21.10.08

India set to launch its first Moon probe

India set to launch its first Moon probe
  • 16:36 21 October 2008
  • NewScientist.com news service
  • Padma Tata, Chennai


A week ahead of the festival Diwali, which is celebrated with fireworks and lights, the Indian Space Research Organisation is planning its own rocket show.

On Wednesday, ISRO is set to launch an uncrewed spacecraft to map the Moon in more detail than ever before – a far cry from ISRO's beginnings in the 1960s, with a church in Kerala as their first office.

India's maiden Moon mission Chandrayaan may have cost less than other countries' lunar missions – $80 million as opposed to $140 million for the European Space Agency's SMART-1 – but its aims are no less ambitious.

"For the first time, we hope to have a comprehensive mapping of the entire Moon," says ISRO scientist Parameswaran Sreekumar.

The spacecraft, designed and built in India, will carry various instruments from around the world: for example, a radar made in the US will image the permanently shadowed regions of the poles to locate ice.

And upgraded versions of two spectrometers used in SMART-I will gather clues on the origin and evolution of the lunar crust. The maps will be invaluable for the crewed Moon mission that India is planning for 2014 or 2015.

Some Indian development policy analysts question whether the money might be better spent on tackling India's myriad social needs.

"They asked the same question when we built our first satellite, Aryabhatta, in the '70s," notes Mylswamy Annadurai, Chandrayaan project director.

"ISRO has done fairly good work in using space for societal needs. Today we have satellites for education, crop, health and communications," Annadurai says. "Chandrayaan is today's equivalent of Aryabhatta."

http://space.newscientist.com


Congressman admits saying, 'Liberals hate real Americans'

Posted: 06:22 PM ET
Hayes is facing a tough reelection race.
Hayes is facing a tough reelection race.

(CNN) — A North Carolina congressman locked in a tight re-election race admitted Tuesday to recently telling a crowd of John McCain supporters that "liberals hate real Americans," the latest in a string of comments from Republicans that appear to question Democrats' patriotism.

Rep. Robin Hayes, a five-term Republican who has been heavily targeted by Democrats this election cycle, first denied making the remarks, but conceded Monday afternoon that he was accurately quoted.

"After reading it, there is no doubt that it came out completely the wrong way," Hayes said. “I actually was trying to work to keep the crowd as respectful as possible, so this is definitely not what I intended."

The comments came at a McCain rally in Concord, North Carolina Saturday before the Arizona senator or members of his staff had arrived at the event. As first reported by the New York Observer, Hayes said, "Liberals hate real Americans that work and achieve and believe in God."

Hayes also told the raucous crowd to make sure "we don't say something stupid, make sure we don't say something we don't mean," warning the news media would likely distort such remarks.

In his statement Tuesday, Hayes suggested he meant to differentiate between the liberal and conservative philosophies rather than directly impugn the patriotism of his opponents.

"Liberals are advocating higher taxes, which I believe punish success — and they are advocating policies like gay marriage that I feel undermine strong families," he said. "We have a strong difference of opinion about the future of our nation, but obviously this was the wrong way to get that difference of opinion across."

Hayes is top target of the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee and his prospects of re-election appear to be endangered by Obama's stronger than expected support in North Carolina. According to Stuart Rothenberg of the Rothenberg Political Report, Obama is out-polling McCain by 9 points in Hayes' 8th district, a dynamic that could spell trouble for Hayes come Election Day. In 2004, President Bush defeated John Kerry by 9 points in Hayes' district and the GOP congressman narrowly won in 2006.

Gallup Daily: Obama Holds Lead in Various Scenarios

Lead between seven and 10 points among likely voters


PRINCETON, NJ -- Barack Obama maintains a lead over John McCain in the latest Gallup Poll Daily tracking update from Saturday through Monday; the size of the lead varies between seven and 10 percentage points among likely voters, depending on turnout assumptions.


8ugocrnqcukimclcyqp4fa

sro


Among all registered voters, there has been fairly little variation in recent days, with Obama receiving between 50% and 52% of the vote over the last five reports and McCain in a range between 41% and 43%. In the current three-day rolling average of registered voters Obama remains ahead by 52% to 41%, exactly the same as Monday's update. (To view the complete trend since March 7, 2008, click here.)

cylcvuromecsi05j0_wn4g
Gallup's modeling of likely voters indicates the race is slightly tighter if we assume that voter turnout patterns will be similar to those seen in most presidential elections from 1952 through 2004. Using this"traditional" definition of likely voters, which takes into account respondents' history of voting, as well as their current interest in the campaign and self-reported likelihood to vote, Obama leads McCain by seven points, 51% to 44%. This is tied for Obama's largest lead among this group since Gallup began reporting likely voters in Gallup Poll Daily tracking.


