The Republican National Convention – Speeches Were Short on Policy and Long on Attacks, Half-Truths and Lies

I love politics, or at least I did.  And in the the interest of seeing what the opposition has to say, I have been watching or listening to the Republican National Convention this week.  But last night was very difficult for me to take as you will see in this post. 

It all started for me with Rudy Guiliani’s speech, which I found offensive for it’s snide and mocking tone.  He mocked those with Ivy League educations and community organizers, and looked down his nose at those with a more cosmopolitan outlook (this from the former mayor of New York City).  He, and others, also acted as though their candidate for VP, whose experience includes eight years as the mayor or a town of 6000 and less than two years as the governor of Alaska was the most qualified candidate running for elected office this year.  And almost all of the speakers derided the Washington establishment as if Republicans had not been the ones in charge there for 20 out of the last 28 years.   George W. Bush, a conservative Republican, has been president for almost eight years, and Republicans controlled Congress until January of last year – they do know this, don’t they?

And some of the statements made last night were just baffling.  As you can read in a NY Times editorial published this morning and found here:

Sarah Palin, the vice presidential nominee, was a combative and witty relief at a torpid convention. But it was bizarre hearing the running mate of a 26-year veteran of Congress, a woman who was picked to placate the right-wing elite, mocking “the permanent political establishment in Washington.”

And we couldn’t imagine what Mitt Romney was thinking when he denounced “liberal Washington” and then, at the convention of the party that brought you unimpeded presidential spying, declared: “It’s time for the party of big ideas, not the party of Big Brother!”

As for Palin’s speech, several things caught my attention.  At one point she said, “And children with special needs inspire a special love. To the families of special-needs children all across this country, I have a message: For years, you sought to make America a more welcoming place for your sons and daughters.  I pledge to you that if we are elected, you will have a friend and advocate in the White House.”  What is interesting about this is that the budget for special needs schooling has been slashed over 60% since Pailn became governor, and this during a time of budget surpluses in the state. You can see this in the following figures provided by the Washington Monthly:  Budgets: FY 2007 (pre-Palin), 2008, 2009 (all pdfs).

Palin also repeated her now famous line about she opposed the funding and building of the “bridge to nowhere,” saying, “I told the Congress ‘thanks, but no thanks,’ for that Bridge to Nowhere. If our state wanted a bridge, we’d build it ourselves.” But during her campaign for governor, Palin supported funding for the bridge. Brad Plumer, citing the Anchorage Dialy News via Nexis:

Would you continue state funding for the proposed Knik Arm and Gravina Island bridges?

Yes. I would like to see Alaska’s infrastructure projects built sooner rather than later. The window is now–while our congressional delegation is in a strong position to assist."

And as the Ketchikan Daily News reported on October 2, 2006:

"Part of my agenda is making sure that Southeast is heard. That your projects are important. That we go to bat for Southeast when we’re up against federal influences that aren’t in the best interest of Southeast.’ She cited the widespread negative attention focused on the Gravina Island crossing project. ‘We need to come to the defense of Southeast Alaska when proposals are on the table like the bridge and not allow the
spinmeisters to turn this project or any other into something that’s so negative,’ Palin said." [Ketchikan Daily News, 10/2/06]

And then Palin turned her attention to Barack Obama, saying “We’ve all heard his dramatic speeches before devoted followers. And there is much to like and admire about our opponent. But listening to him speak, it’s easy to forget that this is a man who has authored two memoirs but not a single major law or reform - not even in the state senate.”  While it’s nice to see the admiration flow from Palin’s lips here (sarcasm intended).  In fact, Obama has written only one memoir, and if you want to see a list of  his legislative accomplishments, you can go here or here or here (about halfway down the page).

Going on, Palin added,

“This is a man who can give an entire speech about the wars America is fighting, and never use the word “victory” except when he’s talking about his own campaign. But when the cloud of rhetoric has passed … when the roar of the crowd fades away … when the stadium lights go out, and those Styrofoam Greek columns are hauled back to some studio lot - what exactly is our opponent’s plan? What does he actually seek to accomplish, after he’s done turning back the waters and healing the planet?

Nothing like snide, snarky comments to get the party faithful all riled up, and riled up they were at this point. Encouraged by the response, Palin continued, “The answer is to make government bigger … take more of your money … give you more orders from Washington … and to reduce the strength of America in a dangerous world. America needs more energy … our opponent is against producing it.”

Of course the fact is that government on the federal, state and even most local levels has been increasing in size throughout the last four decades, and this is regardless of whether Democrats or Republicans have been in power.  This is true even for her own hometown of Wasilla, which saw its total government expenditures increase 63% in her eight year term, from 4.3 to 7 million dollars.  Further, she inherited a city government with no debt and left it in 2003 $18 million dollars in debt.  And need I say anything about the federal deficit under Republicans?  The amount our nation owes has balloned to almost 9.7 trillion dollars, and over 4 trillion dollars have been added since George W. Bush was elected in 2000.  I really don’t want to hear any talk about smaller government and fiscal responsibility from Republicans anymore.

