Full Article Text
Michael Giltz: Obama's Win and the Ten Lies The Right Is Spreading About It
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/michael-giltz/obamas-win-and-the-ten-li_b_143395.html [4/5/2009 1:06:29 PM]
APRIL 5, 2009
MAGHOUND.com Feedback - Ads by Google
HOME POLITICS MEDIA BUSINESS ENTERTAINMENT LIVING STYLE GREEN WORLD CHICAGO
COMEDY 23/6 VIDEO BLOGGER INDEX ARCHIVE
Make HuffPost Your HomePage
Get Email Alerts
Twitter: Follow Us
BIG NEWS : Michelle Obama | North Korea | Barack Obama | David Axelrod | More...
LOG IN | SIGN UP
Michael Giltz
Posted November 12, 2008 | 05:22 PM (EST)
BIO
Become a
Fan
Get EmailAlerts
Bloggers'Index
Obama's Win and the Ten Lies The
Right Is Spreading About It
Read More: Al Gore , Barack Obama , Bill Clinton , Far Right ,
Joe Lieberman , John McCain , Karl Rove , Lee Atwater , Lies About Obama , Lies Of The
Right , Rush Limbaugh , Sarah Palin , Sean Hannity , Politics News
During the final weeks of the election, when it
became clear Barack Obama was going to win, thefar right started a drumbeat of lies to minimizeObama's victory, downplay the viciously uglycampaign that McCain and Palin ran and trickthe weak-kneed left into bungling thisopportunity. You know something is up whenKarl Rove, David Brooks, Sean Hannity andeveryone else starts repeating a phrase like theUnited States is "a center-right country." (A lieknocked down by Robert Borosage. ) Now that
Obama's historic win is in the books, those lies
have become even more pronounced. Here are the top lies of the right and why you shouldn't fallfor them.
The Top Ten Right Wing Lies About Obama's Win
1. Obama's win wasn't that big
2. Obama only won because of the black vote and the fringe far left3. Obama only won because he ran a center-right campaign4. John McCain couldn't have won5. Political parties almost never win three terms in a row6. The US is a center-right country7. Bush prevented a terrorist attack for seven years and if Obama doesn't prevent an attack for thenext seven years then he has failed to protect us8. John McCain's concession speech was notably gracious9. Punishing Joe Lieberman would be petty10. Sarah Palin is the future of the Republican Party
Be the First to
Submit
This Story to Digg
Get Breaking News Alerts
Share
Print
Comments
never spam
Right Now on HuffPost
REPORT: NORTH
KOREA LAUNCHESROCKET
SEOUL, South Korea —North Korea defiantly
carried out...
Sunday Roundup
In Strasbourg yesterday,the president was...
Popular Stories on HuffPost
Fashion Face-Off!
Michelle Obama And
Carla Bruni-Sarkozy
Finally Meet InFrance (VIDEO,
PHOTOS, POLL)
*Video, poll and slideshow
Levi Johnston Talks
Safe Sex With TyraBanks (VIDEO)
***UPDATE*** 8:30pm:People.com is reporting
that Sarah Palin has
issued...
Boehner Vs. Cantor: GOP Leadership
Increasingly Divided
More in Politics: Axelrod Smacks
Cheney... Brennan Helping Cheney...
Obama Reacts To Rape Law...
Rasmussen To Apologize To 'Islamic
World' For Mohammed Cartoons
Michael Giltz: Obama's Win and the Ten Lies The Right Is Spreading About It
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/michael-giltz/obamas-win-and-the-ten-li_b_143395.html [4/5/2009 1:06:29 PM]OBAMA'S WIN WASN'T THAT BIG -- Obama only won by six points in the popular vote, they
say. Shouldn't it have been much bigger? Sure he won, but it's not like Obama got a rousing
endorsement. (This from the party where Bush squeaked out a win in 2004 by one state and 50.7%
of the vote but immediately insisted it was a mandate.) Where to begin? The win by Obama and
the Democrats was nationwide and significant on many levels. Obama won the biggest percentage
of the popular vote for any Democrat since Lyndon Johnson in 1964. He's the first to win more
than 50% since Carter in 1976. Virtually, the entire country went more Democratic than
Republican -- except for the Old Confederacy, where the Republican Party still holds on to a
narrow, poor strip. Obama was the first Democrat to win North Carolina since 1976 and the first to
win Virginia and Indiana since 1964. The party win was even bigger, especially given this era of
redistricting where kicking out an incumbent is tougher than ever. The Republicans lost big two
elections in a row. Like Ronald Reagan in 1980, Obama won huge margins of victory from young
people. Add in Hispanics and independents and Obama's win may presage a wave of loyal
Democratic voters for years to come.
OBAMA ONLY WON BECAUSE OF THE BLACK VOTE AND THE FRINGE FAR LEFT --
This is an attempt to treat Obama's win as simply identity politics (black people voting for a black
nominee because it was the first time they could) rather than a broad mandate from the country as
a whole that saw Obama as the best candidate. The truth is that Obama did better than John Kerry
in virtually every demographic you can name, including white voters. The only two areas where
Obama drew fewer votes than Kerry were the over 65 crowd and gays and lesbians. This was not
an eked-out victory; it was a broad national success.
OBAMA WON BECAUSE HE RAN A CENTER-RIGHT CAMPAIGN -- That's the jaw-
dropper from Karl Rove and others. The guy they were screaming was a socialist ran a "center-right" campaign. That's right, the guy who said he'd raise taxes on the rich and end the war in Iraqwas pretending to be Reagan.
JOHN MCCAIN COULDN'T HAVE WON -- In this argument, the forces working to hand
Democrats a victory were so overwhelming there was nothing John McCain or any Republican
nominee could have done to change that. And when the economy went south, McCain's fate wassealed. It's the economy, stupid (plus the most despised President in 80 years if not ever, plus twowars, etc.) Well, by this logic it was a given that Gore would win in 2000 and there was nothingBush could do to change THAT, either. It certainly shouldn't have been so close that one state (anda Supreme Court) could change the inevitable. In fact, nothing is inevitable. The simple truth isthat McCain was often ahead in the polls for much of the general election season and especiallyafter his convention. It was McCain's floundering that sent his poll numbers tumbling, not someinescapable tide of history. He didn't lose because the economy went south: McCain lost becausethe economy went south and his reaction was a boondoggle of epic proportions. McCain madethree rash, hasty decisions when faced with a major crisis and all of them made voters rethink theirattitude towards him. First, he faced a floor fight at the convention if he chose the running mate hewanted, Joe Lieberman. McCain caved and hastly settled on Governor Sarah Palin. She thrilled thebase but in a general election you're supposed to reach out to moderates and independents. Themore voters saw of Palin, the less they liked. And it was abundantly clear he'd only met her onceand chatted with her on the phone briefly before offering her the VP slot. Second, when Russia andGeorgia came to blows, McCain bombastically declared "We are all Georgians!" and seemed almosteager for another war. With America bogged down in two wars already, the prospect of a Presidentwho looked delighted at the possibility of committing US troops to a third war that didn't involvevital national interests frightened voters. Finally, when the economic meltdown occurred, McCainrashly pretended to "suspend" his campaign and suggested the next Presidential debate might haveto wait. Obama simply stated the obvious: that a President needs to be able to do more than onething at a time. McCain caved and un-suspended his campaign even though no deal had yet beenstruck and looked even more foolish when he had literally nothing to offer in DC. And all of thisignores Obama, who ran a flawless campaign and had to. McCain didn't need to do anything ifObama made a gaffe, any gaffe, really.
POLITICAL PARTIES RARELY WIN THREE TERMS IN A ROW -- This is a strange one
I've heard lately. Its message is simple: if you've held the White House two terms in a row, holding
it for a third term almost never happens. It's one more piece of the "McCain couldn't possibly win"argument. Except that it's not even remotely true. For seven elections from 1800 through 1824, theDemocratic-Republicans held the White House. Thomas Jefferson won twice, James Madison wontwice, James Monroe won twice and John Quincy Adams won once. That was followed by threeelections in a row for the Democratic party -- twice with Andrew Jackson and once for Martin VanBuren from 1828 through 1836. Then the Republicans won four Presidential elections in a rowfrom 1868-1880 thanks to Ulysses Grant, Rutherford B. Hayes and James Garfield. The
Oscar de la Renta
Slams Michelle
Obama's Buckingham
Outfit As Major
Designers Feel
Ignored
While Michelle Obamahas made lesser...
Verena von Pfetten 7
Lessons To BeLearned From CarlaBruni
So here's the thing.There's no shortage ofarticles dedicated to that
certain je ne...
