Time's Michael Scherer still distorting Obama's ads to give McCain a pass

[ProSense]

Scherer fire

Time's Michael Scherer strains unsuccessfully to find equivalence in campaign ads

Posted by David Roberts at 11:15 AM on 19 Sep 2008

Time's Michael Scherer wrote a dopey post trying to tag Obama for misleading ads. The Social Security part was dismantled by Media Matters, with additional notes from Josh Marshall and Atrios.

In an update, Scherer is unrepentant, claiming he was attacked because he dared question Obama. Of course, counterintuitively going after Obama for misleading ads at a time when the very air is thick with McCain campaign howlers is designed to get attention. But whatever. I'll leave the SS part to others, but Scherer also says:

I find it telling that the good people of Media Matters/Atrios/TPM found no objection to the much more significant distortion I identify in the second Obama ad about McCain's plans for alternative energy. I am sure they are all working on their own posts to chastise Obama about this distortion presently.

I hope they aren't, because the thing is, Scherer was completely off target on the energy part too.

The central and rather bizarre complaint is that "instead of talking about the opponents' plans, the ads talk about the opponents' past votes ... Candidates should argue with what their opponents say they will do, not with what can be inferred from a vote a decade ago." But why on earth wouldn't past votes be relevant to the decision whether to trust a candidate's campaign promises? Anyway, the votes referenced in Obama's "Alternative" ad all took place in Bush's second term, not "a decade ago." There was the 1995 energy bill (the ethanol and hybrids -- though McCain's nay vote was better on the merits) and the whole series of energy votes this past session.

Of course, if you do go back more than a decade, you'll see McCain voted against clean air or clean energy some 50 times over his career ... but that shouldn't distract you from his plans!

<...>

In short, the ad is correct both in its claims and in the overall impression it leaves. McCain really has voted against alternative energy; he really does favor oil companies.

more

[ProSense]

1. No comments? n/t

[krkaufman]

2. Scherer comes across as clueless, especially this election cycle ...

... given McCain's wholesale issue flip-flopping. What McCain promises bears no resemblance to what he's said/done in the past, so his actions are much louder than his words.

[Cha]

3. He's not being willfully

obtuse?

[krkaufman]

4. No way of knowing, really. I can only speak for my impression.

He can try to fact-check each side, but the magnitude of McCain deceit far outshadows the Obama campaign and doing a one-to-one comparison is ridiculous.

[Cha]

5. Precisely..which is why

Obama is free to ridicule mccain.

[krkaufman]

6. Chuckle. I just heard Chris Hayes say, on Olbermann, that "Obama and McCain can *say* anything..."

"... you have to look at their records."

Precisely the point that Scherer misses. Excellent segment.