Palin then stated that “Victory in Iraq is finally in sight … he wants to forfeit.”  Of course, this in not true, even though Obama has opposed the war from the beginning.  Recently Obama has talked about developing a timetable for a successful withdrawal of troops from Iraq – an approach that Bush had opposed but now has accepted in negotiations with Iraq’s Prime Minister.  Further, Obama wants to concentrate our military efforts in Afghanistan and the continued pursuit of terrorists like Ben Laden, both of which seem to have been largely forgotten/neglected since we invaded Iraq.

Palin then remarked that while terrorist states are seeking new-clear weapons without delay, that Obama wants to meet them without preconditions.  Again, a blatant falsehood.  Obama has spoken of face to face negotiations with our “enemies.”  After all, what’s the alternative? Bomb and invade them first?  In fact, many Republican statesmen have suggested meeting face to face with our “enemies” like Iran,  including the following folks:

Defense Secretary Gates: We Need To “Sit Down And Talk” With Iran.“The United States should construct a combination of incentives and pressure to engage Iran, and may have missed earlier opportunities to begin a useful dialogue with Tehran, Defense Secretary Robert M. Gatessaid yesterday. ‘We need to figure out a way to develop some leverage . . . and then sit down and talk with them," Gates said. "If there is going to be a discussion, then they need something, too. We can’t go to a discussion and be completely the demander, with them not feeling that they need anything from us.’” [Washington Post, 5/15/08]

Henry Kissinger Said That The U.S. Should Negotiate Directly With Iran. “Former Secretary of State Henry Kissinger said the U.S. should negotiate directly with Iran over its nuclear program and other bilateral issues. ‘One should be prepared to negotiate, and I think we should be prepared to negotiate about Iran,’ Kissinger, who brokered the end of the 1973 Yom Kippur war and peace talks with the North Vietnamese, said yesterday in an interview with Bloomberg Television. Asked whether he meant the U.S. should hold direct talks, Kissinger,84, responded: ‘Yes, I think we should.’” [Bloomberg, 3/14/08]

Chuck Hagel: The United States Should Actively Pursue Direct, Unconditional,And Comprehensive Talks With Iran. Hagel said, “Now is the time for the United States to actively pursue an offer of direct, unconditional, and comprehensive talks with Iran. We cannot afford to refuse to consider this strategic choice any longer. We should make clear that everything is on the table, our issues and Iran’s issues.” [CNN, 11/8/07]

Richard Lugar: Direct Talks With Iran “Would Be Useful.” “The United States needs to pursue direct talks and other diplomatic avenues with Iran about its disputed nuclear program before considering a military option, lawmakers from both parties said yesterday. ‘I think that would be useful,’ said Richard Lugar, chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, when asked on ABC’s ‘This Week’ about having direct talks. ‘The Iranians are a part of the energy picture,’ said Lugar, a Republican from Indiana. ‘We need to talk about that.’” [AP,4/17/06]

Former H.W. Bush Secretary of State James Baker: “It’s Not Appeasement to Talk to Your Enemies.” James Baker said, “I can’t make that judgment here this morning because I don’t know what other elements are involved in it. I will say just generally as I’ve been saying since I’ve been on this book tour that I believe in talking to your enemies. I don’t think you restrict your conversations to your friends. At the same time, it’s got to be hard-nosed. It’s got to be determined. You don’t give away anything, but in my view, it’s not appeasement to talk to your enemies. There ought to be some way. I mean, I point out the fact that I made 15 trips to Damascus back in 1991 when they were on our list of countries of state-sponsored terrorism and they changed 25 years…”[“This Week,” ABC News Transcripts, 10/8/06]] – these quotes taken from the official Obama rebuttal, which can be read here.

And when Palin stated “Al Qaeda terrorists still plot to inflict catastrophic harm on America … he’s worried that someone won’t read them their rights?” I thought to myself:  “Since when is the proper and legal administration of justice a bad thing.  Guantanamo Bay is filled with prisoners who have been held for over six years without any recourse to the legal system for which we fight.  It is a disgrace and black eye for this nation, which prides itself on “liberty and justice for all.”

And finally, Palin stated that “Government is too big … he wants to grow it.  Congress spends too much … he promises more.  Taxes are too high … he wants to raise them.”  And while I realize that it is asking too much for her to add that this is true only if you make more than $250,000 a year, such broad generalities are neither helpful are true (For more on this, see the quotes from the AP below).  In fact, one of McCain’s plans is to begin taxing the health benefits of workers who receive them from their employers.  That is, if you employer provides you health insurance as one of your work benefits, McCain would tax the value of that plan – something that is not currently done.  This would have the effect of an immediate raise in taxes for millions of working Americans.