An alternative, expanded likely voter model shows what would happen if turnout reflects voters' self-reported likelihood to vote and campaign interest, but is not assumed to be dependent on their voting history. Under these assumptions, Obama leads by 10 points, 52% to 42%. -- Frank Newport

oz8ah4unl0ki_zablcdsjw
(Click here to see how the race currently breaks down by demographic subgroup.)


Survey Methods

For the Gallup Poll Daily tracking survey, Gallup is interviewing no fewer than 1,000 U.S. adults nationwide each day during 2008.

The general-election results are based on combined data from Oct. 18-20, 2008. For results based on this sample of 2,784 registered voters, the maximum margin of sampling error is ±2 percentage points.

For results based on the sample of 2,384 "traditional" likely voters (based on the model taking into account current voting intention and self-reported past voting behavior), the maximum margin of sampling error is ±3 percentage points. The traditional likely voter model assumes a turnout of 60% of national adults. The likely voter sample is weighted to match this assumption, so the weighted sample size is 1,816.

For results based on the sample of 2,299 "expanded" likely voters (based on the model taking into account current voting intention only), the maximum margin of sampling error is ±2 percentage points. (The expanded voter model does not make any assumptions about turnout level).

Interviews are conducted with respondents on landline telephones (for respondents with a landline telephone) and cellular phones (for respondents who are cell phone only).

In addition to sampling error, question wording and practical difficulties in conducting surveys can introduce error or bias into the findings of public opinion polls.

Wacky presidential election hotel promotions

MSN Tracking Image

Wacky presidential election hotel promotions
Lodgings around the world are offering special packages, drinks for event
By Karen Catchpole
Travel+Leisure
updated 10:45 a.m. MT, Sun., Oct. 19, 2008

Image: Avalon presidential drinks
The Avalon Beverly Hills would rather tally cocktail orders than hanging chads, so their restaurant is offering the Obamarita (Patron silver, blue curacao, fresh lime juice, and prosecco) and McCainades (Jim Beam, Amaretto, lemonade, iced tea, and grenadine)

Guests at W Hotels have come to expect “Whatever/Whenever.” But this year’s presidential election finds the luxury chain partnering with get-out-the-vote organization Declare Yourself in order to push that motto one step further — allowing guests to register to vote right from bed.

It’s nothing new for hotels to create special packages around events, of course. But the intense interest in this year’s presidential campaign and election has resulted in packages not just in blue and red states, but also in countries around the world.

For example, this is the first time the Hotel Concorde La Fayette in Paris has run a promotion to coincide with any U.S. presidential election. Chef Laurent Belijar has always been interested in politics, said Concorde Hotels Director of Communications, Vanina Sommer, and this election’s focus on change has taken his interest to a new level. He’s created two burgers with the candidates in mind: the Hawaiian-themed O-Burger for the 50th state’s native son, and the Southwestern-flavored Elephant Burger for the senator from Arizona.

The unprecedented interest has also prompted the Ritz-Carlton, Amelia Island in Florida to offer its first ever election special — an election-night package that offers real presidential perks: a private jet, motorcade, even fireworks. (At $15,000, though, paying for it may require taxpayer dollars.)

It’s not just the big chains that are harnessing the election excitement. California’s Avalon Beverly Hills, for example, has unveiled candidate-inspired cocktails — the “Obamarita” (Patron silver, blue curacao, fresh lime juice and prosecco) and the “McCainade” (Jim Beam, Amaretto, lemonade, iced tea and grenadine). “I wanted to offer our politically charged diners a fun and playful way to support their favorite candidate,” said Executive Chef Scott Garrett.

Some hotels are taking a different tack, trying to spare guests the agony of one more candidate profile or tit-for-tat exchange. One place is the Five Gables Inn & Spa, just outside Washington, D.C. in St. Michaels, Maryland.

