Originally Posted by spunkmaster

FactChecking Obama

He stuck to the facts, except when he stretched them.

Summary

We checked the accuracy of Obama's speech accepting the Democratic nomination, and noted the following:

Obama said he could ?pay for every dime? of his spending and tax cut proposals ?by closing corporate loopholes and tax havens.? That?s wrong ? his proposed tax increases on upper-income individuals are key components of paying for his program, as well. And his plan, like McCain?s, would leave the U.S. facing big budget deficits, according to independent experts.

He twisted McCain?s words about Afghanistan, saying, ?When John McCain said we could just 'muddle through' in Afghanistan, I argued for more resources.? Actually, McCain said in 2003 we ?may? muddle through, and he recently also called for more troops there.


He said McCain would fail to lower taxes for 100 million Americans while his own plan would cut taxes for 95 percent of ?working? families. But an independent analysis puts the number who would see no benefit from McCain?s plan at 66 million and finds that Obama?s plan would benefit 81 percent of all households when retirees and those without children are figured in.

Obama asked why McCain would "define middle-class as someone making under five million dollars a year"? Actually, McCain meant that comment as a joke, getting a laugh and following up by saying, "But seriously ..."

Obama noted that McCain?s health care plan would "tax people?s benefits" but didn?t say that it also would provide up to a $5,000 tax credit for families.


He said McCain, far from being a maverick who?s "broken with his party," has voted to support Bush policies 90 percent of the time. True enough, but by the same measure Obama has voted with fellow Democrats in the Senate 97 percent of the time.


Obama said "average family income" went down $2,000 under Bush, which isn't correct. An aide said he was really talking only about "working" families and not retired couples. And ? math teachers, please note ? he meant median (or midpoint) and not really the mean or average. Median family income actually has inched up slightly under Bush.

Analysis
Democratic presidential candidate Barack Obama accepted his party's nomination Aug. 28, speaking before more than 84,000 people in Denver's Mile High football stadium. Some of his comments were worthy of a ref's yellow flag.


Not Quite Every Dime


Obama reassured voters that he can pay for all his spending proposals:

Obama: Now, many of these plans will cost money, which is why I?ve laid out how I?ll pay for every dime ? by closing corporate loopholes and tax havens that don?t help America grow.

This is misleading. Even by his own campaign?s estimates, closing corporate loopholes and tax havens won?t pay for all of Obama?s new plans. In July, the campaign told the Los Angeles Times that they estimate the yearly cost of their proposed tax cuts at $130 billion. They put revenue from closing tax loopholes at just $80 billion. Obama also proposes to raise taxes to pre-Bush levels for families earning more than $250,000 a year and singles making more than $200,000, yielding additional revenue. But he didn't mention that in his speech.

But Obama?s claim is misleading on another level. According to the nonpartisan Tax Policy Center, "without substantial cuts in government spending" Obama?s plan ? and McCain's, too ? "would substantially increase the national debt over the next ten years." Obama spokesman Tommy Vietor told FactCheck.org that the Tax Policy Center's analysis "fails to take in account Senator Obama's spending cuts, including ending the Iraq war." That's true, but Obama's proposed cuts are dwarfed by the Tax Policy Center's projected deficits. Obama?s new spending programs might be completely offset by new revenue and spending cuts. But overall spending will still exceed overall revenue, and the nation would face at least 10 more years of annual deficits.