In an excellent article (at least to me) by Jim Kuhnhenn of the Associated Press, you can read about many of the half-truths and truth-stretching moments from last night’s speeches.  Concerning Palin’s speech, he quotes her and then provides rebuttals:

PALIN: "I have protected the taxpayers by vetoing wasteful spending … and championed reform to end the abuses of earmark spending by Congress. I told the Congress ‘thanks but no thanks’ for that Bridge to Nowhere."

THE FACTS: As mayor of Wasilla, Palin hired a lobbyist and traveled to Washington annually to support earmarks for the town totaling $27 million. In her two years as governor, Alaska has requested nearly $750 million in special federal spending, by far the largest per-capita request in the nation. While Palin notes she rejected plans to build a $398 million bridge from Ketchikan to an island with 50 residents and an airport, that opposition came only after the plan was ridiculed nationally as a "bridge to nowhere."

PALIN: "There is much to like and admire about our opponent. But listening to him speak, it’s easy to forget that this is a man who has authored two memoirs but not a single major law or reform — not even in the state senate."

THE FACTS: Compared to McCain and his two decades in the Senate, Obama does have a more meager record. But he has worked with Republicans to pass legislation that expanded efforts to intercept illegal shipments of weapons of mass destruction and to help destroy conventional weapons stockpiles. The legislation became law last year. To demean that accomplishment would be to also demean the work of Republican Sen. Richard Lugar of Indiana, a respected foreign policy voice in the Senate. In Illinois, he was the leader on two big, contentious measures in Illinois: studying racial profiling by police and requiring recordings of interrogations in potential death penalty cases. He also successfully co-sponsored major ethics reform legislation.

PALIN: "The Democratic nominee for president supports plans to raise income taxes, raise payroll taxes, raise investment income taxes, raise the death tax, raise business taxes, and increase the tax burden on the American people by hundreds of billions of dollars."

THE FACTS: The Tax Policy Center, a think tank run jointly by the Brookings Institution and the Urban Institute, concluded that Obama’s plan would increase after-tax income for middle-income taxpayers by about 5 percent by 2012, or nearly $2,200 annually. McCain’s plan, which cuts taxes across all income levels, would raise after tax-income for middle-income taxpayers by 3 percent, the center concluded.

Obama would provide $80 billion in tax breaks, mainly for poor workers and the elderly, including tripling the Earned Income Tax Credit for minimum-wage workers and higher credits for larger families.

He also would raise income taxes, capital gains and dividend taxes on the wealthiest. He would raise payroll taxes on taxpayers with incomes above $250,000, and he would raise corporate taxes. Small businesses that make more than $250,000 a year would see taxes rise.

Kuhnhenn also looks at the statements of other GOP figures from last night and last week:

MCCAIN: "She’s the commander of the Alaska National Guard. … She has been in charge, and she has had national security as one of her primary responsibilities," he said on ABC.

THE FACTS: While governors are in charge of their state guard units, that authority ends whenever those units are called to actual military service. When guard units are deployed to Iraq or Afghanistan, for example, they assume those duties under "federal status," which means they report to the Defense Department, not their governors. Alaska’s national guard units have a total of about 4,200 personnel, among the smallest of state guard organizations.

FORMER ARKANSAS GOV. MIKE HUCKABEE: Palin "got more votes running for mayor of Wasilla, Alaska than Joe Biden got running for president of the United States."

THE FACTS: A whopper. Palin got 616 votes in the 1996 mayor’s election, and got 909 in her 1999 re-election race, for a total of 1,525. Biden dropped out of the race after the Iowa caucuses, but he still got 76,165 votes in 23 states and the District of Columbia where he was on the ballot during the 2008 presidential primaries.

And finally there was the snide remark about “community organizers,” which brought the house down with derisive laughter.  In Palin’s own words:  “I guess a small-town mayor is sort of like a ‘community organizer,’ except that you have actual responsibilities.”  My response to that is to simply let a community organizer speak for herself in this youtube video.

Now what I have written here may be considered just another rant from a pro-Obama, died-in-the-wool Democrat.  But even though I claim and wear both of these labels proudly, I don’t think this negates my belief that what many of us saw or heard last night from the RNC was appalling and filled with personal attacks and ridicule and many half-truths and lies.  Of course, you may disagree, and you are welcome to leave a dissenting comment below. But before you do, if you haven’t already heard or read Palin’s entire speech for yourself, please click here to do so first.

And, needless to say, many others watching the same speech had a vastly different reaction to it than I did (funny how that is, huh?).  In the interest of presenting opposing viewpoints you can go and read what my friend Julie has to say, as well as what Mortimer Hayden Smyth, of The Center for American Free Thought thought.