“Talking to guests during the 2004 election,” said owner Bonnie Booth, “we came to the conclusion that everyone falls victim to election overload.” So the inn created the “Beltway Buster” package, which offers a room, massage, dinner and daily delivery of The Washington Post … with all election coverage removed.

Why are hotels dreaming up such elaborate and varied election packages? Some are looking to boost bookings, plain and simple. “Election time and election years are actually typically slower as people are involved in the business of elections and tend to save money,” said Greg Velasquez, Director of Sales & Marketing at the US Grant Hotel in San Diego.

The hotel is highlighting its presidential heritage (the 100-year-old property is named after our 18th president) with a new, politically themed bar menu. “We thought playing off the campaign would be a fun and appealing way to keep patrons excited about the property.”

But getting heads in beds isn’t the only motivation behind this election season trend. “Hotels generally try to create packages to generate media attention,” said hotel consultant Rick Swig. “The election provides an opportunity for some buzz. It’s really about market visibility, promotion, and positioning.”

Sounds a lot like politics.

URL: http://today.msnbc.msn.com/id/27103326/


© 2008 MSNBC.com

20.10.08

The Real Plumbers of Ohio

October 20, 2008
OP-ED COLUMNIST

The Real Plumbers of Ohio

Forty years ago, Richard Nixon made a remarkable marketing discovery. By exploiting America’s divisions — divisions over Vietnam, divisions over cultural change and, above all, racial divisions — he was able to reinvent the Republican brand. The party of plutocrats was repackaged as the party of the “silent majority,” the regular guys — white guys, it went without saying — who didn’t like the social changes taking place.

It was a winning formula. And the great thing was that the new packaging didn’t require any change in the product’s actual contents — in fact, the G.O.P. was able to keep winning elections even as its actual policies became more pro-plutocrat, and less favorable to working Americans, than ever.

John McCain’s strategy, in this final stretch, is based on the belief that the old formula still has life in it.

Thus we have Sarah Palin expressing her joy at visiting the “pro-America” parts of the country — yep, we’re all traitors here in central New Jersey. Meanwhile we’ve got Mr. McCain making Samuel J. Wurzelbacher, a k a Joe the Plumber — who had confronted Barack Obama on the campaign trail, alleging that the Democratic candidate would raise his taxes — the centerpiece of his attack on Mr. Obama’s economic proposals.

And when it turned out that the right’s new icon had a few issues, like not being licensed and comparing Mr. Obama to Sammy Davis Jr., conservatives played victim: see how much those snooty elitists hate the common man?

But what’s really happening to the plumbers of Ohio, and to working Americans in general?

First of all, they aren’t making a lot of money. You may recall that in one of the early Democratic debates Charles Gibson of ABC suggested that $200,000 a year was a middle-class income. Tell that to Ohio plumbers: according to the May 2007 occupational earnings report from the Bureau of Labor Statistics, the average annual income of “plumbers, pipefitters and steamfitters” in Ohio was $47,930.

Second, their real incomes have stagnated or fallen, even in supposedly good years. The Bush administration assured us that the economy was booming in 2007 — but the average Ohio plumber’s income in that 2007 report was only 15.5 percent higher than in the 2000 report, not enough to keep up with the 17.7 percent rise in consumer prices in the Midwest. As Ohio plumbers went, so went the nation: median household income, adjusted for inflation, was lower in 2007 than it had been in 2000.

Third, Ohio plumbers have been having growing trouble getting health insurance, especially if, like many craftsmen, they work for small firms. According to the Kaiser Family Foundation, in 2007 only 45 percent of companies with fewer than 10 employees offered health benefits, down from 57 percent in 2000.

And bear in mind that all these data pertain to 2007 — which was as good as it got in recent years. Now that the “Bush boom,” such as it was, is over, we can see that it achieved a dismal distinction: for the first time on record, an economic expansion failed to raise most Americans’ incomes above their previous peak.

Since then, of course, things have gone rapidly downhill, as millions of working Americans have lost their jobs and their homes. And all indicators suggest that things will get much worse in the months and years ahead.

So what does all this say about the candidates? Who’s really standing up for Ohio’s plumbers?

Mr. McCain claims that Mr. Obama’s policies would lead to economic disaster. But President Bush’s policies have already led to disaster — and whatever he may say, Mr. McCain proposes continuing Mr. Bush’s policies in all essential respects, and he shares Mr. Bush’s anti-government, anti-regulation philosophy.