Huff TV Arianna
Discusses Michelle
Obama's "Fantastic"
Style On CBS'
"Washington
Unplugged"
Arianna was on CBS'"Washington...
Alex Leo The "Real
Housewives Of New
York City" Flowchart
Of Hate
I'm a little embarrassed tolove this show as much
as...
"BRUNO" TRAILER!
Calamity, African
Babies, Chase
Scenes And More
(NSFW VIDEO)
IT'S HERE! The trailer for
this July's Sacha Baron
Cohen...
NATO Leaders Focus
On Afghanistan, But
Most Reject Obama'sPlea For Troops
(SLIDESHOW)
STRASBOURG, France
— On the eve of the
NATO...
First Lady Fashion At
Friday's NATOConcert (PHOTOS)
Another night, anotherfashion opportunity forNATO leaders and their
spouses! See...
Diana Palin, Sarah
Palin's Sister-In-Law,
Arrested For
Breaking Into Home
ANCHORAGE, Alaska —Police say Alaska Gov....
John Oliver Explains
The Real Reason You
Never Touch TheQueen (VIDEO)
John Oliver was upsetenough to drop hismonocle when he...
Obama TeasesReporter From India
During Press
Conference (VIDEO)
Obama held a conference
packed with press from
around the world on
Thursday. He called...
Jim Cramer Declares
The Depression
"Over" (VIDEO)
Michael Giltz: Obama's Win and the Ten Lies The Right Is Spreading About It
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/michael-giltz/obamas-win-and-the-ten-li_b_143395.html [4/5/2009 1:06:29 PM]Republicans won four in a row again from 1896 through 1908 with William McKinley, Teddy
Roosevelt and William Howard Taft. Well, maybe the 20th century is different? Not really. The
Republicans won three in a row from 1920-1928 with Harding, Coolidge and Hoover. Then the
Democrats won five in a row from 1932-1948 with FDR and Truman. And of course Republicans
won three in a row with Reagan and Bush in the 80s. (Some Dems would throw in Clinton and
Gore as the most recent example, but that's another issue entirely.) It would probably have
happened even more except for term limits.
THE UNITED STATES IS A CENTER-RIGHT COUNTRY -- Robert Borosage does a great
breakdown of demogaphics to show how people who call themselves moderates (which is a bigger
chunk than liberals or conservatives) lean left on major issues of the day. But don't get bogged
down in exit polls and stats. Here's one fact: 39% of registered voters are Democrats, 32% are
Republicans and 27% are independents. It's more likely that independents will pass Republicans in
the next decade than Republicans catch up with the Democrats. Here's another simple realitycheck: the Democrats control a majority of state Houses, a majority of the Governor mansions, amajority of the House, a majority of the Senate and the Presidency. And they increased theirdominance in every category. In what fantasy world are a significant majority of the votersregistered Democrats and the Democrats control every level of government from the local to thenational level and yet someone can argue with a straight face that the US is a "center-rightcountry?"
BUSH PREVENTED A TERRORIST ATTACK FOR SEVEN YEARS AND IF THERE'S A
TERRORIST ATTACK IN THE NEXT SEVEN YEARS OBAMA WILL HAVE FAILED TOPROTECT US -- That's a new doozy that does some pretty clever juggling of history. Bush
prevented a terrorist attack for seven years on our soil? Um, except for when he didn 't protect us
and we suffered the worst terrorist attack on US soil in history. The Democrats took 9-11 as a signto rally around a President whose election victory was suspect at best and give him their fullsupport. The Republicans are already signaling that the moment any disaster might strike they'regoing to attack Obama as "weak" on defense and the good of the country be damned. By thestandards of Bush, Obama gets a free pass for at least one terrorist attack. But this moronic"calendar" approach ignores the real test we should make. No leader can prevent bad things fromhappening. It's like hiring a fire chief and then blaming him because fires still occur. The test of aleader is not the impossible one of magically preventing bad things from ever happening again. It'show they respond to a crisis. Bush froze on 9-11 and then launched an unnecessary war that lefttens of thousands of US soldiers dead or wounded, drained our national treasury to more than $1trillion and counting, failed to catch or kill the people responsible and has left Al Quaeda strongerthan ever by every measurement. That's the failure of Bush, not the fact that 9-11 occured in thefirst place.
JOHN MCCAIN'S CONCESSION SPEECH WAS NOTABLY GRACIOUS -- Every loser in a
Presidential election is expected to say they fought a tough campaign, but the other guy won and
now everyone should rally around the President-elect. That's not gracious; that's the LEAST
anyone should do. John McCain did that and he did it fine. But it wasn't noble or remarkable or
exceptional. Nonetheless everyone from Elizabeth Hasselback of The View to historian Doris
Kearns-Goodwin raved about McCain and how gracious he was. Barbara Walters cooed that his
concession speech was "elegant." As others have pointed out, this is in some ways an attempt to
pretend that McCain's campaign was just "tough" and "hard fought," just like every other
campaign. Jon Meacham of Newsweek insisted "McCain ran a noble campaign; it could have been
far worse." Short of having people at his rallies lynch Obama in effigy, it's hard to see how McCain
and Palin's campaign could have been any less noble or more nasty. McCain and Palin ran the
nastiest, most divisive general election campaign since George Bush (who I supported) in 1988.
Palin regularly impugned Obama's patriotism, McCain rallies featured people calling Obama a
terrorist and demanding his death and McCain's ads were so laughably and transparently lies that
the traditional media felt almost obliged to denounce them in every possible way. And McCain
didn't just sell his soul during the general election. He sold it four years ago when he hitched hiswagon to Bush because McCain cynically decided to support a guy he despised and abandon hisprinciples as the only way he'd ever win his party's nomination.
STRIPPING JOE LIEBERMAN OF HIS CHAIRMANSHIP WOULD BE PETTY -- This,
too, is a rather strange debate and John Aravosis of Americablog weighs in on on why it's so
disastrous for the Democrats to go soft on Joe. Lieberman was ready to run as VP for the
Republican Party. When he didn't get it, he endorsed his old friend John McCain but promised
Women's
Rights
Michelle
Obama
Europe
Newspapers
Cars
War Wire
Video
Financial
Crisis
Barack
Obama
MORE BIG NEWS PAGES
»
Books by this author
A cabin of one's own: New
England's MacDowellColony celebrates 100years of artistic utopia.And the gay and lesbianartists who prosperedthere celebrate ... (Thenational gay & lesbiannewsmagazine)
by Michael Giltz
Affairs to remember:Farley Granger beddedAva Gardner, ShelleyWinters, and LeonardBernstein. In hisautobiography, IncludeMe Out, Hitchcock's muse... (The national gay &lesbian newsmagazine)
by Michael GiltzOn Thursday's episode of
"Mad Money" host Jim
Cramer declared that the
depression...
Scientists Find
Rocket FuelChemical In Infant
Formula
ATLANTA — Traces of a
chemical used in rocketfuel were found insamples of...
Least Wasteful CitiesIn America
(SLIDESHOW)
It's great to love the cityyou live in, and better to
love it for a reason likebeing green!FastCompany...
HUFFPOST'S BIG NEWS PAGES
This Blogger's Books from
Michael Giltz: Obama's Win and the Ten Lies The Right Is Spreading About It
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/michael-giltz/obamas-win-and-the-ten-li_b_143395.html [4/5/2009 1:06:29 PM]
Michelle Obama's Clothing
Has Sean Hannity All Out OfSorts
RICHARD POPLAWSKI,Pittsburgh Gunman, Kills 3Police Officers
Dr. Rachel Ehrenfeld: DoesIran Harbor Osama binLaden?
John Demjanjuk, Ohio ManAccused Of Being NaziGuard, Avoids Deportation
Comments 61 Pending Comments 0
Obama In Prague:
Launches Effort To
Rid...
Obama's Statement
On North Korean
Rocket Launch
Conservatives
Holding Up
Increasing Number
Of Obama...
