Bush Campaign Commercial...

Discussion in 'Politics, Religion, Social Issues' started by blackfox, Apr 19, 2004.

  1. blackfox macrumors 65816


    Feb 18, 2003
    I apologize if this topic has already been covered, as I have not kept up w/ the forums (as I was having a wonderful vacation in Vancouver BC)...but I happened to see a Bush Campaign commercial out at a bar last week which covered many topics about Kerrys tax-issue voting record, but at the end asserted that Kerry would spend $900 billion in 100 days...which seemed an incredible assertion to make. Does anyone know how this figure was estimated, or any of the information behind the commercial. It seems like it couldn't possibly be true, yet it is running...opinions/clarifications?

    PS I am sorry if this is old hat, as I do not watch TV as a rule, so I do not know how long it has been running...and my apologies for not finding a link.
  2. Neserk macrumors 6502a


    Jan 1, 2004
    It is an example of Bush's fuzzy math :D
  3. numediaman macrumors 6502a

    Jan 5, 2004
    Chicago (by way of SF)
    This should help:

    Attack ad revives question of whether Kerry's numbers add up.


    In its first attack ad to hit the airwaves, the Bush campaign accuses Kerry of proposing to raise taxes by $900 billion. Kerry denies that. And Bush's ad fails to mention that Kerry's "new government spending" would provide health insurance to more than 26 million who don't have it now.

    But Kerry's ambitious health-care plan that would indeed cost an estimated $895 billion over 10 years. And Kerry has also promised to cut the current $500-billion federal deficit in half. Can he pay for all that while raising taxes only for the wealthy? Those numbers don't quite add.


    Bush unveiled an ad March 11 that claims Kerry plans to pay for "new government spending"*by raising taxes $900 billion. The Kerry campaign calls that number "completely false." Neither side is exactly right. We'll try to put this in context.

    Bush Spin

    Naturally enough, Bush's ad leaves out that the "new government spending" it mentions would benefit millions of Americans who lack health insurance. According to a study by Emory University professor Kenneth Thorpe, which the Bush campaign's own background material cites as a credible authority, Kerry's plan would provide coverage for 26.7 million who currently have no coverage.

    The ad also goes too far when it says "Kerry's plan" is to raise taxes by at least $900 billion. Kerry has never endorsed such a figure, and his campaign spokeswoman Stephanie Cutter issued a statement accusing the Bush campaign of using "weapons of deception and distortion" and saying "The $900 billion ad is completely false."

    Well, maybe not completely.

    Kerry Spin

    Kerry himself issued a statement (see below) in which he didn't address the $900 billion figure directly. Instead he said, "What's most interesting about this ad is what's not in it." But the same can be said of Kerry's tax proposals, which leave out many specifics . . .


    There's more, of course.

    The Annenberg Political Fact Check is a project of the Annenberg Public Policy Center of the University of Pennsylvania.
  4. Thomas Veil macrumors 68020

    Thomas Veil

    Feb 14, 2004
    It's an age-old tactic. If you're gonna tell a lie, make it a big one. People will think, "They wouldn't say something that outrageous unless it were true." :mad:
  5. numediaman macrumors 6502a

    Jan 5, 2004
    Chicago (by way of SF)
    This dialogue should be turned into a Kerry ad:

    From NBC Dateline airing tonight:

    Stone Phillips NBC Reporter: “What's the biggest enforcement challenge right now when it comes to air pollution?”

    Bruce Buckheit: “The Bush Administration. An opportunity to reduce pollution just as we saw in Tampa is being foregone.”

    Phillips: “Are you saying this administration just doesn't care about air pollution?”

    Buckheit: “Yes. I'm saying this administration has decided to put the economic interests of the coal fired power plants ahead of the public interests in reducing air pollution.”

    Phillips: “That's a pretty serious allegation.”

    Buckheit: “Well, I was the head of the air enforcement division up until a couple weeks ago and I watched it happen.”

  6. blackfox thread starter macrumors 65816


    Feb 18, 2003
    Thanks for the info numediaman...I figured as much, although the 'in 100 days' seems impossibly quick...after all, that is 9 billion per day. I had forgotten how much the modern political system disgusts me (ie spin)...so depressing

Share This Page