SPONSORED BY:
Photo illustration: Newsweek.com; photo: Getty Images
POLITICS

The Whoppers of 2007

Factcheck.org reviews political distortions of the year.

By Brooks Jackson | factcheck.org
Jan 2, 2008 | Updated: 12:31  p.m. ET Jan 2, 2008
 

Email To A Friend

Please fill in the following information and we'll email this link.

Separate multiple addresses with commas

SPONSORED BY
 

Summary
The year 2007 wasn't a good one for political honesty. Though not even technically an election year, it provided a bumper crop of falsehoods and distortions nonetheless.

Presidential candidates kept us busy:

*Republican Rudy Giuliani made false claims over and over about his record as mayor of New York, and even about England's health care system.

*Democrat Bill Richardson also mangled the facts repeatedly, claiming credit for creating more jobs as New Mexico's governor than actually materialized and using a made-up figure about the performance of U.S. students, among other misstatements.

*Republican Mitt Romney claimed undeserved credit for himself as governor of Massachusetts and made false or misleading claims about two of his rivals.

*Democrat Hillary Clinton ran an ad claiming that National Guard and Reserve troops had no health insurance before she went to work, when in fact most of them did.

*Republican Gov. Mike Huckabee repeatedly twisted the facts when talking about his record on taxes in Arkansas and other subjects. And there were plenty of other howlers from the large field of candidates.

Misinformation came both from Congress and the White House:

*Democrats made false promises about their Medicare drug bill in January.

*President Bush returned the favor in September by making a false claim about a Democratic effort to expand health care coverage for children in low-income families.
Independent groups also dispensed misinformation during 2007:

*Advocates of the so-called "FairTax" claimed a 23 percent national sales tax can replace both the federal income tax and Social Security taxes. In truth, the actual rate would have to be at least 34 percent even if it fell on new homes, mortgage and credit-card interest and a host of other products and services not usually subject to state or local sales taxes.

Label

Newsweek Top Stories
Solving the Palin Puzzle
Solving the Palin Puzzle

See how well you can see Sarah from your house, by taking our trivia quiz.

The Failure of Copenhagen
The Failure of Copenhagen

Why there could be a silver lining in a failed climate treaty.

Dial 'A' for Accessory
Dial 'A' for Accessory

This season's top i-Phone add-ons.

118 Days in Hell
118 Days in Hell

A NEWSWEEK journalist recounts his captivity in Iran.

Discuss

Sponsored by

Member Comments

  • Posted By: mdgreasyjohn @ 01/19/2008 12:20:01 AM

    that was long, and no mention of ron paul. i cant beleive that the media , fox news , msnbc , cant......wait no ron paul. is that a good thing ??

  • Posted By: Johnny1967 @ 01/03/2008 11:13:53 PM

    Granted, there are many situations jobs being shipped out is problematic. For example, if jobs are being shipped out due to unfair trade practice by other countries or other governmental subsidies skewing fair trade. However, the basic premises of the benefits of international trade for the welfare of the United States are sound. For example, will the United States be better off if we forced U.S. citizens to purchase only U.S. made cars and forbid imports? Sure, we can save few automobile industry jobs. Also, large US automotive companies would benefit greatly. However, the US citizens will be forced to drive only American cars and the inefficiencies of our automotive industry will be profound. International trade is part of our market economy that arguably raises the United States standard of living and wealth.

    What Edwards is saying rings the tone of protectionism. He wants to fight large corporations from sending jobs overseas. However, by doing so, he will have to protect those large corporations from outside competition. Nothing will make corporate shareholders happier than the government protecting it from international competition. Such thoughtless protectionism, focusing only on the welfare of the certain company employees, may cause more problems than benefits.

    Again, unsound governmental policies have caused jobs to be shipped that do not benefit our nation. However, the hard part is reviewing our policies, including trade agreements and taxes, to maximize the welfare of our Nation.

    Simply vilifying the big corporations is unsound.

  • Posted By: rail60 @ 01/03/2008 9:26:09 PM

    The Kurds were gassed in 1988, when Sadam was our allie. In 1991 we destroyed the majority of there military and had UN Weapons Inspectors in Iraq for several years. Didn't seem serious enough for Reagan or HW Bush to invade and topple the Sadam regime then, but for some reason the slightly retarded Dubya felt it was critical to security in 2003. If your response, like Cheney (aka Satan) is that there was a connection between Sadam and Al Quida, you like Cheney should do a little research. The countries with clear connections to terrorist organizations were Iran and Syria and Iran has not only sought weapons of mass destruction, but has had an active nuclear program. So, why didn't we invade Iran, but instead chose Iraq? I am certain of one thing, the lies the Bush Adminstration have been feeding us are not the true reasons we invaded Iraq. So, turn off Rush Limbaugh and the other Republican propaganda machines and seek truth.

Reply

Report Abuse

Enter comments if any for reporting abuse

View All Comments »

My Take

Customize the NEWSWEEK homepage
to feature your favorite columnists.

Customize Now