Sunday RoundupDemocrats he would support McCain without attacking the Democratic nominee. Then he broke
his promise and went on the campaign trail and spoke at the Republican convention, impugning
Obama's patriotism at every turn. And this wasn't the first time Lieberman aligned with
Republicans at the expense of Dems. It's one thing to support Bush's disastrous policy in Iraq. It's
quite another to give Bush political cover by attacking any Democrat who questions Bush's policy
as underming the troops, as he did repeatedly. Why would anyone think they could malign and
smear members of their own party and the Democratic presidential nominee and then turn around
and expect lots of treats? Joe Lieberman could have easily and nobly supported McCain without
attacking the Democrats. But he didn't. Only Democrats would debate whether a rogue Senator
consistently undermining their party deserves every perk they can give him. Stripping Liebermanof his chairmanship isn't petty; it's common sense. I would never suggest using Karl Rove as amodel for ethics or decency or just about anything. But he must be laughing right now. It isinstructive to imagine if the roles were reversed and Lieberman were a Republican and to imaginewhat Rove and Hannity and Limbaugh would be saying about what should be done to him. I thinktheir only debate would be over tar and feathering versus a good thrashing.
SARAH PALIN IS THE FUTURE OF THE REPUBLICAN PARTY -- Actually, she represents
the past. But if you're a Democrat, you should certainly hope the Republicans think so.
So what lies about the campaign and Obama's victory have you spotted?
More in Politics...
HuffPost Stories Surging Right Now
Buy a link here Sponsored Links
The Most $100K+ Jobs
Search 72,384 Jobs that pay over $100,000 at TheLadders.com.
www.TheLadders.com
"My Teeth Are so White"
Read the trick, discovered by a mom, to turn yellow teeth white.
CathysTeeth.com
Arthritis Information
Sign Up to Receive a Free Info Kit About Rheumatoid Arthritis.
www.RAStraightTalk.com
Want to reply to a comment? Hint: Click "Reply" at the bottom of the comment; after being
approved your comment will appear directly underneath the comment you replied to
View Comments: Newest
First Expand All
Page: 1 2 3 Next › Last » (3 pages total)
Michael Giltz: Obama's Win and the Ten Lies The Right Is Spreading About It
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/michael-giltz/obamas-win-and-the-ten-li_b_143395.html [4/5/2009 1:06:29 PM]
rockyb26 See Profile I'm a Fan of rockyb26 permalink
Great post! Thank you.
keating5 See Profile I'm a Fan of keating5 permalink
One other issue about the turnout. It was lower than it could have been because the race just wasn't
closely contested. It just wasn't. Everyone knew from the polls this was going to be a big win. EvenRove predicted Obama winning well in excess of 300 electoral votes. So, of course Obama's turnoutwasn't quite as high as predicted. But his electoral tally was.
Pretty accurate system, I'd say.
AbstractImp See Profile I'm a Fan of AbstractImp permalink
The republicans were in power, and ignoring warnings, when we were hit by the worst terrorist attack in
our history.
Then they used this terrible event to steal our money and our rights.No republican has told the truth since that day. . .
Lee323 See Profile I'm a Fan of Lee323 permalink
Excellent post!I would like to reinforce one aspect of the #4 Lie..."McCain couldn't have won." Palin was a HUGE
turnoff for the "Hillary women" and many moderate repub women!! If 50% of the 18 "million cracks" hadgone over to McCain after the bitter democratic primary, there would be a different election result today.Furthermore, Palin was, as you mentioned, flagellating the "energized base" instead of bringing inmoderates/independents. As much as McCain and Palin like to retrospectively downplay her drag onthe ticket, it was obviously a huge factor when you consider all of the above.
BaileyWo See Profile I'm a Fan of BaileyWo permalink
I disagree. I think Palin brought the base back and kept it close. Don't forget howdysinfranchised the Christianist right-wing was feeling when all the party had to offer wasGuiliani, Romni, that joke from Arkansas and McCain.
SoD1 See Profile I'm a Fan of SoD1 permalink
And a theocratic, fatally uneducated Palin, is less of a joke hmm? Since that "base" that you mentioned chose two "Jokes "to run for the two mostimportant position, the other 'choices not minder a joke were, the conclusion canonly be the enitre Republican Party and its followers are JOKES! Among manyother conclusions, hmm?
Interesting as Excellent Evaluation of the Republican "Brotherhood", their helpers-
helpers in the general media way of "twisting reality", Mr. Michael Glitz . And mostAmerican suspiciousness minds just believe without Questioning. I , would blame such apathy of the mind on the over-emphasis on Religion in theU.S. . AS usual, among other related reasons.
Best Regards!
SoD1
aloha43 See Profile I'm a Fan of aloha43 permalink
Don't forget:
11. Lied, broken promise, he had more money....bought the election.
(A person has the right to change their mind, that doesn't mean it's a lie. And NO, he didn't buy the
Favorite
Flag as abusive Posted 09:46 AM on 11/16/2008
Favorite
Flag as abusive Posted 01:52 AM on 11/16/2008
Favorite
Flag as abusive Posted 05:03 AM on 11/14/2008
Favorite
Flag as abusive Posted 01:15 AM on 11/14/2008
Favorite
Flag as abusive Posted 02:25 PM on 11/14/2008
Favorite
Flag as abusive Posted 06:05 PM on 11/14/2008
Michael Giltz: Obama's Win and the Ten Lies The Right Is Spreading About It
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/michael-giltz/obamas-win-and-the-ten-li_b_143395.html [4/5/2009 1:06:29 PM]
election, WE THE PEOPLE donated our hard earned money to HELP Obama win!)
BARRISTER See Profile I'm a Fan of BARRISTER permalink
Obama NEVER promised to take Public Funding, NEVER!!
ThirdPartyGal See Profile I'm a Fan of ThirdPartyGal permalink
I have heard a few of the 'lies' here. But I have to differ. I think they are right McCain couldn't have won
this. The public isn't educated to think past Republican and Democrat & considering they are toldGeorge Bush is to blame, they will likely vote Democrat. I don't think McCain could have won. And I dothink McCain's speech on Election night was over the top awesome, especially when I heard his speechnext to the previous speeches given by those who lost. The election campaign was down right dirty onboth sides. I think they both went negative. Though it is a lie to think the country is "center right" still
after they voted to put a far left president in the next administration. When all is said and done, the past
few months have been 99.999% dirty politics no matter what party you fall in - republican or democrat.
silverball See Profile I'm a Fan of silverball permalink
hmmmm....did we just experience the same election cycle in the usa???....."a far left
president"???....and when you say "they both went negative"...you are suggesting this was
done equally....WRONG!!!....mccain had a very good chance to win, but he ran a very rovian
campaign and chose to appeal to the "base"....meaning the right wing evangelical whack
balls....he sold his soul (and priciples) and did EVERYTHING he could to win....sounds a lot
like king george, dontcha think?...
Adjuster See Profile I'm a Fan of Adjuster permalink
You're full of moose scat. Get lost.
Michael Giltz See Profile I'm a Fan of Michael Giltz permalink
you're right that McCain had a very tough row to hoe. But even if he started ten yards back,didn't he hurt himself at every turn w a bad campaign? (and I supported him over bush in2000.) and third parties are cool - with 27% registered independents, we could passrepublicans in ten years.
laocoon See Profile I'm a Fan of laocoon permalink
the argument about Bush protecting us is amazing. Clinton did a better job in his 8 years by anyobjective measure. the military failure of this administration on 9-11 is one of the worst in US history. 40minutes after a second plane attack, the pentagon was left without an air cap and somehow managedno attempt at ground to air defense. That anyone could claim with a straight face that Bush is superiorin protecting US is so ridiculous. this was a massive and unexplainable failure to take the most
fundamental steps to defend your command center long after you know you are under attack. We
mastered air tactics in WWII. We planned and perfected air defense for 50 years of cold war. Yet this
administration was so inept it made no effort to defend the flag ship, the center from which any defense
would need to be coordinated for 40 minutes after it had to know there was a multiplane air attack inprogress. It is insulting to our intelligence to suggest Bush was any thing but a abject failure indefending us.
Michael Giltz See Profile I'm a Fan of Michael Giltz permalink
great points. Thx for reading.
ohioan73 See Profile I'm a Fan of ohioan73 permalink
In the 60s, people aged 1-25 were the 52%. They were called "baby boomers". If 52% is enough tomark a generation with the word "boom" then I would think that meant there were a frickin LOT of them.52% is the majority. Period.