What about the claim, based on Joe the Plumber’s complaint, that ordinary working Americans would face higher taxes under Mr. Obama? Well, Mr. Obama proposes raising rates on only the top two income tax brackets — and the second-highest bracket for a head of household starts at an income, after deductions, of $182,400 a year.

Maybe there are plumbers out there who earn that much, or who would end up suffering from Mr. Obama’s proposed modest increases in taxes on dividends and capital gains — America is a big country, and there’s probably a high-income plumber with a huge stock market portfolio out there somewhere. But the typical plumber would pay lower, not higher, taxes under an Obama administration, and would have a much better chance of getting health insurance.

I don’t want to suggest that everyone would be better off under the Obama tax plan. Joe the plumber would almost certainly be better off, but Richie the hedge fund manager would take a serious hit.

But that’s the point. Whatever today’s G.O.P. is, it isn’t the party of working Americans.


 

17.10.08

18 days to Blue Tsunami

Nation could face short Election Night
Mike Allen – Fri Oct 17, 12:34 pm ET
Featured Topics: 
McCain goes for broke in final debate with ObamaAFP – Democratic presidential candidate Barack Obama (left) and his Republican rival John McCain greet each …

Network news executives said they are preparing for an unusual Election Night challenge: How to be honest with the audience, and still keep them tuned in, if the race between Sen. John McCain and Sen. Barack Obama  is effectively decided before most Americans have finished dinner.

After two elections in which the suspense went far into the evening (and, in the case of 2000, for 36 days afterward), the executives said they are contemplating how to manage their newscasts in the event of an Obama blowout — in which the Democrat’s victory would be obvious while polls are still open in most of the country.

“Our policy is that we won’t call individual states until all of the voting in those states is finished,” said Jeffrey Schneider, ABC News senior vice president. “If enough of those states add up to 270 electoral votes, then the outcome is obvious.”

The quandary is highlighted by Virginia, a state that has not voted Democratic for president since 1964 but where Obama is now leading in polls. There is no realistic McCain electoral college strategy that does not depend on winning the Old Dominion.

If it is clear on Nov. 4 that Obama has won in Virginia by the time polls there close at 7 p.m. — it will still be daylight west of the Mississippi — the obvious conclusion will be that Obama is headed to the White House.

But executives are already mulling how clearly they would want their anchors and analysts to state the obvious, since networks have been criticized for depressing turnout by calling elections while polls are still open for several more hours. But they must also decide how they are going to fill air time, since networks are planning to be on the air until 2 a.m. on the East Coast.

Paul Friedman, CBS News senior vice president, said he has started to think “about what we could do to augment our Senate and House coverage on election night if the presidential story is over."

“As to the presidential race, it's pretty simple: We will try to call a winner in each state as soon as possible after the polls close in each state,” Friedman e-mailed. “If that adds up to 270 for someone before the polls close in the West, there's not a lot we can do. If there are not enough electoral votes for one man to win it before the Western states close, but we're pretty sure how they're going to fall, we will be ready with language which states the obvious without being too obvious. We can't be in the business of pretending to be stupid.”

Network political experts do not expect a candidate to reach the winning threshold of 270 electoral votesbefore 11 p.m. Eastern. “Nearly a mathematical impossibility,” one network official e-mailed.

So even if the trend looks insurmountable, the technical suspense will remain, even in the outcome has been clear for hours.

Friedman said that in case of a landslide, “We could say something like, ‘Given the number of electoral votes Obama already has, and given what we know about the voting so far in various states where the polls have not closed, it is going to be very hard for John McCain to win.’ I would sincerely hope that kind of language would not discourage people out West from voting.”

Sam Feist, CNN's political director, cautioned that it could be harder than ever to project states early because all of the new, young and African-American voters could scramble turnout models. "Projecting races on Election Night is very dependent on comparisons to what the vote looked like in previous years," he said.

A night of early surprises would be a gift for John King's "Magic Wall" of computerized maps. Feist said: "If we know early in the evening that Barack Obama wins a critical state such as Virginia or Florida, we'll have a conversation about what John McCain would have to pull out of his hat now," such as Wisconsin, Minnesota, New Mexico, Colorado or Nevada.

McCain strategists, while not conceding defeat, argue that they are running in what is perhaps the most hostile climate a major-party nominee has ever faced, considering the economic implosion, the unpopularity ofPresident Bush and news coverage that they believe has turned against them.

