans.

    Guess where I read about this? In Scott McClellan's father's book about LBJ being the force who arranged for JFK's assassination. He's a Texan lawyer, Barr McClellan, and he saw or was told most of the truth about the ugly side of Texas politics as one of LBJ's lead attorneys.

    You cannot underestimate the corruption of the Bushes, the Republican party, and the conservative politicians from Texas. They will pass the mantle to McCain - so watch out for more fraudulent election shenanigans this Fall.

    • Posted By: notroubleatall1963 @ 06/07/2008 10:47:24 AM

      And stealing elections isn't the worst of it - the corruption extends to murder and "arranged" suicides, mysterious plane crashes, various other lovely activities.

      The Axis of Evil? It takes one to know one, Mr. Bush et al.

  • Posted By: cerrojim @ 06/07/2008 10:41:55 AM

    McCain is just another Republican liar. Republican for me has become a synonym for liar. It has become so comical to see them caught in a lie and then cry "negative attack." It has worked for them in the past ... some people are just plain gullible ... but, I doubt that this will continue. At least, I pray it doesn't.

    McCain can't remember his votes? Please! Well, maybe he is so old that things do slip his mind. God forbid he orders an attack on Iran someday and them forgets we are there!

Reply

Report Abuse

Enter comments if any for reporting abuse