Favorite
Flag as abusive Posted 10:23 PM on 11/13/2008
Favorite
Flag as abusive Posted 05:18 AM on 11/14/2008
Favorite
Flag as abusive Posted 07:05 PM on 11/13/2008
Favorite
Flag as abusive Posted 09:14 AM on 11/14/2008
Favorite
Flag as abusive Posted 07:57 AM on 11/14/2008
Favorite
Flag as abusive Posted 11:32 PM on 11/13/2008
Favorite
Flag as abusive Posted 06:46 PM on 11/13/2008
Favorite
Flag as abusive Posted 11:34 PM on 11/13/2008
Michael Giltz: Obama's Win and the Ten Lies The Right Is Spreading About It
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/michael-giltz/obamas-win-and-the-ten-li_b_143395.html [4/5/2009 1:06:29 PM]
See Chris
Weigant's Profile
biabouman41 See Profile I'm a Fan of biabouman41 permalink
The notion that Preident elect Obama won because of the black vote implies that the vote by blacks is
dismissable, also that by itself it forced Obama to victory. Fact is Sen. Kerry got 90% of the AfricanAmerican vote (and I believe Pres. Clinton got 92%) and Obama got 95%. The other theory that was hot and heavy leading up to the vote was about the "Bradley effect". In fact
as an Obama campaign volunteer I can tell you there was a reverse Bradley effect. As an example of
my experience I will relate one call to a Florida voter Nov2 .I called and asked for a female voter byname, a male , whom I assumed was her husband answered and passed the call to her. I said this is
Jim, a volunteer for Barack Obama's campaign for change. She said , in a very loud voice: "we are all
Republicans here" The tone and volume of her response told me this was not normal, so I said to her:
"well so is Colin Powell and William F Buckley's son and they support Obama" She giggled at this, and
so I said: "I take it that you are an Obama supporter but can not say so at this point" She responded ina loud voice: "you are absolutely right" and terminated the call. I had several similar calls to both Floridaand Virginia.On a separate topic: If Liberman goes unpunished, I will not contribute to the DNC
raygunnot See Profile I'm a Fan of raygunnot permalink
One more correction: The numbers are wrong. At this time, Obama is at 52.7% which rounds to 53%.
He leads McCain by 6.7% which rounds to 7%.
He now leads by almost 8.5 million votes.All these numbers have been growing almost every day since election day, as late returns come in. So
election day memes can need revision. Don't let them slide.
Michael Giltz See Profile I'm a Fan of Michael Giltz permalink
I will tweak the post. Thanks for making a great point - facts matter.
bassman4rent See Profile I'm a Fan of bassman4rent permalink
Ironically, the main reason that President-elect Obama was able to deflect GOP attacks was thatthey,(the campaign), had heard it all before in the primary. Well, maybe not the center right argument.How many times did Sen. Clinton say that her opponent was un-electable? While many among theDems were wringing their hands about the fierceness and length of the primary campaign, I predicted(quite correctly I might add) that should he survive the Clinton onslaught, he would be a much stronger
candidate in the general election.
Chris Weigant - Huffpost Blogger I'm a Fan of Chris Weigant permalink
On the terrorist attack thing -
Don't forget that the way many Republicans or right-wingers utter this line is, in
itself, a lie. "There have been no terror attacks since 9/11, because Bush issuch a studmuffin" or similar phrasings completely ignore the anthrax letters
attack. Which has never been completely solved, on Bush's watch.
So I guess Obama will get TWO free passes from right-wing commentators... right?Heh.
-CW
michaelsmolder See Profile I'm a Fan of michaelsmolder permalink
And don't forget North Korea testing a Nuclear Bomb!
BTW Didn't they just execute, after a trial, the perpetrators of the Bali Bombing? (Implying that
THEY know how to capture, try, and punish terrorist !... but we don't. )
Favorite
Flag as abusive Posted 06:40 PM on 11/13/2008
Favorite
Flag as abusive Posted 03:50 PM on 11/13/2008
Favorite
Flag as abusive Posted 03:46 PM on 11/13/2008
Favorite
Flag as abusive Posted 11:35 PM on 11/13/2008
Favorite
Flag as abusive Posted 03:41 PM on 11/13/2008
Favorite
Flag as abusive Posted 03:00 PM on 11/13/2008
Michael Giltz: Obama's Win and the Ten Lies The Right Is Spreading About It
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/michael-giltz/obamas-win-and-the-ten-li_b_143395.html [4/5/2009 1:06:29 PM]
commonsenselives See Profile I'm a Fan of commonsenselives permalink
Not to mention the train bombings in Europe. Maybe if we had some decent intelligence
around the world, we may have been able to prevent attacks on our allies
bliss0027 See Profile I'm a Fan of bliss0027 permalink
why is it they never mention that there hadn't been an terrorist attack on US soil for 60 years
until Bush took office?????????
is it really an accomplishment to have only had one terrorist attack against the country while
in office??
WAY TO GO BUSH
Lust4Lost See Profile I'm a Fan of Lust4Lost permalink
huh? the world trade center was bombed in march of 1993. had that car bomb been
one parking stall over the entire complex full of people would have collapsed makingit significantly worse than 9/11 was
HypocrisyAlarm See Profile I'm a Fan of HypocrisyAlarm permalink
Doesn't OK City count as a terrorist attack, albeit domestic extremists?
Michael Giltz See Profile I'm a Fan of Michael Giltz permalink
good points all. Obviously Bush isn't responsible for security in other countries butthe idea al qaeda has been stymied when they've been launching attacks in the uk,Spain, and elsewhere (not to mention the unexplained anthrax letters on our soil)?Hey when our friends are being killed hardly seems appropriate.
momof3inGA See Profile I'm a Fan of momof3inGA permalink
Excellent Article. Really. Outstanding.
Davee1 See Profile I'm a Fan of Davee1 permalink
Very good except one minor correction. John McCain was only ahead in the polls for two weeks (onereally). After the Republican National Convention he led for one week and was tied for one week.
Other than that Obama maintained a lead ranging from narrow to significant since he clinched the
nomination.
ReelBusy See Profile I'm a Fan of ReelBusy permalink
Which essentially means McCain was in the lead at the end of the 3rd quarter and blew it in
the last part of the game.
The one reason Joe L. will walk out clean and chairman is Obama wants to be liked and he
has to get over that and be a real leader. Real leaders choose their key followers and Joe Leiberman is not one of them.
Bounce him now.
snogard5 See Profile I'm a Fan of snogard5 permalink
Let's look at the accompishments of George W. Bush. An eight year tax holiday fo the wealthiest
among us. An astounding 2,688 straight days without a radical Islamic terrorist attack on US soilplacing him a strong third behind forty-one other presidents who tied with perfect records and justbehind Bill Clinton at 2,885 consecutive days. What a great guy.
Favorite
Flag as abusive Posted 12:10 AM on 11/14/2008
Favorite
Flag as abusive Posted 06:42 PM on 11/13/2008
Favorite
Flag as abusive Posted 05:33 PM on 11/13/2008
Favorite
Flag as abusive Posted 10:07 AM on 11/14/2008
Favorite
Flag as abusive Posted 02:47 AM on 11/14/2008
Favorite
Flag as abusive Posted 11:40 PM on 11/13/2008
Favorite
Flag as abusive Posted 02:26 PM on 11/13/2008
Favorite
Flag as abusive Posted 02:23 PM on 11/13/2008
Favorite
Flag as abusive Posted 04:19 PM on 11/13/2008
Michael Giltz: Obama's Win and the Ten Lies The Right Is Spreading About It
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/michael-giltz/obamas-win-and-the-ten-li_b_143395.html [4/5/2009 1:06:29 PM]
HOME POLITICS MEDIA BUSINESS ENTERTAINMENT LIVING GREEN STYLE WORLD CHICAGO COMEDY FUNDRACE
ARCHIVE
Advertise | Login | Make HuffPost your Home Page | RSS | Jobs | FAQ: Comments & Moderation | FAQ: Huffpost Accounts | Contact Us
Copyright © 2009 HuffingtonPost.com, Inc. | Archive | User Agreement | Privacy | Comment Policy | About Us | Powered by Movable Type
Comments are closed for this entry
Goddatunda See Profile I'm a Fan of Goddatunda permalink
I have yet to hear one Republican mention Bush's record # of days on vacation.
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2008/03/11/politics/uwire/main3927378.shtmlAnd with two wars going on, too.
I would consider that the most shameful part of his legacy, but there's so much more to
choose from.
Great post. Sorry I got off-topic.
Michael Giltz See Profile I'm a Fan of Michael Giltz permalink
I forgot abt the endless vacations. It's amazing how many terrible aspects we can
forget about. They do pile up so. Thx for reading.
Page: 1 2 3 Next › Last » (3 pages total)
You must be logged in to reply to this comment. Log in or
Ads by Google
Watch Bush’s Lies
The first casualty of the Iraq War was the truth.