McCain is playing defense in a host of states that George W. Bush won twice, most notably Ohio and Florida but also such normally safe states as North Carolina and Indiana (which, incidentally, has a 6 p.m. Eastern poll closing).

Bush strategist Karl Rove contended in The Wall Street Journal on Thursday that “Obama Hasn't Closed the Sale,” but even Rove called a McCain recovery “improbable.”

“This task, while not impossible, will be difficult,” Rove wrote. “If Mr. McCain succeeds, he will have engineered the most impressive and improbable political comeback since Harry Truman in 1948. But having to reach back more than a half-century for inspiration is not the place campaign managers want to be now.”

After McCain failed to shake up the race in Wednesday’s debate, pundits have been increasingly bold in suggesting that the race could be over.

As the leading edge of what is likely to be a race by journalists to forecast the outcome of what has been the most exciting presidential race in American history, ABC News veteran Sam Donaldson said of McCain on “Good Morning America” on Thursday: “Something could happen. But unless it does, he’s going to lose.”

Over on MSNBC, host Joe Scarborough said on “Morning Joe”: “When it becomes obvious that one candidate’s going to lose, usually members of that party start jumping, like rats from a ship. You’re starting to hear from Republicans that are really afraid McCain’s going to lose, Democrats may [reach] 60 in the Senate, and this is going to be a historic rout.”

And Republican analyst Torie Clarke, who once worked as McCain’s Senate press secretary and who appeared with Donaldson, had this advice for her former boss: “He has to ask himself some very tough questions, because one way or the other, this is the final chapter in his political career. And how does he want to write that final chapter? … Does he want to do anything in an effort to win, or does he want to go out the way he likes to think of himself — as a public servant?”

(SOURCE: http://news.yahoo.com/s/politico)

Buffett says 'Buy American'

Buffett says 'Buy American'

Buffet says 'Buy American'AFP/DDP/File – Warren Buffett, the world's richest man according to Forbes magazine, said Friday in a newspaper …

NEW YORK (AFP) – Warren Buffett, the world's richest man according to Forbes magazine, said Friday in a newspaper commentary that he is buying US stocks even though the American economy is in a "mess".

Buffett, 78, who has become known as the "Oracle of Omaha" because of his fortune building skills, said he has been buying into US companies even as "fear spreads".

"The financial world is a mess, both in the United States and abroad. Its problems, moreover, have been leaking into the general economy, and the leaks are now turning into a gusher," the head of Berkshire Hathaway Inc conglomerate wrote in the New York Times.

"In the near term, unemployment will rise, business activity will falter and headlines will continue to be scary," Buffett added.

"So ... I've been buying American stocks. This is my personal account I'm talking about, in which I previously owned nothing but United States government bonds. (This description leaves aside my Berkshire Hathaway holdings, which are all committed to philanthropy)."

"If prices keep looking attractive, my non-Berkshire net worth will soon be 100 percent in United States equities."

The reason, he said, is a key maxim in his outlook: "A simple rule dictates my buying: Be fearful when othersare greedy, and be greedy when others are fearful.

"Most certainly, fear is now widespread, gripping even seasoned investors. To be sure, investors are right to be wary of highly leveraged entities or businesses in weak competitive positions. But fears regarding the long-term prosperity of the nation's many sound companies make no sense," Buffett said.

"These businesses will indeed suffer earnings hiccups, as they always have. But most major companies will be setting new profit records five, 10 and 20 years from now."

Buffet stressed that he could not predict how the market would ride out its roller-coaster days in the short-term.

But he said "what is likely, however, is that the market will move higher, perhaps substantially so, well before either sentiment or the economy turns up. So if you wait for the robins, spring will be over."

Buffett has supported Democrat Barack Obama in the race for the White House. But both Obama and his Republican rival John McCain say they agree he would make a good treasury secretary.

Buffett, who is noted for his personal frugality despite his huge fortune, has said in the past he believes the financial markets should be more tightly regulated.

According to Forbes magazine's annual wealth list published in March, Buffett saw his worth jump from 52 billion dollars last year to 62 billion, pushing Microsoft co-founder Bill Gates out of first place.

(SOURCE: http://news.yahoo.com)

16.10.08

Electoral College Graphs 2008


Graph of electoral votes over time

The graph above shows the current number of electoral votes for each candidate since Mar 22, The brown horizontal line shows the 270 electoral vote mark needed to be elected president. The gray vertical lines show the boundaries between the months.

