Obama has 63 Nobel Laureates working on his policy team. They are developing a plan to push America back to the top. Who is responsible for McCain's planning? Americans would be shocked to find that Douglas Holtz-Eakin is the sole person responsible for planning McCain's policy for America's future. Holtz-Eakin is also McCain's economic advisor, filling two full time positions on McCain's team. How can one single man (an economist) be responsible for developing a viable technology plan for our future? Obama has an enormous pool of the most intelligent, talented men and women in America working for him. Soon, they will be working for US.
And let's not forget that the McCain campaign spent more on Palin's makeup artist than it did on it's foreign policy advisor. When you pay your makeup artist DOUBLE what you pay your foreign policy advisor, it is time to start examining your priorities.
You look just fine without makeup, John. And Sarah is young enough not to need any. So cut the crap, and start paying some good ECONOMIC ADVISORS so you can have a fiscal plan to present to America. We're in the middle of a huge global financial meltdown, and you are worried about hair and makeup? PLEASE start worrying about the middle class, John. Please.
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- Next Page »
FactCheck.org: "Outrageous" Exaggerations
Email To A Friend
Please fill in the following information and we'll email this link.
McCain (Senate floor, Feb. 13, 2003): Because these appropriations are never discussed with nonmembers of the Appropriations Committee, one can only imagine and conjure up an idea as to how this might be used. Approach a bear: That bear cub over there claims you are his father, and we need to take your DNA. Approach another bear: Two hikers had their food stolen by a bear, and we think it is you. We have to get the DNA. The DNA doesn't fit, you got to acquit, if I might.
Good laugh lines, maybe, but the United States Geological Service's Northern Divide Grizzly Bear Project didn't study DNA for paternity tests or forensics. Rather, it explored a means of estimating Montana's grizzly bear population by analyzing bear fur snagged on barbed wire. The project was funded partly by federal appropriations – about $1 million per year in add-ons to USGS in 2003 through 2005, $400,000 in 2006 and $300,000 in 2007, plus a $1.1 million earmark through the Forest Service in 2004, according to the study's principal researcher, Katherine C. Kendall. Part of that funding was doled out as part of the omnibus appropriations bill McCain discussed in February 2003.
Despite the fun McCain had ridiculing the bear project on the Senate floor, he didn't actually try to remove it from the bill. He did introduce several amendments, including three to reduce funding for projects he considered wasteful or harmful, but none removing the grizzly bear project appropriations. And despite his criticisms, he voted in favor of the final bill.
A Hippie Museum
The last earmark McCain highlights in the ad is $1 million for a Woodstock museum, which, he mentions not-so-subtly, was proposed by Sen. Hillary Clinton, the leading Democratic presidential contender. The earmark would have allotted $1 million to New York state's Bethel Woods Center for the Arts, future site of a museum celebrating the 1969 Woodstock music festival and its effect on American culture.
But McCain wasn't present for the vote on an amendment he co-sponsored (spearheaded again by Coburn) to remove the stipulated funding for the museum and reroute about a third of it to maternal and child health services. He was out on the campaign trail.
It's true, as the McCain campaign points out, that McCain's vote would not have changed the outcome. Still, we wonder whether voters might have a different view of McCain's ridiculing of the museum not just in this ad but in two others, as well as a presidential debate, if they knew of his absence for the key votes.
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- Next Page »
Discuss