Free videos.
www.leadingtowar.com
Favorite
Flag as abusive Posted 02:15 PM on 11/13/2008
Favorite
Flag as abusive Posted 04:00 PM on 11/13/2008
Favorite
Flag as abusive Posted 11:42 PM on 11/13/2008
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/michael-giltz/obamas-win-and-the-ten-li_b_143395.html [4/5/2009 1:06:29 PM]
APRIL 5, 2009
MAGHOUND.com Feedback - Ads by Google
HOME POLITICS MEDIA BUSINESS ENTERTAINMENT LIVING STYLE GREEN WORLD CHICAGO
COMEDY 23/6 VIDEO BLOGGER INDEX ARCHIVE
Make HuffPost Your HomePage
Get Email Alerts
Twitter: Follow Us
BIG NEWS : Michelle Obama | North Korea | Barack Obama | David Axelrod | More...
LOG IN | SIGN UP
Michael Giltz
Posted November 12, 2008 | 05:22 PM (EST)
BIO
Become a
Fan
Get EmailAlerts
Bloggers'Index
Obama's Win and the Ten Lies The
Right Is Spreading About It
Read More: Al Gore , Barack Obama , Bill Clinton , Far Right ,
Joe Lieberman , John McCain , Karl Rove , Lee Atwater , Lies About Obama , Lies Of The
Right , Rush Limbaugh , Sarah Palin , Sean Hannity , Politics News
During the final weeks of the election, when it
became clear Barack Obama was going to win, thefar right started a drumbeat of lies to minimizeObama's victory, downplay the viciously uglycampaign that McCain and Palin ran and trickthe weak-kneed left into bungling thisopportunity. You know something is up whenKarl Rove, David Brooks, Sean Hannity andeveryone else starts repeating a phrase like theUnited States is "a center-right country." (A lieknocked down by Robert Borosage. ) Now that
Obama's historic win is in the books, those lies
have become even more pronounced. Here are the top lies of the right and why you shouldn't fallfor them.
The Top Ten Right Wing Lies About Obama's Win
1. Obama's win wasn't that big
2. Obama only won because of the black vote and the fringe far left3. Obama only won because he ran a center-right campaign4. John McCain couldn't have won5. Political parties almost never win three terms in a row6. The US is a center-right country7. Bush prevented a terrorist attack for seven years and if Obama doesn't prevent an attack for thenext seven years then he has failed to protect us8. John McCain's concession speech was notably gracious9. Punishing Joe Lieberman would be petty10. Sarah Palin is the future of the Republican Party
Be the First to
Submit
This Story to Digg
Get Breaking News Alerts
Share
Comments
never spam
Right Now on HuffPost
REPORT: NORTH
KOREA LAUNCHESROCKET
SEOUL, South Korea —North Korea defiantly
carried out...
Sunday Roundup
In Strasbourg yesterday,the president was...
Popular Stories on HuffPost
Fashion Face-Off!
Michelle Obama And
Carla Bruni-Sarkozy
Finally Meet InFrance (VIDEO,
PHOTOS, POLL)
*Video, poll and slideshow
Levi Johnston Talks
Safe Sex With TyraBanks (VIDEO)
***UPDATE*** 8:30pm:People.com is reporting
that Sarah Palin has
issued...
Boehner Vs. Cantor: GOP Leadership
Increasingly Divided
More in Politics: Axelrod Smacks
Cheney... Brennan Helping Cheney...
Obama Reacts To Rape Law...
Rasmussen To Apologize To 'Islamic
World' For Mohammed Cartoons
Michael Giltz: Obama's Win and the Ten Lies The Right Is Spreading About It
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/michael-giltz/obamas-win-and-the-ten-li_b_143395.html [4/5/2009 1:06:29 PM]OBAMA'S WIN WASN'T THAT BIG -- Obama only won by six points in the popular vote, they
say. Shouldn't it have been much bigger? Sure he won, but it's not like Obama got a rousing
endorsement. (This from the party where Bush squeaked out a win in 2004 by one state and 50.7%
of the vote but immediately insisted it was a mandate.) Where to begin? The win by Obama and
the Democrats was nationwide and significant on many levels. Obama won the biggest percentage
of the popular vote for any Democrat since Lyndon Johnson in 1964. He's the first to win more
than 50% since Carter in 1976. Virtually, the entire country went more Democratic than
Republican -- except for the Old Confederacy, where the Republican Party still holds on to a
narrow, poor strip. Obama was the first Democrat to win North Carolina since 1976 and the first to
win Virginia and Indiana since 1964. The party win was even bigger, especially given this era of
redistricting where kicking out an incumbent is tougher than ever. The Republicans lost big two
elections in a row. Like Ronald Reagan in 1980, Obama won huge margins of victory from young
people. Add in Hispanics and independents and Obama's win may presage a wave of loyal
Democratic voters for years to come.
OBAMA ONLY WON BECAUSE OF THE BLACK VOTE AND THE FRINGE FAR LEFT --
This is an attempt to treat Obama's win as simply identity politics (black people voting for a black
nominee because it was the first time they could) rather than a broad mandate from the country as
a whole that saw Obama as the best candidate. The truth is that Obama did better than John Kerry
in virtually every demographic you can name, including white voters. The only two areas where
Obama drew fewer votes than Kerry were the over 65 crowd and gays and lesbians. This was not
an eked-out victory; it was a broad national success.
OBAMA WON BECAUSE HE RAN A CENTER-RIGHT CAMPAIGN -- That's the jaw-
dropper from Karl Rove and others. The guy they were screaming was a socialist ran a "center-right" campaign. That's right, the guy who said he'd raise taxes on the rich and end the war in Iraqwas pretending to be Reagan.
JOHN MCCAIN COULDN'T HAVE WON -- In this argument, the forces working to hand
Democrats a victory were so overwhelming there was nothing John McCain or any Republican
nominee could have done to change that. And when the economy went south, McCain's fate wassealed. It's the economy, stupid (plus the most despised President in 80 years if not ever, plus twowars, etc.) Well, by this logic it was a given that Gore would win in 2000 and there was nothingBush could do to change THAT, either. It certainly shouldn't have been so close that one state (anda Supreme Court) could change the inevitable. In fact, nothing is inevitable. The simple truth isthat McCain was often ahead in the polls for much of the general election season and especiallyafter his convention. It was McCain's floundering that sent his poll numbers tumbling, not someinescapable tide of history. He didn't lose because the economy went south: McCain lost becausethe economy went south and his reaction was a boondoggle of epic proportions. McCain madethree rash, hasty decisions when faced with a major crisis and all of them made voters rethink theirattitude towards him. First, he faced a floor fight at the convention if he chose the running mate hewanted, Joe Lieberman. McCain caved and hastly settled on Governor Sarah Palin. She thrilled thebase but in a general election you're supposed to reach out to moderates and independents. Themore voters saw of Palin, the less they liked. And it was abundantly clear he'd only met her onceand chatted with her on the phone briefly before offering her the VP slot. Second, when Russia andGeorgia came to blows, McCain bombastically declared "We are all Georgians!" and seemed almosteager for another war. With America bogged down in two wars already, the prospect of a Presidentwho looked delighted at the possibility of committing US troops to a third war that didn't involvevital national interests frightened voters. Finally, when the economic meltdown occurred, McCainrashly pretended to "suspend" his campaign and suggested the next Presidential debate might haveto wait. Obama simply stated the obvious: that a President needs to be able to do more than onething at a time. McCain caved and un-suspended his campaign even though no deal had yet beenstruck and looked even more foolish when he had literally nothing to offer in DC. And all of thisignores Obama, who ran a flawless campaign and had to. McCain didn't need to do anything ifObama made a gaffe, any gaffe, really.
POLITICAL PARTIES RARELY WIN THREE TERMS IN A ROW -- This is a strange one
I've heard lately. Its message is simple: if you've held the White House two terms in a row, holding
it for a third term almost never happens. It's one more piece of the "McCain couldn't possibly win"argument. Except that it's not even remotely true. For seven elections from 1800 through 1824, theDemocratic-Republicans held the White House. Thomas Jefferson won twice, James Madison wontwice, James Monroe won twice and John Quincy Adams won once. That was followed by threeelections in a row for the Democratic party -- twice with Andrew Jackson and once for Martin VanBuren from 1828 through 1836. Then the Republicans won four Presidential elections in a rowfrom 1868-1880 thanks to Ulysses Grant, Rutherford B. Hayes and James Garfield. The
Oscar de la Renta
Slams Michelle
Obama's Buckingham
Outfit As Major
Designers Feel
Ignored
While Michelle Obamahas made lesser...
Verena von Pfetten 7
Lessons To BeLearned From CarlaBruni
So here's the thing.There's no shortage ofarticles dedicated to that
certain je ne...