Is it all over?

Obama Wins Final Debate by a Large Margin

John McCain had to give it everything he had last night and he did, but it probably wasn't enough. He attacked Barack Obama on his character, on his relationship with William Ayers, on everything. His best sound bite was: "Senator Obama. I am not President Bush. If you wanted to run against President Bush, you should have run four years ago." But Obama parried this by saying: "on the core economic issues that matter to the American people--on tax policy, on energy policy, and spending priorities--you have been a vigorous supporter of President Bush."

The day before the debate, Obama practically dared McCain to bring up the subject of William Ayers. McCain hesitated to do it, but moderator Bob Schieffer called his bluff saying to him: "Your running mate said he palled around with terrorists." McCain was now on the spot and angrily said: "I don't care about an old, washed up terrorist. But as Sen. Clinton said in her debates with you we need to know the full extent of that relationship. Obama calmly replied: "Bill Ayers is a professor of education in Chicago. Forty years ago, when I was 8 years old, he engaged in despicable acts with a radical domestic group. I have roundly condemned those acts. Ten years ago, he served and I served on a board that was funded by one of Ronald Reagan's former ambassadors and close friends, Mr. Annenberg." From now on, when the Republicans bring up Ayers, the Democrats are going to point out that one of Reagan's close friends liked him enough to put him on the board of one of his foundations.

While McCain scored more formal debating points than he did in his earlier debates, he lost the body language war. He was tense, angry, smirking, and sarcastic, anything but presidential. Prof. Obama, the law professor, acted like Prof. Obama, the law professor, focused, unruffled, and in control on the facts and in his demeanor. Watch him at Youtube.

Immediately after the debate, Opinion Research Corp., CNN's pollster this year, ran a poll on who won. Once again, Obama won, 58% to 31%, an almost 2 to 1 margin. To shake up the race, McCain had to win decisively. All Obama needed was a draw. Instead he got a resounding victory. On the economy, which is topic A (as well as topic B and topic C) at the moment, 59% said Obama would manage it better and 24% said McCain would. Respondents also preferred Obama's stand on taxes by 56% to 41% and also his stand on health care by 62% to 31%. In addition, the people polled also said Obama expressed his views better, was the stronger leader, was more likeable, and was less of a typical politician. And on the heart of the McCain campaign--that he never met William Ayers and Obama did--51% said Ayers didn't matter to them at all.

Maybe Lee Atwater is really dead, finally.

As it did before, CBS commissioned Knowledge Networks to run a poll among uncommitted voters. The 638 respondents said Obama won, 53% to 22%. Before the debate 54% thought Obama shared their values (a key Republican selling point). Afterwards it was 64%. For McCain the figures were 52% and 55%, respectively. Before the debate, 54% thought Obama would make the right decisions about the economy; after it was 65%. For McCain the numbers were 38% and 48%, respectively. Before the debate, 66% thought Obama understood their needs; afterwards it was 76%. For McCain it was 36% to 46%.

In short, in the World Series of Debate, the Democrats won 4-0. There will be no game 5. Obama was already ahead when he started and he increased his lead in every area that matters to the voters. Many observers have said all along this is Obama's race to win or lose and there is nothing John McCain can do about it. The voters are sick and tired of George Bush and his enablers and angry about the direction the country is going. They desperately want change. The only issue is whether Obama is up to the job. The Republicans have thrown everything including the kitchen sink at him, but he has come off as cool (in at least two ways), knowledgeable, and completely unflappable. There will be more complete polls in the next few days, but Obama probably closed the deal last night.

(SOURCE: http://www.electoral-vote.com/ )


ABC Fact Check after 3rd Presidential Debate

FACT CHECK: Truth Behind Final Presidential Debate Claims

ABC News Independently Checks Claims Made by Barack Obama and John McCain During Last Debate

Oct. 15, 2008 —

ABC News independently checked some of the claims made by John McCain and Barack Obama during the third and final presidential debate at Hofstra University in Hempstead, N.Y.

The candidates made many charges against each other, but are they true?

With reporting by the ABC News Fact Check team John Berman, Lisa Chinn, Dennis Dunlavey, Brian Hartman, Tom Giusto, Kimberley Randolph, Z. Byron Wolf, Justin Rood, Teddy Davis, Karen Travers, Kirit Radia, Luis Martinez, Ariane deVogue, Arlette Saenz, Reynolds Holding, Jerika Richardson, Tim Jaconette and Steven Portnoy.