Huff TV Arianna
Discusses Michelle
Obama's "Fantastic"
Style On CBS'
"Washington
Unplugged"
Arianna was on CBS'"Washington...
Alex Leo The "Real
Housewives Of New
York City" Flowchart
Of Hate
I'm a little embarrassed tolove this show as much
as...
"BRUNO" TRAILER!
Calamity, African
Babies, Chase
Scenes And More
(NSFW VIDEO)
IT'S HERE! The trailer for
this July's Sacha Baron
Cohen...
NATO Leaders Focus
On Afghanistan, But
Most Reject Obama'sPlea For Troops
(SLIDESHOW)
STRASBOURG, France
— On the eve of the
NATO...
First Lady Fashion At
Friday's NATOConcert (PHOTOS)
Another night, anotherfashion opportunity forNATO leaders and their
spouses! See...
Diana Palin, Sarah
Palin's Sister-In-Law,
Arrested For
Breaking Into Home
ANCHORAGE, Alaska —Police say Alaska Gov....
John Oliver Explains
The Real Reason You
Never Touch TheQueen (VIDEO)
John Oliver was upsetenough to drop hismonocle when he...
Obama TeasesReporter From India
During Press
Conference (VIDEO)
Obama held a conference
packed with press from
around the world on
Thursday. He called...
Jim Cramer Declares
The Depression
"Over" (VIDEO)
Michael Giltz: Obama's Win and the Ten Lies The Right Is Spreading About It
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/michael-giltz/obamas-win-and-the-ten-li_b_143395.html [4/5/2009 1:06:29 PM]Republicans won four in a row again from 1896 through 1908 with William McKinley, Teddy
Roosevelt and William Howard Taft. Well, maybe the 20th century is different? Not really. The
Republicans won three in a row from 1920-1928 with Harding, Coolidge and Hoover. Then the
Democrats won five in a row from 1932-1948 with FDR and Truman. And of course Republicans
won three in a row with Reagan and Bush in the 80s. (Some Dems would throw in Clinton and
Gore as the most recent example, but that's another issue entirely.) It would probably have
happened even more except for term limits.
THE UNITED STATES IS A CENTER-RIGHT COUNTRY -- Robert Borosage does a great
breakdown of demogaphics to show how people who call themselves moderates (which is a bigger
chunk than liberals or conservatives) lean left on major issues of the day. But don't get bogged
down in exit polls and stats. Here's one fact: 39% of registered voters are Democrats, 32% are
Republicans and 27% are independents. It's more likely that independents will pass Republicans in
the next decade than Republicans catch up with the Democrats. Here's another simple realitycheck: the Democrats control a majority of state Houses, a majority of the Governor mansions, amajority of the House, a majority of the Senate and the Presidency. And they increased theirdominance in every category. In what fantasy world are a significant majority of the votersregistered Democrats and the Democrats control every level of government from the local to thenational level and yet someone can argue with a straight face that the US is a "center-rightcountry?"
BUSH PREVENTED A TERRORIST ATTACK FOR SEVEN YEARS AND IF THERE'S A
TERRORIST ATTACK IN THE NEXT SEVEN YEARS OBAMA WILL HAVE FAILED TOPROTECT US -- That's a new doozy that does some pretty clever juggling of history. Bush
prevented a terrorist attack for seven years on our soil? Um, except for when he didn 't protect us
and we suffered the worst terrorist attack on US soil in history. The Democrats took 9-11 as a signto rally around a President whose election victory was suspect at best and give him their fullsupport. The Republicans are already signaling that the moment any disaster might strike they'regoing to attack Obama as "weak" on defense and the good of the country be damned. By thestandards of Bush, Obama gets a free pass for at least one terrorist attack. But this moronic"calendar" approach ignores the real test we should make. No leader can prevent bad things fromhappening. It's like hiring a fire chief and then blaming him because fires still occur. The test of aleader is not the impossible one of magically preventing bad things from ever happening again. It'show they respond to a crisis. Bush froze on 9-11 and then launched an unnecessary war that lefttens of thousands of US soldiers dead or wounded, drained our national treasury to more than $1trillion and counting, failed to catch or kill the people responsible and has left Al Quaeda strongerthan ever by every measurement. That's the failure of Bush, not the fact that 9-11 occured in thefirst place.
JOHN MCCAIN'S CONCESSION SPEECH WAS NOTABLY GRACIOUS -- Every loser in a
Presidential election is expected to say they fought a tough campaign, but the other guy won and
now everyone should rally around the President-elect. That's not gracious; that's the LEAST
anyone should do. John McCain did that and he did it fine. But it wasn't noble or remarkable or
exceptional. Nonetheless everyone from Elizabeth Hasselback of The View to historian Doris
Kearns-Goodwin raved about McCain and how gracious he was. Barbara Walters cooed that his
concession speech was "elegant." As others have pointed out, this is in some ways an attempt to
pretend that McCain's campaign was just "tough" and "hard fought," just like every other
campaign. Jon Meacham of Newsweek insisted "McCain ran a noble campaign; it could have been
far worse." Short of having people at his rallies lynch Obama in effigy, it's hard to see how McCain
and Palin's campaign could have been any less noble or more nasty. McCain and Palin ran the
nastiest, most divisive general election campaign since George Bush (who I supported) in 1988.
Palin regularly impugned Obama's patriotism, McCain rallies featured people calling Obama a
terrorist and demanding his death and McCain's ads were so laughably and transparently lies that
the traditional media felt almost obliged to denounce them in every possible way. And McCain
didn't just sell his soul during the general election. He sold it four years ago when he hitched hiswagon to Bush because McCain cynically decided to support a guy he despised and abandon hisprinciples as the only way he'd ever win his party's nomination.
STRIPPING JOE LIEBERMAN OF HIS CHAIRMANSHIP WOULD BE PETTY -- This,
too, is a rather strange debate and John Aravosis of Americablog weighs in on on why it's so
disastrous for the Democrats to go soft on Joe. Lieberman was ready to run as VP for the
Republican Party. When he didn't get it, he endorsed his old friend John McCain but promised
Women's
Rights
Michelle
Obama
Europe
Newspapers
Cars
War Wire
Video
Financial
Crisis
Barack
Obama
MORE BIG NEWS PAGES
»
Books by this author
A cabin of one's own: New
England's MacDowellColony celebrates 100years of artistic utopia.And the gay and lesbianartists who prosperedthere celebrate ... (Thenational gay & lesbiannewsmagazine)
by Michael Giltz
Affairs to remember:Farley Granger beddedAva Gardner, ShelleyWinters, and LeonardBernstein. In hisautobiography, IncludeMe Out, Hitchcock's muse... (The national gay &lesbian newsmagazine)
by Michael GiltzOn Thursday's episode of
"Mad Money" host Jim
Cramer declared that the
depression...
Scientists Find
Rocket FuelChemical In Infant
Formula
ATLANTA — Traces of a
chemical used in rocketfuel were found insamples of...
Least Wasteful CitiesIn America
(SLIDESHOW)
It's great to love the cityyou live in, and better to
love it for a reason likebeing green!FastCompany...
HUFFPOST'S BIG NEWS PAGES
This Blogger's Books from
Michael Giltz: Obama's Win and the Ten Lies The Right Is Spreading About It
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/michael-giltz/obamas-win-and-the-ten-li_b_143395.html [4/5/2009 1:06:29 PM]
Michelle Obama's Clothing
Has Sean Hannity All Out OfSorts
RICHARD POPLAWSKI,Pittsburgh Gunman, Kills 3Police Officers
Dr. Rachel Ehrenfeld: DoesIran Harbor Osama binLaden?
John Demjanjuk, Ohio ManAccused Of Being NaziGuard, Avoids Deportation
Comments 61 Pending Comments 0
Obama In Prague:
Launches Effort To
Rid...
Obama's Statement
On North Korean
Rocket Launch
Conservatives
Holding Up
Increasing Number
Of Obama...
Sunday RoundupDemocrats he would support McCain without attacking the Democratic nominee. Then he broke
his promise and went on the campaign trail and spoke at the Republican convention, impugning
Obama's patriotism at every turn. And this wasn't the first time Lieberman aligned with
Republicans at the expense of Dems. It's one thing to support Bush's disastrous policy in Iraq. It's
quite another to give Bush political cover by attacking any Democrat who questions Bush's policy
as underming the troops, as he did repeatedly. Why would anyone think they could malign and
smear members of their own party and the Democratic presidential nominee and then turn around
and expect lots of treats? Joe Lieberman could have easily and nobly supported McCain without
attacking the Democrats. But he didn't. Only Democrats would debate whether a rogue Senator
consistently undermining their party deserves every perk they can give him. Stripping Liebermanof his chairmanship isn't petty; it's common sense. I would never suggest using Karl Rove as amodel for ethics or decency or just about anything. But he must be laughing right now. It isinstructive to imagine if the roles were reversed and Lieberman were a Republican and to imaginewhat Rove and Hannity and Limbaugh would be saying about what should be done to him. I thinktheir only debate would be over tar and feathering versus a good thrashing.
SARAH PALIN IS THE FUTURE OF THE REPUBLICAN PARTY -- Actually, she represents
the past. But if you're a Democrat, you should certainly hope the Republicans think so.
So what lies about the campaign and Obama's victory have you spotted?
More in Politics...
HuffPost Stories Surging Right Now
Buy a link here Sponsored Links
The Most $100K+ Jobs
Search 72,384 Jobs that pay over $100,000 at TheLadders.com.
www.TheLadders.com
"My Teeth Are so White"
Read the trick, discovered by a mom, to turn yellow teeth white.
CathysTeeth.com
Arthritis Information
Sign Up to Receive a Free Info Kit About Rheumatoid Arthritis.
www.RAStraightTalk.com
Want to reply to a comment? Hint: Click "Reply" at the bottom of the comment; after being
approved your comment will appear directly underneath the comment you replied to
View Comments: Newest
First Expand All
Page: 1 2 3 Next › Last » (3 pages total)
Michael Giltz: Obama's Win and the Ten Lies The Right Is Spreading About It
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/michael-giltz/obamas-win-and-the-ten-li_b_143395.html [4/5/2009 1:06:29 PM]
rockyb26 See Profile I'm a Fan of rockyb26 permalink
Great post! Thank you.
keating5 See Profile I'm a Fan of keating5 permalink
One other issue about the turnout. It was lower than it could have been because the race just wasn't
closely contested. It just wasn't. Everyone knew from the polls this was going to be a big win. EvenRove predicted Obama winning well in excess of 300 electoral votes. So, of course Obama's turnoutwasn't quite as high as predicted. But his electoral tally was.
Pretty accurate system, I'd say.
AbstractImp See Profile I'm a Fan of AbstractImp permalink
The republicans were in power, and ignoring warnings, when we were hit by the worst terrorist attack in
our history.
Then they used this terrible event to steal our money and our rights.No republican has told the truth since that day. . .
Lee323 See Profile I'm a Fan of Lee323 permalink
Excellent post!I would like to reinforce one aspect of the #4 Lie..."McCain couldn't have won." Palin was a HUGE
turnoff for the "Hillary women" and many moderate repub women!! If 50% of the 18 "million cracks" hadgone over to McCain after the bitter democratic primary, there would be a different election result today.Furthermore, Palin was, as you mentioned, flagellating the "energized base" instead of bringing inmoderates/independents. As much as McCain and Palin like to retrospectively downplay her drag onthe ticket, it was obviously a huge factor when you consider all of the above.
BaileyWo See Profile I'm a Fan of BaileyWo permalink
I disagree. I think Palin brought the base back and kept it close. Don't forget howdysinfranchised the Christianist right-wing was feeling when all the party had to offer wasGuiliani, Romni, that joke from Arkansas and McCain.
SoD1 See Profile I'm a Fan of SoD1 permalink
And a theocratic, fatally uneducated Palin, is less of a joke hmm? Since that "base" that you mentioned chose two "Jokes "to run for the two mostimportant position, the other 'choices not minder a joke were, the conclusion canonly be the enitre Republican Party and its followers are JOKES! Among manyother conclusions, hmm?
Interesting as Excellent Evaluation of the Republican "Brotherhood", their helpers-
helpers in the general media way of "twisting reality", Mr. Michael Glitz . And mostAmerican suspiciousness minds just believe without Questioning. I , would blame such apathy of the mind on the over-emphasis on Religion in theU.S. . AS usual, among other related reasons.
Best Regards!
SoD1
aloha43 See Profile I'm a Fan of aloha43 permalink
Don't forget:
11. Lied, broken promise, he had more money....bought the election.
(A person has the right to change their mind, that doesn't mean it's a lie. And NO, he didn't buy the
Favorite
Flag as abusive Posted 09:46 AM on 11/16/2008
Favorite
Flag as abusive Posted 01:52 AM on 11/16/2008
Favorite
Flag as abusive Posted 05:03 AM on 11/14/2008
Favorite
Flag as abusive Posted 01:15 AM on 11/14/2008
Favorite
Flag as abusive Posted 02:25 PM on 11/14/2008
Favorite
Flag as abusive Posted 06:05 PM on 11/14/2008
Michael Giltz: Obama's Win and the Ten Lies The Right Is Spreading About It
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/michael-giltz/obamas-win-and-the-ten-li_b_143395.html [4/5/2009 1:06:29 PM]
election, WE THE PEOPLE donated our hard earned money to HELP Obama win!)
BARRISTER See Profile I'm a Fan of BARRISTER permalink
Obama NEVER promised to take Public Funding, NEVER!!
ThirdPartyGal See Profile I'm a Fan of ThirdPartyGal permalink
I have heard a few of the 'lies' here. But I have to differ. I think they are right McCain couldn't have won
this. The public isn't educated to think past Republican and Democrat & considering they are toldGeorge Bush is to blame, they will likely vote Democrat. I don't think McCain could have won. And I dothink McCain's speech on Election night was over the top awesome, especially when I heard his speechnext to the previous speeches given by those who lost. The election campaign was down right dirty onboth sides. I think they both went negative. Though it is a lie to think the country is "center right" still
after they voted to put a far left president in the next administration. When all is said and done, the past
few months have been 99.999% dirty politics no matter what party you fall in - republican or democrat.
silverball See Profile I'm a Fan of silverball permalink
hmmmm....did we just experience the same election cycle in the usa???....."a far left
president"???....and when you say "they both went negative"...you are suggesting this was
done equally....WRONG!!!....mccain had a very good chance to win, but he ran a very rovian
campaign and chose to appeal to the "base"....meaning the right wing evangelical whack
balls....he sold his soul (and priciples) and did EVERYTHING he could to win....sounds a lot
like king george, dontcha think?...
Adjuster See Profile I'm a Fan of Adjuster permalink
You're full of moose scat. Get lost.
Michael Giltz See Profile I'm a Fan of Michael Giltz permalink
you're right that McCain had a very tough row to hoe. But even if he started ten yards back,didn't he hurt himself at every turn w a bad campaign? (and I supported him over bush in2000.) and third parties are cool - with 27% registered independents, we could passrepublicans in ten years.
laocoon See Profile I'm a Fan of laocoon permalink
the argument about Bush protecting us is amazing. Clinton did a better job in his 8 years by anyobjective measure. the military failure of this administration on 9-11 is one of the worst in US history. 40minutes after a second plane attack, the pentagon was left without an air cap and somehow managedno attempt at ground to air defense. That anyone could claim with a straight face that Bush is superiorin protecting US is so ridiculous. this was a massive and unexplainable failure to take the most
fundamental steps to defend your command center long after you know you are under attack. We
mastered air tactics in WWII. We planned and perfected air defense for 50 years of cold war. Yet this
administration was so inept it made no effort to defend the flag ship, the center from which any defense
would need to be coordinated for 40 minutes after it had to know there was a multiplane air attack inprogress. It is insulting to our intelligence to suggest Bush was any thing but a abject failure indefending us.
Michael Giltz See Profile I'm a Fan of Michael Giltz permalink
great points. Thx for reading.
ohioan73 See Profile I'm a Fan of ohioan73 permalink
In the 60s, people aged 1-25 were the 52%. They were called "baby boomers". If 52% is enough tomark a generation with the word "boom" then I would think that meant there were a frickin LOT of them.52% is the majority. Period.