Mortgage Plan

Early in the debate, John McCain said that Sen. Hillary Clinton, D-N.Y., proposed the same kind of mortgage buy-up plan that he did. "During the depression era, we had a thing called the Homeownership Loan Corporation, and they went out and bought up these mortgages and people were able to stay in their homes and, eventually, the values of those homes went up and they actually made money. And, by the way, this was a proposal made by Sen. Clinton not too long ago," McCain said.

FALSE. While Clinton has proposed directly helping homeowners by having the government buy and resell mortgages that are in danger of foreclosure, her proposal would force financial institutions to take a loss. The McCain proposal, by contrast, is more generous to financial institutions and more costly for taxpayers. The Arizona senator would have the government pay face value for home mortgages, ensuring that financial institutions avoid a loss. More background here.

ACORN

Tonight, Obama defended himself against McCain's charges that his campaign has been linked to the voter registration group ACORN, which is under investigation for voter fraud in several states.

Obama said, "The only involvement I've had with ACORN was I represented them alongside the U.S. Justice Department in making Illinois implement a motor voter law."

FALSE: That's a bit of an understatement. This election, Obama's campaign has contracted with an organization aligned with ACORN for "get-out-the-vote" efforts, paying them $800,000.

Ayers

John McCain charged that Obama "launched his political campaign in Bill Ayers' living room." Obama flatly rejected this association between his campaign and the University of Illinois professor who was among the founders of the radical anti-war group the Weather Underground. Obama said, "that's absolutely not true."

FALSE: Recollections differ about the beginnings of Obama's political career and 1996 run for State Senate in Illinois. A Chicago rabbi says he hosted the first coffee for Obama, not Ayers. And the Obama campaign says the "official kickoff" of that campaign happened at a Ramada Inn, not Ayers' living room.

Federal Bailout

Tonight both candidates got the amount of the federal Wall Street bailout wrong. But what's $50 billion between friends?

McCain said, "We have allocated $750 billion. Let's take 300 of that billion and go in and buy those home loan mortgages."

And Obama said, "The $750 billion rescue package, if it's structured properly, and as president I will make sure it is structured properly, means that, ultimately, taxpayers get their money back."

Well, they were both WRONG. The bill signed by the president only allocates $700 billion. Here is the language from the bill: "...The President transmits to the Congress a written report detailing the plan of the Secretary to exercise the authority under this paragraph, unless there is enacted, within 15 calendar days of such transmission, a joint resolution described in subsection (c), effective upon the expiration of such 15-day period, such authority shall be limited to $700,000,000,000 outstanding at any one time."

Negative Ads

Obama claimed that 100 percent of John McCain's campaign ads have been negative.

Obama: "A hundred percent, John, of your ads, a hundred percent of them, have been negative."

McCain: "It's not true."

Obama: "It absolutely is true."

FALSE: Or rather, not exactly. While an independent study by Campaign Media Analysis Group and the Wisconsin Advertising Project found that, during the week of Sept. 28-Oct. 4, nearly 100 percent of McCain's ads were negative, the Wisconsin Advertising project also found that only 74 percent of the ads McCain has run since June have been negative.

Joe the Plumber's Health Insurance

McCain said that small businessman "Joe the Plumber" would end up paying a fine if he refused to provide his workers with health insurance under Barack Obama's health care plan.

FALSE: Under the Obama proposed health plan, small businesses are exempt from a requirement imposed on large companies that they contribute to a national health fund if they fail to make "a meaningful contribution" to their employees' health care costs.

15.10.08

Sen McCains "My friends, we've got them just where we want them"

"Senator Obama is measuring the drapes, and planning with Speaker Pelosi and Senator Reid to raise taxes, increase spending, take away your right to vote by secret ballot in labor elections, and concede defeat in Iraq. But they forgot to let you decide." - Sen. McCain

"My friends, we’ve got them just where we want them"


ON GOING FACTS:

WASHINGTON - The Republican National Committee is halting presidential ads in Wisconsin and Maine, turning much of its attention to usually Republican states where GOP nominee John McCain shows signs of faltering. (Oct 15 AP)

VARIOUS SOURCES

Blog Archive

Search This Blog