Favorite
Flag as abusive Posted 10:23 PM on 11/13/2008
Favorite
Flag as abusive Posted 05:18 AM on 11/14/2008
Favorite
Flag as abusive Posted 07:05 PM on 11/13/2008
Favorite
Flag as abusive Posted 09:14 AM on 11/14/2008
Favorite
Flag as abusive Posted 07:57 AM on 11/14/2008
Favorite
Flag as abusive Posted 11:32 PM on 11/13/2008
Favorite
Flag as abusive Posted 06:46 PM on 11/13/2008
Favorite
Flag as abusive Posted 11:34 PM on 11/13/2008
Michael Giltz: Obama's Win and the Ten Lies The Right Is Spreading About It
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/michael-giltz/obamas-win-and-the-ten-li_b_143395.html [4/5/2009 1:06:29 PM]
See Chris
Weigant's Profile
biabouman41 See Profile I'm a Fan of biabouman41 permalink
The notion that Preident elect Obama won because of the black vote implies that the vote by blacks is
dismissable, also that by itself it forced Obama to victory. Fact is Sen. Kerry got 90% of the AfricanAmerican vote (and I believe Pres. Clinton got 92%) and Obama got 95%. The other theory that was hot and heavy leading up to the vote was about the "Bradley effect". In fact
as an Obama campaign volunteer I can tell you there was a reverse Bradley effect. As an example of
my experience I will relate one call to a Florida voter Nov2 .I called and asked for a female voter byname, a male , whom I assumed was her husband answered and passed the call to her. I said this is
Jim, a volunteer for Barack Obama's campaign for change. She said , in a very loud voice: "we are all
Republicans here" The tone and volume of her response told me this was not normal, so I said to her:
"well so is Colin Powell and William F Buckley's son and they support Obama" She giggled at this, and
so I said: "I take it that you are an Obama supporter but can not say so at this point" She responded ina loud voice: "you are absolutely right" and terminated the call. I had several similar calls to both Floridaand Virginia.On a separate topic: If Liberman goes unpunished, I will not contribute to the DNC
raygunnot See Profile I'm a Fan of raygunnot permalink
One more correction: The numbers are wrong. At this time, Obama is at 52.7% which rounds to 53%.
He leads McCain by 6.7% which rounds to 7%.
He now leads by almost 8.5 million votes.All these numbers have been growing almost every day since election day, as late returns come in. So
election day memes can need revision. Don't let them slide.
Michael Giltz See Profile I'm a Fan of Michael Giltz permalink
I will tweak the post. Thanks for making a great point - facts matter.
bassman4rent See Profile I'm a Fan of bassman4rent permalink
Ironically, the main reason that President-elect Obama was able to deflect GOP attacks was thatthey,(the campaign), had heard it all before in the primary. Well, maybe not the center right argument.How many times did Sen. Clinton say that her opponent was un-electable? While many among theDems were wringing their hands about the fierceness and length of the primary campaign, I predicted(quite correctly I might add) that should he survive the Clinton onslaught, he would be a much stronger
candidate in the general election.
Chris Weigant - Huffpost Blogger I'm a Fan of Chris Weigant permalink
On the terrorist attack thing -
Don't forget that the way many Republicans or right-wingers utter this line is, in
itself, a lie. "There have been no terror attacks since 9/11, because Bush issuch a studmuffin" or similar phrasings completely ignore the anthrax letters
attack. Which has never been completely solved, on Bush's watch.
So I guess Obama will get TWO free passes from right-wing commentators... right?Heh.
-CW
michaelsmolder See Profile I'm a Fan of michaelsmolder permalink
And don't forget North Korea testing a Nuclear Bomb!
BTW Didn't they just execute, after a trial, the perpetrators of the Bali Bombing? (Implying that
THEY know how to capture, try, and punish terrorist !... but we don't. )
Favorite
Flag as abusive Posted 06:40 PM on 11/13/2008
Favorite
Flag as abusive Posted 03:50 PM on 11/13/2008
Favorite
Flag as abusive Posted 03:46 PM on 11/13/2008
Favorite
Flag as abusive Posted 11:35 PM on 11/13/2008
Favorite
Flag as abusive Posted 03:41 PM on 11/13/2008
Favorite
Flag as abusive Posted 03:00 PM on 11/13/2008
Michael Giltz: Obama's Win and the Ten Lies The Right Is Spreading About It
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/michael-giltz/obamas-win-and-the-ten-li_b_143395.html [4/5/2009 1:06:29 PM]
commonsenselives See Profile I'm a Fan of commonsenselives permalink
Not to mention the train bombings in Europe. Maybe if we had some decent intelligence
around the world, we may have been able to prevent attacks on our allies
bliss0027 See Profile I'm a Fan of bliss0027 permalink
why is it they never mention that there hadn't been an terrorist attack on US soil for 60 years
until Bush took office?????????
is it really an accomplishment to have only had one terrorist attack against the country while
in office??
WAY TO GO BUSH
Lust4Lost See Profile I'm a Fan of Lust4Lost permalink
huh? the world trade center was bombed in march of 1993. had that car bomb been
one parking stall over the entire complex full of people would have collapsed makingit significantly worse than 9/11 was
HypocrisyAlarm See Profile I'm a Fan of HypocrisyAlarm permalink
Doesn't OK City count as a terrorist attack, albeit domestic extremists?
Michael Giltz See Profile I'm a Fan of Michael Giltz permalink
good points all. Obviously Bush isn't responsible for security in other countries butthe idea al qaeda has been stymied when they've been launching attacks in the uk,Spain, and elsewhere (not to mention the unexplained anthrax letters on our soil)?Hey when our friends are being killed hardly seems appropriate.
momof3inGA See Profile I'm a Fan of momof3inGA permalink
Excellent Article. Really. Outstanding.
Davee1 See Profile I'm a Fan of Davee1 permalink
Very good except one minor correction. John McCain was only ahead in the polls for two weeks (onereally). After the Republican National Convention he led for one week and was tied for one week.
Other than that Obama maintained a lead ranging from narrow to significant since he clinched the
nomination.
ReelBusy See Profile I'm a Fan of ReelBusy permalink
Which essentially means McCain was in the lead at the end of the 3rd quarter and blew it in
the last part of the game.
The one reason Joe L. will walk out clean and chairman is Obama wants to be liked and he
has to get over that and be a real leader. Real leaders choose their key followers and Joe Leiberman is not one of them.
Bounce him now.
snogard5 See Profile I'm a Fan of snogard5 permalink
Let's look at the accompishments of George W. Bush. An eight year tax holiday fo the wealthiest
among us. An astounding 2,688 straight days without a radical Islamic terrorist attack on US soilplacing him a strong third behind forty-one other presidents who tied with perfect records and justbehind Bill Clinton at 2,885 consecutive days. What a great guy.
Favorite
Flag as abusive Posted 12:10 AM on 11/14/2008
Favorite
Flag as abusive Posted 06:42 PM on 11/13/2008
Favorite
Flag as abusive Posted 05:33 PM on 11/13/2008
Favorite
Flag as abusive Posted 10:07 AM on 11/14/2008
Favorite
Flag as abusive Posted 02:47 AM on 11/14/2008
Favorite
Flag as abusive Posted 11:40 PM on 11/13/2008
Favorite
Flag as abusive Posted 02:26 PM on 11/13/2008
Favorite
Flag as abusive Posted 02:23 PM on 11/13/2008
Favorite
Flag as abusive Posted 04:19 PM on 11/13/2008
Michael Giltz: Obama's Win and the Ten Lies The Right Is Spreading About It
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/michael-giltz/obamas-win-and-the-ten-li_b_143395.html [4/5/2009 1:06:29 PM]
HOME POLITICS MEDIA BUSINESS ENTERTAINMENT LIVING GREEN STYLE WORLD CHICAGO COMEDY FUNDRACE
ARCHIVE
Advertise | Login | Make HuffPost your Home Page | RSS | Jobs | FAQ: Comments & Moderation | FAQ: Huffpost Accounts | Contact Us
Copyright © 2009 HuffingtonPost.com, Inc. | Archive | User Agreement | Privacy | Comment Policy | About Us | Powered by Movable Type
Comments are closed for this entry
Goddatunda See Profile I'm a Fan of Goddatunda permalink
I have yet to hear one Republican mention Bush's record # of days on vacation.
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2008/03/11/politics/uwire/main3927378.shtmlAnd with two wars going on, too.
I would consider that the most shameful part of his legacy, but there's so much more to
choose from.
Great post. Sorry I got off-topic.
Michael Giltz See Profile I'm a Fan of Michael Giltz permalink
I forgot abt the endless vacations. It's amazing how many terrible aspects we can
forget about. They do pile up so. Thx for reading.
Page: 1 2 3 Next › Last » (3 pages total)
You must be logged in to reply to this comment. Log in or
Ads by Google
Watch Bush’s Lies
The first casualty of the Iraq War was the truth.
Free videos.
www.leadingtowar.com
Favorite
Flag as abusive Posted 02:15 PM on 11/13/2008
Favorite
Flag as abusive Posted 04:00 PM on 11/13/2008
Favorite
Flag as abusive Posted 11:42 PM on 11/13/2008